Implemented Bullying on Okinawa.Org

[cici]

Nobody has been engaged in bullying against @chris. In fact, it was found to be the opposite as @chris sent a conversation inciting physical violence on this forum, which will not be tolerated due to the size of this island. As such, he has officially been warned about that.

All ideas are welcome here. However, if it is found to be inaccurate by anyone, be prepared for someone to question you about it as this is not Facebook and citations are gold in forming a debate, next to not relying on an ad hominem as a crutch. This extends to all Okinawa.Org staff members, as well as @David (the founder), as the title and status of belonging to Okinawa.Org's core do not remove them from having to explain themselves or to be above the rules either.

Everyone is encouraged to report all content with a note so that we may determine the proper action to take. All reports are kept anonymous and, for the most part, handled anonymously. Generally, only a notification is sent to the reporter which sometimes won't outline the action we took, rather that it was resolved or rejected (handled).

Thank you and back on topic, please!

Hi, I did not mean to step over bounds but there is a difference between bullying and fighting and physical violence online and I see neither, but that is of course your decision but it maybe wise for someone to actually understand verbal conjectures as there are implications on party A that clearly dictates any form of violence as step outside is a polite way to say settle a difference outside of a place of business or home. Physical violence would state bodily harm as to break a leg or nose or choking and such as there is no indications to that matter. Clearly no one understand's typical English, but before you judge a book by it's cover alone you must see all angles and it is quite apparent no one has seen all angles and if truth be told and by looking at the beginning conversations back on page 67 ( I think) I believe the bullying started from two members and it is clear and concise typical online bullying by two members here. I think it would be wise for staff here to clearly get a second opinion from a person who understands English and proper bodily tones and proper word placements.

 

The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of Okinawa.Org.

[Okinawa]

How would you suggest to word an anti-bullying rule that doesn't teeter on taking one's freedom of speech away?

Please provide examples of what you think bullying is, in quotes, as well as a properly written rule that we can implement here and provide a correct translation to our ESL staff to follow as a guideline moving forward.

Thank you!

 

[John]

“you have a problem with me meet me anytime anywhere i live in okinawa lets do this i need a good fight.”

Does this seriously translate to “step outside is a polite way to say settle a difference outside of a place of business or home?”

#2, @chris disputed that COVID19 is the cause of 733k+ deaths, and went on to further argue that the flue killed more than COVID19. So, I disproved him by letting him know that death per annum from the flu was no more than 650k. This is where cyber bullying from @chris occurred, started with name calling of “ MR. KNOW IT ALL.”

If anything, I continued to express decorum and civility against juvenile name calling and sarcasm.

If you consider demanding facts and acknowledgement of one’s misusage of data “bullying,” sure, I’ll be a bully. I just cannot see how that would be the case based on common sense and normal level of intelligence.

If that doesn’t suffice, the admin has made the call, and looks like you don’t respect that decision. If you don’t like the establishment, it’s your God-given right to leave.

 

[cici]

“you have a problem with me meet me anytime anywhere i live in okinawa lets do this i need a good fight.”

Does this seriously translate to “step outside is a polite way to say settle a difference outside of a place of business or home?”

Excuse me but this statement does not in anyway form a hostile threat towards violence of a certain nature. You appear in many OP'S trying very hard to get a rise out of Chris and in doing so you take a simple statement towards physical violence which there is none in this statement.
Now if Chris had said ( You have a problem with and meet me anytime anywhere so I can break your neck)
then that is considered a physical violence statement.

 

[cici]

How would you suggest to word an anti-bullying rule that doesn't teeter on taking one's freedom of speech away?

Please provide examples of what you think bullying is, in quotes, as well as a properly written rule that we can implement here and provide a correct translation to our ESL staff to follow as a guideline moving forward.

Thank you!

