Toxicity

Just FYI: You don't have an inherent right to freedom of speech on the internet.

 

This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

 

I didnt even see this until del quoted it but I have a comic that might help you
note:language
xkcd: Free Speech

 

Or just don't be stupid

 

Science shows you become 10% more stupid if you listen to stupidity.
HELP ME I CAN FEEL MY BRAIN CELLS ROTTING

 

I'm going to try give my response in a non-bias manner, not from the perspective of any one side.

It seems people on this thread are having a tough time seeing from the perspective of the other side. What I'm going to do is summarize each side’s points, and then state my opinion of it. Note that this is only from what I can see people saying on this thread, not including any of the stupid posts.


Player’s perspective:

- are not allowed to share opinions (limited in what can be said)

- get banned for anything that isn't "approved" by staff

- being a little "negative" shouldn't be enough for a perm ban


Staff perspective:

- those that are constantly negative don't deserve a part in our community

- it is the staff who dedicate hours and hours of their lives to making the experience of the players better, and should therefore not have to have the community questioning them on everything they disagree with

- Giving criticism and being toxic can be mutually exclusive


Overall analysis:

To start off, it seems that even the word "toxic" has now become a joke, which from both sides should be a little concerning. From what I could gather, each side sees the word "toxic" as having the same definition, but with slight differences. From both sides perspective, it is someone who (for example) swears in chat, bashes the server, and makes others around them just feel bad at an extreme level. The only difference is that the staff views your attitude over a long period of time, whereas the community sees it as one post can make or break a situation. Toxicity itself is always looked down upon, but having one bad day isn't enough to get a ban for it.

Players should understand that voicing an opinion isn't looked down upon, but encouraged. The way you voice that opinion however, is very important. It's called the art of diplomacy. A quote that perfectly sums up what this means is “Diplomacy is the art of telling people to go to hell in such a way that they ask for directions.” Members who want to help improve the server by giving constructive criticism, should also be the ones mature enough to go about it in a decent way. Saying "your idea is bad, here is a better one" means the same thing as "My idea is so much better than this dumbass idea" but is said in a way that doesn't hurt anyone, and will actually make people want to listen to you.


Take a second to notice how none of the posts in this thread are "toxic" by either sides standards. This is part of the reason why the conversation is still going on. When constructive criticism is given in a positive way, staff are more than willing to listen. I guarantee that if this thread were to have the same points made in a more toxic and negative way, it would have most likely been looked over and brushed off (thanks @epick8 and everyone else who contributed positively for that).


tl;dr: It seems like there's a simple misunderstanding between how each side views the word "toxic". One side sees it as "one or two posts be negative enough to deserve a ban" vs "this isn't very negative but it's done on a consistent bases by this player". At the end of the day, it's the staffs job to decide what's best for the server. Does that mean you always have to agree with it? No you don't, but that's why we have discussions like this. Staff value your input as long as it's said in a way that isn't completely negative.

 

Its unreasonable to expect a bunch of 14 year olds to be diplomatic.

Alot of the posts here are the same types of posts people got banned for. Its just that if they started banning people for toxicity on a thread about toxicity they would look really bad.

 

Most people who have contributed to this conversation are above the age of 14....... Even people under that age can still be decent.

Have you ever known klutch to care for what people think of him? I haven't. He does what is best for the server, to make it more enjoyable for people like you. If that meant banning people for toxicity, regardless of whether or not it was on this thread, I believe he would.

 

Go to hell for free diamonds

 

because Klutch is the only admin...

They can, but they haven't been diplomatic on this thread.

 

14 year olds are not young adults. They are still kids, and it is unreasonable to ask them to be "Diplomatic". To clarify, i'm not saying that we should let people be genuinely toxic.

 

I'm 14. Calling "them" kids is what they are. Kids shouldn't neccesarily be below adults in the hierarchy, if you devalue a "kids" opinion without listening to it because there lower than you on a hierarchy, than you have an issue.

 

Yes, calling 14 yr olds that are going through their teenage years are considered "kids".

 

They are? a 14 year old is a kid.
An adult is someone who is fully grown and developed. 14 year olds (who like you said are going through there teenage years I.E. puberty) are definitely not fully grown as they are actively growing.

 

You do realize that a certain group doesn't have to decide between two categories? Not fitting into one category doesn't automatically place it in the other. You typically don't call teens and young adults "kids" just because they aren't adults.

 

Ok, regardless, how does being a "Kid" versus a "Teen" affect the worth of what your saying?

 

Why does age define worth? I'm fairly sure the more important word is maturity.

 

The issue isn't kid, adult, teen, young adult, etc. Instead, telling somebody that

This is unkind as it places people into groups for the purpose of placing one group lower. This is something many people do: announce that one group is inferior to another. We need to look at people as individuals, not a collection of same thinking people, as this leads to pointing out flaws in a few individuals and projecting the behavior of a few onto the entire group.