Happy Holidays: Server Upgrades and Rule Updates

[sabercantbethiscute]

I fully support lex rapeman

 

[Friendly_Ram]

I know someone mentioned not applying rules to content made before they're written, but hasn't mangadex done that previously?

 

[gormadoc]

@Teasday Look at your interaction with Kanami-chan from my point of view, where I don't really know them at all or know that you've talked to them before: it seems like a reasonable and substantial point to be brought up and you point out an inconsistency without addressing the substance, even though it seems that they may not be all that proficient at English and that may be why there's an inconsistency.

I'm talking more about the long-term. In the short-term there'll be less to deal with (after this thread) and moderating won't change much but in the long-term the clarity issues, the possibility of new moderation approaches, and the way the mods interact with users in general about policies will have some attrition on both you guys and us. I don't have a problem with the idea behind the rule's intention, but I do think a better crafted set of rules would help. It's pretty clear now that a lot of people are upset about the vagueness, warranted or not, and I don't see that improving. I think a way to improve the rule would be to directly point to what you don't want (comment shit-storms) and remove chapters/credit pages that provoke those. Obviously that would have to be content-neutral but I don't think you'd have an issue with enforcing that.

I'm still not comfortable with the idea that chapters will be left up with the credit pages removed, but I don't think it's a substantive enough issue to worry about now. That'll affect hardly anything anyway and since it's not retroactive those scanlators just have to make decisions in the future.

 

[DeadKinginHell]

Merry Christmas, though I don't celebrate it.
Also, I am sorry that I can't financially support this site as I am unable to spare any cent on anything (I have mouths to feed). Overall I am satisfied with the site, its rules, and everything. And again, I am sorry that I can't support it financially, but please accept my praises.

 

[Hounder]

@Ovdose I kinda guessed that part.

@Teasday Possible to use that block discussed further by making it group specific as compared to an overall coverage? This way, you aren't stuck with an all or nothing situation.

 

[Pauan]

@BestBoy The poll was literally about credit pages, it was NOT about user conduct.

Some group sniped one of Hatigarm's manga and added an edgy credit page which said "scanlators which ask for donations are greedy". Hatigarm got upset and demanded that MangaDex ban the edgy credit page. MangaDex then created that poll to determine what the community's attitude was toward *stricter policing of credit pages*. Based on the poll, MangaDex decided to not ban the credit page.

 

[Exile]

@bk3k, again this is not about Rapeman, people dont get riled up about his /pol/ memes as much they were annoyed by Koolio adding pages with rants about politics.

I have pointed out that so far none of the comment section of Rapeman uploaded chapters got out of hand, Koolio does exactly *one* series and that started with chapter 16, I am not going to address if Rapeman is a " snowflake with a persecution complex" (even if considering how he keeps being brought up despite this not being about him or his series) as that is not of my business but I will point out exactly what this is about, its on my post on page 13.

 

[Jumballi]

@sterven @BestBoy Wouldn’t the uploader/group be the user in this case, with there credit pages being their content.

People 7 months ago were happy with how the MD teams level of moderation, and then the site grew roughly 3 times larger and the comment section even more so.

From what the staff has told us, as some point the amount of reports for the content the credit page creates exceeded an amount they could ignore. And there is a report button every 3 inches on this page, so for every normal joe they might feel that it is easy and use it much much more liberally than you or I.

On top of that, the staff also claim that the amount of time they’re investing in cleaning out the comments section is distracting from other responsibilities they have. Time and time again they say they’re not professionals yet we act like they are.

If a poll from 7 months ago showed an overwhelming majority to favor vague rules that lead to the amount of moderation that we saw at that time. Then them updating rules to try to reach that level of moderation with the exact same amount of staff today isn’t to much to ask.

 

[BestBoy]

@sterven Not really the same in my opinion. Clarifying the rules is explaining them. Writing them out explicitly is detailing what the actual rule is. Perhaps the distinction isn't enough for some.

The star war was fine. A little too fanfictiony for my taste.

@Pauan Except no where in the post does it say the poll is specifically about credit pages. The team stated their stance on credit pages (that egregiously offensive ones would be removed) and then asked about how the community felt towards the moderation as a whole. The community voted that they were content. The hatigarm drama was a blip on the radar that you're blowing way out of proportion. It's incredibly humorous of you to say it's not about user conduct when the poll question was explicitly about moderation of user conduct.

@Jumballi Doesn't really seem to be. The paragraph before the poll question frames the context of the question.

Also, while the opinions of a small, vocal minority has been made known, we’d like to hear from you what you think about our rules and how our moderation teams (both forum moderators and site moderators) are doing. Take a look at the poll above and share with us your thoughts and opinions.

They don't narrow it down specifically to credit pages, but leave the framing as wide as possible so they can get a feel for all the rules. Why would you poll your community specifically on 1 rule and not the rules and moderation as a whole?

edit: Also it doesn't make sense to make the poll question about "user conduct" when you actually mean "scanlator conduct." It'd be incredibly misleading and I don't think the staff is negligent enough to make that kind of mistake.

