But what is inappropriate? To a Atheist - Religion is inappropriate, To a Capitalist - Socialism is inappropriate. To a Vegan - Killing animals is inappropriate. To a Fanboy - Anything that steps out of canon is inappropriate. I could go on but I think I've made my point. It's subjective what anyone might think is inappropriate.
Not breaking the rules set by Cryptic/CBS now that should be easy if they made a easy list with what it allowed or not.
But the rest is subjective. An Atheist probably will rate any Bajoran mission containing references to their religion with one star. While someone that's religious might rate it 5 stars.
Please note that I'm bringing this up as possibilities, not as facts that this will actually happen, but it might.
I remember the uproar about that there was an Asian (Japanese), Russian and Afro-American woman on the Enterprise and the kiss between Kirk and Uhura and the one between Dax and Kahn. I know that nothing explicit like that can be made with the Foundry, but it points to the fact that some people can't handle that their values aren't the only ones in the universe.
Some sadly can't see past that Star Trek has always been about breaking those boundaries, showing a human race that has overcome those dark ages when we fought wars over difference of opinions amongst ourselves.
I remember the uproar about that there was an Asian (Japanese), Russian and Afro-American woman on the Enterprise and the kiss between Kirk and Uhura and the one between Dax and Kahn. I know that nothing explicit like that can be made with the Foundry, but it points to the fact that some people can't handle that their values aren't the only ones in the universe.
Some sadly can't see past that Star Trek has always been about breaking those boundaries, showing a human race that has overcome those dark ages when we fought wars over difference of opinions amongst ourselves.
I would hardly compare the Kirk and Uhura scene to "Rejoined". in fact Rejoined wasn't even really about homosexuality, it was more about Trill society and how ANY previous romantic relationship between hosts is forbidden.
sadly what you said is true. it works all around though, as you mentioned earlier. A lot of Trek fans couldn't stand any Bajoran stories because they dealt with religion.
sadly what you said is true. it works all around though, as you mentioned earlier. A lot of Trek fans couldn't stand any Bajoran stories because they dealt with religion.
Well... that and... they were just really dull.
I'm not a huge fan of religion but, for example, my flagship RP character (Rikaelus) is always spiritual or religious in nature. Point of fact... he's Bajoran in STO. He was a paladin in WoW and is whatever class is closest to a paladin or Templar in other RP games.
The Bajoran stuff in DS9, though... was just boring and poorly done.
I'm not a huge fan of religion but, for example, my flagship RP character (Rikaelus) is always spiritual or religious in nature. Point of fact... he's Bajoran in STO. He was a paladin in WoW and is whatever class is closest to a paladin or Templar in other RP games.
The Bajoran stuff in DS9, though... was just boring and poorly done.
I thought it was interesting. I suppose the whole reason I found it interesting was due to Sisko's slow transition into acceptance as his role as the Emissary.
Can't go any further without going off-topic and against ToS.
All I meant is that there are people like those I described, I'm not saying that everyone is like that.
Big difference.
The problem is, will the Foundry handle those cases in a good way, that is people who find things already present in the Star Trek universe inappropriate.
I would hardly compare the Kirk and Uhura scene to "Rejoined". in fact Rejoined wasn't even really about homosexuality, it was more about Trill society and how ANY previous romantic relationship between hosts is forbidden.
Well interracial relationships on TV was a big thing back then for some people. I didn't say that about the 'Rejoined' scene. I know that groups of people who watch Star Trek thought it was inappropriate and didn't belong in Star Trek. I read about all the letters they wrote to Paramount/CBS.
So I'm just worried that the Foundry will not be able to cope with this kind of behaviour.
Any parents who are genuinely concerned about their childrens' activity on the internet need to either actively and directly monitor it and not blame businesses for being unable to psychically divine that the user behind the faceless data-stream is a minor.
I really have no clue how American law works, unfortunately, but inable to accept the EULA might mean that you are also not allowed to use whatever is "hidden" behind it. So the kid would be "breaking the law", akin to stealing a porno movie from a video rental store. The kid might face no legal consequences (being a kid and all), but neither would the video rental store, would it?
I really have no clue how American law works, unfortunately, but inable to accept the EULA might mean that you are also not allowed to use whatever is "hidden" behind it. So the kid would be "breaking the law", akin to stealing a porno movie from a video rental store. The kid might face no legal consequences (being a kid and all), but neither would the video rental store, would it?
That's exactly why such things exist, yes - solely for CYA purposes on the part of the business, and to that end, they should be and are effective.
That doesn't stop parents and politicians from irrationally engineering moral panic and attempting to get services shut down or force them to waste a lot of resources they don't really have.
They will get voted as 1 star and sink to the bottom of the pile. And if they're vulgar, they'll get reported and deleted.
