Comments - yournamehere

"ModDB isn't a goverment, it has every right to "violate freedom of speech" without actually doing so."

I totally agree. If you read my argument again, you'll notice that I only take issue with the premise they used to justify removing the mod. As I've stated before, if the mod had violated a law or a rule in the TOS, I'd be right up there with you guys voicing my support. However, this mod didn't do any of those things. Was this mod an exercise to see how far limits could be pushed? Perhaps. But now that it's removed, what are the limits? Have we figured them out? What justification will be used to determine what is off-limits in regards to hosting stuff on ModDB? These are questions I have right now.

"Point in question: If I were just to post "N***er N***er N***er" my post would get removed because I'd just be being offensive for the sake of offending people... that mod is no different."

It would get removed because you are in direct violation of the 'Terms of Use' for ModDB. I quote from it: 'As a guideline any post that contains (but is not limited to) any of the following will be subject to remedial action by the moderators... comments of a bigotry nature (derogatory towards race, religion, gender or sexual preference)'

It doesn't look like this mod violates anything in the TOU.

I never claimed otherwise :)

People have a right to protest. This doesn't mean that ModDB's only option is to remove the mod. They could've stated very clearly that they do not condone the mod at all, and played no part in its development. Hell, Google links to offensive material all the time. Unless it's something unlawful, I don't think they've ever removed any links (feel free to correct me on that). I feel that even though the mod was in poor taste, this action sets a precedent. To me, it seems like if any mod is made regarding a sensitive concept, the chances of ModDB removing it due to complaints are fairly high. While I understand that iNtense didn't want to deal with all the crap from media outlets and non-gaming press, I feel that he could've handled this situation slightly differently.

Good point. I should have thought of that before posting. But what if a mod's only website WAS the ModDB page? Removal would be denying content. This is how censorship gets started. Australia is a great example. They censored the crap out of L4D/L4D2 because people had knee-jerk reactions to violence years before, leading to censorship laws. In the end though, iNtense can do whatever he wants with the site. I just wish his decisions aren't guided by idle threats.

iNtense doesn't have to stand behind anything other than his "we support freedom of expression\" statement. Moddb is a database for mods. Controversial mods are going to get uploaded at some point no matter what. I'm not sure how ModDB would've been taken down with this mod. They only host the projects. They could've easily added a disclaimer somewhere stating that they are only hosting the mod and nothing more. Instead, it seems like they took the CYA approach and removed it all together.

"Pawnstick doesn't care about ModDB; nor does any anonymous coward on the team that can't show their face because THEY don't want to be associated with this project."

It's just a mod. There isn't much damage it can do. Most parents have never heard of ModDB and they most likely never will. And if they do, what is going to happen? A boycott? Let's get real here. If you're offended by this mod, I fully support your right to express that. However, I draw the line when your reaction prevents me from accessing content.

Nice ad hominem. I am not here to sling mud. I'm here because I have been watching this mod, and the moddb page is where I learned of it. I think it's unfortunate that the MODDB staff decided to remove the modification based on complaints of "oh it'll lead to more school shootings, etc." Arguing about what I believe that's a false statement is for another discussion. I still think iNtense's actions contradict what he says in his post. I have no doubt he only wants the best for the community. I just disagree with his decision.

I registered an account just to voice my thoughts.

Quite frankly, I think MODDB made a huge mistake in removing this mod by hiding under the guise of "protecting the images other mods." This would be like my local library banning a really offensive book because it is a detriment to other books. It hasn't happened, nor will it ever happen.

By caving into the unfounded concerns of parents who don't understand what the ESRB system is for, you've just destroyed all credibility in the arguments made within the main post.

Example:
"...but on the other we also feel people should have the right to be creative and share what they want on a community / developer run site, and we shouldn't have the right to dictate what is/isn't allowed."

Except by caving in, you essentially DID dictate what is/isn't allowed, thus in my mind, rendering that part of your post untrue.

Example 2:
"There is also quite a bit of confusion from non-gaming press, who state that games like this are the reason why all bad things occur, spreading misinformation and fear."

The non-gaming press ALWAYS claim random stuff is the reason why all bad things occur. Hilariously, it was FOX NEWS that ran the story. You know, the station that ran the story about anonymous and yellow exploding vans. Yet MODDB caved. As holdenmcclure has said, you're only proving that knee-jerk social reactions will evoke responses from the MODDB administration.

There is a saying that goes something along the lines of "I don't like what your saying, but I'll fight to the death to defend your ability to say it." MODDB clearly doesn't follow this principle.