 

[definitionofinsanity]

@bk3k

Clearly you don't understand. The "offensive" talk is allowed IF IT IS REMOTELY ON TOPIC.
Also it is allowed on the forums where you make whatever topic you want.
/not a MD staff member, but I can fucking read and that makes one of us.

Isn't it interesting I mention and refer to manga scanlator end cards which this rule is about and you... bring up forum posts?
You're right. Someone here has reading comprehension issues, and it ain't fucking me.

 

[doomrider7]

Ok yeah. Just caught up on the gist of the situation and you guys(you guys being Mangadex) fucked up BAD. Not in banning political discussion, but the fact that Rapeman was even allowed on the premises of the site given his naked as fucking hell racism and hate mongering allowing a massive festering shit to happen. I'm not sure how it is you guys see your jobs as mods being like, but that the politics ban came after some mild "don't be a racist asshole" takes from an uploader instead of the years of racist trash from another sends a loud and clear message that racism and hate are tolerated and cool with you guys. This is even ignoring the blatant rule breaks he does on his very user page.

 

[Aryrha]

@bk3k Thank you for the great on-topic, off-topic examples. Made me laugh and my dog even looked at me funny, must have been too loud for her...

 

[bosswoman]

Merry Christmas

 

[famutan]

If anything I feel the 3.2.7 rule append is too weak. Referring to the issue first as "extraneous political content" gives leeway to the content that should be most in question. The Rapeman credit pages are some of the most racist, hateful and inflammatory garbage I've seen, and should be dealt with using the ideal method for tackling any hate speech - complete deplatforming. Anything less is tacit agreement. Meanwhile, the rule as stated takes aim at diametrically opposed content calling out the bigots for what they are.

There's a difference between good and bad things, and in case it's not clear, "being a huge bigot" is the bad thing and "calling out bigots" is the good thing. Administrators and moderators of MangaDex have every right, and in my opinion a responsibility, to make this distinction clear and enforce rules along those lines.

 

[Nick86]

@famutan - Even if they are the most bad and hateful opinions why you care so much what Rapeman do in his scanlations? You know you can block users and whole groups if you want, is your choice, like is my choice if i want to read these extra pages.
Asking for censor someone else opinion is selfish, because you limit my freedom to judge it myself, you impose your juddement over me even if the existence of this scan work don't affect your life in the slighest or change anything.
If you have issue with someone else opinions and views you can simply ignore them, and moreover if MD add the option to hide such extra pages you can read his scans without the memes at the bottom.
There are no excuses to call for censorship when everyone have enought tools to hide what they do not like.

 

[Bashlis]

Feels kinda weird that 2 years ago most of us were talking about the website to go to after batoto was getting shut down. But here we are now celebrating the 2nd anniversary of mangadex.

 

[famutan]

@Nick86 As I said, I believe the only method to moderate regarding hate speech is complete deplatforming. Anything less is tacit agreement through inaction, and tacit agreement leads to the misguided opinion that overt racism, homophobia, transphobia, etc are acceptable in a public forum. It is ultimately the MD administration who can decide what is and is not acceptable for others to host on their servers, and if they decide it's okay to play host to inflammatory content and hate speech, the exclusionary and predatory nature of bigotry dictates that eventually those elements will be the only elements that remain, as anyone I would consider a reasonable user would not want to participate in such a group.

Similarly, expecting every user who is opposed to open racism to block the many racists emboldened by their freedom to share their hateful opinions is unreasonable.

Fortunately, they have decided to take action against that garbage hate speech. Unfortunately, they do so in a very "both sides" way, quietly equating the good and the bad as "political content". That's what is disappointing to me.

 

[Picks]

I'd rather the MD team just get rid of chapter/title discussion functionality altogether, limit forums to service requests and technical issues and just be a scanlation platform.

 

[sterven]

Since this is the trending thread rn I might as well use to notify the mods about this not sure if it's a bug or what but this thread along with
2 more vanished from the gen forum I can still go to them if I go to my notifications but I can't see them listed. At first I thought that maybe
I got blocked by the op (lol) but I haven't been (yet) and it seems i'm not the only one.

 

[Nick86]

@famutan - Hate speech? Please, is a normal human feeling, you can't prevent or censor someone for hating something or someone else, is normal like love or indifference, so everything that try to regulate or limit a human feeling is already a very bad thing or a blatant excuse to limit other people opinions.
Moreover, aren't you doing the same? Hating him or people who do not share you same view? Who decide what 's the correct view in the first place? You are right? He is wrong? Or the countrary? You see, lots of issue when you start to control opinions, better leave this crap elsewhere.

While i agree with a lot of Rapeman statements regarding some issues in europe, but this is another matter and is not the place to debate this, i want the rights to read such content if is a part of the scan release, is original content created by the scanlator, no matter how bad or not is, since everyone have the rights to decide themselves to read it or not.

This is why i support the idea of the admins above to create a further filter for such "extra" pages, having an option in the user settings over censorship is the correct way to fix the issue without censoring different views or opinions, everything else is only the same political correctness rhetoric.