04 Jun, 2010, Cratylus wrote in the 41st comment:
Votes: 0
Davion said:
Ya know, IMC has this thing, where when a single user becomes overly vulgar, and annoying people complain, complain and complain. Eventually said person is banned. If you find someone being overly offensive, feel free to contact one of us. Of course, if you're the only one complaining, chances are your words will fall on deaf ears.


QED
04 Jun, 2010, Sinistrad wrote in the 42nd comment:
Votes: 0
Davion said:
Ya know, IMC has this thing, where when a single user becomes overly vulgar, and annoying people complain, complain and complain.


I think you have a misplaced comma. Or… or maybe you don't.
04 Jun, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 43rd comment:
Votes: 0
Well it is pretty annoying when people complain, complain and complain. :stare:
04 Jun, 2010, Lyanic wrote in the 44th comment:
Votes: 0
This site is filled with some of the whiniest, most overly sensitive drama queens this side of the Youtube comments section. I'm offended by all this whining. I demand a filter be added!
04 Jun, 2010, Sinistrad wrote in the 45th comment:
Votes: 0
David Haley said:
Well it is pretty annoying when people complain, complain and complain. :stare:


I guess that explains why Davion ignores them =)
04 Jun, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 46th comment:
Votes: 0
Lyanic said:
I'm offended by all this whining.

Easy solution: just choose not to be! Otherwise you're double-insane.
04 Jun, 2010, Hades_Kane wrote in the 47th comment:
Votes: 0
Lyanic said:
This site is filled with some of the whiniest, most overly sensitive drama queens this side of the Youtube comments section. I'm offended by all this whining. I demand a filter be added!


In the same way there is a suggestion for an opt-in box suggestion floating around… reading any posts here are on an opt-in basis… so…

;)
04 Jun, 2010, Hades_Kane wrote in the 48th comment:
Votes: 0
In any case, I don't think anyone is taking issue with what is on IMC itself… just asking that a simple way to block it (for any number of reasons) be added. I second this suggestion because I think some of the stuff that can pop up so prominently on the front page (seriously, it is the most obvious thing on the front page) could make the site overall look bad, and considering it's not Mudbytes content, but rather external content being displayed very prominently on the front page, I don't see why that's a bad suggestion.

I'm not offended by much, and I could care less what's there for my own sake… talk about rimjobs and murdering babies (or a combination of the two) for all I care… but I think it's in all of our best interests as the Mudbytes community for the site to have as broad of a reach and accessibility as possible, and if a discussion about rimming dead babies is the first thing someone sees coming into the site, I think that's a bad thing for the site.

Nor would I classify suggesting an opt-in box as being overly sensitive or whining about offensive content. I think it's a perfectly reasonable and valid suggestion. In place of the box for the opt-out people could even be a disclaimer, something to the tune of "IMC Chat Box - This has been hidden by default in your user preferences. As the content is unmoderated by the MUD Bytes team, may contain offensive material, and is not MUD Bytes hosted content, you must opt-in to view." Then maybe followed by a front-page click to opt-in, and then maybe followed with a brief description of what IMC is.

Of course, if the general consensus is that we don't care what type of potential garbage is the first thing people see logging onto the site, then so be it (but wasn't this also the entire reason the "unmoderated" section of the site doesn't appear on the most recent discussion section?).

Overall, I don't see how this suggestion would affect anyone here that doesn't want to be affected by it. Existing user accounts could be unaffected by automatically being opted-in, while new user accounts and non-members would have to opt-in.
04 Jun, 2010, Davion wrote in the 49th comment:
Votes: 0
Hades_Kane said:
I'm not offended by much, and I could care less what's there for my own sake… talk about rimjobs and murdering babies (or a combination of the two) for all I care… but I think it's in all of our best interests as the Mudbytes community for the site to have as broad of a reach and accessibility as possible, and if a discussion about rimming dead babies is the first thing someone sees coming into the site, I think that's a bad thing for the site.


This makes it seem like people on IMC actually talk about this! You read the CT forum? I know it's unmoderated, but never does it contain stuff like that. IMC does have a tendency to get a little… uhh overboard, but again, rarely does it fall into discussion like this. There's lots of really good stuff in there. Most of the time though, it's idle chit-chat.
04 Jun, 2010, Cratylus wrote in the 50th comment:
Votes: 0
Davion said:
This makes it seem like people on IMC actually talk about this! You read the CT forum? I know it's unmoderated, but never does it contain stuff like that. IMC does have a tendency to get a little… uhh overboard, but again, rarely does it fall into discussion like this. There's lots of really good stuff in there. Most of the time though, it's idle chit-chat.


50!

I don't think the point is whether you're not offended.

I think the point is the users would like to be able to opt out.

