Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
gurudennis

What constitutes naming and shaming?

37 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Testers
5,082 posts
5,575 battles

I'd like a bit of clarification on a point, from admins or otherwise, if possible.

 

I just received a warning in a thread where someone was making very strong claims about a particular line of ships being overpowered, and as a response to their comment I quoted it and said something along the lines of: "Says someone with such-and-such WR in these ships, and only up to such-and-such low tier? I think for someone with your level of experience shouldn't be dealing in strong expressions like that". The warning was for this comment, quoted as naming and shaming even though I was responding to a specific person who was already actively participating in the discussion, not deanonymizing anyone.

 

The funny part is that eventually the two of us reached a common understanding and "shook hands" as it were...

 

Hence I'd like a clarification: is pointing out someone's stats/ships as part of a discussion in order to argument their experience with a line of ships considered naming and shaming? Because if that's the case, I think censorship is right around the corner.

Edited by gurudennis
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5,106
[ERN]
Alpha Tester, Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters, Beta Testers
10,906 posts
4,896 battles

It always been this way.

Also

We do not moderate or issue sanctions for something posted on another site, like Reddit. The only exception to that would be if someone broke an NDA. Pretty much the only folks this would apply to would be Supertesters providing information from the ST client or forums to anyone outside of ST. If we could pinpoint exactly which account did that, their live accounts could be banned, in accordance with the NDA and Rules of Supertest that they agreed to upon entering the program.

 

As far as trying anyone in a public court, this is not allowed. If you would like to report someone for something, you can put in a CS ticket, or you can PM one of the admins here. You may not post it publicly. There is actually quite a good reason for this.

 

Situation 1

Let's say that you make someone mad in game - he calls you an idiot, you call him an idiot back. Game ends and you move on with your life, no big deal. Other guy goes off to his clan with his "story" of how you "wronged" him. He claims you were cheating, you called him racial slurs, you threatened to harm his favorite pet. None of this is true. He and his clan arrive on the forums ready to "try you in a public court." All for actions that NEVER actually happened. It's all based on one super salty guy and his "story."

 

Situation 2

Someone team kills you in game, calls you racial slurs, and threatens your favorite pet. You come to the forums with a totally valid story of what happened so this person can be publicly vilified.

 

As the person who moderates the forums, there is absolutely no difference between situation 1 and situation 2 in terms of what I know to be true. Situation 1 is slanderous and harmful and needs to be taken down. Situation 2 needs to be dealt with by Customer Support with sanctions against the other account. But on the forums, I can't tell the difference. The only option here is take BOTH of them down, and send both to CS and let them research what actually happened and deal with it.

 

While it may make you feel better to air grievances publicly, I guarantee that if someone were falsely accusing you of things just to hurt you, you would feel quite strongly that the info needed to be taken down. So we take all of it down, and send folks to the proper channels to have it sorted and dealt with.

 

Edit

To address the point about a video (or a screenshot) - just 2 days ago we had an instance of someone creating an account on the EU server using the name of their enemy on NA. They then proceeded to do very bad things, and then send us "evidence" that a particular account was using hate speech. Never underestimate how petty and mean folks can be on the internet.

 

tl;dr Public accusations can be false, thus all public accusations are taken down. Innocent until proven guilty.

http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/84488-name-and-shame-forum-rules/page__pid__2063387#entry2063387

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,622
[-KIA-]
Senior Volunteer Moderator, Beta Testers, Supertester, Privateers, Senior Volunteer Moderator
6,550 posts
8,491 battles

This guy gurudennis TK'd me today, I hate this guy so much *insults insults blahblahblah*

 

The above you would send in a ticket..

 

 

Naming someone and talking about them in a.. uncivilized way constitutes as naming and shaming.

 

I can see how staff could see your comment as unacceptable, you are putting down a fellow player. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,322
[-K-]
Beta Testers
5,660 posts
18,915 battles

It'd be nice if they actually, you know, put it into the forum rules. It's always just been a de facto rule. I PM'd Niko a few weeks ago, asking for it to be put into the rules, but he never read the PM.

