loosen the nsfw rule

[User]

This is a website requiring users to be 13+, primarily focused on trade. If users are mature enough to start their own business (and yes, there are actual businesses that start on sites like this) and manage their finances, they're mature enough to hear "bobs or vegana" and not flip out. I've seen plenty of people warned or shoutbox banned for ridiculous offences that honestly no one in the real world would bat an eye at, even if said by a literal toddler. The NSFW content rule needs to be restricted to content that is actually NSFW: Not Safe For Work.

 

[Zerxal]

This is a website requiring users to be 13+, primarily focused on trade. If users are mature enough to start their own business (and yes, there are actual businesses that start on sites like this) and manage their finances, they're mature enough to hear "bobs or vegana" and not flip out. I've seen plenty of people warned or shoutbox banned for ridiculous offences that honestly no one in the real world would bat an eye at, even if said by a literal toddler. The NSFW content rule needs to be restricted to content that is actually NSFW: Not Safe For Work.

I agree with what you’re saying, but I think they’re trying to keep this site very PG for a reason. It’s a [Censored] and sales site, not free-for-all and say whatever you want. It’s for business matters. There’s no need to say anything regarding NSFW, so why allow it in the first place?

 

[User]

I agree with what you’re saying, but I think they’re trying to keep this site very PG for a reason. It’s a [Censored] and sales site, not free-for-all and say whatever you want. It’s for business matters. There’s no need to say anything regarding NSFW, so why allow it in the first place?

That's true, but there's also no need for general discussion, giveaways, forum games, and Minecraft UHC events if this meant to be strictly for business matters.

 

[User]

I think it isnt about having kids here that are underaged, its probably for the reputation of mcm

MCM doesn't have great reputation as it is, and a large part of that is due to rules that severely restrict the users.

 

[Lotus]

MCM doesn't have great reputation as it is, and a large part of that is due to rules that severely restrict the users.

Counter intuitively, loosening up how we treat NSFW content only worsens our image as the site devolves with ‘rougher’ content being the norm.

 

[User]

Counter intuitively, loosening up how we treat NSFW content only worsens our image as the site devolves with ‘rougher’ content being the norm.

"Rougher" content has never been an issue in the community, at least, not that I've seen.
The main issues I hear complained about are regarding the rules, the reputation system, scammers, and toxicity.
Toxicity cannot be prevented; it's a staple of the internet as a whole.
Scammers cannot be wholly prevented, though there are systems (that have been rejected) that would allow for better moderation of scammers and ban evasion.
The reputation system has already been tweaked numerous times, and it hasn't ever been widely loved, but it's usable, at the very least.

The rules, however, aren't often changed, even when the vast majority of the community disagrees with them. Throughout this year (that's 8 months!), this is the complete list of changed rules (and their relevancy, which is somewhat biased of course, but I'm sure anyone in the community would agree):

• Rule 1.6.2, Do not continue to send a member content, or content regarding them after being asked by them to stop. [seen a few cases where this rule has been broken, so it's somewhat relevant]
  
• Rule 5.6.1, Clarifying that fan signs and other objectionable content are disallowed. [not received particularly well, but not really a big issue on the site either]
• Rule 5.6 adjustment to clarify that although ebooks may not be sold, they can be distributed [i've seen 1 mention of an ebook on this site, ever]
  
• Rule 3.1.2, Advertising content requiring user registrations is not allowed [doesn't much affect the community, moreso to protect MCM, and I get that]
  
• Rule 1.23 clarifying that external sites and servers and services may only be linked or promoted if the hosted content abides by on-site rules [Duh. But probably still necessary]

... Not counting the rules that have been mildly tweaked to add clarification to something already in place. Now, let's look at how many rules are highly disliked and debated on by the community, adding to an image of a strict and overly formal website (based on Minecraft, mind you):

• 1.1.1
• 1.2
• 1.3.1
• 1.4
• 1.5.2
• 1.8.1
• 1.8.3
• 1.9
• 1.10
• 1.11
• 1.11.1
• 1.12 (hey, that's this!)
• 1.14 (not as big, but still)
• 1.17 (not enforced, from what i can tell, but still)
• 1.18
• 1.20.1
• 3.1
• 3.1.1
• 5.6
• 8.2
• 8.5
• 9.1.1 (this is reputation, so already mentioned)

... There's so many, I couldn't even tell you what they are or why they're disliked within a reasonable time, if at all.