Hi just a quick FYI I got this for you and it pretty much explains the reason for bullying with kids to adults.
Physical Bullying is the most obvious form of intimidation and can consist of kicking, hitting, biting, pinching, hair pulling, and making threats. A bully may threaten to punch you if you don't give up your money, your lunch, etc.
Verbal Bullying often accompanies physical behavior. This can include name calling, spreading rumors, and persistent teasing.
Emotional Intimidation is closely related to these two types of bullying. A bully may deliberately exclude you from a group activity such as a party or school outing.
Racist Bullying can take many forms: making racial slurs, spray painting graffiti, mocking the victim's cultural customs, and making offensive gestures.
Sexual Bullying is unwanted physical contact or abusive comments.
Cyberbullying is one or a group of kids or teens using electronic means via computers and mobile phones (emails, Web sites, chat rooms, instant messaging and texting) to torment, threaten, harass, humiliate, embarrass or target another kid or teen or adult
I will gather all statements regarding as to why I think the judgement here is wrong on violent statements which in turn was an attempt to to anger said person for sole intent to eject a person. Give me some time will return.
Oh sorry the abuse or bullying that has happened here is Verbal Bullying as it starts with one saying to push a button in a way to push anger. Will return tomorrow with all statements of said parties to ensure Chris was defending himself from persistent Verbal actions.

 

[Okinawa]

If you consider demanding facts and acknowledgement of one’s misusage of data “bullying,” sure, I’ll be a bully. I just cannot see how that would be the case based on common sense and normal level of intelligence.

No, we cannot consider this bullying in a debate. Sometimes debates get heated, and that's alright. What's not alright is persistent ad hominem attacks as opposed to rebuttals with citations.

physical violence statement

Context is key. Everyone knows what "let's step outside" refers to, and it always means some form of a physical or verbal altercation. Enticement of either is not acceptable.

The proper way to handle it is this:

If anything, I continued to express decorum and civility against juvenile name calling and sarcasm.

However, we are awaiting feedback on where we should draw the line so that we know from a community standpoint a) what is bullying and b) what the line between a heated debate and bullying is.

 

[island cyclist]

I want to bully with the ads. We need more Okinawan liqour ads please.

 

[Okinawa]

We don't want to follow in the steps of Twitter and Facebook as we are a platform. Therefore, we've come up with this sensible measures regarding bullying and speech within all areas of the site.

Okinawa.Org is a platform that is home to free speech and no censorship. We want everyone to feel safe, but personal attacks—which can't be clearly defined—that are used in a heated discussion are protected under this clause for as long as it's not using offensive terminology against a non/protected class that is direct in nature. What is not protected are insinuated threats of violence, extending to ones that can be read that way in context.

In these rules, we would generally ask no more than 1 curse word per paragraph as sometimes people are frustrated and a lot of people do have a military background which makes this slip more often than others. Though, this does not mean it's a "smoke pit" area where one can let words fly every other word; we'd like to promote articulate discussion, but this can be overlooked for the most part for as long as there's sustenance in what is written beneath that. Otherwise, we'll just be forced to turn on censorship of words (****) as opposed to issuing warnings.

With the rule, we would still encourage everyone to report all content and add a note as to why it's believed that it's an attack gone too far, whether it be against you or somebody else, to build from it going forward.

Would anybody like to discuss these rules? Make a change? Add or remove from it?

 

[John]

We don't want to follow in the steps of Twitter and Facebook as we are a platform. Therefore, we've come up with this sensible measures regarding bullying and speech within all areas of the site.In these rules, we would generally ask no more than 1 curse word per paragraph as sometimes people are frustrated and a lot of people do have a military background which makes this slip more often than others. Though, this does not mean it's a "smoke pit" area where one can let words fly every other word; we'd like to promote articulate discussion, but this can be overlooked for the most part for as long as there's sustenance in what is written beneath that. Otherwise, we'll just be forced to turn on censorship of words (****) as opposed to issuing warnings.

With the rule, we would still encourage everyone to report all content and add a note as to why it's believed that it's an attack gone too far, whether it be against you or somebody else, to build from it going forward.

Would anybody like to discuss these rules? Make a change? Add or remove from it?

I’m good with that rule.

Just needed a clear adjudication on actions by @chris and you’ve done just that.

With that being said I ask @cici to please stop harassing me with false claims of “cyber bullying.” The admin as made the call, and your false claims on my civility and decorum was detrimental to my integrity as a participant in this forum.

I urge you to publicly retract your statement as you have been corrected by the admin, so people know that you have made a false claim.
Thank you

 

[cici]

#2, @chris disputed that COVID19 is the cause of 733k+ deaths, and went on to further argue that the flue killed more than COVID19.

