|
I have a proposal
Option 1: Change nothing
Option 2: Allow Wikipedia Links on ROBLOX
Option 3: Make Twitter and/or YouTube links no longer allowed.
I got this idea from a thread by somebody on Suggestions & Ideas
Of course, not every idea will get added, some may not even be considered, but at the very least, I'm trying to get this idea noticed.
http://www.roblox.com/Forum/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=102370588
Here's some reasons why ROBLOX may have banned these links in the first place:
*Some articles could be on inappropriate topics.
*Some articles may be about sensitive topics, they could lead to flame wars.
*Some articles could include inappropriate or possibly violent pictures.
On the other hand, here's some valid points I'd like to make:
*Tweets could contain offensive material, explicit content, violent words, and could start flame wars.
*For YouTube videos, it's the exact same as Wikipedia and Twitter, but to a whole new level.
This is where Wikipedia's similarities with those two end.
YouTube: In the links, you can't tell what on Earth the video will be, not just by looking at the title. You have to actually watch this. This could slow down the moderation system, and possibly trick people into watching it.
The example below is merely one of ROBLOX's videos, not an inappropriate one, but let's say the video DID have inappropriate content in it, just by looking at the link, nobody really knows what the video contains.
Links look like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GVqyQOZjus
Twitter: Again, there's no exact way to know what you might be about to view without actually using the link.
Links look like this:
https://twitter.com/ROBLOX/status/414163819049402369/photo/1
If ROBLOX's tweet had an inappropriate picture in it, nobody could find out without clicking on it.
Wikipedia: You can instantaneously tell what the link leads to by simply looking at the link, thus allowing any user to report the link before viewing it, which is much easier than reporting an inappropriate video or tweet. Below is an example of what it'd look like if someone tried to link other users to an inappropriate article.
Links look like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/(Insert inappropriate word here)
If some user wanted to be clever, and use something to shorten their link, I'm almost certain that ROBLOX filters those links. Such as t.co links no longer being allowed.
If somebody wanted to be clever, and make a thread full of inappropriate pictures, then give it an appropriate or random name, the Wikipedia bots would probably flag that article for deletion even quicker than a Forum Moderator finds and content deletes the thread. If they don't, it's still easy to tell what the link is going to be to.
On Wikipedia, you can't change the inappropriate word in the link to look appropriate, it'll redirect you to another article.
I'll use ROBLOX Battle for an example. If the words "ROBLOX Battle" were banned on ROBLOX, I could change that in the link's name, without changing the name of the game.
http://www.roblox.com/ROBLOX-Battle-place?id=96623001
would still work like this...
http://www.roblox.com/Just-some-random-game-place?id=96623001
However, it doesn't work like that on Wikipedia.
Thank you for taking the time to read this, I know it's kind of long, I'm not going to expect without doubt that something will change, but I hope you at least consider it.
Thanks! |
|
|
I would like it if nobody replies without reading every last word of this.
|
|
|
I support, and I read its all. |
|
|
|
|
No support. Wikipedia has bad links.
Like If I were to go to like "pizza"
I would find like a million 18+ facts about it.
Wikipedia is for perverts. |
|
|
You have an extremely weak argument, Horoscopist.
"I would find like a million 18+ facts about it."
1. That's a hyperbole.
2. No, you wouldn't.
3. 18+? You're off.
4. Read the whole thing, it's all there, black and white, clear as crystal.
|
|
|
VerizonGuy, thanks for supporting!
|
|
|
@Color
Wikipedia is too PERVERTED.
Check up ALMOST anything and find "18+" facts. |
|
jonny1367Join Date: 2010-07-04
Post Count: 33252 |
@Horo
You're a special kind of stupid
(ง ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°)ง |
|
|
|
"Wikipedia is too PERVERTED.
Check up ALMOST anything and find "18+" facts."
