The ability to speak freely does not give you the guarantee of speaking consequence free. By which I mean...you're free to say what you want, but other people are able to react to it as they see fit, which becomes the consequences of the free speech.

Maybe we need to rebrand it the 'Anti-spam' button?

I like the mute button, although I only use it on TC, who I suspect is a provocateur created by the mods so that everyone has a use for the button!

they already had the ability to choose not to listen. But now they can choose with a 100% success rate.

@SD: Your right. I didn't think of it that way.

Here's my thoughts (as in my own, not anything official) on the mute button:
The (volunteer, unpaid) mods are here to keep the games safe and make sure people aren't getting an unfair advantage over others. We are not here to moderate the forums. Inciting your fellow player is a valid (albeit tasteless) tactic. However, we do not want people cyberbullied or really heavily offended to the core. This was a way to handle that situation.
If you notice there are a lot of threads where people go at each others throats based on how they played a game or two. This also helps those people.
Can this have a poor effect in a game (like mid-game not hearing the verbiage of a fellow player in an anon game)? Absolutely, which is why it should only be used in extreme cases.

Why not just ban a player who offends another? Then we get into the realm of moderating the forums and we have to draw lines in the sand and make rules and we hardly keep up with the game mod'ing... if we have forum modding, we'd have to double the amount of mods we have.

Free speech? Please, this is a private server on a private site. You are here for free only because of Kestas's generosity. If he wants to prevent all players from communication, he has every legal right. Please don't bring the law or constitution into this discussion unless you are a legal representative (sorry, but it is a pet peeve of mine for people to start throwing in amendments when they don't understand when and where they apply).

PS - I also agree with Mafialligator on how the first comment Godwin'd the whole thing. Really krellin? Are you purposely trolling or did you think bringing hitler in at the start was just a good idea?

Yeah, people have to understand "Free speech" doesn't mean I have to listen to you. And just because you have an alternate point of view from mine, doesn't mean it actually merits a response or a rebuttal. And also you aren't entitled to free speech in any forum you want. Privately run organizations are free to censor whatsoever they please.

Everybody in the US has a right to free speech. But you do not have the right for people to value your speech as much as you might want to.

Example: There are several individuals here who after long discussions, I no longer value their thoughts or opinions. They can still feel free to rant on about whatever tickles their fancy, but they do NOT have the right to force me to listen.

I don't use the mute feature save on one person, but I support the concept. Nobody has to read anything they don't care to

I just muted King Atom and I agree with jmo1121109 that the forum is now a better place.

lmao this coming from krellin

I thought mute was a bad idea but then krellin came along and now I am a believer.

fortknox and spyman (and others) have hit the nail on the head. The options were:
- The offended person leaves or the offensive person is banned, and one of their viewpoints are pushed out / censored.
- The offended person ignores the offensive person.

There's no question in my mind which fits best into the ideal of free speech and open discourse, and also for practical reasons fortknox mentioned moderating the forum would be difficult (and may lead to group-think)


But that's the silly stuff really, the real things to focus on are:
- Does it affect games negatively? (If so how, and what is the solution?)
- Does it cause confusion on the forums in the case of seeing responses to muted users? (If so how big a problem is this? How often? Is there a software-based solution e.g. a marker representing a muted post?)

I love when supporters of mute use the "free speech" argument....but only want their own free speech to be heard. When an idea is too offensive to them, they want the person muted....and not only that, they encourage others to mute. THIS is free speech? No.....this is blatant, hard-handed hypocrisy. This is Al Gore saying "The Tea party doesn't deserve equal time" as he encourages the major media to not report on Palin, Bachman, etc....people you may not believe in, but whom deserve the media's attention as much as dolts like Reid and Pelosi.

Ahhhh....but such is hypocrisy. Such are the hypocritical.

Am I offensive to some? ABSOLUTELY! But the real question is: Am *I* offended also by those that claim to be offended by me. Well....offended? Nahh.....you'r just misinformed and I pity you. I certainly won't mute you. I *most* certainly won't be *offended* by you? That is simply *ridiculous*!

