Well, looks like we are launching a bit earlier than originally planned. This site is fully functional, just a bit limited on some things as we get all the backend worked out. Our CSS is a work-in-progress due to some major differences from how reddit was set up, so that will be coming, it will just look a bit barebones until then.
For the time being we still consider reddit.com/r/kotakuinaction to be our primary site, but will be building this up as a proper backup over time. We actively encourage anyone who wants to coexist on both sites to do so, and have no issue with folks who have finally had enough of reddit's bullshit that decide to make the move here completely now.
Rules are generally going to be the same here as they were on /r/kotakuinaction, but we are thinning them out a bit as some rules no longer need to apply here due to different sitewide rules/TOS from above lifting some restrictions we had to deal with. We will try to get a more complete listing of the newly modified rules up soon, as well as get them listed/linked on the Sidebar and such. Automod is not completely operational here, but will be in the very near future to make that all a bit easier to deal with.
Please be patient with us as we get things in gear. I'll try to keep everyone updated on the progress of things, though some parts will be mostly self-evident as they happen (like the return of the banner/sidebar).
So we're getting quite a few new and lapsed users, and more than one person has asked us just exactly what KIA is.
So here's our mission statement, a basic description of what this place is for, and our half-finished rules still full of less-broken-than-I-thought-it-would-be reddit CSS and placeholder text. As you can clearly tell, THIS IS NOT DONE, we haven't even gotten started on figuring out how much of rule 3 we're gonna change...again...now that the admins are off our backs. For the moment we're allowing some shitposting and general partying, but at least now we'll have something to point to when someone goes too far past the line and needs a smack. Please bear with us as things are still very much under construction. Also, we need to do something about the character limit that's forcing me to put half of this into a sticky, so...SEE STICKY!
KotakuInAction is a platform for open discussion of the issues where gaming, nerd culture, the Internet, and media collide.
We believe that the current standards of ethics in the media have alienated the artists, developers, and creators who perpetuate the things we love, enjoy, and enthusiastically build communities around. We have observed numerous incidents involving conflicts of interest and agenda-pushing within media which we feel are damaging to the credibility of the medium and harm the community at large. We believe much of the current media is complicit in the proliferation of an ideology that squashes individuality, divides along political lines, and is stifling to the freedom of creativity that is the foundation of human expression.
KotakuInAction is a community that condemns willful censorship, exclusion, harassment, and abuse. It is a community that organizes to hold the media accountable to the concept of artistic freedom by standing up for the artist, the developer, the writer, the filmmaker, and all who enjoy the freedom to create, explore, and expand. It is a community that allows the exchange of information, supports the ongoing discussion of media ethics, and protects the right of the individual to embrace their personal interests in entertainment and fandom.
KotakuInAction is built around a core focus on reasonable, friendly discussion of the issues related to gaming culture, and those involved in it. That is not all we are about, but it's where we began and will remain our core. We hold ourselves to be politically neutral ground, not forcing anyone to conform in their opinions, and permitting a wide variety of viewpoints to express themselves in a civil manner.
Code Of Conduct for KotakuInAction
For the sake of making it easier to read, more transparent, and to cut back on confusion regarding which rules get dealt with in which way, we are pulling the warning/ban policy out of Rule 1 and moving it to stand independently so that other rules with specific policies are all in one place. The updated policy is as follows:
General Rule 1 Enforcement
You'll get two public warnings from the mods. Any offenses after that, and you'll get a 3 day temporary ban. Screw up again, and you're gone for a month. Screw up again, and you're not coming back.
Warnings will expire after 90 days. So if you got a warning and didn't screw up for, say, three months, and get warned again, that counts as your first warning on the road to being banned. However, if you received a temp ban for breaking Rule 1, it'll stay on your record, and won't expire for a year, so if you screw up after that before a year has gone by, you go to a 7-day/month-long ban and the year-long timer resets. Basically, don't screw around.
Rule 7 Enforcement
If a user is determined by at least two moderators to have violated Rule 7, they will be issued one warning not to do so again. If they repeat the behavior, as agreed upon by at least three moderators, they will be issued a 7 day ban. Doing so again (and agreed upon again by at least three moderators) will result in a permanent ban.
Other Rule Enforcement
All other rules will generally be enforced with a single warning followed by at least one temporary ban before any permanent ban is issued. The notable exceptions are Rule 2 (dox) and Rule 5 (personal army requests), which we reserve the right to immediately and without warning issue a permanent ban. In more severe or extreme cases of violations of other rules, should at least three moderators agree a user needs to bypass the standard warning/ban process and be moved straight to a permanent ban, such action may be taken, though this route should not be taken often.
Moderator Rule-Breaking Policy
Compared to regular Rule 1 enforcement, this is going to be bit more strict - first violation results in warning (publicly visible as all other warnings), second warning within a month will result in temporary suspension or permanent removal of permissions.
