FA+
Shop
Clarification on Off Site Content
12 years ago
As some have pointed out in my previous journal, FA does from occasion use off site comments to take action. This is generally the exception, not the rule. As I outright stated in my last journal, "If they bring that behavior to FA, we'll take action on it because now we've established a clear link between what happened on FA and Site X".
I'm posting this to help clarify where those exceptions stand.
Again, we will consider using off site content to take action when there is a direct link between FA and that content. Drag outside issues onto FA, start causing problems and we can confirm what is happening, we will take the evidence into consideration when making a judgment. You brought it to our site, and your external issues have now become our problem.
If you violated another site's rules, but haven't violated FA's rules (or we haven't found sufficient proof yet), we will give you the benefit of the doubt. We may make a note of it on your profile, but we otherwise don't want to get involved.
Some examples of when we will take action:
* User posts a journal stating X, then (through a confirmed account on another site) states that X is not true and they did solely for drama, to rile up users/admins or stating they didn't have any knowledge of an issue when they clearly did. In this case, we are judging your by your actions on FA and using the proof elsewhere to verify the validity of your statement.
You posted the journal/comments on FA, and if we find proof of misconduct, that is now fair game. You brought it to our domain. Don't be this person.
* You lied about your date of birth to look at mature art, and we've found proof on your linked pages/profiles that this is not true.
* You are directly threatening the site or our users, or encouraging said threats. If we can confirm you are trying to cause disruption for the site or our users, we reserve the right to close your account. We may wait until you take action on the site, or if you have a known history of harassment, take immediate action.
When we will NOT take action:
* When your off site comments do not affect FA or our services.
* You don't drag off site issues on to the site.
I'm posting this to help clarify where those exceptions stand.
Again, we will consider using off site content to take action when there is a direct link between FA and that content. Drag outside issues onto FA, start causing problems and we can confirm what is happening, we will take the evidence into consideration when making a judgment. You brought it to our site, and your external issues have now become our problem.
If you violated another site's rules, but haven't violated FA's rules (or we haven't found sufficient proof yet), we will give you the benefit of the doubt. We may make a note of it on your profile, but we otherwise don't want to get involved.
Some examples of when we will take action:
* User posts a journal stating X, then (through a confirmed account on another site) states that X is not true and they did solely for drama, to rile up users/admins or stating they didn't have any knowledge of an issue when they clearly did. In this case, we are judging your by your actions on FA and using the proof elsewhere to verify the validity of your statement.
You posted the journal/comments on FA, and if we find proof of misconduct, that is now fair game. You brought it to our domain. Don't be this person.
* You lied about your date of birth to look at mature art, and we've found proof on your linked pages/profiles that this is not true.
* You are directly threatening the site or our users, or encouraging said threats. If we can confirm you are trying to cause disruption for the site or our users, we reserve the right to close your account. We may wait until you take action on the site, or if you have a known history of harassment, take immediate action.
When we will NOT take action:
* When your off site comments do not affect FA or our services.
* You don't drag off site issues on to the site.
Good work!
I would prefer to keep it private. May I note you?
Forgive me, but perhaps the person actually was simply inviting others' opinions and thoughts to clarify something that confused them? To say that a person is only acting innocent is a tough claim to prove.
lets say
User A doesnt like User B
User A makes a tumbler/weasyl/inkbunny/ claiming to be user b and making u all sorts of things so that user b gets banned Here.
The proof may be there but it may not be valid
it could make the banning system almost as flawed d as it is on tumbler
If, however, a user had a tumblr account and on their FA profile they linked to that account in the contact information box then that defines a clear link. Like 'neers example previously where an underaged user is discovered because they link to their youtube profile where it lists their age. They put the link there and by doing so said "you can find me here too".
ha·rass [huh-ras, har-uhs] Show IPA
verb (used with object)
1.
to disturb persistently; torment, as with troubles or cares; bother continually; pester; persecute.
2.
to trouble by repeated attacks, incursions, etc., as in war or hostilities; harry; raid.
