Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: Question about "render unto caesar"
  • Subject: Question about "render unto caesar"
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Question about "render unto caesar"

This has gone through my head a couple of times since I've been on this site, but this is the first thread I've made about it. I was reminded of it when I saw this post:

Posted by: Achronos
The moderators, at our direction, are particularly sensitive about things that violate our "Render Unto Caesar" clause in the code of conduct.

I don't like having to talk with FBI, ATF, and police about people who are building explosives, so I'm happy to err on the side of caution here. As such, posts that talk about worrying things, like building explosives, violence, physical threats, etc., are met with swift (and usually permanent) bans.

Expect your continuing posts about these topics to get yourself and your alts permabanned. Make no mistake - you do NOT have freedom of speech on our website. You do have the freedom to go elsewhere. Take the hint, and talk about your explosive-building hobby elsewhere.


The "Render Unto Caesar clause of the CoC says:

Bungie does not permit behavior or content related to illegal activities. If you violate the law, you will be responsible for the consequences. You agree not to use Bungie Web Sites to publish, post, distribute, or disseminate defamatory, infringing, obscene, or other unlawful material or discussion. This includes, but is not limited to, child -blam!-, bestiality, incest, illegal drugs, software and other forms of piracy, racketeering, money laundering, blackmail, murder, prostitution, slavery, lumpy pudding (if its not illegal, it should be), fraud, cannibalism, theft, vigilantism, harassment, and acts of treason.

The rules say:

Do not post about any illegal substances or activities.


Shouldn't the rules say "Do not advocate or instruct about any illegal activities"? This is obviously what the rule means, because if we were banned simply for posting about an illegal activity, we would all be banned by now. It's also what the "render unto caesar" clause means (it dosen't prohibit discussion of the past, like yesterday's shooting in Ohio).

It's a slight change, but a big difference.

  • 01.05.2012 6:38 PM PDT

In a time long past, the armies of the dark came again to the lands of men. Their leaders became known as the fallen lords, and their terrible sorcery was without equal in the west.
In 30 years they reduced the civilized nations into carrion and ash. Until the free city of Madrigal alone defined them. An army gathered there, and a desperate battle was joined against the fallen
Heros were born in the fire and bloodshed of the wars which followed and their names and deeds will never be forgotten

No, he is not ADVOCATING illegal activities, he is reporting them from the news. There is a difference.

[Edited on 01.05.2012 6:40 PM PST]

  • 01.05.2012 6:40 PM PDT

Best of random chance

Point proven. Now it's in the hands of the webteam.

  • 01.05.2012 6:40 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Exalted Unexplainable Member

Assume both are active rules, until proven otherwise, if you want to get technical.

  • 01.05.2012 6:41 PM PDT


Posted by: spartain ken 15
No, he is not ADVOCATING illegal activities, he is reporting them from the news. There is a difference.


Thanks for reading what I wrote.


That's my whole point, man.

  • 01.05.2012 6:41 PM PDT

In a time long past, the armies of the dark came again to the lands of men. Their leaders became known as the fallen lords, and their terrible sorcery was without equal in the west.
In 30 years they reduced the civilized nations into carrion and ash. Until the free city of Madrigal alone defined them. An army gathered there, and a desperate battle was joined against the fallen
Heros were born in the fire and bloodshed of the wars which followed and their names and deeds will never be forgotten


Posted by: coolmike699

Posted by: spartain ken 15
No, he is not ADVOCATING illegal activities, he is reporting them from the news. There is a difference.


Thanks for reading what I wrote.


That's my whole point, man.


Yeah, posting a news story about a shooting is okay but talking about killing someone or committing a crime IS NOT. And threads asking questions about illegal things also are not okay.

[Edited on 01.05.2012 6:42 PM PST]

  • 01.05.2012 6:42 PM PDT

Key


Posted by: spartain ken 15

Posted by: coolmike699

Posted by: spartain ken 15
No, he is not ADVOCATING illegal activities, he is reporting them from the news. There is a difference.


Thanks for reading what I wrote.


That's my whole point, man.


Yeah, posting a news story about a shooting is okay but talking about killing someone or committing a crime IS NOT. And threads asking questions about illegal things also are not okay.
It seems you two aren't in the same conversation....

  • 01.05.2012 6:44 PM PDT

"We live in a special time; the only time where we can observationally verify that we live in a very special time" - Lawrence Krauss.

I was a finalist :P


Posted by: spartain ken 15
But the point of the OP is that the "Render unto Caesar" section of the CoC states: Do not post about illegal substances or activities. This can be read as not posting about anything illegal period (be it talking about killing someone, or posting an article about someone killing someone else).

  • 01.05.2012 6:47 PM PDT

In a time long past, the armies of the dark came again to the lands of men. Their leaders became known as the fallen lords, and their terrible sorcery was without equal in the west.
In 30 years they reduced the civilized nations into carrion and ash. Until the free city of Madrigal alone defined them. An army gathered there, and a desperate battle was joined against the fallen
Heros were born in the fire and bloodshed of the wars which followed and their names and deeds will never be forgotten


Posted by: Zealot Tony

Posted by: spartain ken 15
But the point of the OP is that the "Render unto Caesar" section of the CoC states: Do not post about illegal substances or activities. This can be read as not posting about anything illegal period (be it talking about killing someone, or posting an article about someone killing someone else).