The point is, MC-Market doesn't have an image of being an unprofessional site with a rough community; it's the complete opposite. It has a reputation for being overly strict, and being a place where one minute, you're one of the most respected members of the site, and the next minute, you're banned for something widely regarded as nonsensical or unfair. Examples (these are just a few) would be people like Croc, bank, Love, and Maddy (unbanned now, but i mean the first 3 times). That's not even to mention the hundreds, thousands perhaps, of people who have received warning points for things that are laughably inconsequential.

In conclusion, I'm not saying to remove the rule. Obviously, a limit is needed to keep MC-Market somewhat civil. However, the limit is set to such a high standard that inoffensive jokes, song lyrics, quotes, and so on have become punishable, which any community member would agree is ridiculous (just look at the reactions! 100% of agrees are from community members, 100% of disagrees are from staff members). As staff, I'm sure you have to see some disgusting content, so I understand your immediate reaction to allowing any of it through would be to reject even the notion, but I'm not asking for anything actually regarded as offensive to be allowed. Simply for the rules to serve their intended purpose of maintaining civility, rather than restricting communication.

 

[Kram]

"Rougher" content has never been an issue in the community, at least, not that I've seen.
The main issues I hear complained about are regarding the rules, the reputation system, scammers, and toxicity.
Toxicity cannot be prevented; it's a staple of the internet as a whole.
Scammers cannot be wholly prevented, though there are systems (that have been rejected) that would allow for better moderation of scammers and ban evasion.
The reputation system has already been tweaked numerous times, and it hasn't ever been widely loved, but it's usable, at the very least.

The rules, however, aren't often changed, even when the vast majority of the community disagrees with them. Throughout this year (that's 8 months!), this is the complete list of changed rules (and their relevancy, which is somewhat biased of course, but I'm sure anyone in the community would agree):

• Rule 1.6.2, Do not continue to send a member content, or content regarding them after being asked by them to stop. [seen a few cases where this rule has been broken, so it's somewhat relevant]
  
• Rule 5.6.1, Clarifying that fan signs and other objectionable content are disallowed. [not received particularly well, but not really a big issue on the site either]
• Rule 5.6 adjustment to clarify that although ebooks may not be sold, they can be distributed [i've seen 1 mention of an ebook on this site, ever]
  
• Rule 3.1.2, Advertising content requiring user registrations is not allowed [doesn't much affect the community, moreso to protect MCM, and I get that]
  
• Rule 1.23 clarifying that external sites and servers and services may only be linked or promoted if the hosted content abides by on-site rules [Duh. But probably still necessary]

... Not counting the rules that have been mildly tweaked to add clarification to something already in place. Now, let's look at how many rules are highly disliked and debated on by the community, adding to an image of a strict and overly formal website (based on Minecraft, mind you):

• 1.1.1
• 1.2
• 1.3.1
• 1.4
• 1.5.2
• 1.8.1
• 1.8.3
• 1.9
• 1.10
• 1.11
• 1.11.1
• 1.12 (hey, that's this!)
• 1.14 (not as big, but still)
• 1.17 (not enforced, from what i can tell, but still)
• 1.18
• 1.20.1
• 3.1
• 3.1.1
• 5.6
• 8.2
• 8.5
• 9.1.1 (this is reputation, so already mentioned)

... There's so many, I couldn't even tell you what they are or why they're disliked within a reasonable time, if at all.

The point is, MC-Market doesn't have an image of being an unprofessional site with a rough community; it's the complete opposite. It has a reputation for being overly strict, and being a place where one minute, you're one of the most respected members of the site, and the next minute, you're banned for something widely regarded as nonsensical or unfair. Examples (these are just a few) would be people like Croc, bank, Love, and Maddy (unbanned now, but i mean the first 3 times). That's not even to mention the hundreds, thousands perhaps, of people who have received warning points for things that are laughably inconsequential.

In conclusion, I'm not saying to remove the rule. Obviously, a limit is needed to keep MC-Market somewhat civil. However, the limit is set to such a high standard that inoffensive jokes, song lyrics, quotes, and so on have become punishable, which any community member would agree is ridiculous (just look at the reactions! 100% of agrees are from community members, 100% of disagrees are from staff members). As staff, I'm sure you have to see some disgusting content, so I understand your immediate reaction to allowing any of it through would be to reject even the notion, but I'm not asking for anything actually regarded as offensive to be allowed. Simply for the rules to serve their intended purpose of maintaining civility, rather than restricting communication.