First i would like to ask please find anywhere in this forum that chris disputed 733+deaths as I cannot find that anywhere.

If anything, I continued to express decorum and civility against juvenile name calling and sarcasm.

Also juvenile name calling has to be both ways as you did in replies as referring to as a child or kid as you put it, a boy, and calling his conversation or conversation with you as sub-standard ( which means stupid) and by you saying these things is not juvenile and sarcastic on your behalf as well?
Also you complained of misuse of information:
"And, just because Denny went on this stupid fortune-telling spree, so to say, doesn't mean he can take the blame for you misusing the data. Those are two separate things: he is dumb for doing that, and you misquoted some data."
I am not aware of any misuse of information by an article that was provided as a source of information so can you please be more specific on how Chris misused information please?

 

[Okinawa]

Also juvenile name calling has to be both ways

Juvenile name calling is not against the rule provided as it's still protected free speech. We're not playing that "safe space" and undefinable "hate speech" game here as we are a platform over a publisher.

I urge you to publicly retract your statement

While we won't arbitrate in this matter, if he stated that you're wrong, it's not libel which we would step in on; but hopefully, we don't need to continuously create rules as people ought to act more civil on a forum—as a reminder to all: a forum is much different than a Facebook group with memes and GIFs as citations.

Having said that, the best course of action here is to either prove your stance or to not engage with anyone that makes baseless accusations that you're wrong as it's hopeful that everyone reading can see right through it; the audience here should have a greater attention span than other "platforms" to see the two posts and conclude that you're not wrong.

Thank you for your input though, @John. We're about to close this out as the final rule made unless @cici can provide insight on what we can implement or if the rule needs further clarification as it stands.

 

[cici]

Upon asking friendly advice from my school mates and the source that Chris did provide but somehow no one seems to understand here and the way Chris had presented the source of the information as per his question
Chris asked ("Still doesn't answer the question as to why recovered cases is higher than infection cases worldwide?") I guess this is where it went all wrong because it wasn't very indicted, as the question of infections, as to the site he sourced has infections everywhere.
Reny95 almost shouted this in an attempt to yell or prove a point:
"This is a screenshot directly from your link. This shows that out of the 20.2M total cases. 6.3M worldwide currently have covid and 13.8M have either recovered or died. When you add those numbers up it matches the total. I don’t understand why you are saying that there are more recovered people then people whom have actually had covid. When you spread these false statements it makes any point that you try to bring across invalid. I’m just trying to show you the data and tell you that you need to relook at what is being put out there.There is no reason to get upset or angry."

To my understanding Chris and Reny95 are both wrong but one screams at another your wrong and i'm right
but Reny sees the total confirmed number of cases which is 20.5 million which in my opinion is wrong to post a total without proper break down of said information. The total 20.5 million should be broken into those who are currently active with symptoms hence the term Chris followed as current infections and the next break down of the 20.5 million cases should be those who tested positive and do not have any symptoms or who are not under doctor's care. So I brought the link to my class mate who follows dashboards and he broke the ice with what the charts should say or display information as Chris was looking at current infections to recovered. Yes the current infections number is lower than the recovered number which Chris's main question was all about but Reny who sees total infections did see into the question clearly.
Here's what the page should read and then again there is not a shred of information on those who tested positive for COVID-19 who may have been quarantined with no symptoms and fully recovered to a healthy status but all cases of COVID-19 which is unfair is all thrown together and this is what people fear. Here's the chart from the source site in question:

Chris question was not worded properly this is why it angered Reny and John what Chris should have asked is (Why is the number for Currently Infected Patients lower than Cases which had an outcome?) But no one saw this question and in their minds concluded that he is off the wall sort of speak.
It matters that people listen and try their best to understand a question before leaping into a heated argument with your wrong and keep saying over and over in replies because that makes the other person a feeling of intimidation being pushed upon him or her.

In conclusion both parties are wrong but I am astonished to see the one sidedness of a judgement against one person without back tracking and ready the post's and replies and comprehending the meaning of words that had been used and to blame one person for an argument without investigation solely shows a lack in rational thinking. Without going backwards and understanding meaning of words and how they are said and used and placed in a sentence I am afraid to say you will lose a lot more member's from short sightedness and word definition's.