 

I've never run afoul of this "rule" but it irks me that it's touted as a rule and enforced as a rule when it isn't in the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
5,082 posts
5,575 battles

You're missing the point: there is no in-game involvement here and no "shaming" as such. The entirety of the conversation took place in plain sight on the forum.

 

Are you telling me that I could say: "Midway is op af, beats Hakuryu every time, please nerf so it has no torpedo bombers. WG lost all my respect because Midway is not nerfed" (which is close in spirit to what the person said), and you are literally not allowed to put me in my place by quoting my stats, specifically that I've never played IJN CVs and my only match in CVs since CBT was a crushing defeat in Langley? Would it be naming and shaming? Really?

 

 

Edited by gurudennis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
7,307 posts
3,304 battles

The naming and shaming rule is too broad, too generic. It can be easily abused by users and it lies on the definition of the moderator that is reading the complaint...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,693
[FOXEH]
Alpha Tester
6,885 posts
21,765 battles

The only place you can get away with naming & shaming is on Youtube. you try and do it here you'll get banned, even if you do have photographic proof of their wrong doings. If you really do suspect someone of cheating, use the WOWS tech support tab and file a ticket with your evidence accordingly.

 

However if you really got to rage, do the smart thing! Rage on Youtube :all the cool kids are doing it these days anyways!":hmm: As long as you blur out your name in the video, you can call other players the spawn of Hitler and WG can't do diddly, because of the "fair use act of 1979"! There's quiet a few channels out there on Youtube who do just this, players find and expose cheaters/bad players and warn others to avoid these cancerous persons. Though in all honesty its more ales a lost cause because as long as there are video games, there will be cheaters, hackers, trolls, S*** players, noobs, newbies, whiners, seal clubers, ect.:amazed: You just have to learn to live with it and not let the "as-hats" of the internet get to you! Do what I do, "Laugh at them!":teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
5,082 posts
5,575 battles

The only place you can get away with naming & shaming is on Youtube. you try and do it here you'll get banned, even if you do have photographic proof of their wrong doings. If you really do suspect someone of cheating, use the WOWS tech support tab and file a ticket with your evidence accordingly.

 

Did you actually bother to read the post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
2,029 posts

Maybe they got a new mod or something, because this was never a problem before and this isn't the first post I've seen like this so far this week.  I think it's ridiculous to warn and/or punish someone for displaying something that's publicly available and easily accessible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,513
Members
16,315 posts
12,285 battles

The forums are vague about pretty much anything, just falls to how many people mash that report button.

 

Don't even get me started on images....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,693
[FOXEH]
Alpha Tester
6,885 posts
21,765 battles

The naming and shaming rule is too broad, too generic. It can be easily abused by users and it lies on the definition of the moderator that is reading the complaint...

 

Yup. the biggest abused of it I see is when someone's losing an argument and that they are clearly wrong in a department ( there;s many examples to choose from just take your pick!) and press the report button to more ales let the argument end in their favor because the person they are arguing with is slapped with a warning.:unsure: Now granted there are time when moderators will step in when a debate is getting a bit "too hot" and this is something that many players ( myself included) appreciate because a debate should be a debate, it shouldn't esculate into an all out fight just because 2 parties have a different goal in mind or they have different matters of opinion. When it does come to this however, you are then forced to end the debate with the "facts vs opinions" method.:hmm:

 

edit: spelling errors:hiding:

Edited by BladedPheonix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
759 posts

I'd like a bit of clarification on a point, from admins or otherwise, if possible.

 

I just received a warning in a thread where someone was making very strong claims about a particular line of ships being overpowered, and as a response to their comment I quoted it and said something along the lines of: "Says someone with such-and-such WR in these ships, and only up to such-and-such low tier? I think for someone with your level of experience shouldn't be dealing in strong expressions like that". The warning was for this comment, quoted as naming and shaming even though I was responding to a specific person who was already actively participating in the discussion, not deanonymizing anyone.

