illegal drug presence on modified and your thoughts

Splint · Post by **Splint** » 11 May 2006 09:48

Jeremy wrote:I don't see how banning talk about illegal drugs would on modified would effect the image of footbag. I think a much better approach would be to allow people to discuss what they want but people who want to could post in topics about drugs and express their negative opinions on drugs. Simply banning talk about illegal drugs won't change people's attitudes, it will just alienate people who may seriously take up footbag at a later date. Nobody will quit footbag because there are drug references on the forum and it's a fact that many footbaggers - including plenty of the best players in the world - do drugs. Trying to ignore that or pretend it's not true is definitely not a solution. I also am very much opposed to dissallowing behaviour because of personal convictions from the moderators. Talking about drugs is not illegal, nor is displaying pictures of drugs. Even telling people what the best way to use drugs and how to go about that is not illegal. It would be ridiculous for us to have more freedom according to our national laws than we have on an internet forum. I usually think of the moderators and admins on this forum as less conservative than George Bush or John Howard. Allowing people to talk about drugs doesn't stop anybody from expressing negative opinions about drugs and it doesn't force people to read about drugs.

Okay, but would you say this?...

I don't see how banning talk ivolving discriminatory language on modified would effect the image of footbag. I think a much better approach would be to allow people to discuss what they want but people who want to could post in topics about discriminatory language and express their negative opinions on discriminatory language. Simply banning discriminatory language won't change people's attitudes, it will just alienate people who may seriously take up footbag at a later date. Nobody will quit footbag because there are discriminatory references on the forum and it's a fact that many footbaggers - including plenty of the best players in the world - use discriminatory language. Trying to ignore that or pretend it's not true is definitely not a solution. I also am very much opposed to dissallowing behaviour because of personal convictions from the moderators. Discriminatory language is not illegal, nor is displaying discriminatory language. Even telling people what the best way to use discriminatory language and how to go about that is not illegal. It would be ridiculous for us to have more freedom according to our national laws than we have on an internet forum. I usually think of the moderators and admins on this forum as less conservative than George Bush or John Howard. Allowing people to use discriminatory langauge doesn't stop anybody from expressing negative opinions about discriminatory language and it doesn't force people to read discriminatory language.

Moxie · Post by **Moxie** » 11 May 2006 09:54

(In response to Tsiangkun)

I was and am speaking as a member of this community, not as a moderator telling you what's what.

Saying that modified is a resource doesn't contradict it being a community. A resource doesn't have to be a page of facts, tricks, or videos. Modified is so helpful for people just starting out, and I don't think anyone is arguing against that. I felt encouraged when I started posting here. I felt like there were a million footbag players who were all at different levels, and all pretty nice. I would want everyone to be able to experience that. It's not something that should only be experienced by people who have already gotten over the beginning hump. Otherwise we could do as some suggested and make it an invite-only forum.

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 11 May 2006 10:01

I'm saying maybe they should at least own a bag, and be able to kick it five times before coming here. Even then, not everyone with a hack plays footbag. This used to be a footbag community, almost exclusively freestylers.

shreddaily · Post by **shreddaily** » 11 May 2006 14:04

I think Tsaing brings up some good points.

This whole, "we need to censor for the younger kids" idea to me is just ridiculous. If someone is too young to handle what goes on here they are cerainly too young to handel what goes on at a footbag tourney, or at my house, or on the streets of any major city, ect...

PLUS think about what happens whenever something gets censored by mods, we talk about it for pages and pages. LESS people would think we are all a bunch of drug fiends if we just left up the weed pics and didn't even mention them. Let troyson have his fun and the rest of us can pretend that talking about adds and paradox is relavant and entertaining.

The most relavant thing tsaing has mentioned however is that we are the community. I don't think we need to change to make our selves more atractive to the world that doesn't love footbag. Screw them... We need to face the facts that footbag is underground and wierd!!! Not everyone can dig what we like to do. So lets enjoy/flame each other instead of wondering how we can get more people involved.

Troyson · Post by **Troyson** » 11 May 2006 15:33

well said....i like you Nate, your a good guy ahah

sampotter · Post by **sampotter** » 11 May 2006 15:45

I agree completely with Nate and Cameron.

mc · Post by mc » 11 May 2006 15:57

I say discussion forum only, and therein, anything goes, except outwardly illegal things like how to produce illegal drugs, how to obtain illegal drugs, how to use illegal drugs. If you want to talk about your personal experiences, I personally do not mind that. I just think it would be best if it was all in one place, and left out of the rest of the forum. I would also like to see a big fat disclaimer on the discussion forum.