Synonyms
1. badger, vex, plague, hector torture. See worry. 2. molest.
harass (ˈhærəs, həˈræs)
— vb
( tr ) to trouble, torment, or confuse by continual persistent attacks, questions, etc
harass
1618, from Fr. harasser "tire out, vex," possibly from O.Fr. harer "set a dog on," and perhaps blended with O.Fr. harier "to harry, draw, drag." Originally "to lay waste, devastate," sense of "distress" is from 1656.
If it's intentionally suppose to be hurtful, it's harassment no matter how light or serious.
The thing is, people honestly don't know when they're hurting someone. You may see trolls as intentionally hurting someone, but I've known a few people who enjoy trolling to it's fullest on deviantART and some of them don't intend to hurt. And everyone thinks any pain is intentionally caused. This however is not the case. Trolling is a joke, but people use it these days to either cover up harrassing people or misuse the term because they misjudge people's intentions.
In reality, it's quite easy to tell when you hurt someone's feelings. They tear up, run off, look upset, turn red, I can go on.
Behind text, you can't tell.
You can't tell when someone is joking.
When they're being serious.
When they're hurt.
When they're lying about how they're feeling.
Joking around is not a bad thing. It is not harrassment in anyway. There is no way behind text though you tell that the person on the other side is taking it as a joke. And vise versa. There is also no way of telling when someone is joking or when they're being serious.
Now, if I called every troll comment harassment, I would probably be banned from reporting someone.(that's possible on other art sites believe it or not). Instead, I take most what you would say as "hurtful" comments as either jokes or critiques. When does it become reportable? When they don't leave you alone or begin threatening you. When you block them and they come back with another account. That's when it's no longer a joke and is a ligitmate problem.
It's quite easy to simply close off one's emotions and try to push it away and not act like they're hurt so they don't seem weak at times, and some folks are dense enough that they might not notice the differences in a friend's responses, body language, etc, so the outward reaction is never a completely reliable thing. As for text? I can tell because I've been doing this stuff for years. I look at how people respond, how they act normally vs how they act when they're not happy. I'm an expressive person by nature, and that gives me a good deal of empathy. I can even tell when they're not happy and lying when they say they're fine, typically. It would take a very un-expressive person to be unreadable by me.
What this all boils down to is opinion, personal experience, and personality, whatever that entails... age, upbringing, sex, sexuality, etc. I won't get into those details myself, but I will say this, simply enough, and leave it here. We are two different people with two different mindsets. This is a fact, like day and night. The way you and I view things are different, are going to be different, and therefore we will both believe we are right. The difference between the two of us is I'm not the one who purposely runs the risk of being hurtful with their words in the name of "joking around". Simple fact.
Oh, and... *legitimate.
Ciao!
Or you can learn simple reading comprehension.
Anyone can claim that they are being trolled to the point of wanting to kill themselves, regardless of whether or not they actually feel that way. If a rule was implemented to deal with this, MANY MANY MANY people would abuse it in order to just not have to deal with trolls.
If you are being trolled to the point of harassment(posting on multiple journals, constant shouts, etc), the admins will usually step in and deal with it. But if someone is picking on you and hurting your feelings in a one time situation, that is a good indication that it isn't the admins job to be the thought-police, and the person being trolled needs to learn how to handle themselves on the internet. If they can't, there are alternatives(Such as: Not being on the internet). If it really is THAT BAD, then giving up the internet to not deal with it is a no-brainer.
And another point, why the fuck should the person who's being picked on leave when the people who are the assholes should be the ones to? I mean when the proof is there in black and white, unless you were getting sexual favors from the trolls or being paid off, there's plenty to get them in trouble. Sorry, I thought this site suddenly had some ethics. But I see it's just the same, only with fancier words.
i don't think he was referring to SAYING that they were being trolled to that extent. i think that the implication was that those were the person's actual thoughts. big difference, you know.