How could anyone possibly be personally offended by a complete stranger, to whom you are a complete stranger. If you are *that* sensitive....you have *serious* issues. And you issues are not what I say....you issues involve your over-developed sense of self-importance by which you think nobody should say anything that offends you....and thus you are easily offended when *YOUR* particular set of "morals" are not followed by all.

I don't know anyone on this site personally. I don't know what you background is, what your personal experiences encompass, etc. I don't know from what particular perspective you are coming....and thus how I am supposed to judge your words in such a way as to be personally offended.

So, I laugh at the fools and pretenders that cry "Free Speech! Free Speech!.....but ONLY if *I* agree with it, and am the sole arbiter...." Hypocrisy of the worst kind.

I don't need a mute button to ignore you. I simply man up, close my browser and walk away.

Does it negatively affect games? OF COURSE! I know that I have been muted by some, so when I join a game with them, and am muted (either because the mute carries over into the game or because a peson mutes me in-game upon seeing my name)....then we INSTANTLY have Meta-Gaming....where the decisions of a person In-Game are being made NOT based upon my negotiations, and not based upon past game experiences....but because they didn't like my political opinion....or my use of the word "douche". To think that Muting someone does not affect the integrity of the game is simply absurd.

Now, if you want to ignore me, not read my posts....we can not stop that from happening. But when the very *STRUCTURE* of the game reduces the instances of DIPLOMACY....when I don't even have the opportunity in a game to apologize, to explain, to whatever....then WebDip no longer believes in Diplomacy. Great enemies can become greater allies....unless someone doesn't even have the option of considering the stab, because the courier was killed by the Mute button.

As for confusion in the forums....OF COURSE it causes confusion in the forums! "Hey...did so-and-so say something? Because you responded to him...so....uh....what did he say....?" And now a discussion is being side-tracker because some idiot is responding to responses to a post that he never even had the opportunity to read. So NOW the discussion can be side-tracked into discussing the missed discussion point....To this is conducive to a discussion.

Being that this is first and foremost a Diplomacy web site, it matters not a whit whether forum discussion are affected by mute. So....whatever....most forum discussions are just an examination of extremist ideology and therefore not worth too much emotional imput. But muting me in a game....denying EVERYONE the opportunity of fair and equal play for all. Huh....I guess I just became a Freed Slave....3/5 of a man....unheard by some....

It's certainly cause enough to leave the site. (No....I'm not going to....because it would please to many of you to see me leave. :P )

Here is another highly negative affect in-game:
A has Muted B. C and B come up with an agreement, except C says you must tell A such-and-such, and have them get back to me. B messages A.....who never gets the message....and the deal falls through NOT because A would have disgreed with C or the plan...but because A can't hear B. So now you have a 3rd party being drawn into a mute-fight....and a normal strategic use of diplomacy is rendered useless....and neither B or C even realizes it.

Mute has far-reaching possibilities in affecting games, in unbalancing them. and thus severely denigrating the integrity of this site as a whole.

Does muting carry on over to games? I thought in-game muting was separate? Am I wrong?

I suggest that even giving the In-Game mute option will cause instant muting in games. I personally am hated buy a few people. Personally, I don't care. But I also know that I will be instantly muted in games....I have already been told so. So the inegrity of games in most certainly in question when people can essentially Meta-Game and mute me in game because of actions outside the game. You can ignore me without a mute....but without a mute you might also read my strategy suggestion, put aside your political hatred for me and perhaps accept good strategy as good strategy.. With the option of muting me the instant you join a game, you don't even allow for the option of fair play. This is simply wrong, and against the very nature of Diplomacy.

Perhaps you need to therefore add an option to game selection "Join Game with No Muted Players" or some such thing....

Or maybe if someone joins a game that you are in but you have muted them, you are removed from the game? Since you are the one with prejudice, and will thus negatively affect a game, you are removed. Just a thought.

Looking at your post above krellin (yes, the wall of text) I wonder have you been taking lessons from one obiwanobiwan? Are you perhaps a clone?
At any rate, you are wrong about the mute button being 'anti-free-speech', for reasons that have already been well-discussed here.

