Now as some of you may know we now have a "new" rule that has just been implemented.
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
Now as Giga13 has already noted. Racist remarks are already covered in the current Hateful Comments rule.
Hateful Comments
Any form of severe or excessive hate speech or hateful language based onrace, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, mental capabilities, and other personal circumstances.
Meaning the new rule is redundant, and mainly just serves to increase penalties, and virtue signal.
I think the main problem with the rules is not the quantity, but clarity and enforcement.
So to increase clarity I would recommend changing the Hateful Comments rule to this:
Hateful Comments
Using hateful language with the intent to degrade, discriminate against, or humiliate another person.
Since we are all human, everyone is covered by this rule, and equally protected.
People shouldn't be banned only based on the content of their messages.
But instead also take into account the intent and the context of their messages.
Because I can say the same exact words with completely different meaning in different contexts. Like saying "I killed him." when playing a video game, verses saying "I killed him." after being asked if you committed a murder.
Now I have a perfect example of this:
Recently JM123 managed to receive the very first Racial Slurs Vio.
JM123 wrote:
>half of the site will get banned my n'igga
But fortunately our hero BSM sprinted to the occasion and reported this heinous offender.
Now lets look at the intent: JM123 wished to express his view, that the enforcement of such a policy would result in many players being banned.
Finally lets look at the content:
>half of the site will get banned my n'igga
Obviously the controversial word is n'igga, however I would argue that JM123 has not violated the Racial Slurs rules which is defined as: "Malicious use of slurs against players that are based on race"
While some people may consider n'igga to be a slur, JM123 did not use it maliciously against other players, or people to demean them.
In fact it is often used even till this day as a term of endearment between friends.
So the main issue in this occasion is the interpretation and enforcement of the Racial Slurs rule.
The result of this will be a chilling effect on freespeech, as I might be vio'd for simply discussing this topic right here and now.
Even though my intent is not to demean or be racist towards any person, but rather to allow people to joke and speak freely and only be punished when they are truly being hateful.
The letter of the law does not line up with interpretation of it.
Currently as it stands the real definition of Racial Slurs is
Racial Slurs:
Using n'igga or n-word no matter what your intent is.
This I believe is a very poor way to address things as heavy handed censorship doesn't actually protect the vulnerable, but simply stifles conversation and an open exchange of ideas.
TLDR:
- People should only be vio'd based on the intent and context of their messages.
- Bullies should be targeted not simply people who disagree with you.
Jeff:
'People outside of communities can stop virtue signaling their offense for the people within them. It’s a tired and gross practice to be offended for others who are not. It serves the purpose of trying to be holier than thou and is an ugly way to defend your point.'
tbh i went after slurs bc easy target, and it was a stepping stone. but the mod team refused to let me give HC vios for non slur racism because "it strictly says slurs! you cant do it for other stuff!"
the first mod that saw this shouldve deleted the post and instantly given d3x a HC vio for this. is this where we’re at? deleting slurs but letting slur-free HC go untouched? what a failure of a team
it was never about HC, they let everyday racism slip by all the time god forbid one ever use "the n word" in a very serious, non-racist manner
I seem to remember you messaging me with advice on how to moderate a Gren-Jeff dispute which would have resulted in neither getting proper punishments, so uh go nuts
Black isn't a race in the case of "black power/pride" because it's being used as shorthand for African American
Black in black power is not referring to the race, but the ethnic group African Americans.
So you're saying that everyone of black complexion who isn't both african and american is not allowed to join your pseudo-group? Sounds awfully racist, and the americans using blacks in their logo are stealing that right from africans, which is absolute cultural appropriation.
the first mod that saw this shouldve deleted the post and instantly given d3x a HC vio for this. is this where we’re at? deleting slurs but letting slur-free HC go untouched? what a failure of a team
In fairness, it wouldn't have happened at all if the mods had banned Gren yesterday for telling someone to kill themselves 4-5 times in one thread
the first mod that saw this shouldve deleted the post and instantly given d3x a HC vio for this. is this where we’re at? deleting slurs but letting slur-free HC go untouched? what a failure of a team
An ethnic group is a group with shared cultural origins. e.g. Jewish would be an ethnic identifier.
A race is a grouping used to classify people based on physical similarities, usually skin colour. I can't remember the original names but Caucasian was the one for whites, Arab was the one for Middle Eastern people.
Race is referred to as biology by people quite often but it's not. There's no biological markers for race and scientists don't recognise it as a scientific classification of humans.
Korean = not a race... Puerto Rican = not a race ... Black isn't a race ... White IS a race, and isn't a specific group...
Black isn't a race, and White isn't a race.
Korean is a race. Puerto Rican is a race.
Race: 1. A group of people identified as distinct from other groups because of supposed physical or genetic traits shared by the group. Most biologists and anthropologists do not recognize race as a biologically valid classification, in part because there is more genetic variation within groups than between them.