The last thing you need is a review process chaired by unskilled nobodies with personal agendas and zero objectivity.
it seems to me you may know something about writing things in pen but not practical faith in your work when it reaches the UGC. I for one will like this process as many games have UGC and they are still filtered greatly by the gaming community. Lets get real. there needs to be a review process as to whats good and whats bad. get some back bone and have some faith in your own work man. jess
Well interracial relationships on TV was a big thing back then for some people. I didn't say that about the 'Rejoined' scene. I know that groups of people who watch Star Trek thought it was inappropriate and didn't belong in Star Trek. I read about all the letters they wrote to Paramount/CBS.
So I'm just worried that the Foundry will not be able to cope with this kind of behaviour.
perhaps, but I just don't think you can compare the two incidents. Gene said there were Southern stations that initially flat out REFUSED to air that TOS episode.
perhaps, but I just don't think you can compare the two incidents. Gene said there were Southern stations that initially flat out REFUSED to air that TOS episode.
a few complaints/letters doesn't compare.
I guess I'm mistaken then. All I know of it, that's because I'm not from the US, is/was what I read online and I just did a search and found this on Memory Alpha.
This episode features Star Trek's first same-sex kiss and is one of the most controversial episodes in the show's history. According to Ronald D. Moore, "some felt betrayed, didn't want to see this in their homes. An affiliate down south cut the kiss from their broadcast." Similarly, Ren
I guess I'm mistaken then. All I know of it, that's because I'm not from the US, is/was what I read online and I just did a search and found this on Memory Alpha.
Yes, it provoked controversy. Hell, when I showed the episode to my parents, they were a bit uncomfortable. But I still think it's night and day. guess that's just my opinion.
But the rest is subjective. An Atheist probably will rate any Bajoran mission containing references to their religion with one star. While someone that's religious might rate it 5 stars.
Not to get off topic (she says before getting off topic), but I'm an Atheist and I have no problem with Bajoran spirituality or their religion. In fact, the argument can be made that by having wormhole aliens as "Prophets" it shows how subjective religion can be. It could also be argued that some Fundamentalist could have a problem with any Trek religion because it isn't the same as their religion.
Personally, I'll be giving low marks to missions with typos, shiny vampires, and a lack of originality.
All I meant is that there are people like those I described, I'm not saying that everyone is like that.
Big difference.
The problem is, will the Foundry handle those cases in a good way, that is people who find things already present in the Star Trek universe inappropriate.
Well interracial relationships on TV was a big thing back then for some people. I didn't say that about the 'Rejoined' scene. I know that groups of people who watch Star Trek thought it was inappropriate and didn't belong in Star Trek. I read about all the letters they wrote to Paramount/CBS.
So I'm just worried that the Foundry will not be able to cope with this kind of behaviour.
The thing is, what is "inappropriate" is going to be spelled out. Cryptic is additionally going to doublecheck anything flagged as "inappropriate" and if that reviewer consistently wrongly flags things, they are going to lose their reviewer privileges, and what they flagged as "inappropriate" is just going to get listed along wiht any other "appropriate" mission. It won't be an issue at all in the end.
Not to get off topic (she says before getting off topic), but I'm an Atheist and I have no problem with Bajoran spirituality or their religion. In fact, the argument can be made that by having wormhole aliens as "Prophets" it shows how subjective religion can be. It could also be argued that some Fundamentalist could have a problem with any Trek religion because it isn't the same as their religion.
Personally, I'll be giving low marks to missions with typos, shiny vampires, and a lack of originality.
Indeed. I was too incenced to say something similar to the poster you quoted anywhere nearly as politely.
As an atheist primarily due to being a materialist, having gods that you can go into a wormhole and gently poke would change my personal perspective of religion more than a bit. For me, Deep Space Nine helped round out a discussion started in the Original Series as to what sort of beings might be considered gods and what sort of beings would 'deserve' to be praised as gods. The Prophets IMO plausibly earn the latter category, and are contrasted to the Changelings who set themselves up as gods over the Dominion, and even seem to have drunk their own Kool-aid at times, but are fundamentally acting out of fear of the Solids.
Indeed. I was too incenced to say something similar to the poster you quoted anywhere nearly as politely.
As an atheist primarily due to being a materialist, having gods that you can go into a wormhole and gently poke would change my personal perspective of religion more than a bit. For me, Deep Space Nine helped round out a discussion started in the Original Series as to what sort of beings might be considered gods and what sort of beings would 'deserve' to be praised as gods. The Prophets IMO plausibly earn the latter category, and are contrasted to the Changelings who set themselves up as gods over the Dominion, and even seem to have drunk their own Kool-aid at times, but are fundamentally acting out of fear of the Solids.