Weird, a mod said recently that all journal are backed up by the database so they still have the information. Unusual how they didn't check it, but it's in the past c:
What if person A got few isues on FA especially with person B its not big deal and nothing to be banned off
Person B impersonates person A on other site posting really bad stuff herrasing other users pretending he herrases a lot person B
when person B is done he gets in argument with person A and then raports he is being stalked by person A
So no this method your stateing here even with investigation it wont work not fairly at least if its off site you cant punish some one for offsite. thats like me telling a teacher that friend or ex friend A stole somthing from house teacher will say sense it happend off school property its not their problem. FA is your property you can punish for what happens in your jurisdiction. you cant punish some one what they say off site or what ever. that falls under thought crime practicly.
Now, years ago, on my site, someone was being harassed on my site and off the site. I did what I felt was the right thing to do, and I banned that person. That was my judgment call.
Not long after that, another member on my site was making threats to hack my site. These threats he said offsite, and again, I did what I felt was right, and banned that person.
I cannot [and certainly will not] speak for or assume that i know what the admins of this site will do, want to do, is in the best interest to do. It just makes sense to me to ban someone threatening to hack the site.
However, I will not condone the idea that the admins here can and possibly will ban people for expressing their opinions about...well about anything really. I really hope that won't happen.
Sadly, since people can get powerhungry/stupid it wouldn't surprise me if it did.
Nothing really happens to them, unless their is probably evidence that they could do it. I'm not saying the Admins were right or wrong in this case, I personally, don't care.
It didn't happen to me and yes, it is a shallow way of thinking but hey, I have no problem with FA, their admins, or the like. I am just here to throw some statements and suggestions around so people can start questioning it.
You're right, threats like the above mentioned happens all the time. When it comes to personal sites like mine, I did what I felt was right for my site. [and for the stalked member] Here? Well...I can't say for certain. It's a large site, it's member-base pretty damn huge. So i would think that there would be more to think about with the banning and such.
Again, speaking opinions off site about a site Is all well and good, and I hope not to see the banning of people for speaking their thoughts. I doubt that would happen.
Perhaps there was more to what happened than we know. I mean we're all not privy to the behind the scenes of things.
I'm not to sure if they even have that right.
Another thing that happened on my site, was someone joined my site [who is also here] and tried to scam my members. I saw this person do the same here, and I reported it to Dragoneer as a precaution. At that time he said since it was an off site issue he couldn't do anything about it. [never mind the fact this person was scamming members Here.]
So for my part, this whole...thing is rather confusing.
Has people been banned from here for voicing their opinions, or asking questions? Personally I've not seen that. Not that it means it hasn't happened, I just haven't seen it.
You know I've never had a full on complaint about FA myself, save for how I felt that enforcements of rules were not always constant or clarifications of rules often caused some...let's say hickups in their enforcements that thankfully would later be corrected but still at the time were no less annoying.
So to what extent on FA can you make a journal voicing an opinion about something that can or can not get you banned. I'm sure you are aware of the extent of this question from a prior note sent.
of course if any site is subpoenaed, they naturally have to respond, even if only able to offer testimonial evidence/statements.
No reason just wanted to watch eternal stealing of the sandvich. :P
What if someone has a livejournal/tumblr/etc. account and decides to talk about a subject they found on FA and links to said subject? Or heck, even if they decide to make their own FA journal on said subject? If the subject is drama or not... or if it goes against the opinions of FA or their mods, is it right to ban the person? I mean, is it not their right to state their own opinion? Is it wrong to side against the admins if the rules aren't being broken? Or does someone, on-site or off posting their opinions over an existing subject, drama-related or not a bannable offence?
I understand that the admins are going to get flak for every little thing they do (that's pretty much going to happen with anyone in any position of power), but I don't believe people should be punished for having their opinions. I've seen both good points and bad with such people and going after someone just because they want to talk about something you don't want spread around is, for lack of better imagry, tyranical oppression - almost like Big Brother sending people to Room 101 for thought crime (or getting fined for swearing). Furthermore, if this happens, it's going to cause a lot of problems... nobody likes it when their freedoms are taken away for a weak reason like "keeping up the organization's good name" or similar.
