1  2  3  |   Order by index

Jan 26, 2005, 1:54pm

"syduck": selam
"syduck": hi
Rossyboy: selam backwards is males
"Yami the Pharoah": golduck
Rossyboy: I like males.
"syduck": hi
Immigration Officer: You have been ejected from awgate


Discussion with GK about it later:

GK Data1: Nope you can go after women that is normal, gay behavior is
not normal nor accepted here
Zephyrus: oh, you're gonna clean it :)
Rossyboy: (to GK Data1) Oh okay :¬)
GK Data1: next whisper you get an hour time out
Cocoa2 o: lol
Shadow Creature: See, most kids find clowns kind of scary, so my costume
is an undead psycho clown with rolled up eyes, and yelloyed fangs
Rossyboy: (to GK Data1) So where in the rules does it say that again?
Zephyrus: sorry, male
Shadow Creature: yellowed*
Immigration Officer: You have been ejected from awgate

Jan 26, 2005, 1:59pm

Firstly its Homophobic, I imagine that it was just a typo.

Secondly, this action of ejection for the given reason is discrimination on
behalf of the gatekeepers. Even your comment "I like males" is a ridiculous
think to eject on, after all I imagine you have male friends. . . .

This is another clear example of how undisciplined and ridiculous the GK's
are. I still call for their dismissal.

- Cal

Jan 26, 2005, 3:35pm

I assume this means thing? think to eject on,


[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 3:40pm

The GK's never cease to amaze me..
This is disgusting.

[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 3:43pm

I agree but ENZO is the one who says they must do this I think at least he
is the one who puts the words into the bot for rejection really shows us
a lot about AW


[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 4:06pm

Actually, I don't believe that that is an actual rule.

"Public meeting areas are not appropriate spaces for cyber-sexual
behaviour, sexual orientation discussions or activity."

This rule is the closest. However, sexual orientation discussions and
discussions about one specific person's orientation are two different
things.

[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 4:29pm

Indeed I did, sorry :)

[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 5:45pm

"This rule is the closest. However, sexual orientation discussions and
discussions about one specific person's orientation are two different
things."

Not necessarily. It can be just as easily interpreted as one in the same.





[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 6:22pm

yep, i agree with jadedaemt. you were disscussing (atleast begining to)
you're sexual orientation, and so, that would be a good enough reason to
eject you. which would make "i like females" ejectable too.

And just my opinion, but i'm guessing the GK at the time, wasn't so much
being homophobic, as cautious. It looked like you were going to start
causing trouble.


-SWE

[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 6:54pm

You guys are all about pissing off some GK's aren't you....

Here's a suggestion... Leave the gate to the tourists, and go find
somewhere better to chat. Let the GK's and retarded acting (most of
them, not all) tourists to do their thing. Pick a world where there
aren't uptight eject-happy people standing around all the time.

Just my personal opinion....

This is pretty ridiculous though....

-J



[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 8:08pm

I suggest you telegram Lady Teal about it, Rossy.

[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 10:11pm

I think this ejection is both un-fair and is a act of personal
discrimination against another person. Rossyboy didn't break any rules and
certainly did not deserve a eject. Secondly, a 1 hour time out as Data put
it is outragious for just asking why this person was ejected. I really wish
GKs would calm down and I think some need to be re-considered in keeping
their jobs.

-Matt

[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 10:33pm

I tend to agree with the others on this one, this is unfair and is
discrimination. It's one of the reasons why I keep away from the gate. I
would suggest you complain about it. The way he says that going after
women is normal and how he says that gay behavior is not normal nor
accepted is offensive. Also when Rossyboy asked IN PRIVATE to be shown
the rule of where it says discussion of this nature is not allowed, he
is ejected again. He wasn't even speaking about it publically.. Why the
eject???

This is one of the things that I don't come to the AW universe much
anymore, I find all the GK's to be far too uptight about things. It's a
shame though because AW is a very nice place to be..

-Steve

[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 10:56pm

actually, technicly, he did break a rule, check the other posts.

-SWE

[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 11:12pm

While this problem is simple to solve for you, simply staying away from the
gate would suffice, I can't help but wonder what the responce of a newcomer
to aw, who didn't have a choice to not enter the gate, and had been placed
in the same situation would have reacted to that like.

Oh, and, this is one of the reasons why my home world is Teengate. :p

[View Quote]

Jan 26, 2005, 11:45pm

Technically he did break a guideline (if you want to interpret it that
way). The way the ejects were conducted was unfair however for the
following reasons:

1st Eject
1) No warning. A warning should virtually always be given.

