1  |   Order by index

Jan 9, 2001, 5:34pm

Community Discussion time!

What do you think about Shred's article about censorship at
http://www.awnews.com/features/?id=20?

Here are my thoughts:

He's got a good idea about giving the AW browser a filter that can
optionally turned on and off, but the abolition of the Peacekeepers and
Gatekeepers and all forms of censorship in AW is outrageous. Here are my
points:

1) The peacekeepers do a lot more than tell people to back off with the
vulgarity. They have helped me and my friends out numerous times when
settling domestic disputes over land and what should be put on it or be
taken off of it.

2) The Gatekeepers also do more than stand around the gateway of a world
and eject people who annoy them. They help out the tourists and get them
oriented with using AW. Think of what would happen if a bunch of tourists
ransacked you with tons of questions because you just happened to be at the
AW GZ at just the right time!!! It's annoying, and you wouldn't be able to
eject them.

3) If censorship in all its forms were to be banned, the porn industry
would move right in to "aw." Some of us don't want that trash littering our
streets. For those of you who are saying that "aw" is big enough for
everyone, I would just like to remind you that there is a reason that worlds
are rated G through NC-17.

4) "Most people are ejected for saying an innocent cuss word, not
harrassment." There is no such thing as an innocent cuss word. Usually
when someone says a cuss word, they mean to say it. And there are children
around here, you know. The language should be kept toned down around Ground
Zero's at least. If that optional filter Shred talked about was actually
put into AW, I doubt a first-time user would know how to turn it on.
Believe me, I work at a computer store, and you don't know how computer
illiterate some of the smartest people I've ever met can be.

5) AW is not the ACLU. ACLU says that they are not "anti anything."
That's absolutely true. Anyone remember that NAMBLA fiasco? For AW to
succeed, it needs limits, or it will alienate part of its user base (in
which case this means the kids who have parents monitoring their Internet
usage.) Alienation = less profits.

So in conclusion, Shred has it all turned around. The reason for Active
Worlds doing so poorly is not because of censorship, it's because the idea,
while good, was not implemented correctly. Protagonist has more to say
about that at awnews.com.

Chris.

Jan 9, 2001, 6:21pm

Since we're doing the number thing, I'll answer each one in kind. :)

1) The peacekeepers *do* serve a purpose, I'll agree with you there.
However that purpose has become questionable in recent weeks/months and
I'm starting to think Razzle's little dream has gone awry, as is the
case with most powers of censorship. (As Ron put it, "Once you start
controlling things, where do you stop?") I think the Peacekeepers can
still function as a moderator of disputes and the like, but the idea of
thought/talk police needs to be dropped.

2) Gatekeepers also perform a valuable service for the AW visitor. And I
can see why they wouldn't want to have unruly people hanging around
disturbing the newbie's first visit. However, their actions have also
been called into question on several occasions, and you wind up with a
PK situation again. Since part of the GK's job is to inform newbies on
how to use AW, perhaps they should point out that handy-dandy MUTE
feature to people who feel they are being bothered. That, in my opinion,
is the only censorship tool you need. That, and the ability to block
tgrams from unwanted people. *hint Roland!*

3) Let's take a trip back to AW, circa 1996. Back then, Worlds owned AW,
and their policy was "Chat/Explore at your own risk." They didn't do
anything to monitor content or clean up other people's messes. Now, back
then, I was prone to wander aimlessly and see all I could see in AW.
(still am in some instances :)) In all of my travels, I can maybe think
of all of three or four places I saw which featured porn. Hardly what I
would call "taking over AW". AW is, and should remain, the penultimate
melting pot... the "misc" world, if you will. No specific theme, no
specific objective, just the purest form of diversity. That means in AW
you can find everything from harmless cartoons to hardcore porn. But
because AW is so huge, the only way you'd find anything in AW was if you
were actually *looking* for it in the first place. But trying to keep
the entire AW world "clean" is equivalent to someone trying to get rid
of all the strip joints along the US East Coast: not plausible.

