New Forum Code of Conduct

[Mister Analyst]

Just curious:

Who looks at America's Three Strikes justice system, and decides it's a good idea? By all means, have a system where if you break the rules 3 times you get banned, but naming a rule after a system where someone is spending their entire life in prison for stealing a doughnut is a bit too much imo.

You seriously misunderstand America's three strikes justice system. It applies only to serious crimes called felonies such as murder. It does not apply to petty crimes called misdemeanors. Stealing a doughnut is a petty crime that does not fall under the three strikes justice rules.

The three strikes is borrowed from the American sport called baseball. A ball is thrown towards a catcher, and a batter holding a bat is given the opportunity to swing at the thrown ball. An umpire (referee) judges if the ball crosses the "strike" zone (a zone that is judged to be reasonable for the batter to hit the thrown ball). If the batter fails to swing at a ball that crosses the strike zone or if the batter swings at the ball and misses, then the batter will be given 1 "strike" against him. When the batter accumulates 3 "strikes," he is considered "out" and his turn "at bat" is ended. Hence the common phrase, "three strikes you're out".

 

[InvisibleBison]

You seriously misunderstand America's three strikes justice system. It applies only to serious crimes called felonies such as murder. It does not apply to petty crimes called misdemeanors. Stealing a doughnut is a petty crime that does not fall under the three strikes justice rules.

The problem with three strikes laws (well, one of the problems) is that there are plenty of ways for misdemeanors to be elevated to felonies.

 

[Mister Analyst]

The problem with three strikes laws (well, one of the problems) is that there are plenty of ways for misdemeanors to be elevated to felonies.

The opposite is primarily true. Many felonies are reduced to a much lesser charge in exchange for a guilty plea. The same is true for misdemeanors.

 

[bourboncreamer]

Hi Paradox devs
Long-time player here, mostly of EU3+4, but more recently CK3 and Stellaris too. First time poster.
I often read strategy on this forum and reddit, and basically wanted to say thanks, as I know you get some toxic comments from time to time.
At the end of the day, you’re just trying to make good games for us all to enjoy! Keep up the good work.
This isn’t directly related to the code of conduct, but thought it was the best place to share. Thanks!

 

[Ashantai]

Let's keep this thread on topic, folks.

 

[CobraPL]

Inappropriate content
[...]​

Nazi symbols or Nazi propaganda

[...]​

That is perfectly understandable, but why don't you ban "Communist symbols or Communist propaganda"? Communist ideology caused and Communist butchers killed (raped, mutilated, forced resettlement, stripped from belongings, forced starvation and more) many millions more people than Nazis (mainly Germans). Mao Zedong alone caused death of ~40kk people in peace time.
Echoes of Communist ideology we witness now in Ukraine attacked by Russian butchers.

Few examples:

Communist ideology | Communist terror | Communist Crimes

#1 source on communist crimes. Research and articles on communist ideology and regimes. Learn about 45 countries’ experience with communism and communist terror!

communistcrimes.org

Mass killings under communist regimes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Mass killings under communist regimes - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[DebbieElla]

As I've already stated multiple times in the thread:

This is not a comprehensive list and it often comes down to context. In our experience, while historically many symbols can be seen as oppressive, some trigger negative behavior in our communities more often than others. We want to be strict with the ones we've identified as those triggering symbols, and leave ourselves room for moderating others. Suffice to say, no glorification of historical oppression will be allowed in our communities.

 

[BrokenSky]

As I've already stated multiple times in the thread:

This is not a comprehensive list and it often comes down to context. In our experience, while historically many symbols can be seen as oppressive, some trigger negative behavior in our communities more often than others. We want to be strict with the ones we've identified as those triggering symbols, and leave ourselves room for moderating others. Suffice to say, no glorification of historical oppression will be allowed in our communities.

Does the whole "it's against the rules to argue with me" thing count for this thread? Or just for actual moderator actions?

I assume that people are ignoring this because they're not allowed (or at least don't believe that they're allowed) to comment on it?

 

[AndrewT]

Does the whole "it's against the rules to argue with me" thing count for this thread? Or just for actual moderator actions?

