a clear rule in regards of inflammatory discourse and dogpiling

[thumbsdown]

Been here for a few months, but I've seen enough of this going on since the incident of an user posting AI made art and attributing it to themselves, as handmade art. At the time, even Spike engaged in the crowd saying, correctly (= the statement "per se" did not justify the crowd), that one thing is being into AI trends and another thing is to attempt to pass it as yours. Subsequently to that, the forum userbase overreaction in regards of an application to the writers guild on the topic gender representation in videogames, past its approval by the staff (which means complying with the set of rules established at the time). Then, in a game thread started by one of the CDR curators, which is a controversy game highly in risk of becoming lost media. Recently again, in a post made just for the sake of mocking a questionable game/dev available on steam, which developed to transphobic interactions infringing rule 3 (but idk the details to summarize it well). As we could learn from those situations, the community manifesting their opinions and beliefs, as long as it doesn't infringe the set of rules, is not really a big deal but the overreaction of many, that is, their own inability to ignore unharmful stuff they dislike or don't get, thus interacting unreasonably and violently with certain subjects. It seems like most folks are unable to accept what simply exists, liking it or not. We can continue to pretend that people will behave and make proper use of the report system (we've also seen some people abusing it, for the sake of overwhelming the staff) and "ignore" features, or we could properly and exemplary punish those who are known for being regulars on dogpiling events. The rule and its shape, if interesting and benefitting the collective, up to discussion among the staff only.