New Rule: DNI (Do Not Interact) Lists are Banned

[dissy]

I just kind of wish you ( staff ) would allow your members to participate in discussion before giving out rulings like this. We give you money & have for years, and then you turn around and hurt large portions of your site & then silence us for trying to, like, talk about it. It's extremely frustrating. I've played many pet sites for many years & none of them punish players for having a voice more than chickensmoothie does.

i quite literally do not care about dni's. i solely care about the fact that it only came to user attention after it was set in stone. im not contributing to the discussion, i will not be replying to quotes. this was my personal last straw with the staff. im quitting. after 44 pages of posts and reading, the user ive quoted has said it best. there is no room for user discussion. even if its not rule breaking, content is removed on a whim. i cannot express how grateful i am for not being hired onto the staff team however many moons ago i applied. i personally do not like DNI's and they probably never should have had a home on the site. but policing other games and links.... yeesh

Personally I fail to see how staff is policing other games and links? If someone posts a link to CS that staff deems harmful to their users, I think it's reasonable to ask the poster to remove the link from the website. It would work the same way if someone links to a website aimed at people over 18 for example, I don't think anyone would have an issue with this being removed. You can do whatever you want outside of CS as long as you're not linking it on this site.

my issue is wouldnt removing offsite links entirely fix the whole issue?

[Lemon Tea Rain]

my issue is wouldnt removing offsite links entirely fix the whole issue?

Sure, but it would cause an lot more issues. For one people wouldn't be able to credit any off-site art base, any off-site artist, creators, art folders etc with links which violates the vast majority of rules for individual creators (and I think cs art rules too, though I haven't checked those so I'm not certain) so a lot of the character adoption etc forums would completely go down. Music and things wouldn't be able to be linked, so any of those forum game threads you can say goodbye to. Fun things like discords would be a no go, roleplaying would be entirely restricted to this site, and I'm sure there's a whole host of other issues and objections I haven't thought of, but you get the point.

Edit: I was right about not being able to link to credit bases meaning you pretty much wouldn't be able to use any off-site base, since it would be against cs rules

If you use a free lineart you must provide a link back to the original and give credit to the original artist for the lines. You must clearly display this information underneath or above your colored version.

[Erwin Smith]

Hi. This is very problematic as a response, especially if it is a staff stance.

No it's not. It's literally the standard practice for moderators of a website and most of the time users don't even get a chance to say anything at all, so cs is already more open in that regard. It's not "problematic", it makes complete sense.

We as a user base (...)

You don't speak for all of us.

Okay.
Interesting take. I appreciate your reply, thank you.

For the first part, yes a standard reply from staff. I understand that, for sure. I broke it down into sections to demonstrate why it was problematic. What it’s been interpreted as. It can be blanketed as a standard reply all it likes; it’s still a problematic one because of how shutdown natured it is. We can mediate a discussion civilly. That is why mods have the powers they do. This exact discussion taking place is evidential proof of this. We are able to discuss things as long as we keep it civil. And thus the last 40 odd pages have shown this and shown this effectively.

My point being it’s possible for more discussion to be possible and to take part; and those responses were reasons why / for clearer and open discussion.

The second part is definitely cut incorrectly; and yes I don’t speak of all users, I’m just a plain Jane myself. The userbase as a whole however:

For lots of things on site, discussions are useful. When it comes to issues that we've had moderating, there is a huge disconnect between what is actually happening behind the scenes and what the end user sees.

We as a user base understand this purely on the basis that you guys are working to ensure that the site is safe, often without any sort of compensation for your time and efforts.

By “we” I speak of the unwritten and written rules with the sites sign up and terms of conditions which is illustrating what the mods do and why the rules exist etc. “We understand what the mods do and why they exist”

This “we” was not meant to be a user rule and myself placed on a podium and apologise for this; no it is not fair and honestly a good reason to acknowledge the unfair status. The intention was to acknowledge that yes, users know how and what staff do; most older users would definitely know for sure; yourself included.

[dissy]

my issue is wouldnt removing offsite links entirely fix the whole issue?