I assume that people are ignoring this because they're not allowed (or at least don't believe that they're allowed) to comment on it?

As the CoC clearly states:

Do not comment on moderation decisions publicly

Discussion of the CoC is nothing to do with moderation decisions.

 

[BrokenSky]

As the CoC clearly states:

Discussion of the CoC is nothing to do with moderation decisions.

Ah right.

Well the fact is that I had a rather long and kinda detailed counter-point to the post but given the situation now, I hope you can understand if I'm disinclined to talk about the topic at all at this point regardless?

 

[BrotherJonathan]

This is more of a suggestion than a question, but maybe consider including a ban on the use of "casual" as a perjorative? I often see posts where some issue with a game, pricing complaint, etc., is blamed by the poster on a nebulous horde of "casuals". It's use in this context is almost exclusively perjorative, and fosters a climate of elitism that can be hostile to new or less active players who nonetheless still use the forum. It also obstructs constructive debate and conversation by acting as a vague strawman on which anything and everything can be blamed. Thus, I would argue that the use of "casual" as a perjorative should be restricted under the "no personal attacks" or "no new-player bashing" rule.

 

[DebbieElla]

This is more of a suggestion than a question, but maybe consider including a ban on the use of "casual" as a perjorative? I often see posts where some issue with a game, pricing complaint, etc., is blamed by the poster on a nebulous horde of "casuals". It's use in this context is almost exclusively perjorative, and fosters a climate of elitism that can be hostile to new or less active players who nonetheless still use the forum. It also obstructs constructive debate and conversation by acting as a vague strawman on which anything and everything can be blamed. Thus, I would argue that the use of "casual" as a perjorative should be restricted under the "no personal attacks" or "no new-player bashing" rule.

This is definitely a case of needing context! Us in the mod team will usually infract someone if they are using the term "casual" in a pejorative way, if they are being really elitist or just general trolling, but it's a tricky word to moderate. But overall it is preeeetty much covered under the "no personal attacks", so if you feel we've missed dealing with it somewhere please feel free to report it to let us know and we can take a look.

 

[prismaticmarcus]

This is more of a suggestion than a question, but maybe consider including a ban on the use of "casual" as a perjorative? I often see posts where some issue with a game, pricing complaint, etc., is blamed by the poster on a nebulous horde of "casuals". It's use in this context is almost exclusively perjorative, and fosters a climate of elitism that can be hostile to new or less active players who nonetheless still use the forum. It also obstructs constructive debate and conversation by acting as a vague strawman on which anything and everything can be blamed. Thus, I would argue that the use of "casual" as a perjorative should be restricted under the "no personal attacks" or "no new-player bashing" rule.

if you made a list of 'forbidden words' that list would just keep getting longer and longer

 

[Ferrous Will]

Ah right.

Well the fact is that I had a rather long and kinda detailed counter-point to the post but given the situation now, I hope you can understand if I'm disinclined to talk about the topic at all at this point regardless?

I'm actually interested in seeing what you have to say.

 

[Herzmut]

I agree to the new Code of Conduct in this forum, but I have only one question.

The CoC states as inappropriate content:

• Real-world Politics or events when not present in the game

If you missed an event or some real-world (historic) reference in the game and I'd like to suggest one, how am I supposed to do that and comply to the CoC?

 

[BrotherJonathan]

I agree to the new Code of Conduct in this forum, but I have only one question.

The CoC states as inappropriate content:

If you missed an event or some real-world (historic) reference in the game and I'd like to suggest one, how am I supposed to do that and comply to the CoC?

I think it's more along the lines of "is not relevant to the game".

Essentially don't try to use the game as a Trojan Horse to start arguments about modern-day politics.

 

[Nuclear Elvis]

For a Game Studio that makes most of its money building games about War and Political Controversies in real-world history, it seems odd to not encourage discussion in general on those topics.

Today's topics "against the CoC" are tomorrow's games, after all.

 

[SmokeyMcSubpoena]

For a Game Studio that makes most of its money building games about War and Political Controversies in real-world history, it seems odd to not encourage discussion in general on those topics.

Today's topics "against the CoC" are tomorrow's games, after all.

used to*, most of their studios make sandbox games now , not political ones about real world history