Revising The Hateful Comments Rule

Giga13almost 8 years ago

I really like what I'm seeing with lucid (admin) being more active again. He brings with him the opportunity to make changes, as he owns the website and does all the coding. But before making big changes to the website and to rules, it's important to discuss the changes properly. Now I'm in no way implying that this doesn't get done or hasn't been done recently, but there are just a couple of things which I feel might have been overlooked amongst the changes. I feel like the ideas and progression have the right mindset, but that they've been just a little misplaced/misguided.

I'm talking about the new 'Racial Slurs' rule. The idea behind its creation, I'll infer, is to punish racial slurs heavily. There's no problem with that idea at all, it's great. But consider for a moment the 'Hateful Comments' rule:

Hateful Comments

Any form of severe or excessive hate speech or hateful language based on race, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, mental capabilities, and other personal circumstances.

Expires in 3 months

1. Warning
2. 12 Hour Suspension and 24 Hour Forum Suspension
3. 24 Hour Suspension and Forum, Comment, and Chat Ban
4. Site Ban

This rule seems to already encompass the idea of the 'Racial Slurs' rule. It says "based on race" among other things in the rule already.

Creating a new rule dedicated solely to racial slurs raises the question: "Why not create a separate rule for homophobic slurs? And one for religious hate? And for mental capabilities?" These questions are completely valid on the premise that only one form of hateful language, that being towards race, just had a separate rule created for it.

Now let's have a look at the new 'Racial Slurs' rule:

Racial Slurs

Malicious use of slurs against players that are based on race and/or ethnicity. We will show absolutely no tolerance towards racist and xenophobic ideals.

Expires in 6 months

1. Warning
2. Site Ban

It's clear that the idea behind the violation structure is to have low tolerance for these type of slurs. I completely agree with the notion that slurs need to have low tolerance. However, this idea being limited to racial slurs alone makes it seem as though the potential behind this good idea of low tolerance is being placed improperly. I feel like this idea would be better applied simply to the 'Hateful Comments' rule itself, which would help to mitigate all types of hateful comments and language, not just racial slurs. This would include having a 6 month violation expiry for all hateful comments and in the 'Hateful Comments' rule, not just for racial slurs and in the 'Racial Slurs' rule.

I argue that instead of creating a new rule dedicated solely to racial slurs, simply modify the 'Hateful Comments' rule into something such as:

Hateful Comments

Any form of hate speech or hateful language based on race, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, ableism, mental capabilities, as well as other personal circumstances.

Expires in 6 months

1. 24 Hour Suspension
2. 24 Hour Huspension AND Forum, Comment, and Chat Ban
3. Site Ban

OR

1. Warning OR 24 Hour Suspension AND Forum, Comment, and Chat Ban
2. Site Ban.

Whichever the moderator staff & lucid wish to implement.

In this way, the idea of having very low tolerance on all types of slurs is better justified. Note also that "severe or excessive" is removed, and "ableism" is added in. I admit that I am not the greatest writer, so if there are ideas in regards to this I think I speak for everybody when I say that we would be more than happy to entertain them. Also the second violation structure option may seem harsh, but at the same time, we do not want people who are going to break this rule more than twice on this website at all. The moderator staff can implement whichever of the two violation structures they see fit in accordance with lucid and his ideas for the website; but the idea here remains the same regardless of whichever violation structure is ultimately chosen.

The other option is to have 'Racial Slurs' violations count towards your number of 'Hateful Comments' violations. For example, Player1 has 1 'Racial Slurs' violation, and 1 'Hateful Comments' violation. A 2nd 'Hateful Comments' violation would lead to a site ban, because they already have 1 'Racial Slurs' violation which counts towards that total as well (or they would already be banned if the second violation structure in the revised 'Hateful Comments' rule was implemented). If this were not to be implemented, it would be possible for a user to have 2 'Hateful Comments' violations, 1 'Racial Slurs' violation, and still be unbanned. This doesn't seem to make sense, since 3 'Hateful Comments' violations would lead to a Site Ban... This is how we should structure these rules, as right now, we have a 1 violation maximum for 'Racial Slurs' before a ban, and a 3 violation maximum for 'Hateful Comments' before a ban. Racial slurs are hateful comments, so this simply doesn't make any sense.