4) Again, I point to that oh-so-convenient MUTE feature that just
happens to be installed in your AW browser. If you don't hear something
you like, mute and ignore it. (And if newbies are instructed properly by
the GKs before they enter the AW mainstream, they'll know how to use it)
Most people who swear a blue streak are just doing it for the attention
anyway. And those who aren't merely use it for effect. Should they be
penalized for using one or two "nasty" words properly, as opposed to
someone who uses them merely for shock value? I think not.

As an aside, I've always wondered why it is people think so-called
"swear words" are so evil. Why is saying "fuck" so much worse than
saying "have sex"? Or "shit" so much worse than "feces"? They both mean
the same thing, yet one is labeled "improper". It never made sense to
me. Perhaps someone could enlighten me?

5) Gee, and here I thought AW was supposed to be about *not* having
limits, about having only your imagination (and AW development :P) to
limit you. As for alienation, what about alienating all the people who
abhor limitations on their creativity/expression? AW was practically
tailor-made for these kinds of people. I think you'll find that they
vastly outnumber any group of "parentally-controlled kids". (Exactly how
many kids in here do you think have their parents watching what they do
in AW, anyway?)

It has always been my belief that there is only one person who knows
what's good and bad for you, and that's yourself. If you don't like what
your reading, stop reading it. If you don't like what you're seeing,
stop looking at it. The idea of forcing your ideas and beliefs on
someone else just because you feel you are just and right is ludicrous.
Censorship, after all, is the root of all ignorance. Keep that in mind.

[View Quote] --
Goober King
Hasn't felt this good since his last rant! :)
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Jan 9, 2001, 6:49pm

no offence ment here toward you goober king but this is the same sit that
has basicly destroyed cybertown/colonycity
they gave in to a group called the teenz when they did they allowed them to
basicly say any thing they wanted and of corse they also had to allow this
for every one else
now cybertown/colonycity is dieing all because they choose not to censor
in rr censorship is not and should not be allowed
but in vr it has to be or the chat room turns in to nothing more than a porn
chat
for a chat comunity to survive their must be rules and they must be followed
if they are not followed the person must be punnished in some way
if you dont follow the rules in aw then you should be ejected
i my self dont see rules as sensorship maybe you and others do thats all
amatter of opinion
* returns to his seat after grabbing a few buckets of water * :)
[View Quote]

Jan 9, 2001, 7:08pm

you know even though as shred said aw is based in the us ok fine heres the
thing is every on in aw from the us??
no
so how can you impose one countrys rules on every one and if you can whos
laws should be aplyed?
and to put it another way in the us we have laws to protect kids from porn
and the like if you do not censor some one for cybering in public in a g
rated world maybe we should just let any one go and by a porn mag or go to a
xrated movie even if they are 8 9 10 years old. while were at we could make
child porn legal as thats a form of sensor ship as well it just happens to
be to protect children from harm just like aws rule of noprofanity in g
rated worlds. yes childporn is a hundred times no a 1000 times worse than
some one cussing but where do you stop when not sensoring?
do you stop at allowing foul language or cybering in public in a grated
world or do you just keep going?
we have rules in aw for a reason that reason being to protect children and
any one else from hearing what they do not want to hear if i wanted to hear
public cybering i could go to a xrated world so i dont see aw as sensoring
any thing there are world from g to x rated that is not censorship in the
least.

[View Quote]

Jan 9, 2001, 7:26pm

Ejection is not punishment. People live to get ejected. :)

They only way you can punish someone in VR is if the VR is good enough that you
can make it a pay-only thing. And then to make it so you can accomplish
something real, and the punishment is then real: you spent money and time to
accomplish something, now it can be taken away.

The online gaming environments have this happening. For instance, in Ultima or
Everquest or Asheron's Call or whatever, you spend money to be there. Then you
spend time building something up. If you misbehave, you lose all that. So
fewer people misbehave...and when they do they're gone as in, GONE. Not ejected
until they dial up again or start another "tourist" account or whatever the
workaround for ejection may be. There are still problems with their handling of
their customers of course. But when you have a pay-only service it's a whole
different scene.