Reporting of mod violations should be done via modmail - please provide link to violation, rule violated and context, if necessary. If you don't want to report via modmail, you can also report to the head moderator directly. If you don't want that either, you may elect someone to report on your behalf. Nevertheless, links and context are required. Needless to say the mod in question won't be involved in evaluation of said violation.
- DON'T BE A DICKWOLF
Attack arguments, not people.
"Fuck off, retard," is not an argument. Neither is "Kill yourself, faggot." Regardless of whether you think someone is a shill, SJW, or whatever, stick to arguing the points. Name-calling does not contribute to discussion. Refer to the pyramid as a general guideline. If anything, just make sure your criticism outweighs any insults. However, well-reasoned arguments that end with parting shots like, "Stop being obtuse; even children understand this concept," are okay. Ostensibly, we're all adults here; a comment like that can just be ignored.
The core of this rule is primarily based on patterns of behavior, which fall into these categories:
Badgering and/or baiting another user across multiple threads or baiting after disengaging (mod enforced or otherwise), including persistent mentions and/or replies. Note that this generally does not apply to people that are outside the community, (e.g. "God, the guy who wrote that article is such a fucking retard."), but does apply in cases of tagging a user (e.g. "reallybadpersonidontlike you're a fucking mongoloid and you should go die in a fire.").
Posts and comments which are clearly not intended to generate discussion, but rather aimed at generating or maximizing as much drama and emotion as possible. Intentionally posting to make people angry.
Posts and comments intended to drive a wedge in the community, or to rally a mob to target users or communities, without the intent to hold a constructive discussion. Crusading eschews conversation, going beyond well-meaning criticism into behavior that includes excessive attacks against specific users, demands that action be taken against specific users, and/or bombarding a post with hostility towards KiA or specific users.
Don't resort to malicious name-calling, brazen insults, and/or general hostility against any individual user. Don't use identity politics or unironic slurs (that is, language intended to advocate blatant hatred) against groups of people. Don't make serious calls for violence against individuals or groups. If you're joking, please make clear you are joking so we don't have to slap you for it.
2. No Doxxing
We do not allow the publication of personal information, which is defined as:
1. Real names
Exceptions are made for "public figures," including (but not limited to) journalists, actors, published authors, and public-facing company personalities, as well as the subjects of published journalistic articles (limited purpose public figures). Facebook and LinkedIn pages may only be linked for corporations and public figures.
2. Phone numbers or addresses
Public contact numbers/address for companies (not including individual employees) are exempt.
3. Promotion of known doxxing sites
Certain websites exist for the primary purpose of collecting and spreading dox. You may not link to them, encourage others to visit them, or discuss them by name. The list of such sites can be found here. (link)
4. Other info which may be used to personally identify someone
Including personal e-mail addresses that are not intentionally available to the public, images of homes, etc.
If you are in doubt whether what you posted may constitute posting personal information, reach out to the moderator team. (link)
3. POSTING GUIDELINES
Posts on KotakuInAction must focus on one of the topics included in the whitelist and may not include a topic from the blacklist.
Post that do not meet this criterium will be removed. Removals due to Rule 3 alone have no consequences aside from the post being removed.
Meta Posts are excluded from this rule.
- Journalism Ethics
- Official Social Justice
- Media Meta
- Tabletop gaming, comics, sci-fi/fantasy, manga/anime, and derivative media of such
- Sub related OC Artwork
- Tech Happenings
Temporary Whitelist Items
- Unrelated Politics
- Memes (as in image macros)
- E-Celeb Bullshit
- Forum Noise (random users complaining on random forums [directly involved devs are exempt from this])
- Social Media Hot Takes
- Lets Plays
Temporary Blacklist Items
To pass unrelated pol, topics containing politicians; laws; government or major political organizations without direct relation to GamerGate, must be presented without partisan slant and the majority of the topic must focus on relevant actions or proposals, rather than their partisan or electoral implications.
Official social justice is defined as: The propagation or implementation of identity politics by institutions or companies of major size.
Tech Happenings is defined as: Significant events concerning the policies, business practices, algorithms, behavior, and corporate cultures of tech companies and social networks, especially where pertaining to free expression, identity politics, and anti-consumer activities, as well as legislation affecting tech spaces.
If you believe your post is of sufficient importance to the community but are concerned that it would not pass the above guidelines, please contact the modteam for approval
4. Posts must be intelligible
Non-English links must include a translation in the immediate comments from the OP. This can be either a full length translation, a copypaste of a machine translation, or a direct link to a full machine translation of the page.
All links to videos longer than 5 minutes will require either a comment by the OP or to be in a self post summarizing the relevant parts of the video to what they are trying to point out with it. Exceptions may be allowed if the title is clearly explaining what's going on with the link pointing directly at the relevant timestamp in the video.
Avoid mobile links if possible.
