Double standards in the Debate Hall

[Lord Chair]

With regards to more provoking content in the form of images.

Why are we allowed to discuss the most gruesome matters, but not post relevant pictures?

I wanted to copy the discussion on loli from the main Debate Hall, but then got a no-go from SWF to post a relevant (not even explicit) picture supporting my statements.

Apparently, same regulations to pictures apply in the Debate Hall as in any other subforum of SWF. The site is supposedly teen-orientated, but what's up with limiting the ability of Debaters to voice their opinions?

I'd rather have the Debate Hall to have an age restriction, or a specific terms of agreement with regards to more mature content.

Inb4 ''what's your point'':

Statement: The Debate Hall as well as the Proving Grounds should have less strict regulations in terms of mature content than the other subforums of this site.

 

[Nicholas1024]

Because, images aren't necessary to voice opinions in the way that words are, and explicit or violent images would have a greater impact on someone seeing them than just reading a debate about adultery or war. Additionally, it is perfectly possible for teens to debate well, and there is no reason to forbid or otherwise discourage them from participating here.

In short, I fully agree with SWF's banning of such images, and see no reason whatsoever to change it.

 

[Sucumbio]

In essence we do have less strict observation of the TOS... it is acceptable to talk about anything in the DH/PG so long as it isn't blatantly illegal, e.g. Topic: I just got so wasted on Meth last night, wanna know where I got it from? kinda thing. The loli discussion is provocative but not beyond the scope of the Debate Hall.

Images, however, well it depends on what you're trying to link too. Hopefully you weren't trying to link to images of Lolicon, lol because that's definitely not gonna fly. Yes the DH is typically more mature, but the whole site is still owned by MLG and so MLG rules apply, site-wide, to any rooms that are freely accessible to the public.

It's true that there are debates on legalizing hard drugs, etc. This may seem contradictory, and in the strictest of senses, it is. But the thin red line is carefully monitored to ensure that the discussion remains one of legality, morality, etc. and not one of g3t ur drugz h33r!!

So basically, the DH/PG is already as relaxed as it can be without creating an issue with MLG.

Hope this clarified things a bit.

 

[Lord Chair]

In the loli discussion in particular, images could definitely prove to be a worthwhile asset to making a point. There are other discussions with regards to banning of certain forms of pornography which, I must reiterate, don't have to be explicit or otherwise something that should be considered that would benefit from images.

Hell, it could even be taken as far as discussion related to art or photography taken into the least broad meaning of the word. I'm aware of SWF having a subforum with regards to art (in which, afaik, the slightest bit of nudity is also banned), but that doesn't mean that art is completely useless for the purpose of debate.

 

[Daddy Ash]

I really don't see how the use of pictures are needed in threads in the DH or PG. You can debate as effectively without the use of pictures, and it also forces debaters to step up their game so to speak when they don't have a picture they could fall back on to support them. I mean as a last resort you can always point fellow debaters to source images elsewhere on the web without actually posting them in the threads. And on the whole argument about being allowed to debate mature topics but not show pictures I agree with Nicholas, images are far more impacting than words, and seeing as the SWF is teen friendly I think banning mature images is only fair.

 

[Alacion]

If pictures have the potential to enhance the meaning of anything, then why not?

I remember my English teacher once telling me that language is a terrible way of communication, but it's the only thing we've got. There are so many things being concocted in our minds, but often it may be difficult to articulate into words.

I don't approve of more mature images though. There are still kids that may lurk here :o

 

[Battlecow]

I really don't wanna see anything approaching loli, kids or not. Lol. It's totally unnecessary and quite disturbing.

 

[Dre89]

I don't think we need pictures.

People seem to forget the DH is about pure debating- articulation, structure, logic etc.

Controversial pictures are usually just appeals to emotion, which apart from usually being logical fallacies don't contribute to previously mentioned facets of debating, they're more used just to convert someone to your belief.

 

[Ocean]

how is this a double standard at all? what is so ridiculous about us having to follow the rules, just like every subforum outside of the DH? explicit pictures are far from necessary, in the same way that explicit language is. you do not need a picture of a mutilated body to be able to talk about insanity, death, or torture.

the idea of an age restrict is silly. even if there was an age restriction, the DH is still a viewable forum, so the viewability of the forum would have to be removed as well, which defeats the purpose of having the DH be a part of SWF.

you say that it "limit the ability of Debaters to voice their opinions", but how is posting a picture of something explicit voicing your opinion? a explicit picture does not make a case, it can only be used as an example, and it can always be described in words instead. it's unnecessary.

dre makes a very solid point about pictures appealing to emotion, rather than logic. just think of the anti-abortion propaganda where they just display images of third-trimester abortions.

 

[Dre89]

Also, given the lack of activity in the DH, an age-restriction is probably the worst thing that could happen to us.

 

[AltF4]

The obvious answer is that MLG owns the Smashboards, and they profit from advertising on the website. These advertisers assume a certain demographic and expect its contents to be PG-13 at worst.

If a representative of one of these advertisers visit the site (and they do this) and see a wealth of explicit language and images, they will choose to not associate their product / service with that material, and pull advertisements from our site. Thus MLG retains the rule about no explicit words / images.

Would the Debate Hall be "improved" in some sense by having free control of what we say? Yea, probably. But the ability to monetize the boards will be hurt.

So now you know. It's not for any deep moral reason. Just money.

 

[Battlecow]

Also no one wants to see loli and it's absolutely, totally unnecessary. So there's that. Like, I dunno if that's the reason they're using, but it's a reason why things should stay this way.

 

[Bob Jane T-Mart]

I'd rather have the Debate Hall to have an age restriction, or a specific terms of agreement with regards to more mature content.

Honestly, I really don't want the DH to have an age restriction just so people can post pictures of mature content. Why? I have a vested interest - I'll be below the age-restriction and be turfed out.