The problem with this however is that it still doesn't implement an equal violation counter type of structure in regards to other types of hateful language or comments involving sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, mental capabilities, and other personal circumstances. For example, using hateful language/comments or a slur towards any of the domains I just mentioned would still currently be a 2 violation maximum before a ban, while using hateful language/comments or a slur towards race is at a 1 violation maximum. Hateful language/comments towards all of the domains in the 'Hateful Comments' rule should be equal, and they should all count towards each others' maximum (i.e. So you don't have a user with 1 'Racial Slurs' violation, 1 'Sexist Slurs' violation, 1 'Ableist Slurs' violation, etc., if each domain hypothetically had a separate rule). But the idea of having a separate rule for all of these different domains seems a bit silly, when we could have one rule that incorporates them all with the same low-tolerance that they all would and should have if they were separate. And guess what? We already do, and it's the 'Hateful Comments' rule. It seems easier to just implement the 2nd violation structure for the revised 'Hateful Comments' rule above rather than deal with all of this and rather than creating a new rule ('Racial Slurs'), especially when the idea here is the same and is shared by (or should be shared by) everybody: There must be a lower tolerance towards all hateful comments and language.

P.S. The "No" option in the poll should say "No, I am not for this." instead of "No, I do not like this.". I'd want the Yes and No options to have equivalent wording if I could edit the options over.

tl;dr: There is no need for the 'Racial Slurs' rule. Revising the 'Hateful Comments' rule & its violation structure is better implementation for mods/lucid wanting to lower tolerance on hateful comments in general.

Poll
I'd like to know what you think. Please say why you voted what you voted in a post, thank you.
Yes, I am for this.52%23
No, I do not like this.36%16
Other11%5
Game Board

No players on the board yet.

blacksnakemoanalmost 8 years ago
view
аbo is censored idk if it's a slur or what but it's also a shiddy fetish that doesn't deserve the light of day
slur for aboriginal australians, i should have taken it out of the blizzard list tbh. no one here uses it.
deleteddeletedalmost 8 years ago
NO ONE GAVE lucid any suggestion he isn't even asking before doing stuff he has gone crazy someone give him his meds
viewalmost 8 years ago
аbo is censored idk if it's a slur or what but it's also a shiddy fetish that doesn't deserve the light of day
Bebopalmost 8 years ago
denial
who the fuk gave lucid the suggestion to censor with a WHOLE PHRASE

if we're going to censor, we can just censor the literal word itself with !@$#!@$ instead

pretty sure blizzards phrase replacement is a joke only when people say 'ggez'
so its treason then......
blacksnakemoanalmost 8 years ago
admin
blizzard hate speech filtering added. please let me know if something works or doesn't work
people are still saying the homophobic F slur but I can't say cᴜnt which is a protected word of the culture
blacksnakemoanalmost 8 years ago
denial
who the fuk gave lucid the suggestion to censor with a WHOLE PHRASE
songin
deleteddeletedalmost 8 years ago
denial said fuk please deadmin him for censor bypassing i cannot tolerate this hate speech
1
Jeffalmost 8 years ago
might as well have an automated message that each of our accounts posts when we join a game
"Hey guys! Ready for some scumhunting.... or some fake towntelling! Depends on my role, can't wait to get playing!"
denialalmost 8 years ago
who the fuk gave lucid the suggestion to censor with a WHOLE PHRASE

if we're going to censor, we can just censor the literal word itself with !@$#!@$ instead

pretty sure blizzards phrase replacement is a joke only when people say 'ggez'
3
Giga13almost 8 years agoedited
https://i.imgur.com/SW6D8qH.png
Jeffalmost 8 years ago
can you imagine a game with pre-set phrases and if we have a cc all we can do is rapidly quick fire shoot out the phrase "I am real, they are fake!" hundreds and hundreds of times back and forth
2
Jeffalmost 8 years ago
while we are at it can you ban carmen from mafia games too
1
deleteddeletedalmost 8 years ago
the next step is to allow us to only communicate with a set of pre approved phrases club penguin-style
5
D3xTr0m3th0rph4nalmost 8 years ago
I wont be happy until all speech is removed from my mafia games.
Giga13almost 8 years ago
Yeah i've seen it just now lol, definitely logging out until it's gone.

If anyone wants to reach me my discord is on my profile
emilyalmost 8 years ago
Giga13
thought it was a hate speech filter?
go into any game and swear. see what happens. try typing 'about this' and see what happens again
D3xTr0m3th0rph4nalmost 8 years ago
Swears incite hate speech,...i hope you liberal SJW snowflakes are happy now.

I hate California
emilyalmost 8 years ago
if swears are hate speech then i must be getting hate speech everywhere huh
Giga13almost 8 years agoedited
thought it was a hate speech filter?
1
deleteddeletedalmost 8 years ago
swears aren’t hate speech
3
firecapealmost 8 years ago
ive been on this game for 10 years, probably one of the last people that stuck around... its over now
PonyLovealmost 8 years ago
how is "a bout" a bad word??
PonyLovealmost 8 years ago
and the r word...
shayneismynamealmost 8 years ago
You filtered the f word....
adminalmost 8 years ago
blizzard hate speech filtering added. please let me know if something works or doesn't work