Ya know, I'm really ****ing slow sometimes. Because despite watching all 7 season of DS9, I never put together the contrast between the Founders and the Prophets. Goddamn, how the HELL did I miss that OBVIOUS comparison? /facepalm
Ya know, I'm really ****ing slow sometimes. Because despite watching all 7 season of DS9, I never put together the contrast between the Founders and the Prophets. Goddamn, how the HELL did I miss that OBVIOUS comparison? /facepalm
It's a rather more even-handed and less anvilicious exploration of the subject than in the Stargate shows, though I like those too. Except for Universe, but that's waaaaaaaaaaaay off-topic.
It's a rather more even-handed and less anvilicious exploration of the subject than in the Stargate shows, though I like those too. Except for Universe, but that's waaaaaaaaaaaay off-topic.
I mean, I look at it now, and it's so obvious. But I was so engrossed in the characters that I didn't really look for such things.
It's a rather more even-handed and less anvilicious exploration of the subject than in the Stargate shows, though I like those too. Except for Universe, but that's waaaaaaaaaaaay off-topic.
I really enjoyed the unstated implication of the ascended Ancients being the basis for a lot of Christianity. They weren't quite bold enough to point out the connection outright, but it was definitely there. They got a lot of respect from me for doing that. Not very PC.
Not to get off topic (she says before getting off topic), but I'm an Atheist and I have no problem with Bajoran spirituality or their religion. In fact, the argument can be made that by having wormhole aliens as "Prophets" it shows how subjective religion can be. It could also be argued that some Fundamentalist could have a problem with any Trek religion because it isn't the same as their religion.
Personally, I'll be giving low marks to missions with typos, shiny vampires, and a lack of originality.
As I wrote, I didn't say all people belonging to these groups thought like that. Of course some Atheist have no problem with religion etc. What I'm worried about is that the Foundry can't handle these types of groups.
The thing is, what is "inappropriate" is going to be spelled out. Cryptic is additionally going to double-check anything flagged as "inappropriate" and if that reviewer consistently wrongly flags things, they are going to lose their reviewer privileges, and what they flagged as "inappropriate" is just going to get listed along with any other "appropriate" mission. It won't be an issue at all in the end.
Yes, they will loose their rights. But what will happen to the missions they have created? Let's say someone writes a bunch of missions then loose his marbles and starts running around flagging other writers' missions as inappropriate, eventually his rights are withdrawn. Will that mean that person can't make new missions, ever? Or just for a specific time period (1-6 months)? What happens to the missions he already published? Or is it only the right to review other writers' missions that is revoked?
Yes, they will loose their rights. But what will happen to the missions they have created? Let's say someone writes a bunch of missions then loose his marbles and starts running around flagging other writers' missions as inappropriate, eventually his rights are withdrawn. Will that mean that person can't make new missions, ever? Or just for a specific time period (1-6 months)? What happens to the missions he already published? Or is it only the right to review other writers' missions that is revoked?
Only the rights to review content is withdrawn in this instance.
I suppose there will also be rights to make content that can be revoked if you repeatedly get caught trying to break whatever guidelines Cryptic and CBS put forth. This is just conjecture, since I don't recall seeing it touched on directly, but would make sense.
Comments
Except that won't be the case for the people who have to accomplish the required reviewing.
No, it won't. They will have to be willing to sift through said ****.
Not breaking the rules set by Cryptic/CBS now that should be easy if they made a easy list with what it allowed or not.
But the rest is subjective. An Atheist probably will rate any Bajoran mission containing references to their religion with one star. While someone that's religious might rate it 5 stars.
Please note that I'm bringing this up as possibilities, not as facts that this will actually happen, but it might.
I remember the uproar about that there was an Asian (Japanese), Russian and Afro-American woman on the Enterprise and the kiss between Kirk and Uhura and the one between Dax and Kahn. I know that nothing explicit like that can be made with the Foundry, but it points to the fact that some people can't handle that their values aren't the only ones in the universe.
Some sadly can't see past that Star Trek has always been about breaking those boundaries, showing a human race that has overcome those dark ages when we fought wars over difference of opinions amongst ourselves.
Stereotypes are bad, mmkay?
Can't go any further without going off-topic and against ToS.
I would hardly compare the Kirk and Uhura scene to "Rejoined". in fact Rejoined wasn't even really about homosexuality, it was more about Trill society and how ANY previous romantic relationship between hosts is forbidden.
sadly what you said is true. it works all around though, as you mentioned earlier. A lot of Trek fans couldn't stand any Bajoran stories because they dealt with religion.
Well... that and... they were just really dull.
I'm not a huge fan of religion but, for example, my flagship RP character (Rikaelus) is always spiritual or religious in nature. Point of fact... he's Bajoran in STO. He was a paladin in WoW and is whatever class is closest to a paladin or Templar in other RP games.
The Bajoran stuff in DS9, though... was just boring and poorly done.