I see. It seems to be enforced as most of the other rules, vaguely. It is to the mod's discretion.

"Illegal activities" is enforced as anything "illegal" that is conducted ON Bungie.net like links to pirate software and talking about murdering someone.

BUT, posting a news story seems to be acceptable becuase the illegal activity was not conducted on Bungie.net and you are not encouraging people to do it.

A news story is not illegal.

I think ir can be interpreted in different ways.

  • 01.05.2012 6:51 PM PDT

I suspect llamas are secretly wizards. I <3 poptarts n' milk. I like me. Grimick is defined as: a logical parodox, the act of funnaling a potato down your throat, and a deliciously flavored muffin (with pecons and blueberries). Norway is the Swedish word for 'moron'. My sister has cancer, so i get to use handicap parking and cut small children in line at Disneyland.

"Don't eat doughnuts on thin ice."

"The pancake, my friend, has officially been flipped."

It sure does sound like you're right. Unless Bungie actually frowns about us posting about that stuff on their site at all.

  • 01.05.2012 6:55 PM PDT

Yeah, I guess, but Recon's probably tired of having his posts scrutinized.

  • 01.05.2012 7:03 PM PDT


Posted by: ctjl96
Yeah, I guess, but Recon's probably tired of having his posts scrutinized.


I'm not suggesting we scrutinize anything.

  • 01.05.2012 7:50 PM PDT

Posted by:ScubaToaster
Posted by: HipiO7
This man, this man right here put it so eloquently that I actually cancelled my own 2000+ word long post.
/slow clap for respect


:)
The person who said participating is important, not winning, obviously never won anything.

PERMABAN RECON!!!



Seriously though, he was just reporting the news, he wasnt instigating it.

  • 01.05.2012 7:54 PM PDT

Proud member of the EFF.
Proud member of the FSF.
EFF | FSF | GNU

News: /. | Cryptome | Ars Technica

Heavy weighs the crown, low hangs the head who wears it.

I had the exact same thought earlier today when I was reading the code of conduct, after reading that same post. I believe you're correct in your assumption OP.

  • 01.05.2012 7:59 PM PDT

Have you seen my mind anywhere? I seem to have lost it...

0x0 x0x 0x0 000 000 x0x 000
x0x 0x0 0x0 0xx 000 0x0 000
x0x x0x x00 0xx 0x0 x0x 0x0

I have seen you future

I imagine that the clause is intentionally vague, so they can use it in any circumstance without somebody trying to nitpick their way out of trouble. Obviously a news story is allowed, but they don't want to start adding explicit exceptions that people could try to use to appeal a well deserved permanent ban.

  • 01.05.2012 8:04 PM PDT

To the people who think Recon should be banned for his post, Think again:

I think Bungie makes exceptions in certain cases.

For example, while Halocharts was up and runnig, it used the API for the site. The site had ads, and a payed member option.

In the Bungie.net terms of service it states:
You may not use the Bungie.net API for commercial purposes. If your use of the Bungie.net API generates revenue, your use is commercial. If you are in doubt about whether your application is commercial, here are a few common examples of commercial use that may provide you some guidance:

-Users are charged a fee for your product or service that includes some sort of integration using the Bungie.net APIs;
-You sell services to Bungie.net users and use the APIs to bring users' Bungie.net content into your service;
-Your site uses API Data to drive traffic and generate ad revenue.


Yet they were never stopped by Bungie.

People like to say they don't play favorites, but there is always an exception.


[Edited on 01.05.2012 8:13 PM PST]

  • 01.05.2012 8:08 PM PDT


Posted by: insaneAssass1n9
To the people who think Recon should be banned for his post,


Why would Recon be banned for his post? All he did was report a news story, which I and many others do all the time. Almost no one ever gets banned for it, unless the story is particularly inappropriate. I'm not saying anyone should be banned.

  • 01.05.2012 8:21 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Why are you reading my signature? Who actually opens these things and reads them!

And as always, SEND ME A PM. Please. Or really bad things will happen to you.

I agree that the wording should be updated to reflect the true meaning of the phrase and what I assume to be Bungie's true intent of the rule.

I guess vague wording keeps us on our toes though, doesn't it?

  • 01.05.2012 10:02 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I disagree. If I post a topic asking whether or not you do drugs but remain completely neutral, I'm not advocating drugs however we probably agree that this type of discussion shouldn't be allowed.

What I'm trying to say is that the wording doesn't make much of a difference, it still comes down to the individual moderator's discretion.

[Edited on 01.05.2012 10:07 PM PST]

  • 01.05.2012 10:05 PM PDT

Proud member of the EFF.
Proud member of the FSF.
EFF | FSF | GNU

News: /. | Cryptome | Ars Technica

Heavy weighs the crown, low hangs the head who wears it.