That is bias, invalid, and just plain incorrect.
|
|
MhankoJoin Date: 2013-10-22
Post Count: 985 |
No support. Sorry mate, wikipedia isn't really the trusted site for like the "truth." |
|
|
@Mhanko,
Actually,
Studies show that Wikipedia is actually MORE accurate than physical encyclopedias.
|
|
MhankoJoin Date: 2013-10-22
Post Count: 985 |
Well I'm just saying not everything there is true since you can alter the fact. I'm not saying your idea is bad or horrible. I just don't trust Wikipedia 100%... |
|
|
@Mhanko, then according to studies, an encyclopedia is even less trustworthy.
But that's no reason to think that we shouldn't be allowed to post wikipedia links.
And before replying again, read every last word I posted.
|
|
MhankoJoin Date: 2013-10-22
Post Count: 985 |
You should realize I'm reading everything you're posting.
I don't trust encyclopedia either so yeah...
|
|
jonny1367Join Date: 2010-07-04
Post Count: 33252 |
OH WOW
You start saying the word, "perverted" over and over again and then report me for calling you stupid
I just reported you for false reports
(ง ͠° ͟ʖ ͡°)ง |
|
|
"Ban YouTube and Twitter Links"
I can't say why not. Roblox forget that this is a kids game... So support for this one
"Allow Wikipedia Link"
I know this is a weak argument for no support but I hope you get what I mean.
1. Most words are too complicated
2. What if a kid clicked to that link? He/she (the kid) may not even know what he is doing and click the edit button and add random stuff onto it and ruin the wiki page.
3. We can't rely on wikipedia too much |
|
|
@Theacrosoftn,
1. Nothing bad about having big words.
2. They'd have to copy and paste it, and when they look at the link and see wikipedia/(insert bad word here) they'd certainlly know it. Plus, foruming is a 13+ feature anyway. People still could lie on their ages, but again, they at least can recognize bad words.
3. More reliable information than an encyclopedia, but if you find it unreliable, that's no reason to ban them from the forums. |
|
DataStoreJoin Date: 2012-02-07
Post Count: 8540 |
No support.
Whilst I get what you're saying about there being explicit content on Twitter and Youtube, both are moderated to an extent - more so than Wikipedia. On Twitter, if the tweet has adult content there's a button you have to press to open it. On Youtube, you regularly need a registered, over eighteen, account if the video has been flagged by the community.
Wikipedia serves no purpose being linked, and just allows for the viewing of information which is meticulously described, and imaged. If someone wants to know what something is, they can search for it themselves. There is no need to give out a Wikpedia link, at all.
Twitter & Youtube at least serve a purpose in ROBLOX. The former allowing for communication for ROBLOX devs, whilst the latter allows for the sharing of primarily ROBLOX orientated videos. What intrinsic value does Wikipedia bring? Nothing. |
|
VrathisJoin Date: 2010-02-03
Post Count: 473 |
Heh, too late, I didn't read the entire thread. :D
I thought wikipedia links are allowed. I posted one the other day.. |
|
|
I kind of support
Players could link to inappropriate things. |
|
|
@Data, while I understand the points you have made,
On Twitter and YouTube, it's hardly any labyrinth to view the potentially harmful content, it's just a click of a button, or signing in.
(now this is both @Data and @Robotboy...)
In addition, with Wikipedia links, you don't even HAVE to go to the links to know that someone's attempting to link you to bad content!
If they were, it'd look like this!
Links look like this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/(Insert inappropriate word here)
You could report it right then and there! |
|
DataStoreJoin Date: 2012-02-07
Post Count: 8540 |
@Colorful,
Again, whilst I realise that you just have to sign-in or click a button, Wikipedia is still worse. Whilst yes, I agree you can usually tell from the title what the Wikipedia title would entail, but you can't if you don't know the word.
This is a primarily a child orientated site, so how many of them will know the ins and outs of what's inappropriate and what's not if they don't know the meaning of the word presented to them? I mean, there's quite a few articles whereby you can use a word that someone wouldn't necessarily know, yet still find yourself faced with inappropriate content. At least with Youtube & Twitter you're given a choice, even if you don't understand the title. |
|