2nd Eject
1) Quote by GK: "Nope you can go after women that is normal, gay
behavior is not normal nor accepted here". Stating that "gay behavior"
is not normal is harassment and discrimination.
2) Eject was completely unwarranted. Rossyboy should have been
immediately directed to an email address or a contact where he could
take the issue. If he had pressed the issue further, then an
warning/eject would have been nescessary.

Ryan

Jan 27, 2005, 12:10am

[View Quote]

Jan 27, 2005, 12:59am

I think it's getting obvious that AWI needs to address the issues with
the GKs. I understand that people make mistakes, but the complaints are
just so consistant and numerous. It's a shame, but the facts point to
the GKs becoming an organization focused on regulating morality and
stopping "thoughtcrime". They don't even require evidence of wrongdoing
or issue warnings that you have done something wrong before they eject.

As for your comment C P, it doesn't matter what my beliefs or ideas are
when it comes to ejecting or acting as an "official". The rules and
procedures must be followed and equally applied regardless of someone's
opinion of whether or not something is morally right or not. It is
obvious that the procedures aren't being fairly applied here. It could
be argued (with some merit) that Rossyboy is going out of his way to get
ejected but each incident must be evaluated on the facts of that
incident. Prior incidents should only serve to alert GKs to a
*potential* problem, not an *actual* problem.

In any case, though, I think the best solution is to simply avoid AWGate
if you do not agree with the way GKs manage the world or if you consider
yourself a "victim" of GK abuse :(

Ryan

[View Quote]

Jan 27, 2005, 1:08am

Well put..

[View Quote]

Jan 27, 2005, 4:13am

Haha... way to play the "thoughtcrime" card.

I just wonder how many people know where that came from....

-J

[View Quote]

Jan 27, 2005, 6:20am

Please, telegram her. Enough of the public displays of nuisance.

Chris

[View Quote]

Jan 27, 2005, 6:54am

The one with the triplets who can see in to the future and people get
arrested before they commit the crime?

- MR

[View Quote]

Jan 27, 2005, 12:42pm

Many people weren't around or old enough to see the movie when it was
released in "1984", let alone in 1948 when the novel was published. The good
thing about books is they will always be here for us to enjoy ( Unless Ray
Bradbury's vision of the future rings truer than George Orwell's vision ).
[View Quote]

Jan 27, 2005, 3:57pm

No, that was a movie called "Minority Report". That's not where the
comment came from.

The comment came from (as usul 2 explained) the book "1984" by George
Orwell. In this book, the government basicly controlled everything and
"thoughtcrime" was a punsihable offense.

See:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0451524934/qid=1106848309/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-1026980-6267242?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

Here's the editorial review:
"Outside, even through the shut window pane, the world looked cold. Down
in the street little eddies of wind were whirling dust and torn paper
into spirals, and though the sun was shining and the sky a harsh blue,
there seemed to be no color in anything except the posters that were
plastered everywhere."
The year is 1984; the scene is London, largest population center of
Airstrip One.

Airstrip One is part of the vast political entity Oceania, which is
eternally at war with one of two other vast entities, Eurasia and
Eastasia. At any moment, depending upon current alignments, all existing
records show either that Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia and
allied with Eastasia, or that it has always been at war with Eastasia
and allied with Eurasia. Winston Smith knows this, because his work at
the Ministry of Truth involves the constant "correction" of such
records. "'Who controls the past,' ran the Party slogan, 'controls the
future: who controls the present controls the past.'"

In a grim city and a terrifying country, where Big Brother is always
Watching You and the Thought Police can practically read your mind,
Winston is a man in grave danger for the simple reason that his memory
still functions. He knows the Party's official image of the world is a
fluid fiction. He knows the Party controls the people by feeding them
lies and narrowing their imaginations through a process of bewilderment
and brutalization that alienates each individual from his fellows and
deprives him of every liberating human pursuit from reasoned inquiry to
sexual passion. Drawn into a forbidden love affair, Winston finds the
courage to join a secret revolutionary organization called The
Brotherhood, dedicated to the destruction of the Party. Together with
his beloved Julia, he hazards his life in a deadly match against the
powers that be.