Don't make me mute you! I enjoy your flavoursome lunacy =P

+1 fiedler- wall of text = obi
+1 jmo

Et tu, fiedler?

...

Although I do ahve to admit, krellin, your WOT structure and use of capitalization DOES look like a lot of my posts...

Oh well, to thine own self be true (even whilst others throw slings and arrows...and mute bombs, though?

"That it should come to this!

Speak the speech, I pray you all!

Hold as 't were the mirror up to na--*MMM! MHPHPHPH! MMGFGPGP!*"

(And the news has come from WebDip that obiwan and kreillin have been muted.)

Thanks to the "I Don't Want To Hear You Or Respond To You In Arguments And I'm Too Lazy To Just Ignore You" button, the rest is silence...and more folks just muted me, I'm sure. ;)

UGH
Obiwan, posts like that make me want to mute YOU. Please, one theatre person to another, can you please just try and make a post without quoting shakespeare, or making any kind of literary reference. It's so unbearably pretentious.

OK.

Plain English:

If I don't mute TC for his wild conclusions, maple for trolling me every other thread for ages now, and...well, I don't mute ANYONE...

How hard is it to scroll past the bullshit and just ignore it?

"Muting" just seems not only a sign of weakness--as if you can't stand an argument--but also seems an extra slap in the face, and I don't think (in most cases) that's called for when all you have to do is scroll past the text.

If I were a troll, and just aimlessly called people faggots and made fun of the Jews on-site, or else trolled every conversation into a "Conservatism=Good, Liberalism=Evil" garbage-fest, I'd understand.

But when you mute me just for giving my honest opinon?

THAT seems rather rude and discourteous, especially when I don't mute YOU...

If the worst I do is play around with literature quotes, I don't think that's too terrible a sin.

I can always try and cut back on them, but at the same time, concurrent to that, you CAN always just ski[ them over, you know...no one is FORCING you to read Obi's Recitals.

It just seems extraordinarily rude.

Obi - are you SURE krellin isn't your multi?

Please everyone more quotes and references. If mafiaalligator calls you pretentious just mute him.

"A little nonsense now and then, is relished by the wisest men."
-- Anonymous

@fiedler - Actually, that was Willy Wonka and one of the lines from the movie that came from the book by Roald Dahl.

Yeah it's a quotes thread now. So Mute me. Then we would live in parallel universes and that would be kind of cool.

@Draugnar - oh yeah, I can even picture him saying it. Nice one :D

"Don't look now...but there's one man too many here and I think it's you."

And I LOVE that quote, Draugnar (ah, Willy Wonka...one of my first childhood heroes!)

:D

I find it a bit disappointing that people are responding to krellin, but kestas is so far being ignored. Surely you guys haven't muted kestas?

Here are my thoughts:
- Does muting affect games negatively? (If so how, and what is the solution?)
Not really. If player A mutes player B during a game, then player A is a moron. Information is an important commodity in Diplomacy, only a fool would give it up for nothing. If player A mutes player B on the forum, then happens to run into him during an anonymous game, that's his fault for not playing passworded games. If you are pretentious enough to make a blacklist, it's your own responsibility to enforce it.

Maybe there will be novice players who automatically mute someone after they've been stabbed. But that's not even a negative effect, as far as I'm concerned. It's just another way to separate the good from the bad (or the ugly?).

- Does it cause confusion on the forums in the case of seeing responses to muted users? (If so how big a problem is this? How often? Is there a software-based solution e.g. a marker representing a muted post?)
Yes, it can get confusing if you've muted half the people in a certain thread. But are you still interested in that thread? I suppose not. I like the idea of a marker for a muted post. For example, the site could display all the info (name, points, time, etc), but not the text.

^
All fair points, but I still say it's excessively impolite, not to mention bad form for argumentation--really, how far removed is it from "talk to the hand?"--and on top of all that, I ask again...

If you don't care for a poster's comments, are you really so fragile or else so lazy that you cannot bear to simply skip on by them?