Talk:Roblox's problematic moderation

More data

Consumer reaction:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JqOZreneog0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gP0Z6xsm0aI

Threats of litigation for capturing predators:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZOrCL4b73o&pp

History of predators

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DD6cac64fc4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nadkJlllaMY

Schlep: https://www.youtube.com/@RealSchlep

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Awi7Z02Yo0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SluWneivuXc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unRVrmhcFrk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQQpjjHXO1M

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roblox#Reception

General litigation against Roblox regarding predators: https://www.gamethemedia.com/the-crime-history-of-roblox

JamesTDG (talk) 22:27, 10 August 2025 (UTC)

Censorship:

https://devforum.roblox.com/t/the-new-sensitive-content-policy-is-extremely-problematic-and-needs-to-change-before-going-live/3863102

https://www.reddit.com/r/roblox/comments/m8jf0i/why_do_you_think_the_moderation_is_so_bad/

Bypass tools existing:

https://instafonts.io/font/roblox-swear-bypass

Bad support:

https://www.reddit.com/r/roblox/comments/kv4nox/how_come_after_almost_15_years_roblox_support_is/ JamesTDG (talk) 03:06, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

User Generated Content (UGC):

• https://www.instagram.com/reel/DNMYdMlJACj/
• https://www.instagram.com/reel/DNJ0ZSEyY-I/
• https://www.instagram.com/reel/DNHLureNEQY/
• https://www.instagram.com/reel/DNPKmm5MIOy/
• https://www.instagram.com/reel/DNMF-foKilD/

The issue of maintaining nuance while discussing the 'vigilante' terminations

Recently, Roblox has taken moderation action against the YouTuber Schlep, and previously, they have taken both legal and moderation action against another YouTuber, Ruben Sim. Both of these people are mentioned in the article. Both of the situations surrounding these people are ongoing, and the action taken was more nuanced than just "taking vigilantes down because we want to protect them and our reputation." Both of these people violated Roblox's policy and action was taken against them accordingly, and it's very dismissive of nuance to say that Roblox was defending child predators by not making exceptions. Making exceptions was a struggle faced by Ruben Sim, too, as his vigilante moderation system continued operation despite closing their appeals system. It is important also, to mention that Schlep has associated himself with Ruben, collaborating with him on videos dating up to a year ago.

Ruben Sim himself has largely deflected criticism against himself, especially during the operation of his vigilante moderation system, Ro-Cleaner.

I would like to refer to when I recently wrote:

"roblox was arguably justified in taking action against vigilantes. for context, it's important you know that by vigilantes, roblox means to include people who attempt to create third party moderation systems. roblox has made it clear that they're not against people who use legal systems or report features, like the special gdpr reports. a notable example of such vigilantes would be ruben sim.

ruben sim is an interesting case, as he's clearly stopped a lot of groomers from finding targets. however, he has caused more harm to the children affected by purposely preventing access to the appeals system, not providing help and information to the minors that have previously appealed, nor in most cases accepting their appeals, and further isolating them to the communities in which they are being harmed by.

ruben also publicly, shamelessly admitted that he uses far-right politics to alienate the 'weird ones' from his audience. notably, he has repeatedly displayed 'anti-furry' ideology, which jokingly or not, seems to resonate more and more with his community. a lot of people who don't align with his beliefs seem to support him too. when you're "saving the kids" you have a lot of opportunity for more controversial actions, because in the public eye you're still doing good.

roblox was fully aware of this, and still is fully aware of this. now this is where schlep becomes part of the story. his actions closely match the actions of ruben sim during the start of his cascade, and roblox knows that these vigilantes both harm their pr and cause community issues.

this is exactly where the topic becomes difficult to discuss. because roblox is taking moderation action, and even legal action against the mainstream vigilantes, "they're defending the creeps" becomes a very easy stance to take. roblox does have a record of defending them, but i don't think that these actions are a good example of that. it's not that the actions taken by roblox are unrelated to the vigilante actions, but rather that they have some levels of justification and reasoning behind them, more nuanced than just "they want to protect creeps."

the best example i can think of this mislabeling is when ruben sim was recently banned from discord. condensing this as much as possible, his ro-cleaner bot violated their policy by not having an option to remove user data. he wasn't banned for taking action against creeps, he was banned for mismanaging his user data. now obviously, if anybody could request their data be removed, it would make his bot useless. i don't think it's a fault on discord's part for not making an exception for him, it was more that the concept for ro-cleaner itself was flawed.

roblox's report system is flawed, there are large-ish communities of creeps that go mostly unharmed, and those are big problems, yes, but they're not going to be solved by these vigilante youtubers. we've seen a lot of media sensationalism recently about these situations. i don't think this is the way to fix roblox, and more controversially i don't think it's helping. if you took the time to read all that, good on you, because i don't think there's been a whole lot of reading around this topic."

Obviously, this doesn't detract from the fact that Roblox has a poorly managed moderation system. They mostly rely on automated checks to detect mature content in games. This is one of their many shortcomings. Llliiimmmeee (talk) 05:01, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi there, I just approved you so that you can add your edit! JamesTDG (talk) 05:04, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Additionally, I was intentionally brief when it came to the actions of Ruben and Schlep considering I must question some of their ideology (I may not be a furry, but I don't hate them), but I did opt to use their content as references since their content has been valuable pieces of evidence pointing to these incidents.

I did previously attempt to contact the individuals to see if they published any other evidence elsewhere that I could additionally share on the wiki, with zero response. JamesTDG (talk) 05:15, 16 August 2025 (UTC)