Newspeak, doublethink, thoughtcrime--in 1984, George Orwell created a
whole vocabulary of words concerning totalitarian control that have
since passed into our common vocabulary. More importantly, he has
portrayed a chillingly credible dystopia. In our deeply anxious world,
the seeds of unthinking conformity are everywhere in evidence; and Big
Brother is always looking for his chance. --Daniel Hintzsche--This text
refers to the Hardcover edition.


[View Quote]

Jan 27, 2005, 3:59pm

well, book buring has happened in the past. But I doubt it would ever
happen on that sorta scale.

(If you're confused, see
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0345342968/qid=1106848720/sr=2-1/ref=pd_ka_b_2_1/002-1026980-6267242
)

[View Quote]

Jan 27, 2005, 4:31pm

Star Trek - The Next Generation, stole that for one of its episodes.

- MR

[View Quote]

Jan 27, 2005, 5:31pm

[View Quote] Rossyboy should write to GK executive team leaders
at gatekeepers at activeworlds.com and include the chat log.
He can also try to complain to info at activeworlds.com if he wants,
but GKs are a community group and not run by AWI, not least for legal reasons.

However, I don't think that the GK here will be seen as acting against the GK guidelines:
It is not appropriate to discuss sexual orientation in a strictly G rated world.
GKs are allowed to eject without warning, if they feel that necessary.
Continuing argument after ejection can be considered harassment.
GKs do not have to argue with citizens who should know the rules already.
A returning offender can be ejected for 1 hour or more.
And, GKs are largely trusted to handle things according to their own discretion.

Yes there are GKs from all walks of life, some even homophobic (or gay!)
or Gorean or whatever, but they may still be able to do properly
what they are supposed to do, which is to greet and help newcomers.

--
Mauz
http://mauz.info

Jan 27, 2005, 6:05pm

"Mauz" <mauz at my.activeworlds.com> wrote

> However, I don't think that the GK here will be seen as acting against the
> GK guidelines:
> It is not appropriate to discuss sexual orientation in a strictly G rated
> world.
> GKs are allowed to eject without warning, if they feel that necessary.

I do believe there are 3 situations in when this is allowed by the GK
guidelines, but I deleted the telegram they were in, anyone care to post
them?

> Continuing argument after ejection can be considered harassment.

Oh yes... lets eject him, and then not be responsable for our actions... =\

> GKs do not have to argue with citizens who should know the rules already.

We have already seen examples of the GK's not following rules, the sexual
chosing comment is completly illegal, at least in europe.

> A returning offender can be ejected for 1 hour or more.

Well of course they are going to reoffend if they are being ejected
incorrectly.

> And, GKs are largely trusted to handle things according to their own
> discretion.

They shouldent be, they are not their for their own personal domination...
Yesh the GK's have gone to pot since Skyee died.

> Yes there are GKs from all walks of life, some even homophobic (or gay!)
> or Gorean or whatever, but they may still be able to do properly
> what they are supposed to do, which is to greet and help newcomers.

Yet a lot of them spew completly incorrect macros in the wrong situations..

>
> --
> Mauz
> http://mauz.info
>

Jan 27, 2005, 8:01pm

Then this really needs to change because it's being abused since all of
the GKs I've seen seem to never feel that warnings are nescessary.

As far as I know, for EVERY other official AWI organization that uses
eject, at least ONE warning is required.

Ryan

[View Quote]

Jan 28, 2005, 5:58am

So if someone knows better but acts unbecoming you should entertain them
with a threat or two of ejection? I, for one, would never go to awgate and
behave any other way other than what the world is rated for, I keep my convo
appropriate for any child that may be there. So why do people continually go
there and push the boundaries? Why not just go to other worlds and play
there? Act however you think is fitting of that world's rating ... you are
at the mercy of the world owners non the less.

I'm willing to bet that Rossy would have argued the fact no matter what
because he's right in his mind but isn't bearing in mind where he's at. What
makes the line his convo was taking any more right than say a gorean saying
that he likes women, women are his slaves. I'm not saying either *lifestyle*
is wrong, to each their own ... but how is that appropriate convo for the
gate with the potential of a child coming in at any time?

I agree with Mauz, awgate is a greeting place to help newcomers learn the
program, that is the first priority of GKs imho ... secondarily is to keep
the peace and keep the convos g-rated. AWgate is g-rated because there are
often young children in there ... this is nothing new! If you need to
express yourself at another more *mature* level then go to a world that is
higher rated, that's why there are ratings.

LNH


--

[View Quote]

1  2  3  |   Order by index