 

The funny part is that eventually the two of us reached a common understanding and "shook hands" as it were...

 

Hence I'd like a clarification: is pointing out someone's stats/ships as part of a discussion in order to argument their experience with a line of ships considered naming and shaming? Because if that's the case, I think censorship is right around the corner.

 

Welcome to the modern day where rules arent followed but rather challenged.

 

Didnt matter how you guys kissed and made up with mad love, act of calling out that person and his associated property with little malice or much falls under the guideline. Why does traffic cop pull you over when many are over the speed limit? Were you over the speed limit is the only right question to ask.

 

need not to say more, move on pls.

Edited by anonym_76iqf0dp5Wvy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,693
[FOXEH]
Alpha Tester
6,885 posts
21,765 battles

 

Did you actually bother to read the post?

 

I did, I"m just suggesting what you should do in the event you are presented with the said situation again. keep in mind I'm not condoning/supporting negative behavior though. when people have to vent however, they got to vent......

 

if they keep it bottled up it can lead to problems later down the line, ranging from social issues to health problems. at the end fo the day we are all responsible for what we say/type/vidopost/tweet on social media and its stuck there forever. unless of course we get time machines.......:hmm: If I ever get a time machine I'm going back to the 1940s and attending jazz concerts and drive around in some classic cars!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
5,082 posts
5,575 battles

Didnt matter how you guys kissed and made up with mad love, act of calling out that person and his associated property with little malice or much falls under the guideline. Why does traffic cop pull you over when many are over the speed limit? Were you over the speed limit is the only right question to ask.

 

Was I over the speed limit though?

 

Stats are publicly displayed on that person's account, and they can hide them at any point if they so choose. Quoting said stats in a manner pertinent to the discussion is anyone's prerogative, and indeed this has been used both by me and equally against me multiple times in the past. Which is well and good.

 

By the fact that we reached a common understanding eventually, I am reasonably confident that the person in question didn't report me in the first place. This is why I mentioned the fact, not because it would somehow absolve any alleged violation, which I'm confused as to whether there was any.

 

Naming and shaming applies to someone who has up to that point remained anonymous. It's a defense mechanism against hearsay and false accusations, as Nyx pointed out himself not so long ago. In my case, the person was already actively engaged in said discussion, and their stats are public. I used these stats to make a defensible point about said user's experience with a ship line. Where's the naming? Where's the shaming? Do you realize how many similar comments and even entire threads exist on the forum, unhindered?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
759 posts

 

Was I over the speed limit though?

 

Stats are publicly displayed on that person's account, and they can hide them at any point if they so choose. Quoting said stats in a manner pertinent to the discussion is anyone's prerogative, and indeed this has been used both by me and equally against me multiple times in the past. Which is well and good.

 

By the fact that we reached a common understanding eventually, I am reasonably confident that the person in question didn't report me in the first place. This is why I mentioned the fact, not because it would somehow absolve any alleged violation, which I'm confused as to whether there was any.

 

Naming and shaming applies to someone who has up to that point remained anonymous. It's a defense mechanism against hearsay and false accusations, as Nyx pointed out himself not so long ago. In my case, the person was already actively engaged in said discussion, and their stats are public. I used these stats to make a defensible point about said user's experience with a ship line. Where's the naming? Where's the shaming? Do you realize how many similar comments and even entire threads exist on the forum, unhindered?

 

Therefore I used that example. Others were unhindered does not guaranteed you will be.

 

Its only a warning bud, just move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
5,082 posts
5,575 battles

Its only a warning bud, just move on.

