Forum:Shipping Blogs Rule

I have noticed recently that there have been quite a few blogs that have been added pertaining to Sonic couples, and there is a problem with setting rules over these blogs. For one thing, they tend to attract a few unregistered users, and another problem is the fact of respecting opinions has died down. The subject is over-the-top controversial, and becomes plain silly in the end. What I'm proposing is that we restrict blogs pertaining to Sonic couples, and keep the conversations in our chat, or (suggested by Gen) in the forums (which for some reason, everyone seems to ignore). 00:39, April 19, 2012 (UTC)

Per genesjs --&#91;insert awesome user here&#93; 02:59, April 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * What is the definition of a shipping blog? Where is the dividing line between 'shipping blog' on one hand and 'not a shipping blog on the other'? -- Supermorff (talk) 17:30, April 19, 2012 (UTC)


 * The difference being that one blog focuses solely on the topic, whereas another one only makes mention of it (which hopefully shouldn't be a problem). 10:20, April 20, 2012 (UTC)
 * I think it depends if it's a subtle mention or one of those "Top 10" list blogs and the couples are listed in one of the users lists. -- Time Biter "The Rift"  10:46, April 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm still not clear how we'd word any new rule so that it was specific enough and clear enough to do what you want. Can you give some examples (links) of shipping blogs with reasons why they count? -- Supermorff (talk) 11:15, April 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * Gentlemen, Behold! 11:24, April 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay, but what exactly is it about this blog that means it should be banned, whereas other blogs don't count? What if someone wrote a well thought out, meaningful essay about one particular couple. Let's say Sonamy. It's still a shipping blog, right? Does it get deleted? -- Supermorff (talk) 17:31, April 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * Not, that's not the issue. The problem is, if someone wrote a blog that says "Which couple is the best/worst", or if there's a blog where one has two different couples competing, this causes a ton of flamewars and controversy. 18:47, April 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * But what's the difference? -- Supermorff (talk) 18:50, April 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * The difference is that the example you mentioned focuses on one topic without introducing any sub-levels of shipping, thus shouldn't cause controversy. 19:28, April 20, 2012 (UTC)


 * Right, okay. So... the type of blogs we want to ban are ones that focus on multiple shipping pairs presented in a way that encourages users to argue about which is best? -- Supermorff (talk) 06:58, April 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * Exactly. 11:22, April 21, 2012 (UTC)


 * Bit of a mouthful, but okay I'm with that. Anyone object? -- Supermorff (talk) 16:07, April 21, 2012 (UTC)

Nope, I support -- user:willaca 23:58, April 21, 2012 (UTC)

I support, I had enough of this. Pacmansonic138 23:36, April 21, 2012 (UTC)

Might I offer a refinement? The blogs banned be ones that directly compare and bring into conflict certain couples, such as saying "Sonamy vs Shadamy". Comparing them in such a manner as to offer your opinion and preference is one thing, but putting them in direct conflict should be restricted.--Kagi mizu -Seeya 'round 07:07, April 22, 2012 (UTC)


 * Kagi, I'm not sure I understand the distinction. Do you mean that a blog containing an opinion as to which is better is okay, but not a blog that asks for other people's opinions? If that's what you mean, then I'm okay with that. -- Supermorff (talk) 08:23, April 22, 2012 (UTC)

I mean well-written compared to flame instigating. Like if someone wrote a blog about why they liked Sonamy, and made small comparisons or contrasts to Shadamy or Sonaze, that would be okay. The comparisons are part of the blog, but not the main aspect.

"Sonamy iz the best and Shadamy sux if u like Shadmy U SUK!!!1!!!1" would not be okay.