That, or I would like to make it so that if you want to read the discussion forum, you have to ask for permission from a mod to read it. There would be NO CONDITIONS TO THIS PERMISSION. Rather, it would simply put us in a position to say, "you chose to read this forum, you received a disclaimer and information on what's contained (or could, in the future, be contained) in this forum, and if you don't want to read it any more, you can choose not to, or we can remove your permitted status if you like".

and I would like a teddy bear and a Beef on Weck sandwich, now that I'm making demands.

also, an interesting thing has occurred to me lately.

Allowing this kind of information to be posted on our doesn't really put us at a "guilty enabler" status. Anything of the nature that we've been disputing that gets posted on modified is available at a million other places online. We aren't keeping kids from getting this kind of info by keeping it off modified, we're simply saying "look elsewhere", because it IS elsewhere, and EVERYWHERE, and easy to find.

So, if people want it, let's allow it, let's just contain it and offer some minor control over the hardcore stuff, and let it be.

That's how I feel about this currently. I just want to represent the wants and needs of the community in a fair, consistant, reasonable way.

edit: oh yeah, and casual mention / talk in blogs as well. Because I like to talk about my drug use in my blog.

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 11 May 2006 16:03

I think I could live with Matt's proposal to limit adult discussion to the discussion section.

It seems reasonable to keep drugs and perverted sex acts from corrupting the rest of the footbag topics.

Troyson · Post by **Troyson** » 11 May 2006 16:10

matt you are a genious...i love the idea...if you want to enforce the above rules i am fine with that.

thank you for creating a solution to this problem...

sampotter · Post by **sampotter** » 11 May 2006 16:40

Yeah, because other people haven't already suggested a disclaimer or anything.

Snide remark aside... Yes, I am for this proposal.

Splint · Post by **Splint** » 11 May 2006 16:52

In the US a contract signed by a minor is null and void, so any lawsuit that comes up about allowing minors into the Discussion section is not winable.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 11 May 2006 17:07

Not to mention, making minors get permission from a mod (Or all board members or whatever it was) is just silly in pretty much every way. I can't think of any good reason for it.

mc · Post by mc » 11 May 2006 17:12

I didn't say only minors had to ask for permission. I said everyone did. There's no contract. It's simply a way for absolving us of responsibility for exposure. No longer could anyone say "I didn't ask to be exposed to that and I don't want to, so take it down!"

Also, that particular element of my proposal is not a key element. Just a suggestion. Who's got a better idea?

sampotter · Post by **sampotter** » 11 May 2006 17:28

What you suggested in the same post: a disclaimer. It absolves responsibility with about 1/100th of the effort. If someone complains, simply refer them to the disclaimer. It's their problem if they end up looking around in the discussion forums. If they don't want to see potentially adult-like topics, they don't have to look at them.

BainbridgeShred · Post by **BainbridgeShred** » 11 May 2006 18:00

I'm impartial about a disclaimer because it's still the persons decision to click on the thread, as long as the title is clear on what the post is about. But if it helps you sleep at night, a disclaimer's fine by me.

Kyle Hewitt · Post by **Kyle Hewitt** » 11 May 2006 18:07

Why not just save the time if your really going to go and do this and just make a webpage that says something like "this page will have things listed about drugs and other risky things" or something that sounds more professional..... just so they can't say something like "I didn't ask to be exposed to that and I don't want to, so take it down!"

sampotter · Post by **sampotter** » 11 May 2006 18:13

Kyle Hewitt wrote:Why not just save the time if your really going to go and do this and just make a webpage that says something like "this page will have things listed about drugs and other risky things" or something that sounds more professional..... just so they can't say something like "I didn't ask to be exposed to that and I don't want to, so take it down!"

Read: disclaimer.

Larson · Post by **Larson** » 11 May 2006 18:31

I think it's fine the way it is right now. If for some reason someone gets exposed to material that they didn't want to see, it's their fault. They shouldn't get an apology, and they certainly won't file a lawsuit. Lets just keep it in the discussion room.

Kyle Hewitt · Post by **Kyle Hewitt** » 11 May 2006 20:00

Nagasake wrote:
Kyle Hewitt wrote:Why not just save the time if your really going to go and do this and just make a webpage that says something like "this page will have things listed about drugs and other risky things" or something that sounds more professional..... just so they can't say something like "I didn't ask to be exposed to that and I don't want to, so take it down!"
Read: disclaimer.

I'm just recommending that so it would be more direct...... who really reads the disclaimer below it?

Larson · Post by **Larson** » 11 May 2006 21:40

I read it, and I chose to enter.