[View Quote] > no offence ment here toward you goober king but this is the same sit that
> has basicly destroyed cybertown/colonycity
> they gave in to a group called the teenz when they did they allowed them to
> basicly say any thing they wanted and of corse they also had to allow this
> for every one else
> now cybertown/colonycity is dieing all because they choose not to censor
> in rr censorship is not and should not be allowed
> but in vr it has to be or the chat room turns in to nothing more than a porn
> chat
> for a chat comunity to survive their must be rules and they must be followed
> if they are not followed the person must be punnished in some way
> if you dont follow the rules in aw then you should be ejected
> i my self dont see rules as sensorship maybe you and others do thats all
> amatter of opinion
> * returns to his seat after grabbing a few buckets of water * :)
[View Quote]

Jan 9, 2001, 7:41pm

I suppose a good rule to go by is that there should only be limits when not
having them hurts someone else. This includes child porn, defamation,
libel, and obstruction/destruction of property. And of course this is a
serious ethics issue. Where do you know when to stop limiting? And what
about the opposite? Where do you know when to start limiting?

The rule above can also be applied to swear words in the case of children.
Swear words are taboo in mainstream society, but are becoming so even less
and less. People are constantly breaking through the taboo barrier. Anyone
remember the feminist and gay movements? Even those are still
controversial. Now it's starting all over again with one of the Univeristy
of California schools that offers a class to educate people on the use of
sex toys.

Then there is the point Goober brought up about a person should decide what
and what he/she does not want to know about. This brings up ethical issues
as well. Quote from Goober:

"It has always been my belief that there is only one person who knows what's
good and bad for you, and that's yourself."

Tell that to Elian, Mr. Goober. He wanted to stay in Florida because his
relatives allegedly brainwashed him. :) That six year old child is not
smart enough to properly evaluate the situation he was in. So what tells me
adults are any smarter? There's a reason why Jay Leno's Jay Walking segment
is so popular. :P Some people just can't learn or never even bothered.

So the question is this: How do people know what should be censored and
what should not?

These are some questions for you guys to think about. There really are no
right or wrong answers here as far as this discussion goes.


[View Quote]

Jan 9, 2001, 8:03pm

ok you say mute some troll as thats what these people are that were talking
bout thoose who live to be ejected ok so you say just mute them thats a
great idea as long as this troll is also totaly dumb and dont relize that by
tporting out of the world and comeing back un mutes them this goes for any
chat room i know of some call it ignore a few call it turn your back but all
shats i know of have one thing incmmon say you are muted ignored or some one
has turned their back to you you can clear this out by one closeing and
reopening or 2 as it is in aw tporting to another world and returning
muteing in any fomr does no good.
ejecting some one for say 5 minutes will work especialy if that eject is
based on blocking a ip that person will try loging bac in once or twice and
then leavinf period chances are that troll wont come back some hard core
trolls will.
in the old blaxxun com we didn have boot tools and were constantly arassed
by trolls we stayed for a long time fianly leaving the trolls didnt win we
let them win and let them have the worthless place if aw were to disban or
limit the gks/pks and get rid of the bots with the caps to eject the trolls
would adventualy win and aw would die as the old blaxxun com died and as
blaxxun owned colonycity/cybertown is now dieing.
im sure all here will agree with me on this one point no one here unless it
be a troll wants aw to die as blaxxun com has died....
[View Quote]

Jan 9, 2001, 8:17pm

I wasn't trying to suggest that there should be no rules at all. As you
said, rules are there to protect people, and I whole-heartedly support
that idea. The point I was trying to make was it's one thing to limit a
person's actions, (i.e. doing something that clearly endangers self or
others) but it's something else entirely to limit what a person is
allowed to think/say/act. If someone feels the need to "curse" in order
to articulate themselves, I'm not going to yell at them. If someone
feels they want to curse just to piss people off, I mute them; they
aren't worth wasting my time worrying about. If people decide to cyber
in my presence, I mute them as well. Notice a pattern?

