Originally posted by ChrisYou've considerably changed your tune from your first message to me. Without directly quoting an e-mail, in that one you said the avatar was removed because it was upsetting members and you specifically stated it was not considered "racist". Now, it was removed because it disturbed you personally. Which is it?
Let me just say here that the avatar was removed because it disturbed me personally. We have hundreds of avatars alerted to us with people requesting they be removed on the grounds of racism, sexism, religous reasons, etc... and the decision over whether to remove them is always made by us and not simply because someone requested their removal. You have abso t an avatar is suitable simply because it potrays a fictional character is pretty weak at best.
Your simplistic last sentence grossly misstates what the argument is. The avatar was suitable not because it was a fictional character, but because, far from being racist, it showed a hero - a man who struggled for freedom and dignity in the most difficult circumstances imaginable. If Jesus hanging on a cross is "suitable", then so should Kunta Kinte in chains, yet still defiant and proud, be.
04 Jun 09
Originally posted by CrowleyI wonder how a PM to Sush would have gone.
You didn't - it was really your only option. You should not have to chat with other users about such a sensitive subject, especially if it affected you emotionally.
The admins should have opened dialogue with Sushill as they usually do in these cases.
A simple, "I saw your avatar, could you explain why you picked that?"
From there a LOT may have been cleared up, or a decision could have been made about the avatar.
From there perhaps Elamef37 could have easily verified her feelings, or digested what was said and made a new decision... or talked it over.
Why would a question be so bad, Crowley?
P-
04 Jun 09
Originally posted by ChrisWell done, Chris.
Let me just say here that the avatar was removed because it disturbed me personally. We have hundreds of avatars alerted to us with people requesting they be removed on the grounds of racism, sexism, religous reasons, etc... and the decision over whether to remove them is always made by us and not simply because someone requested their removal. You have abso ...[text shortened]... t an avatar is suitable simply because it potrays a fictional character is pretty weak at best.
04 Jun 09
Originally posted by PhlabibitI don't think there should be a precedent where users PM each other why one should remove an avatard.
I wonder how a PM to Sush would have gone.
A simple, "I saw your avatar, could you explain why you picked that?"
From there a LOT may have been cleared up, or a decision could have been made about the avatar.
From there perhaps Elamef37 could have easily verified her feelings, or digested what was said and made a new decision... or talked it over.
Why would a question be so bad, Crowley?
P-
Admin should get feedback and should then talk to the 'offender' and probably give feedback back to their client.
04 Jun 09
Originally posted by CrowleyNot a PM to ask them to remove it.
I don't think there should be a precedent where users PM each other why one should remove an avatard.
Admin should get feedback and should then talk to the 'offender' and probably give feedback back to their client.
A Pm to ask why they use it.
From there they might learn, or verify a suspicion.
P-