I've had, and seen people lump constructive criticism and critique, even asked for critique into hate messages.
Just because you don't like what you see doesn't make it okay to get someone removed from a platform.
Because at this rate it'd just be easier to remove the platform than it would the speech, since everything even slightly negative, even the asked for stuff, is lumped in with hate.
So either the platform has to go, and no one gets to say anything, or people really need to stop wearing emotions on their sleeve. Easier said than done, I know.
But if anything even slightly hurtful launches someone into a carefully constructed tirade of 'this person who said bad things is a turbo hitler, gib munnies I got deth threts' is just a grift with extra steps.
Niche forum : Some old lady with silly ideas got banned because someone got triggered she replied that she didn't like taking and sharing pictures, so she wouldn't.
This was interpreted as "telling me to go f*ck myself" by someone who is friends with moderators. That offended person was the only one who used harsh language. They weren't suspended, censored or told to be polite. Instead the mods banned the old lady.
There seems to be something about janny position that draws unethical people, of messes people into it.
There seems to be something about janny position that draws unethical people, of messes people into it.
People of ill intent are naturally drawn to positions of power, because the power of those positions allows them to more efficiently and effectively exert their ill will unto others.
That's a two sided thing that's being abused. As a guy that has worked in academia and the arts I can say critique is really nice, but there's a way to do it. Also, not all critique is good. If I made a story about a man losing his wife, a critique demanding it be about a dog in a single paragraph is not useful.
On the other hand, lots of people see critique as a complete evil. You either call the person a genius or are evil.
Using these two sides, several groups have used it to silence those they disagree with. They are critiquing others but need no critique. My God, videogame, or ideology is infallible therefore anything I say about it is equally infallible. Anyone who speaks against it or me, is of Satan.
Castlevania Symphony of the Night is one of the greatest games ever made and I play it every year. However, I can see that it has parts that are not as good as Super Castlevania that I wish could be there.
But it gets deeper, if we keep it to this or this is evil/good then we never find option three or four. Actraiser with better controls and the ability to alter the levels you enter with the city builder would make it much better. Dick Tracy for the Genesis would be amazing for the Wii. Orange Soda with Egg Nog is surprisingly Delicious. Dr Pepper is far superior to coke or Pepsi.
By keeping the dichotomy with specific controls, we never break out and can never progress. If we never move forward, someone else can. The history of the world shows that.
When you (not you specifically. In this example, it's a ubiquitous online person asking for critique) ask for critique, and then lump it all into hate messages, you didn't want critique. You wanted someone to agree with your opinion.
At least, that was my interpretation, every time I saw it happen online. Very rarely I felt did someone actually listen to the critique and take it to heart.
I also get what you mean about the level of critique. Some cannot put into words eloquently enough to really put forward what they want to say. Sometimes I'm quiet around here for weeks on end, even when there are topics I have a lot of knowledge on, and have a lot to say about, simply because someone got to it first and I'd just be repeating most of it, or I can't really put it into words well enough that I'd bother posting it, so instead of pocket spaghetti posting, I just choose not to.
I agree with Symphony of the Night by the way. As polished and smooth as it is, there are frustrating parts and head scratching parts that could have been better or were just unnecessary, imo. I've played it so much, but I've only ever full 200.6% competed it twice. All 1890 rooms.
For instance, for completionist sake, it would be nice to get a port of the Saturn version, just so that it's not locked to a pricey as hell version that is inferior in slowdown and some quality in certain areas, even if there is a way to play as a whole other character, with whole new areas, that the Playstation version does not have.
It's on my list of yearly play throughs along with Snatcher, Guardian Heroes, Vandal Hearts, River City Ransom, and several others I still find joy in playing through. Even though they're not perfect, anything I say about them, even negative, doesn't pull from it's enjoyment or take away from it's experience as a whole.
It's almost never about what's being said, it's who it's being said to and how they feel about it.
I've had, and seen people lump constructive criticism and critique, even asked for critique into hate messages.
Just because you don't like what you see doesn't make it okay to get someone removed from a platform.
Because at this rate it'd just be easier to remove the platform than it would the speech, since everything even slightly negative, even the asked for stuff, is lumped in with hate.
So either the platform has to go, and no one gets to say anything, or people really need to stop wearing emotions on their sleeve. Easier said than done, I know.
But if anything even slightly hurtful launches someone into a carefully constructed tirade of 'this person who said bad things is a turbo hitler, gib munnies I got deth threts' is just a grift with extra steps.
Niche forum : Some old lady with silly ideas got banned because someone got triggered she replied that she didn't like taking and sharing pictures, so she wouldn't.
This was interpreted as "telling me to go f*ck myself" by someone who is friends with moderators. That offended person was the only one who used harsh language. They weren't suspended, censored or told to be polite. Instead the mods banned the old lady.
There seems to be something about janny position that draws unethical people, of messes people into it.
People of ill intent are naturally drawn to positions of power, because the power of those positions allows them to more efficiently and effectively exert their ill will unto others.
I've noticed that too. Those who want power seek it. They're not usually the ones that should have it.
That's a two sided thing that's being abused. As a guy that has worked in academia and the arts I can say critique is really nice, but there's a way to do it. Also, not all critique is good. If I made a story about a man losing his wife, a critique demanding it be about a dog in a single paragraph is not useful.
On the other hand, lots of people see critique as a complete evil. You either call the person a genius or are evil.
Using these two sides, several groups have used it to silence those they disagree with. They are critiquing others but need no critique. My God, videogame, or ideology is infallible therefore anything I say about it is equally infallible. Anyone who speaks against it or me, is of Satan.
Castlevania Symphony of the Night is one of the greatest games ever made and I play it every year. However, I can see that it has parts that are not as good as Super Castlevania that I wish could be there.
But it gets deeper, if we keep it to this or this is evil/good then we never find option three or four. Actraiser with better controls and the ability to alter the levels you enter with the city builder would make it much better. Dick Tracy for the Genesis would be amazing for the Wii. Orange Soda with Egg Nog is surprisingly Delicious. Dr Pepper is far superior to coke or Pepsi.
By keeping the dichotomy with specific controls, we never break out and can never progress. If we never move forward, someone else can. The history of the world shows that.
When you (not you specifically. In this example, it's a ubiquitous online person asking for critique) ask for critique, and then lump it all into hate messages, you didn't want critique. You wanted someone to agree with your opinion.
At least, that was my interpretation, every time I saw it happen online. Very rarely I felt did someone actually listen to the critique and take it to heart.
I also get what you mean about the level of critique. Some cannot put into words eloquently enough to really put forward what they want to say. Sometimes I'm quiet around here for weeks on end, even when there are topics I have a lot of knowledge on, and have a lot to say about, simply because someone got to it first and I'd just be repeating most of it, or I can't really put it into words well enough that I'd bother posting it, so instead of pocket spaghetti posting, I just choose not to.
I agree with Symphony of the Night by the way. As polished and smooth as it is, there are frustrating parts and head scratching parts that could have been better or were just unnecessary, imo. I've played it so much, but I've only ever full 200.6% competed it twice. All 1890 rooms.
For instance, for completionist sake, it would be nice to get a port of the Saturn version, just so that it's not locked to a pricey as hell version that is inferior in slowdown and some quality in certain areas, even if there is a way to play as a whole other character, with whole new areas, that the Playstation version does not have.
It's on my list of yearly play throughs along with Snatcher, Guardian Heroes, Vandal Hearts, River City Ransom, and several others I still find joy in playing through. Even though they're not perfect, anything I say about them, even negative, doesn't pull from it's enjoyment or take away from it's experience as a whole.