As for my quote, I guess I should have been more clear. I meant once
you're old enough to know the difference between right and wrong. I
vehemently agree that it's up to the parents to decide for their child
what is right and wrong, and to show them the difference so that, in
time, they'll be able to make their own decisions. But once you're out
on your own, only you should decide what is good or bad for you, and no
one can tell you otherwise.

And as for your last point, are you suggesting that we should decide for
the "stupid people" what's right or wrong? How would we know? Who's to
say we're not the "stupid" ones? This is why censorship is so wrong,
(not to be confused with "following the rules") because there is no
(mortal) all-knowing authority on what's right or wrong, so who are we
to decide either way?

As for nova's points, as I said, I'm all for following the rules. It's
just that some of these so-called rules that COF has laid out are so
grey and subjective that they become almost ineffective. Either they
need to get *really* specific (which is nigh on impossible; How does one
define a "swear word"? Where's the line between "art" (or "beauty") and
"porn"?) or abolish those rules altogether. I'm am in favor of the
latter.

[View Quote] --
Goober King
Revels in the all-mighty rant!
rar1 at acsu.buffalo.edu

Jan 9, 2001, 8:29pm

but what im saying is this active worlds puts a rateing on each of their
worlds g through x (nc 17)
if something is not exceptable in a g rated movie it should not be
acceptable in a grated world .
if some one comes in and says some thing to the effec i think (fill in your
least fav politician here) is a son of a bitch mfer useing the true word
thats there opinion of said political figure but being grated world this
person should be ejected in a r rated world i say this is fine this type of
language is allowable in a r rated or above moive but not below it you will
ocasionaly see wording like this in a pg 13 movie but rarly
[View Quote]

Jan 9, 2001, 9:43pm

[View Quote] I think the pk's may tell people to stop spouting vulgarities at awgate, and
also kick them out when they behave like assholes. But this process should
*never* be automated by a bot or something. And a "bad word" every now and
then is not a problem, imho. Filtering sucks, just mute someone if he annoys
you, and above all don't pay attention. Censorship is very bad, of course,
but kicking ill-behaving people out of awgate is not censorship, but more
like cleaning up.

There are imo different ways to say those words. To give an example:

"That book fell on my head, and now it hurts. That sucks." This is
completely ok, imo.

"You suck." This is meant in a personal way, and not polite at all. I don't
think this is ok. You may say it, but people won't like you, and it's a good
reason to be kicked out of somewhere. There are much better ways to tell
someone you don't like him.

> 1) The peacekeepers do a lot more than tell people to back off with the
> vulgarity. They have helped me and my friends out numerous times when
> settling domestic disputes over land and what should be put on it or be
> taken off of it.

Seems like good work. Seems like a high-risk job on pissing people off too.

> 2) The Gatekeepers also do more than stand around the gateway of a world
> and eject people who annoy them. They help out the tourists and get them
> oriented with using AW. Think of what would happen if a bunch of tourists
> ransacked you with tons of questions because you just happened to be at
the
> AW GZ at just the right time!!! It's annoying, and you wouldn't be able
to
> eject them.

ya, so? You wish to eject a ton of tourists because they ask questions? You
can always just bail out to another world if you get into such a situation.
I, for one, wouldn't mind to be in such a situation, see how much answers
you can give as fast as possible.

> 3) If censorship in all its forms were to be banned, the porn industry
> would move right in to "aw."

Porn made VHS tapes big... maybe it can do something for AW too :-) The porn
industry *is* a multi-billion dollar industry, whether you like it or not.
But people who can't handle it should be able to shield themselves from it.
We already have world ratings, so that's pretty much ok.

> Some of us don't want that trash littering our
> streets.

porn != trash (and != means "is not equal to")

That's just your view. And you don't have to worry, any porn would probably
be x-rated, just don't go to x-rated worlds. AWprime and AWgate are both not
x-rated, so you wouldn't have to worry there.