-Crat
04 Jun, 2010, Ix wrote in the 51st comment:
Votes: 0
Cratylus said:
Davion said:
This makes it seem like people on IMC actually talk about this! You read the CT forum? I know it's unmoderated, but never does it contain stuff like that. IMC does have a tendency to get a little… uhh overboard, but again, rarely does it fall into discussion like this. There's lots of really good stuff in there. Most of the time though, it's idle chit-chat.


50!

I don't think the point is whether you're not offended.

I think the point is the users would like to be able to opt out.

-Crat


Hey where's the link?
04 Jun, 2010, Lobotomy wrote in the 52nd comment:
Votes: 0
Hades_Kane said:
(but wasn't this also the entire reason the "unmoderated" section of the site doesn't appear on the most recent discussion section?)

Not to potentially sabotage the chance (as if there actually is any) that an opt-in/out option might finally be implemented, but here's another thought regarding the IMC-box profanity/inanity business that follows a similar train of thought to the whole "controversial topics" board thing: Why is "ichat" the IMC channel being displayed and not something like, say, "icode"? It seems to me that if the intent is to keep the primary focus of displayed discussions as relating to MUDs and programming (demontrasted by the "controversial topics" decision) then displaying a channel like icode (assuming that people actually discuss MUDs and programming on icode, anyways) instead of ichat would seem to make more sense.

Although that thought still doesn't necessarily address the concern of a need for some kind of content filter for the displayed IMC content; I'm just inclined to assume, and probably wrongly so, that the sort of things that show up on ichat would be less likely to show up on icode.
04 Jun, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 53rd comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
Why is "ichat" the IMC channel being displayed and not something like, say, "icode"?

+
Quote
(assuming that people actually discuss MUDs and programming on icode, anyways)

=
your answer


Quote
I'm just inclined to assume, and probably wrongly so, that the sort of things that show up on ichat would be less likely to show up on icode.

icode is clean by virtue of being relatively unused. :wink:
04 Jun, 2010, Kayle wrote in the 54th comment:
Votes: 0
ichat's the channel displayed because despite my best efforts while I was the IMC Admin people just didn't care for being told to keep conversations on the appropriate channels nobody really cared to, and all conversation happens on ichat.
04 Jun, 2010, Kline wrote in the 55th comment:
Votes: 0
Do people really use the plethora of channels most MUDs come with, sans RP enforced games? Everyplace I've played usually had 10+ channels for various topics, ala Diku/IMC/etc, but rarely were any but one of them used. I think the community of people on a game, or in this instance, IMC, are small enough as is without fragmenting things further amongst many different channels.
04 Jun, 2010, kiasyn wrote in the 56th comment:
Votes: 0
I've populated the censor list with your basic swear words.

As this is the censor used in other places as well (grep CENSOR func/* lib/* | wc -l) shows 87 uses, you may find other sections of the site censor stuff out as well.

At this point, there is nowhere available to turn the censor on/off (?, silly qsf)
05 Jun, 2010, Koron wrote in the 57th comment:
Votes: 0
If we're worried about offending the random nonuser who comes to the site with words describing baby-murder, why not replace the IMC history box with a "Log in to see IMC history here" message? This lets them know that there's some cool feature they get access to by creating an account and logging in. Then make it a window that users can expand or collapse at their pleasure with the bool for its display status saving. Tack on kiasyn's swear censor, and you've got a quick, comprehensive solution. Woohoo.
05 Jun, 2010, kiasyn wrote in the 58th comment:
Votes: 0
Koron said:
If we're worried about offending the random nonuser who comes to the site with words describing baby-murder, why not replace the IMC history box with a "Log in to see IMC history here" message? This lets them know that there's some cool feature they get access to by creating an account and logging in. Then make it a window that users can expand or collapse at their pleasure with the bool for its display status saving. Tack on kiasyn's swear censor, and you've got a quick, comprehensive solution. Woohoo.


I'm not worried. I personally hate sites that I have to log in to view or browse something, and the purpose of the chatbox is to advertise IMC. There are actually interesting discussions that go on there sometimes, that does and has made newbies check it out.

For those of you worried about the 4 or 5 lines it takes up, a 24" screen is currently only $239 on newegg.

By default the censor is enabled for guest viewers, for everyone else it is an opt-in feature.
05 Jun, 2010, Koron wrote in the 59th comment:
Votes: 0
I actually think the IMC chat box could stand to be bigger because you're unlikely to "get" much of a conversation based only on three messages. I don't need to be able to see two news updates on the main page at once when they only update once a month or so, so IMC taking up more space wouldn't make me cry.
05 Jun, 2010, Kline wrote in the 60th comment:
Votes: 0
But it would make other people cry in much the same way that sparked this thread.
40.0/98