Rule Change targeting offsite bullying/harassment

[Seasonal]

Illegal/Harmful/Dangerous behavior: If we have adequate cause to believe this person poses a real threat to CS or CS users, then we may take action based on their activity offsite. For example, a person seeking illicit relationships with minors. If there is no reason to believe their behavior will ever cross over onto CS, e.g. sharing unrelated R18 artwork on an adult art forum, this does not concern us.

Sorry this answer confuses me a little, it's not very clear. Are you saying if a user is seeking illicit relationships with minors, however aren't doing it directly on cs, or are doing it behind the scenes, the user will still be allowed to participate in a children-based community? Please correct me if I'm wrong I'm honestly confused, this response has a lot of grey area that I would really appreciate if it was cleared up

Specifically about what cs would consider a threat to our community? Users who discuss and share national socialism? Users who regularly share graphic imagery such as gore or horror on an account connected to cs? Users who share and consume R18 of that would be dangerous to my neice or little sister? To what extent would these users be allowed to regularly participate on our site, if there was clear evidence to tie them to these things I feel like it would be dangerous to let them near children and be able to interact with the cs community.
I hope you understand I'm using extremes off the top of my head as examples, I'm not saying I've seen any users who match these descriptions, I'm just trying to get a better grasp of what is trying to be said here.

Illegal/Harmful/Dangerous behavior: If we have adequate cause to believe this person poses a real threat to CS or CS users, then we may take action based on their activity offsite.

If an adult is seeking out inappropriate relationships with minors, even offsite, then we can take action on CS.

Specifically about what cs would consider a threat to our community?

Like Tess said, there is no one blanket statement or list of reasons that we can provide, as every situation is different. If you feel that something or someone may pose a threat to our users, submit a report and CS staff will take a look. We'd rather things be over-reported than under-reported if it means helping someone.

I've noticed from friends' experiences with staff, there can be a lot of bias from certain members of staff. One member of staff may consider something non-problematic, versus another who may agree with the user reporting a ticket. How can users be assured a fair judgement from higher ups when some staff members are known to have wavering opinions compared to others?

Multiple staff members work on help tickets and reports together so this is very unlikely to occur. If you feel that a staff member has treated you unfairly, you are welcome to submit a ticket that only admins can see.

what if we send in help tickets and they just get looked over and not dealt with? i have instances where i send in a ticket, and nothing gets done. no response from staff. if i try to report again, i can't. i've spoken to people who have had the same issue.

i also agree with only_sky. what will you guys do if one staff member things it's fine, but another doesn't? or if they are biased on a subject?

Staff will not always notify you if a report or ticket has been handled, so action may have been taken without your knowledge. If you have any questions about specific instances, feel free to submit another help ticket or PM me and I can take a look.

[Lacuna]

if posts must be deleted to protect users who could potentially harm the community, can we be given more of a reason?

it seems like it should be addressed publicly since it does involve more than just those users. elaborating on this aside from the claim of vaguing would be nice. i understand not wanting to start conflict, but to address something that affects the site as a whole in a private discussion rubs me the wrong way. not only can there be bias as stated by @ only_sky, but the site is notorious for poor staff communication. i feel like there are better ways to approach this.

If you feel users are a danger to the community, please submit a help ticket with all information. It will not be overlooked; we are taking these situations very seriously. These reports will be evaluated by multiple impartial people who are aware of the laws and statutes users are concerned about.

If a user is deemed harmful or potentially harmful to the community, they will be removed from the site, along with any danger they pose. There is no reason to broadcast specific users or details of specific situations/bans, which is why, as Seasonal said, you may not get a specific reply to your report. This is not poor communication; it is an attempt to avoid drama and hatefulness both on and offsite if some users know details that have not been made public (and do not need to be made public).

What was removed were posts with very detailed scenarios about what specific users are being accused of without naming them or being able to provide proof, which helps no one; it only breaks our rules regarding personal attacks against other users. Tess has provided a detailed clarification on potential situations on the previous page, and there has been additional explanation after that as well. At the end of the day, everything will need to be evaluated on a case by case basis and we cannot give the best answers to hypotheticals here, because they are not tailored to the real situations.