 

Oh, I did move on. I just can't shake the feeling that it's precisely how liberties are taken away. One ignored sign at a time. I stand by my conviction that calling out someone's public stats in a public discussion with said person isn't something that can or should be prohibited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,229 posts
7,820 battles

The rule, as interpreted by NyxWGA, is ridiculous.  Part of the reason people come to the forums it to get advice.  To ask questions from knowledgeable and skilled players in an effort to play the game better.  How is someone who is trying to evaluate two different pieces of advice supposed to know who to listen to if people can't argue from the authority of their skill or experience or the lack thereof from someone giving bad advice?  Do they listed to the guy with a 45% win rate or the guy with a 65% win rate?  Do they listen to the guy with 2 battles played in a particular ship or the guy with 350? 

 

Generation Snowflake has struck again and the only people hurt are those who use your forums for what they were designed for.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
759 posts

 

Oh, I did move on. I just can't shake the feeling that it's precisely how liberties are taken away. One ignored sign at a time. I stand by my conviction that calling out someone's public stats in a public discussion with said person isn't something that can or should be prohibited.

 

Liberty in argument... sigh

 

well sirs you have the floor.

Edited by anonym_76iqf0dp5Wvy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,268 posts
8,387 battles

The naming and shaming rule is too broad, too generic. It can be easily abused by users and it lies on the definition of the moderator that is reading the complaint...

 

It is actually pretty black and white and easy to follow. The only people that have a problem with it are the ones that want to challenge the rule and push buttons.

 

Maybe they got a new mod or something, because this was never a problem before and this isn't the first post I've seen like this so far this week.  I think it's ridiculous to warn and/or punish someone for displaying something that's publicly available and easily accessible. 

 

It doesn't matter whether you think it is ridiculous or not. It is WG's forum and they make the rules. Period.

 

 

Oh, I did move on. I just can't shake the feeling that it's precisely how liberties are taken away. One ignored sign at a time. I stand by my conviction that calling out someone's public stats in a public discussion with said person isn't something that can or should be prohibited.

 

How are WG's rules taking away "liberties?"

 

Liberty is defined as the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views. I don't see WG's rules as being oppressive, and they certainly do not affect or effect my freedom.

 

Being able to play World of Warships is not a right. It is a free to play game that a person has the privilege and the opportunity to play if they have the means to do so. The forums here are no different. WG provides the opportunity for those in the WoWs community to post and converse, discuss, and debate on various topics. However, that privilege, that opportunity can be taken away if a person doesn't follow the rules.

 

The rule, as interpreted by NyxWGA, is ridiculous.  Part of the reason people come to the forums it to get advice.  To ask questions from knowledgeable and skilled players in an effort to play the game better.  How is someone who is trying to evaluate two different pieces of advice supposed to know who to listen to if people can't argue from the authority of their skill or experience or the lack thereof from someone giving bad advice?  Do they listed to the guy with a 45% win rate or the guy with a 65% win rate?  Do they listen to the guy with 2 battles played in a particular ship or the guy with 350? 

 

Generation Snowflake has struck again and the only people hurt are those who use your forums for what they were designed for.

 

Actually, I think it has more to do with the fact that some individuals just don't have any respect for authority or they want to see if they can push buttons and see how far they can push the boundaries of the rules. I think some people have no self-respect or maturity and therefore, think the rules do not apply to them. IMO, that is just as bad as being PC or too sensitive.

 

I don't think the OP is out of line here in asking for clarification, but I thought NyxWGA was pretty clear in what naming and shaming was and is defined as. He was also clear on why WG has the policy.

 

edit: fixed some grammatical errors. Man it has been a long day. I'm tired lol!

Edited by daVinci761st

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,535
[S-N-D]
Banned
3,327 posts
7,738 battles

 

Was I over the speed limit though?

 

Stats are publicly displayed on that person's account, and they can hide them at any point if they so choose. Quoting said stats in a manner pertinent to the discussion is anyone's prerogative, and indeed this has been used both by me and equally against me multiple times in the past. Which is well and good.

 

By the fact that we reached a common understanding eventually, I am reasonably confident that the person in question didn't report me in the first place. This is why I mentioned the fact, not because it would somehow absolve any alleged violation, which I'm confused as to whether there was any.

