So, a lot of people recently have been questioning why I've made certain rules here on my various channels, and the logic behind some of the stranger ones. First of all, a lot of people don't think they should listen to them. That's fine, as long as they realize I don't have to keep them around. I'd like to think that most people would like to know upfront what I'll allow and what I won't allow.But doesn't making these rules just make more people break them?
Um... no. At this point, I can affirm that no it does not. Besides, that logic doesn't really hold up. If people are going to break laws anyway, why do we have them? It's kind of on that same train of thought. But let's go into the actual rules.Rule #1: Do Not Mention Blocked People to me in general
I don't know why this one needs explaining, but I do block people for a reason. But this rule is in place for two reasons. Let's start with the most annoying. Some people think that I'm an attack dog that wants to go out of my way to stifle any negative thought against me. I've added an addendum for a reason "If their behavior on some other website would get them blocked/banned on a channel that I have control over, assume them to be blocked." Like it's really, really annoying. "Hey, these people are shit talking you!" Okay... what do you want me to do about it? No, I'm actually like really serious. What do you want me to do about it? If there's a legitimate problem with what they're doing you should bring it up with a moderator or site admin, not me.
The other reason? I'd like to believe that people can change, but the people who get blocked tend to poke holes in that theory. A large percentage wants to be unblocked... just to keep doing the behavior that got them blocked in general. Many of them also like to make multiple accounts, doing the same thing. You people keep telling me to "ignore the trolls" but it's kind of hard to do when everyone
keeps bringing them up, you know.Rule #2: Under most circumstances I don't unblock people
If you really thought that your blocking was unfair, you can take it to my tumblr. The one caveat is that the conversation will not be private and we will go through all of the details of your blocking. No one has EVER taken this option. Is this difficult? Not really, I don't think so. It puts us on an even playing field: "If I didn't make a mistake, everyone will know what you did." To those who have a problem with this method, what would you suggest that does not allow what rule #1 tries to avert? Like on DeviantArt, if you unblock someone you cannot block them again for 48 hours. People know this and many people are willing to abuse this.Rule #3 Do not Post External Links
This rule... does seem strange. But there are too many shock sites, troll sites, porn sites, flashing epilepsy lights, and viruses to allow any external links. Like on YouTube, if your comment consists of a URL, I generally delete it for this reason. Also, the most dangerous reason to allowing external links is if it's to a website that some troublemaker owns. Whenever you log into a website, whether it be Google, Facebook, or something smaller, they accept and log your IP. Their are websites out there that are designed to record someone's IP address and send them to you through e-mail. It's the first thing to do (and the easiest thing to do) if you're attempting to dox someone. If you want proof, I'll give it to you....tumblr.com
Also, that link there doesn't lead to tumblr. Never, ever, ever, ever, ever! Trust a link of any kind, whether it's from your e-mail or here on my pages. Yeah guys, I know a bit about web design and cyber security. The only reason I allow internal links on DeviantArt is because the site legitimately tells me where they're coming from.Rule #4: Don't Respond to Comment Chains with nothing to do with current conversation
I don't really know if I have to explain this one, but when you're responding to a comment that's three weeks old, I have to check what the actual conversation was about. And when it has nothing to do with what you just said, I get annoyed. Why do people do this? Because replies to comments on DeviantArt are put into a different, more visible, stack than any normal comment. So you're cutting in line, and when you do that, I'm not going to listen to.Rule #5: Don't Harass my viewers
Way too many people have gotten blocked by replying to EVERYONE agreeing with one of my videos and insulting them/annoying them/generally making a scene. This is the second most common blocked thing on YouTube, behind only spam bots. Why do I do this? Because it annoys EVERYONE. I hate to say it dude, but people didn't come to my video for your opinion. People claim I'm forcing my opinions on others all the time, but no one has
to see my videos. When you do something like this, they have
to see your opinions. Also, if you are forcing my opinions on other people, please stop. It's just as annoying.Rule #6: Don't Insult Me
"Mr. Enter can't take criticism!"
Well, when it's laden with blatant insults then I don't want to take your
criticism. There is plenty of people I take criticism from. Honestly, it's more of a trust thing than a pride thing. There are plenty of people who try to give me "criticism" that's more akin to sabotage. And I don't know if I'm one to talk, but a lot of people aren't good at giving criticism. Remember, and I've learned this the hard way, no one is obligated to listen to your criticism. Some people will only listen to it if it's the most glowing thing ever, and you should leave them to their fate of being George Lucas. If people have a history of directly insulting me, making fun of me, etc it does not matter how good their points are. Also, Tu quoque, which in English means "do as I say, not as I do." Also, I don't think someone realizing a behavior was wrong and then going on to condemn said behavior counts as hypocrisy. I'm getting off track.
