India-Forums.com- Participation Guidelines & Rules - Page 14

Originally posted by: Autumn.

Thanks Vijay and All the DT who help in bringing this change. 😊

Oh.. wanted to say this for a few days...

When I asked for a self-ban for my previous ID, I was sent an email with a code. I never tried it but I'm assuming using that code I can unban my previous ID whenever I feel like.

I am eeyore now; tomorrow if I feel like unbanning my previous ID, I can easily do that. The members of DT are not omniscient, nor do they check the IP of every other ID. So I can easily abuse that power (Of unbanning my old ID) & can use both my IDs.

So here are my suggestions...

- I-F should not send the unbanning code to the member who asked for self-ban the day the ID got banned. That code should be sent the day that member would request (with a new/temporary ID) to lift the ban.

- When a member would request a GM to lift his/her self-ban, the GM must check the IP of the banned ID first, ban the IDs from the same IP (If there are)... & then lift the ban.

I guess changes in rules were imperative and expected. I agree with some of the rules. I have always held that the number one goal of any forum should be to provide a safe friendly posting environment for its members. Privacy violations, threats or personal attacks no matter how mild should not be tolerated. Everything else is secondary and unimportant compared to this.

However, 90% of these rule updates are somewhat of an extension of old rules. They are highly subjective, ambiguous and rendering to arbitrary interpretation and implementation.

For example what is explicit content?

Earlier the Delhi Gang rape was discussed in several sections of the forum. The details of this rape were graphic, explicit and gruesome. Yet articles on it were published and the issue discussed. Similarly there are many current affairs and mature issues like sexual harassment, pre-marital sex, extra-marital sex, abuse and harassment, sex education, war crimes, gun violence that make for very explicit discussions. But censoring such vital discussion would be ludicrous.

Another issue is adult humor, flirting or banter on the forums. Such things are actually not explicit in the literal sense. The language is often innocuous, but the implicit meaning tends to be adult. It is a very subjective matter of how to interpret such language and what level of explicitness and offensiveness it carries. There is also a matter of subjective cultural interpretation of explicit. To a libertarian European even nudity is not explicit unless it is intentionally po*nographic in nature while a small town conservative may deem the smallest show of skin to be explicit. Why should any one subjective culture be subject to rules dictated by the other?

Same thing goes for swearing. In India dropping the f bomb is shocking, repulsive and ill mannered while here where I live even five year olds will drop the f bomb like it's the ABCs. Indians don't seem to think too much when they say Bloody Hell or God Damn It, but to many here that is absolutely revolting and worse than dropping the f bomb because of the religious sentiments attached.

Why bother with all this censorship or grapple with the highly subjective issue of what defines explicit? The law requires that members be over 12 anyways. Anyone under 16 must have parental consent-supervision. So honestly, immature kids shouldn't be hanging around without supervision. The law requires that only X rated po*nographic content or graphic violence be censored. So we don't really need to mess around with this explicit bullshit. po*nographic and titillating material is clear and easy to censor. For the rest of it, just require that topics be marked mature if it contains mature discussions. That way no one experiences censorship and the prudes can know what to avoid. And hopefully the DT can catch a breather rather than double time as net nannies for kids who shouldn't be here in the first place.

Then comes the issue of slander

Slander by definition is an untruthful statement passed as fact with an intention to defame. An opinion or critique does not classify as slander no matter how outrageous it is. I think celebrity X acts gay, I think celebrity X is gay wouldn't be slander unless passed off as fact. Celebrity X is a fat slug, Celebrity X looks like a transvestite, Celebrity X is one ugly mishap – can all be offensive to fans but they are all opinions and nowhere close to being slander. Finally truthful statements like 'Sanjay Dutt is a convicted criminal' or 'Salman Khan is a convicted criminal' or 'SRK is banned from Wankhede for misbehavior' would cause a hue and cry.

Celebrities are not members of this forum. Unless it actually fits the bill of slander and defamation, the forum shouldn't bother. The DT is not a paid PR squad to protect celebrities and eliminate traces of unsavory remarks from the internet. Moreover, fans and bashers need to grow up and get out of their obsession with celebrities. 99.99% of the useless workload in IF would be cut out if it was simply decided screw the celebrities. They have their PR machines and their fans. We'll just deal with slander. Otherwise let everyone say what nonsense they will. Fans and bashers will just have to battle it out till they finally grow up. Intervene only when it gets personal.

That rule about MIDs is also nice. MIDs are my pet peeve. But what measures do we have to prevent MIDs? What measures do we have to prevent banned members coming back with a new ID? Do we block proxies? What process do we have to ensure that every warning and ban is warranted and no moderator acts out of pettiness or nitpickiness. I myself have come across DT who have acted ridiculous, but I can't be knackered to argue a futile cause.

I could nitpick a lot about the rules but this is it for now. Maybe more later.