 

Naming and shaming applies to someone who has up to that point remained anonymous. It's a defense mechanism against hearsay and false accusations, as Nyx pointed out himself not so long ago. In my case, the person was already actively engaged in said discussion, and their stats are public. I used these stats to make a defensible point about said user's experience with a ship line. Where's the naming? Where's the shaming? Do you realize how many similar comments and even entire threads exist on the forum, unhindered?

 

Stats are never pertinent. Not everyone that plays does so for intense stat competition.

 

Why shouldn't those who buy the premiums and subscription, the ones whom actually keep the game afloat, have all the say? How much have you spent so far? Who cares how good you are, do you actually pay the bills?

 

If the game was composed of nothing but elite free players the game would be shutdown. If only the worse players in the community that bought every premium and subscription played, then the game would be just fine.

 

Perspective, get some.

Edited by _Caliph_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
5,082 posts
5,575 battles

Stats are never pertinent. Many older people play this game and have thousands of games of experience yet suck at playing video games. Not everyone that plays and has a complete understanding of the game does so for intense stat competition.

 

Actually why shouldn't those who buy the premiums and the subscription, you know actually keep the game afloat, have all the say as opposed to free players? How much have you spent so far? Who cares how good you are, do you actually pay the bills? If the game was composed of nothing but elite free players the game would be shutdown. If only the worse players in the community that bought every premium and subscription played, then the game would be just fine.

 

Perspective, get some.

 

I'm quite amazed at how badly you need to get over yourself. Fine, I'll play along even though I don't see how any of the points you just made are relevant in any way.

 

I can't be sure how much I've spent on World of Warships so far without checking bank statements and such, but I estimate it to be around $300+ and counting. I own most of the premium ships and run premium non-stop since entering CBT. Is it enough by your standards to be allowed to have an opinion?

 

Yes, many people are older or less skilled than others, which is fine. It changes nothing about the fact that the better and more experienced players are statistically more likely have well-informed opinions, even though valid opinions can of course come from the most humble of origins. In balance discussions with random strangers on the forum, the notion of how much a given player has played with or against a particular ship or ships is one of the few statistically significant predictors of the likelihood that their opinion is generally useful as opposed to just contributing to the noise. Since we have no other tools to get to know each other better, we rely on stats. It sucks but it's what we've got.

 

Now pray tell me, why would it be a good idea to prevent people from surfacing this information?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,268 posts
8,387 battles

 

I'm quite amazed at how badly you need to get over yourself. Fine, I'll play along even though I don't see how any of the points you just made are relevant in any way.

 

I can't be sure how much I've spent on World of Warships so far without checking bank statements and such, but I estimate it to be around $300+ and counting. I own most of the premium ships and run premium non-stop since entering CBT. Is it enough by your standards to be allowed to have an opinion?

 

Yes, many people are older or less skilled than others, which is fine. It changes nothing about the fact that the better and more experienced players are statistically more likely have well-informed opinions, even though valid opinions can of course come from the most humble of origins. In balance discussions with random strangers on the forum, the notion of how much a given player has played with or against a particular ship or ships is one of the few statistically significant predictors of the likelihood that their opinion is generally useful as opposed to just contributing to the noise. Since we have no other tools to get to know each other better, we rely on stats. It sucks but it's what we've got.

 

Now pray tell me, why would it be a good idea to prevent people from surfacing this information?

 

I don't have a problem if people want to discuss stats, especially players who are trying to improve their win rate and performance, and from what I can tell, WG doesn't either. 

 

Where WG draws the line, and I agree with them, is when players start using the stats in a negative fashion to berate a player. I've seen too many people automatically talk down to or dismiss a player's opinion if they have below a 50% winning percentage, both in the in-game chat and here on the forums. The fact is, that a player, regardless of his or her stats, has as much right to express their opinion here on the forums as does the person with the above 50% winning percentage or the unicum's.