> For those of you who are saying that "aw" is big enough for
> everyone, I would just like to remind you that there is a reason that
worlds
> are rated G through NC-17.

whatever that rating means... there are many rating systems all over the
world. Rate yourself the way you like best.

> 4) "Most people are ejected for saying an innocent cuss word, not
> harrassment." There is no such thing as an innocent cuss word.

Now what would be non-innocent about them?

> Usually
> when someone says a cuss word, they mean to say it.

No, they mean to express something to others. And they use the words they
think are appropriate to do so. Unfortunately, other people can see those
words in a different way. Some people are raised with the idea that "shit"
is a word someone should be hanged for, and other people learn that it is a
usual word to express frustration. When you put those people together, you
get problems.

> And there are children
> around here, you know.

That's one of the lamest arguments used around this topic. As if children
don't use cuss words themselves. And even if they hear one, they won't die
or become an instant criminal or something.

> The language should be kept toned down around Ground
> Zero's at least.

Sure. People harassing other people should be kicked out, as this clearly
spoils the fun for someone. And it doesn't look good when people are cursing
all around.

> If that optional filter Shred talked about was actually
> put into AW, I doubt a first-time user would know how to turn it on.

If it was on, it wouldn't work well. It would either filter out too much or
not enough. There are almost an infinite different ways to spell some of
those words, and if that doesn't work you can always start in another
language.

> Believe me, I work at a computer store, and you don't know how computer
> illiterate some of the smartest people I've ever met can be.

I know some tech stories :-)

> 5) AW is not the ACLU. ACLU says that they are not "anti anything."
> That's absolutely true. Anyone remember that NAMBLA fiasco? For AW to
> succeed, it needs limits, or it will alienate part of its user base (in
> which case this means the kids who have parents monitoring their Internet
> usage.) Alienation = less profits.

hm... I know some other things they might want to do too if they really like
the profits coming from their users.

> So in conclusion, Shred has it all turned around. The reason for Active
> Worlds doing so poorly is not because of censorship,

Censorship is just something stupid hanging around. I don't think it's the
reason for AW doing poorly either. (on the other hand, AW doesn't do all
that bad either... it just could be so much more)

> it's because the idea,
> while good, was not implemented correctly. Protagonist has more to say
> about that at awnews.com.

quite right.

>
> Chris.
>
>

Jan 9, 2001, 10:00pm

[View Quote] That has something to do with those weird people from the Victorian age.
They were completely affraid of anything that had to do with body functions
and nudity, and therefore banned anything that relates to them. Before that
time there was nothing weird about them.. Other cultures don't really mind
about body functions, but have other topics, like diseases or so that are
taboo. Things like "shit" and "fuck" are *not* bad, they are *made* bad by
society, in some countries more than in others. And because people had to
talk about these things anyway, they usually make up euphemisms - other
words or expressions - and use them as something that is "polite". Whether
or not a word is bad or whatever is just something most people in the
society deceide on, yet most people don't even know they do. They just do it
because everyone does, or because they are raised with those idea's.

> 5) Gee, and here I thought AW was supposed to be about *not* having
> limits, about having only your imagination (and AW development :P) to
> limit you. As for alienation, what about alienating all the people who
> abhor limitations on their creativity/expression? AW was practically
> tailor-made for these kinds of people. I think you'll find that they
> vastly outnumber any group of "parentally-controlled kids". (Exactly how
> many kids in here do you think have their parents watching what they do
> in AW, anyway?)

Ever noticed how people always want restrictions and limits to control
*other* people? It's always "I don't want *them* to do this-or-that because
*I* think it's bad".

> It has always been my belief that there is only one person who knows
> what's good and bad for you, and that's yourself.

There are some restrictions. Society always overrules the individual, so if
you think killing little sheep is ok, and everyone else thinks it's not,
it's considered "bad" and you should not do it or people will get angry at
you. (btw, I do not advocate killing little sheep here, it's just an
example)

> If you don't like what
> your reading, stop reading it. If you don't like what you're seeing,
> stop looking at it.

