Here's a fun shitpost to play with and troll npcs: when does wishing them they got vaxxed turn from npc programming to trolling and a Rule 2 violation? 🤔
Comments (21)
sorted by:
It would depend specifically on your intent. "I hope you get vaxxed and die" is as much of an endorsement of violence as "Since your unvaxxed, I hope you get covid and die".
Your example is not merely showing intent. That's explicit wishing of death.* Intent is not discernible through text, even by omniscient mods.
(*but wishing someone die from disease or medical malpractice isn't endorsement of violence either)
I am never going to accept that intent is not discernible through text. That is a retarded standard.
If "expressing hope or support for someone's death" = "expressing hope or support for someone's violent death" then the word "violent" has no meaning whatsoever. Have you joined the left?
You are still wishing for someone's death.
But, again, that’s not violence. Unless “KYS” is an actual death threat now?
It's not a death threat, but it endorsing and glorifying the death of someone else, which is why it is also a violation of Rule 2, particularly enforced harshly when used against other users.
Really? Could you point out where rule 2 says anything other than violence?
Wishing for someone's death is wishing for violence.
No, that’s dumb.
It's called satire.
If it were satire it's not likely going to be an issue. But, that has to be determined from context.
I hope you get srs
I read this as "I hope you get serious"
I’m not sure exactly what it means, but I read it as considerably harsher, and assumed it was some abbreviated profanity I wasn’t getting. Clearly, at least one of us has failed to determine intent. Good thing no one would ever try to enforce rules based on something like that, right?
Sex reassignment surgery
You realize that courts use texts, facebook posts, and other written expressions to determine intent and mens rea, right?
No system on Earth accepts the idea that because confusion is possible, written statements are inadmissible for the purpose of understanding intent.
Confusion is possible with other physical evidence too, like video recordings, and literally testifying on the stand in other cases.
That standard is so retarded, it would eliminate the entire concept of determining intent altogether. No human, anywhere, under any circumstance, can determine intent if you can't determine it from self-written statements.
Absolutely. But, on the flip side, none of those systems would—unless we’re talking about kangaroo courts and equivalents—suggest that the same singular person can always determine intent despite their own personal biases, based usually upon one or two sentences with no action coupled to them. Which is much closer to a fair description of what you do.
True, but there is also no real consequence to my judgement besides being refused from a single forum.
More importantly, what other bits of npc programming is there this could be done with?
"You behave just like Clinton."
"Your family is as close as the Bidens."
"You know how to handle a mic, just like Obama."
It won't count as a rule 2 violation. Because then the redditor janny who doesn't understand how the immune system treats hostile invaders (and is probably stupid enough to ban his own white blood cells for 'promoting violence' against germs) and his fedtard handlers would have to acknowledge the fact that the clot shots are very harmful, and can lead to death.
Me, I prefer saying "Enjoy your Suddenly."