 

[cici]

Juvenile name calling is not against the rule provided as it's still protected free speech. We're not playing that "safe space" and undefinable "hate speech" game here as we are a platform over a publisher.

Excuse me but juvenile name calling is a verbal abuse and is considered bullying. If someone called you and your conversation a sub standard conversion which the true meaning of the word means (stupid) you would not be offended by such wording?
I truly do not understand the one sidedness of this forum at all. Astonishing!

 

[John]

Having said that, the best course of action here is to either prove your stance or to not engage with anyone that makes baseless accusations that you're wrong as it's hopeful that everyone reading can see right through it; the audience here should have a greater attention span than other "platforms" to see the two posts and conclude that you're not wrong.

Understood. Thank you. I will resort to the latter course of action with profound faith that the audience can discern incoherent false claims.

Thank you for the hard work as always!

 

[John]

Excuse me but juvenile name calling is a verbal abuse and is considered bullying. If someone called you and your conversation a sub standard conversion which the true meaning of the word means (stupid) you would not be offended by such wording?
I truly do not understand the one sidedness of this forum at all. Astonishing!

The admin has made the call. Either you live with it or take a hike, son.

 

[cici]

The admin has made the call. Either you live with it or take a hike, son.

Well be it as may I am a girl and your tone in your reply indicates a form of harassment as you are telling me to get out of a public place.

 

[cici]

Understood. Thank you. I will resort to the latter course of action with profound faith that the audience can discern incoherent false claims.

Thank you for the hard work as always!

To what matter do you proclaim that I made false, as you are blatantly calling me a liar as per your claim
"incoherent false claims"

 

[Okinawa]

I truly do not understand the one sidedness of this forum at all.

There is absolutely no one sidedness here. Nobody got a warning for name calling. Chris received a warning for, in context, a threat of violence.

Well be it as may I am a girl

We do not promote protection of dead naming like Twitter. If you're biologically a female or male and someone calls you the opposite, essentially misgendering you, or refuses to use your pronouns, we will not step in as that is not our place. The only option you have here is to ignore them. We must add that people should do it out of respect, if respect is given. However, this is not a violation, nor will it ever be unless the overwhelming majority want this protection.

We will not use the specific slurs that we will enforce, but as an example, we live in Japan and if you were to refer to any Japanese on or off this forum as a racial slur, we will warn you. This is how the rule is intended as written.

 

[Okinawa]

To what matter do you proclaim that I made false, as you are blatantly calling me a liar as per your claim
"incoherent false claims"

You have these options—which go both ways—if @John pointed out that there are incoherent false claims in your post you can:

• Ignore them and scroll on or ignore them on the platform so you no longer see their posts.
• Report posts for terms violations, in which we really have no rules at this point so it would result in an unofficial warning with a newly created rule.
• Post a source and clarify what you mean to the best of your ability. You could also tag a staff member, such as @David, in that post so he can try and understand while attempting to make your argument more coherent (while agreeing or disagreeing with you separately).

 

[cici]

Post a source and clarify what you mean to the best of your ability. You could also tag a staff member, such as @David, in that post so he can try and understand while attempting to make your argument more coherent (while agreeing or disagreeing with you separately).

To post a source for a statement made from John saying I made "incoherent false claims". Now how on God's green earth can you do that. There is no such source as to the post he made here is your source.

John
Member
Founding Member
Today at 5:00 PM

• Add bookmark
• #14

Okinawa said:
Having said that, the best course of action here is to either prove your stance or to not engage with anyone that makes baseless accusations that you're wrong as it's hopeful that everyone reading can see right through it; the audience here should have a greater attention span than other "platforms" to see the two posts and conclude that you're not wrong.

Understood. Thank you. I will resort to the latter course of action with profound faith that the audience can discern incoherent false claims.

Thank you for the hard work as always!

Does anyone realize what Incoherent False Claims means? After I made an assessment to why the bickering started between your member's with their quotes and exact wording as per your idea. So in reality you are basically telling me to shut up, take it, or leave, like John implied? I am appalled to the fact it is correct behavior to call a person a liar in the words of (incoherent false claims) used by said member and this is acceptable to label such people as liars. I provided a lengthy post to try and comprehend the action's of three of your member's and the Thank you I receive is being labeled False! As indicated before Astonishing!