Naming & Shaming

[Computer]

Please post official information by steam which steam officially endorses of rules concerning 'Naming & Shaming.' I cannot find any official steam rules concerning the topic.

[H4CK3R MAN]

I feel like a lot of people completely ignored the post i linked that was posted by an actual moderator at the time the topic was posted

[Satoru]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από SlowMango:

Let's start with this question.

Is it harassment towards and individual to name and shame them?

Note these people who are "rules lawyers" do not care about nuance. They want to break the rules and as such always want 'explicit' rules for every conceivable behavior. They want 'ctrl-f' because it then gives them carte blance to act in any way they wish. They don't care about the rules. They don't care about following the rules in reality. Asking a "rules lawyer" about nuance is as effective as throwing money into a burning fire. They do not care. They will never, ever respond in a way that actually acknowledges they are wrong. Because they are never actually 'wrong' because 'the rules do not expliclity say so"'. your attempts to clarify the rules are pointless because their default and only response is "its not ctrl-f so its not a rule" and they shut down because they have no other actual argument.

[Computer]

I'm not finding anything on steam with the phrase 'naming and shaming' only 'Defaming.'

Also like to note this common interpretation of naming and shaming is usually used towards a harasser or provoker. "Name and shame describes a tactic sometimes used against harassers..."

I would also like to point out that when certain amount of agreement or knowledge of facts exist for example published by multiple news organizations, or known to millions of people, then there becomes a transformation of a so called defamation into common knowledge.

I would also like to voice my concern of risk to the public if certain categories of concentric supposed defaming and notices or alerts receive contrived acceptance as solely defamatory.

[Computer]

And finally as defaming can impede investigations of legal arbitration it can also be concerning such as obstructing the authentication of evidence.

[Computer]

It could very well be proved that defaming has contributed to negatively influencing sub-communities and therefore overall impacting the morals and behaviors of society.

[Boblin the Goblin]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Gamer:

And finally as defaming can impede investigations of legal arbitration it can also be concerning such as obstructing the authentication of evidence.

It falls under 'harassment' as others have stated.

[Computer]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Gamer:

It could very well be proved that defaming has contributed to negatively influencing sub-communities and therefore overall impacting the morals and behaviors of society.

Just as well we could prove the decree of defamation boundaries have long been misinterpreted as alternative judicial territories obstructing the safety of communities overall impacting its morals and behaviors.

[H4CK3R MAN]

guess i try again then since people want to argue ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

https://steamcommunity.com/app/730/discussions/0/1621726179584510041/

The op of the linked topic is a volunteer moderator and was a moderator at the time of the topic creation

[Computer]

Our alternative for better or worse is implementation of technology to reduce relative incidences from arising.

[Computer]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Gamer:

Our alternative for better or worse is implementation of technology to reduce relative incidences from arises.

To name a couple examples of such technology concepts: Censoring encryption. Moderation tools.

[Computer]

Bottom line is defamation clauses are not sufficient, in some cases can do more harm than without.

[Weimu]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Gamer:

Bottom line is defamation clauses are not sufficient, in some cases can do more harm than without.

it doesn't really matter. this is not some kind of legally binding thing and ultimately if the moderators deem something is not appropriate for the forums they will lock or delete it. guess what? bumping old posts are not even mentioned remotely in the guidelines, yet the current mods will lock necro'd threads and even sometimes delete the post that bumps the thread

[Brian9824]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Weimu:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Gamer:

Bottom line is defamation clauses are not sufficient, in some cases can do more harm than without.

it doesn't really matter. this is not some kind of legally binding thing and ultimately if the moderators deem something is not appropriate for the forums they will lock or delete it. guess what? bumping old posts are not even mentioned remotely in the guidelines, yet the current mods will lock necro'd threads and even sometimes delete the post that bumps the thread

Yep, steam's house, steam's rules. OP has been told what the rule is, he is free to not follow it but he will face teh consequences if he doesn't.

[H4CK3R MAN]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Weimu:

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Gamer:

Bottom line is defamation clauses are not sufficient, in some cases can do more harm than without.

it doesn't really matter. this is not some kind of legally binding thing and ultimately if the moderators deem something is not appropriate for the forums they will lock or delete it. guess what? bumping old posts are not even mentioned remotely in the guidelines, yet the current mods will lock necro'd threads and even sometimes delete the post that bumps the thread

But it's old so it must be locked to prevent confusement despite being extremely relevant because logiiiiiicccccc

[Tito Shivan]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Satoru:

Note these people who are "rules lawyers" do not care about nuance. They want to break the rules and as such always want 'explicit' rules for every conceivable behavior. They want 'ctrl-f' because it then gives them carte blance to act in any way they wish. They don't care about the rules. They don't care about following the rules in reality. Asking a "rules lawyer" about nuance is as effective as throwing money into a burning fire. They do not care. They will never, ever respond in a way that actually acknowledges they are wrong. Because they are never actually 'wrong' because 'the rules do not expliclity say so"'. your attempts to clarify the rules are pointless because their default and only response is "its not ctrl-f so its not a rule" and they shut down because they have no other actual argument.

I remember one thread long time ago with its OP trying to rules-lawyer and sealion his way out of a ban because of the definition of 'spam'... Was kind of hilarious to see all the semantic leaps-fo-faith and mental gymnastic because "I didn't really 'spam' the forums because potato".

With rigid rules ends up happening the same as when you don't setup rules. Seen it happen multiple time here on Steam.
-User gets banned for X
-User decides to make 'his own casino (Steam group) with blackjack and hookers (no rules/rigid rules)
-People start joining the group (usually like minded-individuals)
-Chaos ensues
-User set up rules (and starts moderating) or eases its definitions.

It's a really fun experiment anyone here can try. Be the king of your own castle and rule your Steam group as you see fit

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Pierce Dalton:

I suggest you do the following:

1. Click the link you posted

2. Hold ctrl and press the F key

3. Type "name and shame", "naming and shaming", you can also try combining both

Come on, you're smarter than that.