[nickjr]

Oh, I think I understand what Tess was trying to say in that paragraph.

Adults doing unproblematic adult things on unproblematic websites aren't a cause for concern--Tess's example here is "sharing unrelated R18 artwork on an adult art forum" so e.g. if you post art of an adult OC in certain ooh-la-la poses on websites that are specifically for adult artwork and prohibit minors from entering. It's when people do problematic things or are on problematic websites that they become a cause for concern.

edit: apparently tonight is not my night for English... by "problematic" I meant what Lacuna says below: illegal and/or harmful to children

[soma fish]

OH LORD thank you so much tess! Question...

What if a user gets unfairly banned? Like for example: a user is hacked by another user and their pets/items get traded away to another user (the hacker). Then, another user that the hacked person has interacted with often, gets banned because t​he mods/admin (whoever dealt with the issue) say thats its them. And when they ban the account that is supposedly the alt account and the person who the hacked person interacts with, its unfair to them,, it’s happened to me before and my friend was unfairly banned because of that :/

Edit: ack sorry thats a lot,,,

[vyntageheart]

Oh, I think I understand what Tess was trying to say in that paragraph.

Adults doing unproblematic adult things on unproblematic websites aren't a cause for concern--Tess's example here is "sharing unrelated R18 artwork on an adult art forum" so e.g. if you post art of an adult OC in certain poses on websites that are specifically for adult artwork and prohibit minors from entering. It's when people do problematic things or are on problematic websites that they become a cause for concern.

But honestly what is considered 'problematic' depends on who you ask, lately. Person 1 could say site A is fine but site B is problematic, while person 2 says the opposite. Opinions vary very very widely on what is problematic and what's not and it's been a very hot button topic as of late.. I sometimes worry logic and reason will be thrown out simply because of 'majority vote'. And just because someone does something a person doesn't like doesn't make that person a danger.

[Lacuna]

Oh, I think I understand what Tess was trying to say in that paragraph.

Adults doing unproblematic adult things on unproblematic websites aren't a cause for concern--Tess's example here is "sharing unrelated R18 artwork on an adult art forum" so e.g. if you post art of an adult OC in certain poses on websites that are specifically for adult artwork and prohibit minors from entering. It's when people do problematic things or are on problematic websites that they become a cause for concern.

But honestly what is considered 'problematic' depends on who you ask, lately. Person 1 could say site A is fine but site B is problematic, while person 2 says the opposite. Opinions vary very very widely on what is problematic and what's not and it's been a very hot button topic as of late.. I sometimes worry logic and reason will be thrown out simply because of 'majority vote'. And just because someone does something a person doesn't like doesn't make that person a danger.

Problematic isn't really the right word. The correct words would be illegal or harmful to children. There is no majority vote on logic and reason, there is just careful consideration of the legality and danger of provable actions. Because the admins evaluating the situations are not directly involved, they are able to make a judgement solely based on facts, laws, and child endangerment.

[vyntageheart]

Problematic isn't really the right word. The correct words would be illegal or harmful to children. There is no majority vote on logic and reason, there is just careful consideration of the legality and danger of provable actions. Because the admins evaluating the situations are not directly involved, they are able to make a judgement solely based on facts, laws, and child endangerment.

This makes me feel much better. Thank you.

[nickjr]

Oops yes for some reason I totally blanked and forgot that the terms "illegal" and "harmful to children" exist. That's exactly what I meant. I actually spent 5 minutes trying to figure out what I actually wanted to say instead of "problematic" but came up blank and forgot to put a disclaimer that I didn't figure out the right word lol

[rileypillow]

Thank you so much for this, I saw someone being really nasty about someone on CS but on another website and I’m glad this rule is now in place.

I have some questions, both about real off-CS users:

• What if the person bullying is anonymous? What actions will be taken against them? Could you force the website owners to reveal their identity, or is that wrong to do so, even if they’re being really nasty about other users and upsetting them?
• What if someone may of done something terrible, but there isn’t enough evidence? Would they still be reportable, or not?

[Tailish]

Thank you, this sounds like a good change!