MS made a HUGE library of their own publishing often partnered with other companies. Xbox was NOT the first thing they did. OH NO! That has twisted a whole generation around in their thinking whom never saw any of this.
1996: edition: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gMC_uFdcWE 1998: edition: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_DninpA9mA 2000: edition: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LA037sJ7CD4 I honestly didn't know it went quite this far!
Just doing a politics check before I give them my money. Obviously, the splash screen and emphasis on combining cultures seems a little like SJW red flags, but not, on their own, enough to really push it one way or the other. Anyone know anything about the studio or game beyond that?
We've all had our fair share of disappointments these last few years. A popular game series has an anticipated sequel, and it's impact is damaged by unwarranted nannying from the game itself, or its vocal staff on Twitter. Which game series did you like, that had a poor sequel?
One of mine is: The World Ends with You: Neo. Apparently it's dub is aggressively political? For my own health, I'm not reading that.
So a few years ago I wrote several articles about Reddit being a disgusting platform. More specifically, Reddit had a bunch of subs openly advertising paedophilia in the text index as I set out in my article - Reddit Bans /r/PedoWorld and /r/PedoCity the Day After MHN Article.
Abandoning Reddit has been long overdue.
Given all the upheaval today, could KiA perhaps use it to advertise the KotakuInAction.win platform enthusiastically?
So there's some recent major reddit drama at the admin level involving a recently hired admin turning out to have hired their now-convicted pedo father post-arrest during a brief journey into Britbong politics. This has completely exploded over the last couple days after posts on /r/ukpolitics were force-removed, a moderator was suspended (then later reinstated) for linking to an article from the Spectator, and there have been horrifically broad automod rules implemented which were nuking any links to that and more articles, alongside accusations made regarding this admin by name (username and IRL name).
Now, we aren't getting into the weeds on the accusations, but the overwhelming admin level response to them, including mass comment hard nukes (they show up for moderators as [removed] and cannot be reapproved at all), mass user suspensions, as well as the hard block on links to actual news sites (IIRC the Spectator, Independent, and a couple others were included) is something we cannot remotely condone. There's such a thing as a proportional response, and this from the admins is not it.
To add to the mess, we recently felt it necessary to implement a broad "no transgender discussion of any kind" policy on KiA (Reddit, not here) to head off the rather insane Anti-Evil removals and warnings/suspensions issued, including a warning issued to me personally for using the term "chick-with-a-dick" in reference to Polly from HuniePop2 as "promoting hate". When I approached the admins to get clarification on their policy, including a request for a full list of what they consider to be "trans-related slurs", I was given the run around with half-scripted answers before I asked to be escalated to a senior community team member. My request was never escalated, and it now turns out that the admin who gave me the run around was the admin at the center of all this drama. That makes the admin decision a total conflict of interest regarding actual sitewide policy enforcement.
All this put together - the bans, hard comment removals, link blocks, and the direct policy interactions with this admin - have caused us to make the decision to speak up the best way we can to make reddit take notice, by going private alongside hundreds of other subs for at least a day (we will see if it goes longer or not). We just have one benefit that most other subs do not in that we can link to a post here to more clearly explain why we are doing this, instead of just relying on a link to another post on reddit by someone who is not completely representative of our position.
A few of us will be around on and off today to maybe answer some questions, though this is almost fully in the laps of the admins to decide if they are going to continue fucking up their enforcement policies, counter to how things have been run in their own rules regarding public figures for years. Our own Rules 2 and 5 regarding personal info of people were built on the original interpretation of those sitewide rules with admin help. Going completely counter to that makes it impossible for anyone to enforce rules evenly, and the admins need to pull their collective heads out of their asses to understand that.
EDIT: So the admins sacrificed the employee on the altar to appease the masses, but failed to actually address any of the real issues this mess created around sitewide rules, automated moderation, etc. We are going to stay aimed at a target of roughly 24hours of staying private, in hopes that something gets addressed by a redname on that side of things. So figure somewhere in the 5am US Eastern timeframe, give or take, then the sub should be public again.
Recently got it for free and been messing with it in MS Teams meetings for a laugh and doing some video stuff and a buddy of mine was suggesting maybe we do Youtube sort of pop-culture discussion from the perspective of 40-somethings. I was trying to see if anyone has experience with it as I notice when I begin to talk fairly quickly it loses track and was wondering if folks have some suggestions.
Just went to KiA on reddit and it's locked out in a 'private mode'. Been subbed to there for years. What's going on?
The logic is simple. Star wars is now for regressives, which are our natural enemies. Every time we get upset and make a YouTube video or cry about Star wars on social media, the regressives view it as a good thing which makes Disney think they're doing something right. If we all just collectively dropped the franchise, there would be no more pushback and regressives would eventually lose interest, forcing Disney to change their direction or at the very least, halting the franchise all together and selling it off to another entity.