Now, this is just my thoughts based on some incidents that I have heard about lately... that some people may have been banned for the reasons I've mentioned above. I can't confirm that it's necissarily true (I've seen people bend the truth before over petty issues), but if it is, I would ask that you reconsider such actions and, if possible, consider a better solution to simply banning a person over such issues. Perhaps talking to them directly (send a note or whatever) either telling them the whole story (in case they were misinformed) or to simply ask them to kindly remove the "offending material" from wherever they have it. Even at least giving them a warning or a chance to defend themselves would be better than sending in the black baggers to make them disappear in the middle of the night.
I know I'll probably get positive and negative responses to what I've said so far. Personally, I'd like to remain neutral on subjects like these as best I can. However, if what I've been hearing has been true, I think it was handled poorly. I don't have any animosity over the admins (I understand the job's not easy and you will often come off as the bad guy no matter what you do), but I think punishing people for their opinions is, to be blunt, wrong.
Good to know. MUCH MUCH MUCH cheaper to just cut to the chase and avoid having to sue people for libel. Just kick them out.
I think that's what much of this comes down to.
That's pretty vague. Anything can be interpreted to mean it's "affecting FA".
So, basically, you will take action whenever you want, and there's no rule really.
Okay. That's good to know.
If acting a bit creepy on FA would be a bannable offense, a third of us would probably have to go.
Zero.
Now those perps better watch out.
BUT, I can say bad things about another site here and that'd be fine.
And no, actually, we generally ask other people to keep site bashing down. It doesn't benefit anyone.
Additionally, "civil and truthful" is too relative. What I believe to be truthful and civil, others may not - I believe I sent you a note in regards to that earlier this month or late last month. So this should be just a history lesson.
So as far as I can tell, it's very true because I've already been banned (permanently) for it.
In other words develop thicker skin, start using this rightly, and make the rules even more clear. I can't believe you banned people for badmouthing the site on another site. It shows how much you have lost control of the site and don't how to take critism to improve. It makes me wonder how your able to run it to this day. No wonder Alkora sold the site to you, because the person probably knew it was going to be this big problems coming down the line. I hope you straighten out your, but chances you won't and it goes away. Then a new problem comes and rinse and repeat. It must get lonely at the top, even when your married.
That's not the case. If I were going to ban people over this, if you even thought that I did, would you legitimately have still written your comment in the tone/wording you did?
It makes look like one can't do certain things. I can understand the criminal and other serious offense. But when somethng is vague of its wording, then its open most ways of possibilities of getting ban through other ways. So maybe to get it more clear of what can get ban and not. Sometimes I wonder how site can survive vague rules, but ti varies on some things. But like said it needs to be clear. That is pretty much it. Hope it helps and what not.
don't you people get it? the administration of FA doesn't give two shits what you say about the site. Really. you can love it, hate it, or leave it and they aren't particularly concerned.
the statement about taking action on those who "threaten FA", has nothing to do with people who say "FA is terrible you should all leave", its talking about situations where a person is saying they are going to actually to something (or encouraging others to do something) to FA or its members that compromises the security or physical safety of the website or its members.
its no different than if I said "I hate America", no one gives a fuck, but if you start running around saying "I hate America, I'm gonna blow it up, or you should go blow it up" then CIA or some shits gonna show up at my door.
what a shitstorm... people need to calm their tits the fuck down.
I don't recall Furaffinity being some supreme website, that when you join it you must throw away your opinions on the internet else you'll get banned.
But then, weed and underage drinking is illegal. And there's groups for things like that, and people who admit to it. So are they bringing it to the site? Are you obligated to ban them, then, for illegal activities since they said it on your site? I'm not sure where to stand, but I think FA should only rule on things that are directly affecting its site and users negatively.
Also, for Kayla na, I'm curious why she was banned. I learned from last time not to assume the worst of your and your admin's decisions. But from what people have posted, she was only asking why someone who threatened FA was banned. Since when has asking a questions been a one month ban...?
But, FA's rules are made by admin and interpreted by admin as they feel warranted.
Agreed, and thanks