Posted by: Alec9224
I disagree. If I post a topic asking whether or not you do drugs but remain completely neutral, I'm not advocating drugs however we probably agree that this type of discussion shouldn't be allowed.

What I'm trying to say is that the wording doesn't make much of a difference, it still comes down to the individual moderator's discretion.
I'll agree it ultimately comes to the moderators discretion. In your particular topic, there could be no "discussion", because under the rules you'd only be able to advocate against, as advocating for would be advocating someone do something illegal.

  • 01.05.2012 10:44 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Elder Mythic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Primum Agmen
A tosser is the same as a wanker. To toss oneself off is to fondle the trouser weasel.


Achronos

Joe Staten

The lumpy pudding part never ceases to amuse me.

I think there's a clear difference between discussing an incident and discussing how to do something.

[Edited on 01.05.2012 10:49 PM PST]

  • 01.05.2012 10:48 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: XoG Suppressor

Posted by: Alec9224
I disagree. If I post a topic asking whether or not you do drugs but remain completely neutral, I'm not advocating drugs however we probably agree that this type of discussion shouldn't be allowed.

What I'm trying to say is that the wording doesn't make much of a difference, it still comes down to the individual moderator's discretion.
I'll agree it ultimately comes to the moderators discretion. In your particular topic, there could be no "discussion", because under the rules you'd only be able to advocate against, as advocating for would be advocating someone do something illegal.

Well it could be discussed how drugs are bad, but even that probably shouldn't be permissible. Additionally you could state that you do drugs without advocating it.
It really just comes back to the moderator's discretion. If we used a doctrine of moderating by using the CoC as the supreme set of rules and adhered strictly to what was explicitly stated then I would agree that we should worry a little more about the specific wording. Since we don't do that, I don't see the current wording as a problem.

  • 01.05.2012 10:52 PM PDT

I remember when I used this space to put cool looking links to my chapters back in the day. I don't even know why I'm using it now. Why are you even reading this? You must be interested in me. Still reading?

Posted by: spartain ken 15

Posted by: Zealot Tony

Posted by: spartain ken 15
But the point of the OP is that the "Render unto Caesar" section of the CoC states: Do not post about illegal substances or activities. This can be read as not posting about anything illegal period (be it talking about killing someone, or posting an article about someone killing someone else).


I see. It seems to be enforced as most of the other rules, vaguely. It is to the mod's discretion.

"Illegal activities" is enforced as anything "illegal" that is conducted ON Bungie.net like links to pirate software and talking about murdering someone.

BUT, posting a news story seems to be acceptable becuase the illegal activity was not conducted on Bungie.net and you are not encouraging people to do it.

A news story is not illegal.

I think ir can be interpreted in different ways.
You describe your own personal outlook on "Render unto Caeser", exactly like the mods are expected. But this is the problem the OP is pointing out. How can we know how the mods descide what is allowed and disallowed? But that is really the only thing any of us can do when it comes to this specific section of the CoC. It is very specific when it comes to describing what "illegal" is but not specific enough on how it can and cannot be discussed.I suggest you reread the OP in its entirety a couple times just so you understand what he is saying.

Do not post about illegal substances or activities. In no way are we scrutinizing Recon, it is simply a perfect example nor does it require any scrutiny to see that his thread about the shooting in Ohio breaks the basic, immediate purpose of the "Render unto Caeser" section of the CoC. Do not post about illegal substances or activities. Yes, it is a mere news topic, but it is a a news article based on an illegal activity. This where mods will realize no harm is being done, it is simply promoting good, healthy discussion, but it is still breaking the CoC (technically anyways).

What the OP is trying suggest is that more basic, technical, and obvious meaning needs to be added to the CoC to show that it is completely unallowed to discuss specifically attempting or doing anything illegal (in which those activities have, in fact, been outlined in the CoC and is a good thing here) BUT it is okay to discuss compelling news articles that may revolve around an illegal activity but ONLY if the discussion being carried out is strictly about the news article and what happened.

Now, if you understood what I just stated, Recon's thread would not be a perfect example of technically breaking the "Render unto Caeser" section of the CoC, but instead, a perfect example of how it is okay to discuss an illegal activity as in discussion of a recent occurrence in news, etc.

  • 01.05.2012 11:36 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member

Posted by: r c takedown
Yax is a shining beacon in these dark times. You should all strive to be more like Yax.

Read the goddamn thread, Ken. He is suggesting a slight change in the rule's wording so that it accurately reflects what is already common practise.

[Edited on 01.05.2012 11:51 PM PST]

  • 01.05.2012 11:50 PM PDT

I remember when I used this space to put cool looking links to my chapters back in the day. I don't even know why I'm using it now. Why are you even reading this? You must be interested in me. Still reading?

Posted by: Yax
Read the goddamn thread, Ken. He is suggesting a slight change in the rule's wording so that it accurately reflects what is already common practise.
I just laid it all out for him in my post above you, at least hoping it coincides with what the OP is describing.

  • 01.05.2012 11:52 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2