In the end, this is from your perspective. As staff, we have to consider the desires and wants of everyone on this site but beyond that, how we want this site to grow and it's future. Members don't see the reports made, the tickets made. If you could, you'd see that NSFW posts, disrespectful posts, etc, they are reported by other members. They don't want this content. Now, if we had to pick between stopping posts that can make people uncomfortable and allowing a few members to joke around which they could in private, I'd pick stopping the posts any day.

Outside of MCM, the look of MCM is definitely not that we are too strict, it's that we allow too much toxicity and too many sketchy products to be sold. It's only within MCM, and even within MCM, it's only the people who break the rules, that view the rules as too strict.

Your example is also just not something we would warn for unless someone is trying to get warned by repeatedly saying something staff has told them not to. It's something we would verbally warn for though because to put it simply, these posts are not needed, and not everyone is comfortable with it. Not every 13 years old is comfortable with NSFW topics likely due to their upbringing and values. Being comfortable with selling your art services versus being comfortable talking about sex is very different and you can't compare the two. If you're mature enough to handle money, you should also be mature enough to realize that haha sex isn't needed on the site.

I can go through every single rule and explain why it's needed or how some people believe it's not strict enough and how some people think it's too strict. Also, bank was banned for doing community members and Love was banned for being a community risk. When Love was banned, people were happy because he was being reported constantly for his activities.

 

[User]

In the end, this is from your perspective. As staff, we have to consider the desires and wants of everyone on this site but beyond that, how we want this site to grow and it's future. Members don't see the reports made, the tickets made. If you could, you'd see that NSFW posts, disrespectful posts, etc, they are reported by other members. They don't want this content. Now, if we had to pick between stopping posts that can make people uncomfortable and allowing a few members to joke around which they could in private, I'd pick stopping the posts any day.

Outside of MCM, the look of MCM is definitely not that we are too strict, it's that we allow too much toxicity and too many sketchy products to be sold. It's only within MCM, and even within MCM, it's only the people who break the rules, that view the rules as too strict.

Your example is also just not something we would warn for unless someone is trying to get warned by repeatedly saying something staff has told them not to. It's something we would verbally warn for though because to put it simply, these posts are not needed, and not everyone is comfortable with it. Not every 13 years old is comfortable with NSFW topics likely due to their upbringing and values. Being comfortable with selling your art services versus being comfortable talking about sex is very different and you can't compare the two. If you're mature enough to handle money, you should also be mature enough to realize that haha sex isn't needed on the site.

I can go through every single rule and explain why it's needed or how some people believe it's not strict enough and how some people think it's too strict. Also, bank was banned for doing community members and Love was banned for being a community risk. When Love was banned, people were happy because he was being reported constantly for his activities.

It's not exclusively from my perspective; I have no doubt that someone, somewhere will hear "bobs and vagana" and get angry, but they're free to take it up in private, or even to disagree with this suggestion. So far though, 100% of community members who have voted, agree, and 0% of them disagree.

Outside of MCM... I don't have a clue who you're looking at, but if you're comparing yourself to competitor sites, neither of those are issues, and I think you know that. To be quite frank, MC-Market is easily the most uptight and strict online forum I've seen on any subject.

My example is not the only example, and I would mention more if it weren't for the threat of me then getting warned or suspended as a result. "haha sex" isn't needed, but neither is half of the rest of the site. Not every 13-year-old is comfortable with online trading either, so I don't see why you use that example.

When Love was banned, people memed it for 3 weeks straight, and it still comes up all the time. As for bank, I could be wrong here as this happened before I was well-immersed into the community, but he doxed someone who had broken numerous site rules (enough to get himself banned), and moreover, committed actual crimes (e.g fraud). The same practice is employed by, for example, security researchers, which there are several of on this site (I saw a few of them when the Twitter hack was still fresh).

At the end of the day, you're catering to a small and relatively silent part of the community, while then ignoring the general consensus of MCMarket users as to what they would be alright with.

 

[Kram]

It's not exclusively from my perspective; I have no doubt that someone, somewhere will hear "bobs and vagana" and get angry, but they're free to take it up in private, or even to disagree with this suggestion. So far though, 100% of community members who have voted, agree, and 0% of them disagree.

Outside of MCM... I don't have a clue who you're looking at, but if you're comparing yourself to competitor sites, neither of those are issues, and I think you know that. To be quite frank, MC-Market is easily the most uptight and strict online forum I've seen on any subject.

