GuildWiki has been locked down: anonymous editing and account creation are disabled. Current registered users are unaffected. Leave any comments on the Community Portal.
Talk:Necromancer Elite Cultist armor[edit source]
Hey, GuildWiki talk pages are not censored, unless they are blatantly vandalised, please discuss on the bottom of the talk if you think it is totally inappropriate, do not change it unless we have a concencus. RandomTime 22:10, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
- I apologize if the talkpage offends you, but that's kind of the price we pay for freedom of expression here. People can say just about whatever they want, wherever they want, without fear of retribution...The only case where it's okay to censor stuff freely is on your own talkpage. (T/C) 00:04, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
- If I may add my personal opinion to this, it's not about the "price for freedom" or anything like that. We revert spam and vandalism, so there is an area where that freedom of expression starts taking a back seat to other concerns. When that happens, admins weigh the consequences on a case-by-case basis, and may come to different conclusions. In your case, it is on one hand quite offensive to use the word "gay" as an insult. On the other hand, we deem it offensive to change another person's comments; i.e. people who want to say "look, I'm a jerk" won't be stopped. So what I think is that here you have a person who chose to be offensive on the wiki; and the proper recourse that anyone has is to take it up with them on their talkpage, politely. (If a discussion escalates into a flamefest, people are going to get blocked because there's no point to let them go on editing until they've cooled down). Of course, this recourse is sort of pointless in that the offense is half a year old. If it does offend you to have it out in plain sight, there is another option open to you: considering GuildWiki:Archiving help, you could archive that talk to remove the offending header from the page and place it one more link away, and giving it the status of something old. Would that be satisfactory? --◄mendel► 03:53, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Its been almost 2 yrs, I shouldn't need to care too much but I need to say... Using the word GAY as an insult is totally rude and homophobia!
we deem it offensive to change another person's comments << This is a very strange opinion...
Its just like somebody hurt people on street physically and verbally and you're saying "its rude to stop him because he has the right to hurt people?"
I really can't understand why people spend time feeling symapthy on those "murders" instead of the "victims"?
Freedom of speech doesn't means you can say anything offensive you want... there are immature, low educated kids and adults around the world, but that doesn't mean they can do/say anything without conciquences.
ANyway, to make matter simple! VERBAL VIOLENCE is always a problem in every society and for what you guys did here.. you guys aren't respecting freedom of speech, you guys are encourage verbal violence! Nikaido25 03:30, August 21, 2010 (UTC)nikaido25
- dude the fact that you replied to that almost 2 years later makes you ridiculously awesome. — Warw/Wick 04:35, August 21, 2010 (UTC)
- You just called Firetock "rude", "homophobic", "immature" and "low educated" and compared him to a murderer. You accused me of encouraging verbal violence. I think that's more hurtful than just expressing one's opinion of a video game armor in vulgar terms. Should I delete your comment? --◄mendel► 08:09, August 21, 2010 (UTC)
- The comment doesn't refer to people in the first place, so it can hardly be homophobic. If he were insulting someone directly, by saying (for example) "Nikaido is a gay faggot and should be shot on sight", it's unlikely to persist for an hour. But he wasn't; he was complaining that this armor looked bad in his opinion.
- Also, there's a huge difference between physical abuse, and calling a fictional armor gay. --Vipermagi 08:36, August 21, 2010 (UTC)
I haven't seriously play gw for a long time, hence I didn't really need to log on wiki for ages. Therefore I was surprised wiki never modified the page.
For what you're saying... its very obvious you're giving people right to use the word "Gay" as an insult... no matter as an insult to human/event/ or simply a virutal videogame image.
But the meaning is still the same! That person loathe something, dislike something, want to insult and being sarcastic, and he choose to use the term fucking gay armor. That's verbal abuse on that language, on that word. GAY was NEVER meant something bad, and he use it that way! His choose of mis-use the language is more then obvious homophobia!
"Also, there's a huge difference between physical abuse, and calling a fictional armor gay"
Okay according from the way you defend him. What if he use the term fucking "white people, cascasians, black or heterosexual, fucking christian etc." I don't ever think wiki can sit there and say that's freedom of speech! Or commend he is only calling that because he dislike the "FICTIONAL ARMOR"!
Guys mis-using a sensitive term to describe something he doesn't like, he hate on anything including real life or fictional thing is wrong. I can't believe people are still trying to defend it. Verbal/language abused is always an issue in every society! "I think that's more hurtful than just expressing one's opinion of a video game armor in vulgar terms." << Because the title he wrote is very impolite and mis-using the language yet wiki allow it. Nikaido25 16:12, August 21, 2010 (UTC)nikaido25
- You have been more than "impolite", yet you don't feel sorry. You don't mind the use of the word "retarded" as an insult either. You fail to realize that we do not defend the word "gay", we defend the right of user to express himself on our talkpages and to have that which he signed stand as written - a norm that cuts both ways, as we'll easily allow everyone (even you) to make a fool of themselves for eternity or until the demise of this wiki, whichever comes first. And yes, this is a "freedom of speech" issue, and we're not the FCC. If you can cite a judicial opinion that weighs the use of the word "gay" in a printed publication against Freedom of Speech and comes down against the use of the word, I might reconsider; but until then, I'll go on believing that democratic institutions would come down in favor of freedom. I do remember that we did delete a description containing "gay" from an armor description recently, can anyone recall where that was? --◄mendel► 16:57, August 21, 2010 (UTC)