And if you have a happy little place where nobody does something you don't
like, and suddenly people come in and do things you don't like, you'll get
angry. Even if you think they are coming, you'll get angry.

> The idea of forcing your ideas and beliefs on
> someone else just because you feel you are just and right is ludicrous.

Quite so. Usually people don't even know *why* they are just and right.

> Censorship, after all, is the root of all ignorance. Keep that in mind.

Yup.

Jan 9, 2001, 10:04pm

[View Quote] Give the people who want to talk about porn their own chat room, and
everything's ok.

> for a chat comunity to survive their must be rules and they must be
followed
> if they are not followed the person must be punnished in some way
> if you dont follow the rules in aw then you should be ejected

AWcom can do this because they own AW and therefore make the rules. The
rules are here to make sure the kind of people they don't want in here are
kept out.

> i my self dont see rules as sensorship maybe you and others do thats all
> amatter of opinion

If the rules tell you not to talk about something, it is censorship, since
that is what censorship is (amongst others)

Jan 9, 2001, 10:11pm

[View Quote] AW is owned by AWcom, so they make and enforce the rules. Since they are
based in the US, it will probably be US rules.

> and to put it another way in the us we have laws to protect kids from porn
> and the like if you do not censor some one for cybering in public in a g
> rated world maybe we should just let any one go and by a porn mag or go to
a
> xrated movie even if they are 8 9 10 years old. while were at we could
make
> child porn legal

child porn is illegal because it usually goes hand in hand with child
molesting. And since the adults involved usually have a strong influence on
the children, they don't have much choice. Therefore it's bad for the
children. This is not censorship, it's a law to prevent children from sexual
abuse.

> as thats a form of sensor ship as well it just happens to
> be to protect children from harm just like aws rule of noprofanity in g
> rated worlds. yes childporn is a hundred times no a 1000 times worse than
> some one cussing but where do you stop when not sensoring?
> do you stop at allowing foul language or cybering in public in a grated
> world or do you just keep going?

"where do you stop" is always a valid question. But it shouldn't be a reason
to not to do anything, just make it very clear for yourself where you want
to stop. And never loose your original goal.

> we have rules in aw for a reason that reason being to protect children and
> any one else from hearing what they do not want to hear if i wanted to
hear

How do you know they don't want to hear those things?

> public cybering i could go to a xrated world so i dont see aw as sensoring
> any thing there are world from g to x rated that is not censorship in
the
> least.

It *is* censoring.

>
[View Quote]

Jan 9, 2001, 10:36pm

i my self have no problem with the ocasinal this sucks or as ive seen alot
of latly and say my self that sux or suxx i say it that way cause its simply
faster than typing sucks but some language should not be used in a g rated
world is all im saying same for pg and pg 13 after that if you dont want to
here it you can goto a world that doesnt allow the language but ill be
dambed if im going to be in a g rated pg or pg 13 and have to leave because
some punk thinks free speech means he can sit there and cuss un till evry
one leaves as this type of person will be the type who came for that exact
purpose you say mute them ok yeh ill mute him what will he do every few
minutes tport and come back cclearing the mute out a troll will keep this up
untill one of 2 things happens every one leaves or he is ejected. i say yes
free speech should never be taken a way but you also should not be alowed to
break simple rules if you do break them then you should be punished in some
mannor alowing some one to constanly cuss does hurt some one it hurts the
person who want to be in a clean cussing free inviro people seem to forget
thats there are people from every religion and race in aw and aw gate a
cristian will not want to hear this language even if you dont agree with his
beliefs they should be respected and if they are not the person who isnt
should be delt with by being ejected i do agree that a person should not be
imediatly ejected for comeing in and saying something to the effect "what
the hell is this place?" when i was a city guide in colony city i seen many
many people come in and say just that you know how mind blowing it is for
some one who just got a computer to find 3d chat? first thing i always said
to them "this is colonycity a 3d chat room and is a g rated chat " most
would say o ok sorry
so yes i think some things are obviously in need of being reworked as i have
seen people come in say something like what the hell is this place and
imidatly be ejected
(personal experaince) was in some world or another a grated worl forgot the
name and dont even know if its still open any more was helping some newbie
whent through the normal stuff arrow keys to move yad yada yada
then was explaining how to pass though objects to him
i said to pass through a object use your shit key wham i was ejected i
sliped and missed the t would i consider this fair no i should have recived
a warning about it that shouldnt be alowed as matter of fact their should be
no bot that ejects with no warning alowed in aw as far as im conserned.
but when you warn some one not to say shit or waht ever and they start with
this shit why cant i say shit i think that bullshit stuff they should be
ejected
[View Quote]