We all cool with me just giving anyone who gives a blatant insult the boot? Like, no one is seriously defending me keeping them around? Like, we already did that talk about free speech, right?
Also, there are many arguments that I WILL not listen to. You can find them here:
Bad Critical TechniquesWhen you have any sort of following, on the internet or otherwise, you tend to become very adverse to criticism. In general, most criticism you get are trolls or an echo-chamber. And real, honest critics towards your work can seem exactly like one of those two groups. If they're harsh, it's easy to see them as a troll. If they're lenient, it's easy to see them as a part of the echo-chamber. Now there are certain ways to decide what's valid and what's invalid and here are some things that I've found will lead to destructive criticism. Keep in mind "everything you do is awesome!" is as much destructive criticism as "everything you do is crap." Keep in mind that this is very much a "do as I say, not as I do" journal, because I've learned a lot. Sometimes it takes people punching you in the face to realize that punching people in the face is wrong. But no (good) feedback should contain any of these "techniques." All of these are examples of destructive criticism.
B.C.T. 1: "Nitpicking"<
Mostly, it's "I'm an x
, so you should listen to me." X can be anything. Most of the people I actually get are "I'm a college student in x
major" (even if it has nothing to do with their argument. For example, psychology major debating standardized testing. Yes, this is a real example). Okay... well, I'm the Fairy Princess of Mars, so you should listen to me. I don't take these things at face-value. And what I usually hear is "I'm pretentious, so you HAVE to listen to me."
If your argument is good, I don't need to know about your credentials. And I hate to say it, being in college is not a credential. College graduate? Sure, why not. But just being in college? You could be the laziest student in the world or an absolute genius, I don't know. Also, I don't care.
Also, it's "It should be x instead of y"
when both x and y are on a neutral level to the unbiased observer. Like, a lot of people told me Growing Around would work better if it was in a dystopia. And then they go on to criticize what I've done as if it SHOULD be a dystopia. I got to my limit when they told me it would be more original. Kidworld (Tabletop RPG), Lord of the Flies, the Tribe (TV show), Logan's Run (book version), Gone (book), The Subtle Knife (book). What I'm kind of saying is "No it f-cking isn't..." it doesn't matter what I'm saying. Criticism, when lobbied at an author, has to play with an author's judgement. Rule #7: No Obvious Spam
Hey you guys remember those people spamming the same thing on literally EVERY single article here? It was a pain in the ass. And no matter how sound the arguments, it has no goal other than to be a pain in the ass. It's also against DeviantArt's rules itself. So doing this very well can get your account banned.Rule #8: Do Not Ask for my Skype
You want to talk to me on Skype? There are plenty of people imitating me, who will accept your invitation easily. It is not easy to gain access to my Skype. It is for business and collaboration purposes only when dealing with the general internet.Rule #9: I don't watch Response Videos
And here's the question that sparked this elaboration. Why do people seem to have a problem with this? For one, the most visible response video makers to me are trolls. Like, obvious, self-admitted trolls. They're hard to find, usually bad, and take too much time for me to watch. My average video is 7 minutes long and a response video is usually at least twice as long. With 9 times out of 10, it fails, that's watching over 2 hours of crap for something that MIGHT be insightful.
Most responses either think they understand the whole situation while missing a key piece of information, like someone saying with Viacom on my ass I shouldn't have kept pushing my luck and I deserved to get my channel taken down. Forgetting the small fact that Viacom was doing it manually within the span of two days at a completely random point in time. While no one kept this piece of information a secret.
Other ones... are logically absurd. Like one person, a self-professed troll, telling me that the point of trolling was to waste people's time. I shouldn't have to explain this one, should I? Like... what?
To make a response video, generally speaking, there's something that you don't want to say to me directly. Or you don't want to say on "my turf" or whatever. Most of the time, they're speaking to an audience, not me. And most of the time, they actually don't want a response from me. Why? No matter the creator's intentions, if I do respond to them, they will be bombarded with hatred. It's happened when I was a smaller channel and I can't imagine what would happen now. I don't care if you, Mr.-or-Ms.-Response-Video-Maker is willing to take that chance, I'm not willing to take that chance.
And let's add onto the pile that no you know that I don't watch response videos. So, why did you make one?Rule #10: If you're in a topic stream, try to stay on topic
A lot of people have been going into a stream by Kyle or Meghan will absolutely no intention of watching what they're doing. Which is... uncool man. Like, really uncool. This also extends to questions about me and stuff like that. There are better times for that, and the stream time itself is quite valuable.
Thank you for your time, and I hope I made these rules sound reasonable. I may add more as time goes on if I feel sufficient need (like if any of those bad critical techniques get out of need here, or if trolls just get more creative). And yes, I am allowed to do that on my page here. I just can't enforce these rules anywhere else, nor do I plan to.