I thought it was interesting. I suppose the whole reason I found it interesting was due to Sisko's slow transition into acceptance as his role as the Emissary.
All I meant is that there are people like those I described, I'm not saying that everyone is like that.
Big difference.
The problem is, will the Foundry handle those cases in a good way, that is people who find things already present in the Star Trek universe inappropriate.
Well interracial relationships on TV was a big thing back then for some people. I didn't say that about the 'Rejoined' scene. I know that groups of people who watch Star Trek thought it was inappropriate and didn't belong in Star Trek. I read about all the letters they wrote to Paramount/CBS.
So I'm just worried that the Foundry will not be able to cope with this kind of behaviour.
I really have no clue how American law works, unfortunately, but inable to accept the EULA might mean that you are also not allowed to use whatever is "hidden" behind it. So the kid would be "breaking the law", akin to stealing a porno movie from a video rental store. The kid might face no legal consequences (being a kid and all), but neither would the video rental store, would it?
That's exactly why such things exist, yes - solely for CYA purposes on the part of the business, and to that end, they should be and are effective.
That doesn't stop parents and politicians from irrationally engineering moral panic and attempting to get services shut down or force them to waste a lot of resources they don't really have.
it seems to me you may know something about writing things in pen but not practical faith in your work when it reaches the UGC. I for one will like this process as many games have UGC and they are still filtered greatly by the gaming community. Lets get real. there needs to be a review process as to whats good and whats bad. get some back bone and have some faith in your own work man. jess
perhaps, but I just don't think you can compare the two incidents. Gene said there were Southern stations that initially flat out REFUSED to air that TOS episode.
a few complaints/letters doesn't compare.
I guess I'm mistaken then. All I know of it, that's because I'm not from the US, is/was what I read online and I just did a search and found this on Memory Alpha.
Yes, it provoked controversy. Hell, when I showed the episode to my parents, they were a bit uncomfortable. But I still think it's night and day. guess that's just my opinion.
Not to get off topic (she says before getting off topic), but I'm an Atheist and I have no problem with Bajoran spirituality or their religion. In fact, the argument can be made that by having wormhole aliens as "Prophets" it shows how subjective religion can be. It could also be argued that some Fundamentalist could have a problem with any Trek religion because it isn't the same as their religion.
Personally, I'll be giving low marks to missions with typos, shiny vampires, and a lack of originality.
The thing is, what is "inappropriate" is going to be spelled out. Cryptic is additionally going to doublecheck anything flagged as "inappropriate" and if that reviewer consistently wrongly flags things, they are going to lose their reviewer privileges, and what they flagged as "inappropriate" is just going to get listed along wiht any other "appropriate" mission. It won't be an issue at all in the end.
Indeed. I was too incenced to say something similar to the poster you quoted anywhere nearly as politely.
As an atheist primarily due to being a materialist, having gods that you can go into a wormhole and gently poke would change my personal perspective of religion more than a bit. For me, Deep Space Nine helped round out a discussion started in the Original Series as to what sort of beings might be considered gods and what sort of beings would 'deserve' to be praised as gods. The Prophets IMO plausibly earn the latter category, and are contrasted to the Changelings who set themselves up as gods over the Dominion, and even seem to have drunk their own Kool-aid at times, but are fundamentally acting out of fear of the Solids.
Ya know, I'm really ****ing slow sometimes. Because despite watching all 7 season of DS9, I never put together the contrast between the Founders and the Prophets. Goddamn, how the HELL did I miss that OBVIOUS comparison? /facepalm
It's a rather more even-handed and less anvilicious exploration of the subject than in the Stargate shows, though I like those too. Except for Universe, but that's waaaaaaaaaaaay off-topic.
I mean, I look at it now, and it's so obvious. But I was so engrossed in the characters that I didn't really look for such things.
I really enjoyed the unstated implication of the ascended Ancients being the basis for a lot of Christianity. They weren't quite bold enough to point out the connection outright, but it was definitely there. They got a lot of respect from me for doing that. Not very PC.
As I wrote, I didn't say all people belonging to these groups thought like that. Of course some Atheist have no problem with religion etc. What I'm worried about is that the Foundry can't handle these types of groups.
Yes, they will loose their rights. But what will happen to the missions they have created? Let's say someone writes a bunch of missions then loose his marbles and starts running around flagging other writers' missions as inappropriate, eventually his rights are withdrawn. Will that mean that person can't make new missions, ever? Or just for a specific time period (1-6 months)? What happens to the missions he already published? Or is it only the right to review other writers' missions that is revoked?
Only the rights to review content is withdrawn in this instance.
I suppose there will also be rights to make content that can be revoked if you repeatedly get caught trying to break whatever guidelines Cryptic and CBS put forth. This is just conjecture, since I don't recall seeing it touched on directly, but would make sense.