Sure, but it would cause an lot more issues. For one people wouldn't be able to credit any off-site art base, any off-site artist, creators, art folders etc so a lot of the character adoption etc forums would completely go down. Music and things wouldn't be able to be linked, so any of those forum game threads you can say goodbye to. Fun things like discords would be a no go, roleplaying would be entirely restricted to this site, and I'm sure there's a whole host of other issues and objections I haven't thought of, but you get the point.

what gets me in a bunch is that its half half moderating. if there is an ability to link offsite, this site isnt safe by definition. and policing content on links offsite is just creepy to me. in my mind, the only way to keep everyone in line with safety rules is to either double down and ban anything that could possibly have such content or to change account settings(which wouldnt do anything in the first place since so many people lie about their age online, not to mention the kids who would want to make an "adult" account to see the locked content). so in my opinion, they either need to moderate w a y more, or lessen up on link surfing to other areas of the internet for on-site consequences if that makes sense. and my issue isnt with the staff's goal of safety, its just that there was zero room for discussion just like with many of their other "controversial" rule implementations. and i do agree that DNI's have no place on this site at all.

[LordGhoul]

👍

this was my personal last straw with the staff. im quitting. after 44 pages of posts and reading, the user ive quoted has said it best. there is no room for user discussion. even if its not rule breaking, content is removed on a whim. i cannot express how grateful i am for not being hired onto the staff team however many moons ago i applied. i personally do not like DNI's and they probably never should have had a home on the site. but policing other games and links.... yeesh

Can you be a bit more concrete on things? Like what exactly is being removed? I've only really noticed the age thing as it's been a personal issue (I forgot I had it in a deviantart journal when I linked to my dA ages ago and a moderator pointed it out to me) or like three pixels of blood in a tiny silly gmod gif which I didn't even notice but took off at the time anyways, and those seemed at least reasonable to me since it's in the rules.

[karmini]

100% agree. This was a great call

[Becah]

what gets me in a bunch is that its half half moderating. if there is an ability to link offsite, this site isnt safe by definition. and policing content on links offsite is just creepy to me. in my mind, the only way to keep everyone in line with safety rules is to either double down and ban anything that could possibly have such content or to change account settings(which wouldnt do anything in the first place since so many people lie about their age online, not to mention the kids who would want to make an "adult" account to see the locked content). so in my opinion, they either need to moderate w a y more, or lessen up on link surfing to other areas of the internet for on-site consequences if that makes sense. and my issue isnt with the staff's goal of safety, its just that there was zero room for discussion just like with many of their other "controversial" rule implementations. and i do agree that DNI's have no place on this site at all.

I don't necessarily agree, but I do understand your point! Either way I think that the outrage would be out of this world if they decided to ban links altogether :') I don't think anyone would want that

[dissy]

what gets me in a bunch is that its half half moderating. if there is an ability to link offsite, this site isnt safe by definition. and policing content on links offsite is just creepy to me. in my mind, the only way to keep everyone in line with safety rules is to either double down and ban anything that could possibly have such content or to change account settings(which wouldnt do anything in the first place since so many people lie about their age online, not to mention the kids who would want to make an "adult" account to see the locked content). so in my opinion, they either need to moderate w a y more, or lessen up on link surfing to other areas of the internet for on-site consequences if that makes sense. and my issue isnt with the staff's goal of safety, its just that there was zero room for discussion just like with many of their other "controversial" rule implementations. and i do agree that DNI's have no place on this site at all.

I don't necessarily agree, but I do understand your point! Either way I think that the outrage would be out of this world if they decided to ban links altogether :') I don't think anyone would want that

thats why im liquidating and dipping out. so much drama, so many loopholes, too many specifics to keep up with.

[Aaron✦]

Agreed. Internet and real-life are different situations, but we still need to be able to interact with people who have different opinions than ours, and we can't judge people just for liking something we don't, even if a particular fandom has a bad reputation.

^This. Making assumptions about someone based on the fandom they're in or their likes and even dislikes is pretty rude. There will be situations where you do have to interact with someone.

[removed]

And if you don't have trauma related to that topic, then it's actually a pretty good thing to discuss with people who think differently about something than you. Maybe they like a topic you don't like, and they have an interesting, nuanced reason for enjoying it. You don't have to change your mind, but you could have an insightful conversation! Maybe they love that piece of media for the set-design, and you can enjoy your own favorite media better for being aware of a new aspect of film-making.

This is making me feel pretty old too haha.

Who knows. People might end up learning something new.

Like for example. A discussion I had on a Discord server I'm on about why some characters in Star Trek the Original Series have make up on and others don't, ended up leading to the topic of the history of theater make up and film making in general which dare I say it was fascinating.

And I feel old as well. lol

~LLAP 🖖

[Drive Like Jehu]

very happy to see this! i'd hate it if i sent a trade to someone and they'd be like "dni if you like animal collective" or "dni if your name is keaton"
if you don't want to interact with someone, just block. the internet doesn't have to cater to you.