My example is not the only example, and I would mention more if it weren't for the threat of me then getting warned or suspended as a result. "haha sex" isn't needed, but neither is half of the rest of the site. Not every 13-year-old is comfortable with online trading either, so I don't see why you use that example.

When Love was banned, people memed it for 3 weeks straight, and it still comes up all the time. As for bank, I could be wrong here as this happened before I was well-immersed into the community, but he doxed someone who had broken numerous site rules (enough to get himself banned), and moreover, committed actual crimes (e.g fraud). The same practice is employed by, for example, security researchers, which there are several of on this site (I saw a few of them when the Twitter hack was still fresh).

At the end of the day, you're catering to a small and relatively silent part of the community, while then ignoring the general consensus of MCMarket users as to what they would be alright with.

So far, this suggestion has been up for less than 24 hours and only 14 people have agreed, and 5 members disagreed. Keep in mind, staff members are still community members, they have their own opinion based on what they would like to see on the site.

The places we'd censor to be competitors you're right. However, places like Spigot, which is likely where a bunch of recent members has joined from as our resources section has grown, definitely hold a different perspective of us and our moderation.

The 13-year olds that aren't comfortable with online trading wouldn't be joining this site as that is the point of the site, they aren't our target audience so it doesn't matter. However, there are people who are fine with online trading but aren't fine with NSFW content. Content that can bring everyone together is beneficial to the community, content that polarizes people and turns people away, aren't needed.

I distinctly remember people were happy with Love's ban because they were concerned about his behavior, thinking he was going to scam out. People weren't happy with the ban reason though because it's not a commonly used and accepted one.
Yes, Bank did dox someone who scammed someone if I recall correctly, but that doesn't make it okay. I have no clue what practice you're referring to though.

I think you underestimate the silent part of the community, it makes the majority, not the minority.

 

[User]

honestly it doesn't matter at this point, the suggestion was already denied by the time it got a disagree from a staff member

 

[Ally]

Yes there's a rule but it needs some sort of punishment slider. Tiny minor things that barely at all fall into "nsfw" receiving the 10 warning points and thus getting instantly suspended is a joke. There are different levels of NSFW and the rule should reflect that. Tiny small violations getting the same slam down of 10 warning points kicked from chat and instantly suspended due to the fact its 10 warning points is insanity. The punishment should be in line with the crime. At bare minimum the rule should have a slider for warning points and the punishment depending on what was said. I mean i walked in chat a few weeks back and laughed and said "Imagine allowing people selling stolen shit, but yelling in chat someone said nofap" as there was a conversation about it. And ive gotten thrown out for a week... You cannot even begin to tell me thats "fair" Didnt cam get thrown at for "minecraft condoms" as well? The rule itself is understandable. But you cannot sit here and say small comments that dont have bad intentions behind them should carry the same weight as someone posting porn links or other truthfully NSFW things.

TLDR Adjust the warning point value depending on what was said or done. Adjust the punishment based on what was said or done. A single guideline being applied to such a board range of a topic isnt working.... A simple chat kick vs suspending people for tiny ass comments would suffice.... You're just pissing people off at this point

We follow chatbox escalation procedures for most offences depending on severity (extreme scenarios will warrant instant escalation). If you've previously had 2 verbal warnings for NSFW content, you're going to receive points the third time. We expect that by the time you've been verbally warned twice, you should know not to do it again. That includes accidental violations.

 

[Kram]

Still boils down to the rule needs to be flexible based on the severity One size dosent fit all on this. Porn links and a small joke should not be getting the same punishment....

And they don't and they never have. However, if you constantly make an inappropriate joke, at some point you're going to get warning points. However, if you send actual porn, you're immediately getting warning points, no verbal warning.
We have always treated warnings as something that is flexible and based on context, we don't give staff members strict guidelines because there are always unique circumstances and we can't consider all of them.

User's example in this thread would not be something we'd give warning points for 99% of the time. If you have been warned for something like that, you can always make a ticket asking for a second opinion/escalate it to me.

 

[Mick]

We are a marketplace forum first and a community second. We allow minors into this community and our userbase is generally on the younger side so we try to ensure that we're an appropriate environment. You're strawmanning and exaggerating when you say that we don't allow "bobs and vagana".

Our rules are as strict as they should be in my opinion. If people want to be sexual or talk about porn or be inappropriate then do that in a community other than this Minecraft marketplace forum.

Denied, thanks for the suggestion