To sum it up, it's about quality. If it's well-written and reasonable, I don't see a problem; there are always going to be butthurt fans. If it's poorly written and meant to insult people, then it goes.--Kagi mizu -Seeya 'round 07:07, April 23, 2012 (UTC)

The problem with basing the difference on quality is that quality is very subjective. Who decides what's well-written or not? How do you quantify purpose, literacy or maturity, and how much is enough? It's easy enough to give examples of things that would and wouldn't be allowed, but not to establish an unambiguous line that separates them. -- Supermorff (talk) 18:54, April 27, 2012 (UTC)

Quality is normally subjective, but admins should have the capability to come to a fair and objective decision. Things like grammar, tone, and wording would be the primary factors that judgment should be based on.--Kagi mizu -Seeya 'round 21:25, April 27, 2012 (UTC)


 * Taking the example that Sacor posted. There's only one sentence, and the grammar only falls down because it's a sentence fragment. The tone is fine and the wording is not inflammatory. There's nothing wrong about the quality of the blog, so how do you justify deleting it if quality is all you're looking at? -- Supermorff (talk) 06:29, April 28, 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'm aware it's been over a month since this was updated, but I figure I should bring it back to life to request more consensus from the community. My main point about discouraging shipping blogs is due to how inflammatory the comments section can become by an users, registered or not. The quality of said blogs isn't my concern, moreover civility. 18:53, June 11, 2012 (UTC)
 * I would have said what Genesjs said. -- 19:00, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

In theory, I'm all for this, but we need to be very clear about what is and what isn't allowed. -- Supermorff (talk) 19:22, June 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, I'll try to be straightforward and clear about this:


 * Basically, any future blogs such as these should be deleted, due to their attractiveness towards debating and flaming. If consensus does not agree on this, then these blogs must be moderated. If a flamewar starts, we give a warning. If another flamewar emits, then the blog should have its comments disabled, or the blog itself should be deleted. However, discussions such as these can be brought to the chat, but there could potentially be a similar rule; If a flamewar starts, a Moderator or Administrator must request both parties to stop, maybe two warnings to be less harsh. If the flamewar continues after that, I recommend a Mod or Admin uses the kick feature to knock some sense into the user. 19:29, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

What does "blogs such as these" include? What does it not include? Where is the dividing line? We're fine with handling issues that arise, but this is about disallowing certain blogs, and we need to be clear about which blogs are being disallowed. -- Supermorff (talk) 19:39, June 11, 2012 (UTC)


 * Forgive me, I thought I had made it clear enough. My bad! Essentially, my proposed rule applies to blogs that pertain towards Sonic character romance, and blogs that openly ask people what their favorite "couples" are. 20:07, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

If I can reword that a bit: Blogs asking for users' favourite Sonic couples/pairings are not allowed. What about giving users a choice between a small number of pairings? Also not allowed? -- Supermorff (talk) 20:14, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

Although harsh, yes, I'd like to restrict these blogs in any way, shape, or form. 20:17, June 11, 2012 (UTC)

How about blogs discussing one or more pairings, but not asking for opinions about them? -- Supermorff (talk) 18:55, June 12, 2012 (UTC)

What would be the point of the blog then? I guess those would be OK, but not asking for opinions almost makes the blog completely pointless, as opposed to simply stating your opinions on your user page. 18:58, June 12, 2012 (UTC)

Well hold on; how are we going to restrict them? Making any blogs talking about pairings entirely forbidden? I support moderating them, but not completely 100% restricting them. I mean seriously, this wiki is allowing the community to talk about less and less related to the series, unless it's relevant to the wiki itself.--Kagi mizu -Seeya 'round 02:59, June 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * From the sounds of it, it's not going to be all blogs talking about pairings, just the blogs saying "Which pairing is the best?" or similar. -- Supermorff (talk) 07:31, June 16, 2012 (UTC)

I Support Austin311 08:44, June 16, 2012 (UTC)

I'm neutral about this. I'm okay with having the blogs, but it should have some limitations since it can cause some trouble.  DJ Mikee   ♪ ♫ ♥ ★ ♫ ♪   Well, we should at least get ones that are smart and opinion-open be posted.-- ~♥Snegg♥   13:01, June 16, 2012 (UTC)

How about this: instead of deleting such blogs, they just get automatically locked to prevent comments being added? -- Supermorff (talk) 20:01, June 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * Then what's the point in the Blog Post then? --[[File:AMS.png]] Yo Bro [[File:WS.png]] <Big>Let's Talk</Big> [[File:CSAS.png]] 23:00, June 16, 2012 (UTC)


 * To express a thought or opinion. -- Supermorff (talk) 07:16, June 17, 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh ok. --[[File:AMS.png]] Yo Bro [[File:WS.png]] <Big>Let's Talk</Big> [[File:CSAS.png]] 07:48, June 17, 2012 (UTC)