 

WG provides the stats for players that want to see how they are doing and for those players that enjoy stats. However, not everybody that plays WoWs cares about the stats.

 

Again, I think asking for clarification on what naming and shaming is, is a good idea to know for sure what it is and what it is not, but I thought NyxWGA was pretty clear and straight forward on what naming and shaming is and why they have the policy in the other thread. Not sure if you saw his response or not though, but here it is: http://forum.worldofwarships.com/index.php?/topic/84488-name-and-shame-forum-rules/page__st__15

 

"We do not moderate or issue sanctions for something posted on another site, like Reddit. The only exception to that would be if someone broke an NDA. Pretty much the only folks this would apply to would be Supertesters providing information from the ST client or forums to anyone outside of ST. If we could pinpoint exactly which account did that, their live accounts could be banned, in accordance with the NDA and Rules of Supertest that they agreed to upon entering the program.

 

As far as trying anyone in a public court, this is not allowed. If you would like to report someone for something, you can put in a CS ticket, or you can PM one of the admins here. You may not post it publicly. There is actually quite a good reason for this.

 

Situation 1

Let's say that you make someone mad in game - he calls you an idiot, you call him an idiot back. Game ends and you move on with your life, no big deal. Other guy goes off to his clan with his "story" of how you "wronged" him. He claims you were cheating, you called him racial slurs, you threatened to harm his favorite pet. None of this is true. He and his clan arrive on the forums ready to "try you in a public court." All for actions that NEVER actually happened. It's all based on one super salty guy and his "story."

 

Situation 2

Someone team kills you in game, calls you racial slurs, and threatens your favorite pet. You come to the forums with a totally valid story of what happened so this person can be publicly vilified.

 

As the person who moderates the forums, there is absolutely no difference between situation 1 and situation 2 in terms of what I know to be true. Situation 1 is slanderous and harmful and needs to be taken down. Situation 2 needs to be dealt with by Customer Support with sanctions against the other account. But on the forums, I can't tell the difference. The only option here is take BOTH of them down, and send both to CS and let them research what actually happened and deal with it.

 

While it may make you feel better to air grievances publicly, I guarantee that if someone were falsely accusing you of things just to hurt you, you would feel quite strongly that the info needed to be taken down. So we take all of it down, and send folks to the proper channels to have it sorted and dealt with.

 

Edit

To address the point about a video (or a screenshot) - just 2 days ago we had an instance of someone creating an account on the EU server using the name of their enemy on NA. They then proceeded to do very bad things, and then send us "evidence" that a particular account was using hate speech. Never underestimate how petty and mean folks can be on the internet.

 

tl;dr Public accusations can be false, thus all public accusations are taken down. Innocent until proven guilty." (posted by NyxWGA , 06-22-2016 at 4:07 PM)

 

Edited by daVinci761st

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,322
[-K-]
Beta Testers
5,660 posts
18,915 battles

Now pray tell me, why would it be a good idea to prevent people from surfacing this information?

 

For starters, because using statistical likelihood based on a group of people to pre-judge a particular person is both unfair and unwise. Not every coach was a great player, and not every great player makes a competent coach.

 

On the other hand, when someone makes absolute or authoritative claims about the way a ship should be played, they've certainly made their own performance pertinent. But even then, failure to perform is not proof positive of being wrong—there are multiple potential reasons, some of which could excuse said failure (e.g., "I can't aim worth a damn but I still know which situations this ship is better-suited for").

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Testers
5,082 posts
5,575 battles

For starters, because using statistical likelihood based on a group of people to pre-judge a particular person is both unfair and unwise. Not every coach was a great player, and not every great player makes a competent coach.

 

Not every coach used to be a great player, but nearly every coach is an experienced ex-player, and for a good reason. I wouldn't want my team to be coached by someone who's familiar with the sport in question through watching it on TV on Sundays with a can of beer, or worse still, only heard about the sport from their friends. Stats are just as indicative of experience as they are of performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×