Jan 10, 2001, 12:56am

Very good points there. Also, I never assumed anything about you. Those
were just some questions to liven up the thread. :)


SW Chris
Staff Officer, SW City
Governor Secretariat, James River; a subcommunity of SW City


[View Quote]

Jan 21, 2001, 6:20am

Hi Everyone,


[View Quote] >

**** Problem with using "mute" at the Gate is a hassle because on a typical
Friday and Saturday night, people come in and cause trouble more than any other
day. If you went around muting all those whom swear or do anything off-color,
then you've virtually muted most of those at the Gate and are spending all your
time muting and can't enjoy yourself. Once the bot ejects those who decide to
curse, or if someone doesn't curse but is ejected by a GK, it's normally 5
minutes (normal first offense if 5 for GK's). Then what happens??? The same
person comes back and causes more trouble and it can last for hours.. This is a
game.. or when someone wants attention and no matter if it's "good" or "bad"
attention, they get it. Also, If a number of people mute someone, they find out
from not getting this attention, leave and then log back in, where we then need
to "mute" again every time they return. ****

>

**** From being a regualr at the Gate, I can assure anyone that it's usually a
teen who is comming in to cause trouble and doing the swearing.. Obviously most
parents do not hang over their kid's shoulders watching everything they do or
say in AW, let alone the entire net. If they are called on the carpet their
excuse is that they are a "kid" and can do whatever they want and that everyone
is suposed to exclude them from simple chat ettiquette.

Those that know "right from wrong", well there seems to be this problem that
some believe that they can do anything online and do not need to go by any
rules.. No one can see them or know where they live, etc so that helps some act
like idiots. ****

>

**** Maybe if parents did their jobs in child rearing, all persons would know
how to conduct themselves according to some level of cordial discussion?? ****

>

**** Funny thing happened to me.. A bunch of us were joking around and lightly
making sport of another regular.. Towards the ending of this I decided to make
the comment that no matter what, this person was just a "pussycat" and was very
endearing.. Well even though I posted "pussycat", not "pussy cat", the bot
nailed me because of saying the word "pussy" and was ejected... *LOL*

I'm suprised that no one has remarked about the comments of:
"First off, Activeworlds.com is losing money because of censorship. For example,
if a newbie comes into the Gateway, for the first time, and is ejected for using
all caps, do you really think he/she is going to come back and register?"

When someone comes to the Gate and uses all caps, there are a number of us who
ask them to unlock their cap lock because we are blinded by it... My typical
remark is "Thanks for screaming, now I'm blind.. thankyouverymuch"

When a GK is on (or sometimes cits have the macros at hand and post them), they
are told that all caps indicates screaming/yelling, that's it.. I do not know of
anyone who has been ejected for this reason, unless they continue to use caps
after so many warnings to stop it..

Blessings and May Your Path Be Smooth,
*~~~AngelsLuv~~~*

My Sites:

~AngelsLuv~
http://www.geocities.com/angelsluv1/
~The Peter Barton Site~
http://www.peterbarton.50megs.com/
http://www3.50megs.com/peterbarton/
~Magick~
http://users2.50megs.com/angelsluv/

Fight Spam! Join CAUCE! == http://www.cauce.org/

1  |   Order by index