Just wondering about the console bashing policy, as people seem to be getting bounced left and right from the videogame forum. What is the logic behind not allowing console bashing?

I see people on this forum bash political parties, religions, nationalities, stores, production companies, movie studios, artists. . .

What is it about consoles that gives them special protection above and beyond all of these other things?

EDIT: two spelling errors because I'm an illiterate ****.

I am not a VG Talk moderator, and I don't play one on television, but people wouldn't be "getting bounced left and right" if they read(and followed) the first post here http://www.dvdtalk.com/forum/showthr...hreadid=172249

From reading that, it seems pretty clear that I could expect to be suspended for using the term S***box in the VG Talk forum.

I'm not questioning whether the rules of the forum were appropriately violated or not. I don't really care if people get suspended or not. Did my post read that way?

My question was, why? Why are there different rules for this one forum as compared to the rest of the forum.

My guess is that without that rule the Signal/Noise ratio in there would be pretty much zero.

If there was a religion forum, I'm sure Christian or Muslim bashing would be dealt with more harshly. Same with a politics forum and political parties.

The fact is, this forum is about games. 70% of the conversation is about consoles. When console bashing gets out of hand, as it did last year around this time, that means that 70% of the forum is turned to a big pile of s***. This is an attempt to curb that issue.

I guess that kind of makes sense. So the answer is -- pragmatism.

Still, I think it makes sense to suspend people who flame as a response to the bashing, not the bashing itself. I mean, it is hard to read a thread in Other about politics without "Yeah but remember Clinton" or something similarly idiotic.

But stepping back, my approach was seeing this as an equity issue. There are people who post annoying, or trollish things in other forums who last forever. I guess I need to rethink it putting fairness aside and replace that with practicality. That is, practically speaking there is no VG forum if people are allowed to do the console bashing.

Well, all I really know on this subject are two things:

1. Gamestation 252 SUX!

2. Gamestation 256 ROX!

and

Gamestation 288 RULEZ!!!

Yeah but remember Clinton?

Yeah. His gamebox sucked.

If by "bounced," you mean suspended/banned... recently more people have been getting bounced because they get into arguments with other forum members and then they hold a grudge and carry the hostility into other threads. Then it turns into sort of a harrassment situation, and it ruins other threads that have nothing to do with the initial argument.

Again, I think you mods (other than X) are being a little sensitive. I'm not saying anyone or anything is bad or that you're doing the wrong thing.

I'm just trying to figure out the logic behind the rule enforcement because it seemed inconsistent with rules in other parts of the forum. Now I've been getting good answers from members, focusing on the policy and not bristling at the fact that I noticed multiple people being suspended.

Keep it light.

I just thought I'd explain recent reasons why people have been "bounced." There's no bristling on my end. *shrug*

Ok, just reads that way with both you and Andy focusing on that one little phrase that had little to do with my question.

Cool.

That's what mods do best

The reason is that the past history of the Video Game Talk forum has shown that console bashing starts flame wars. As for why we punish the console basher and not the flamers: we almost always focus on the instigator, and not the instigated.

It's easier to suspend/make an example out of one person than to have to do the same to 5-15 other people. Also, if you cut down on the cause, then the result will naturally drop off as well.

I was waiting for you, David.

So what if someone trolls in Other? Just because members in Other can contain themselves from flaming some idiot who posts off topic in a thread and brings up Clinton and insults him (or whatever), actions that are likely to piss people off, the troll gets rewarded? All because of the forum it is in?

I mean my blood boils at a number of the posters trolling about politics in Other, but I just walk away from the computer when it gets to be too much.

I guess this is a pragmatic approach, I'm just not sure it is fair. Just my opinion.

Which side isn't it fair to? Do you want the people in VG to have free reign, or the trolls banned in Other?

I'd prefer the latter. Nothing like the daily "bash a party, bash an ideology" to make the discussions in Other unpleasant.

But also I'm just anal. I prefer logical consistency, whatever that means. That's just a personal preference. I'm comfortable if other place pragmatism as a higher priority.

Its only politics, geez. Were talking important stuff like games. Get a life.

Bushdog, my quick analysis is you are completely right that there are double standards between forums. In Other, races, nationalities, religions, and politics are all fair game for even the harshest most baseless criticisms (ie flamebait). Restraint and thickskin are needed, but definitely there is a bit of give and take. You can attack the issue but not the person, but you can attack what the person is saying and not the person also. The forum has decided that the VG forum is a whole different beast.

Here's my take on it. Intelligent, unbiased, well-thought out criticisms of consoles are welcomed. If a person is unbiased like say Aghama before he got all consoles, their insight can be very refreshing. If someone has a chip on their shoulder about a certain console making company or are just biased about a console in general, they have nothing to bring to the table except flamebait and negativity that makes the forum go to hell. Even people who own all three consoles can bring flamebait to the table if they have an angry attitude toward one of the consoles they own. Vice versa, there are people who don't own all three consoles and can engage in intelligent unbiased conversation about consoles they don't own without creating a negative thread that goes to hell.

It all depends on the person and the baggage they bring to a subject. Some dead horses are extremely beaten by some people.

I guess I'm of the opinion the forum is a bit undermoderated. Not that I don't appreciate the jobs that Static and Namja do, but if we could get someone on the forum who doesn't moderate other forums and has a lot of presence at the VG Forum (like say X does on the Other forum), that would be nice.

Edited:

I'm a multi-console gamer. I play a game on the Playstation 2 a lot called SOCOM. This game lets you play in teams against other teams. You can verbally communicate with your team with a microphone. When you get killed, you have the chance to chat with other people. I sometimes talk about Xbox on there since it has an Online system coming out soon that I will be subscribing to. The comments I hear on there are absolutely RADICULOS.

"**** Xbox"
"I don't know why I hate it, I just do."
"Xbox sucks!"

These are some of the same people who post here (not literally, but their attitudes are the same). I'm sure if I would have mentioned Gamecube they would have had similar things to say. At least in Other, the opposing side is a bit more thought out. I'm sure I'll hear the same thing about PS2 when I get on Xbox Live.

Gallant Pig put up a pretty good summary of the situation, so I'll just point out that I said "based on the past history of the Video Game Talk forum," also note that the Other forum has been censored similarly in the past when necessary (remember the rolleyes temporary ban?), and emphasize that the goal of these forums is to foster discussion (and not to necessarily treat all members or forums equally) and we try to shut down things that interfere with that.

Another winner from cokeaddict!