<Removed>
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:52 am<Removed>
Conquer Club
Conquer Club, a free online multiplayer variation of a popular world domination board game.
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/
<Removed>
https://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=181173
Page 1 of 5
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:52 amPosted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:03 pmRed X?
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:08 pm
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:36 pm*****
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 12:56 pm<Removed>
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:10 pm*****
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:18 pmBGtheBrain wrote:No i think it correctly describes your original use of the image as an avatar and the argument your attempting to make now.
Context is super important in this case. The number one rule on CC is "don't be intentionally annoying." If you are choosing an avatar that you know will be controversial, just because it is controversial, then you are intentionally being annoying. If you honestly feel that using a swastika as your avatar is a representation of some religious belief, then that is probably ok. If that is actually the case, then say so. Otherwise, the mods will rightly err on the side of not offending anyone.
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:36 pm<Removed>
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:42 pm*****
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 1:56 pmI think it might be worth pointing out that there are several easily visible differences between:
A) the red Hindu swastika with slightly curved arms and dots in the middle (as seen in the OP)
and
B) the black Nazi swastika with no curves and no dots
To my knowledge, only the Nazi swastika is being sanctioned on CC.
A) the red Hindu swastika with slightly curved arms and dots in the middle (as seen in the OP)
and
B) the black Nazi swastika with no curves and no dots
To my knowledge, only the Nazi swastika is being sanctioned on CC.
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 2:42 pmsempaispellcheck wrote:To my knowledge, only the Nazi swastika is being sanctioned on CC.
By sanctioned, I assume (hope) you meant discouraged.
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:05 pmButters1919 wrote:sempaispellcheck wrote:To my knowledge, only the Nazi swastika is being sanctioned on CC.
By sanctioned, I assume (hope) you meant discouraged.
If a player has an offensive avatar, the mods ask him/her to remove it within 24 hours. If they choose to do not, then the mods will do it for them.
So first its discouraged to wear the avatar, then sanctioned.
sniff
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:45 pmsanc·tioned, sanc·tion·ing, sanc·tions
1. To give official authorization or approval to
2. To encourage or tolerate by indicating approval
1. To give official authorization or approval to
2. To encourage or tolerate by indicating approval
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:52 pm*****
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:54 pm<Removed>
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:20 pm*****
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:22 pmThere is no single official symbol that represents Hinduism.
Here's a list of 10 different symbols that are sometimes associated with Hinduism:
http://hinduism.iskcon.org/lifestyle/806.htm
The one that most people would recognise as "the" Hindu symbol is the Aum:
The others are of lesser importance.
It's difficult to draw precise parallels between different traditions, but let's make this attempt:
The Aum is to Hinduism as the Cross is to Christianity, a clear and universally understood symbol.
The Swastika is to Hinduism as the Chi-Rho is to Christianity, an icon with meaning to the faithful and to students of the religion, but without the same broad universality of representation.
Here's a list of 10 different symbols that are sometimes associated with Hinduism:
http://hinduism.iskcon.org/lifestyle/806.htm
The one that most people would recognise as "the" Hindu symbol is the Aum:
The others are of lesser importance.
It's difficult to draw precise parallels between different traditions, but let's make this attempt:
The Aum is to Hinduism as the Cross is to Christianity, a clear and universally understood symbol.
The Swastika is to Hinduism as the Chi-Rho is to Christianity, an icon with meaning to the faithful and to students of the religion, but without the same broad universality of representation.
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 6:50 pmJust to be clear, this:
is the definition of sanction as I was using it.
I apologize for any confusion.
BGtheBrain wrote:4. Law.
a. a provision of a law enacting a penalty for disobedience or a reward for obedience.
b. the penalty or reward.
is the definition of sanction as I was using it.
I apologize for any confusion.
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 7:13 pmDukasaur wrote:The one that most people would recognise as "the" Hindu symbol is the Aum:
This is the exact case. I work at a Hinduistic school (I'm an atheist, but Hindus find that irrelevant if you support their values) and Swastika's are rare in our building. The Aum-sign, however, is all over the place. If a Hindu would choose a sign to represent his beliefs, I'm quite certain they'd pick the Aum. But it cannot be ignored that the Swastika is one of the holiest signs og Hinduism.
The 13th of November, is Diwali. Suppose bedub would've chosen to put a Swastika as his avatar, along with the line: Subh Diwali (A blessed Diwali), would it be tolerated? I'm not so sure that would be intentionally annoying anyone. He might've gotten some (upset?) reactions, but if he really did choose to wish everyone a Subh Diwali, he'd be glad to explain it, so more people are aware of Diwali. I know that our school gave candles to the entire neighbourhood to let them in on the holiday and I thought it was wonderful, eventhough I don't believe in it personally. You're supposed to share the feeling.
This whole debate about the definition of 'sanction' has nothing to do with it. It's not about the sanction, it's about whether it was fair. Don't you dare quote only this last sentence, because that was not what my post ws intended for.
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Tue Nov 13, 2012 10:12 pmI think that timing ought to be considered into the equation. Did the appearance of the swastika correlate with some discussion or has it been a longtime avatar? The former suggests it was put up to irritate while the latter suggests it represents the owner's belief system.
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 7:48 amFunkyterrance wrote:I think that timing ought to be considered into the equation. Did the appearance of the swastika correlate with some discussion or has it been a longtime avatar? The former suggests it was put up to irritate while the latter suggests it represents the owner's belief system.
Certainly it was not a long time avatar of his. One thing I keep noticing in bedub's arguments is that he seems to feel that not allowing him to use ONE particular symbol as his avatar is discrimination against an entire religion. This is quite simply ridiculous. bedub used that one symbol and never tried to use other, (as has been pointed out) more readily associated symbols to the religion. The fact is that there are many people who do not even know that the swastika was originally a Hindu symbol and subsequently utilised by Hitler and is often therefore automatically offensive to many. As a result it is often best not to use it in an international site where it can (intentionally or not) anger others.
Because of its history, in a situation where only that particular has been attempted to be used to "represent" a religion, it is a natural conclusion that there is an intention to be controversial which can also be viewed as being intentionally annoying, even more so when you take into account the user's history.
As a result I'd say its a complete misrepresentation to say that CC is discriminating against a particular religion. I have not seen evidence of that. in fact I have seen more of a practice of religious tolerance and discouragement of discrimination whether on the basis on race, religion, gender or otherwise.... After all.. isn't that exactly what the Bigotry guidelines address?
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:17 am<Removed>
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:36 am*****
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:39 ambedub1 wrote:This isn't about me. It's about a single symbol, from a single religion, that is not offensive, that causes no harm. It is about CC's intolerance to a religions holy symbol.
I think you are mistaken there bedub, the whole point of all of this is that that particular symbol will be offensive to many and therefore will cause harm... its not about intolerance to a religious symbol... its about concern that a particular symbol does cause problems.
bedub1 wrote: How do you think it feels to expression your religious belief, and me told it's not allowed? That others are fine to express their beliefs, but I cannot?
You are not being told you cannot express your beliefs. You have not been stopped from posting nor have you been banned from the site. If you wish to support Hinduism I am sure that you can find many images that are fully acceptable within the site guidelines. To me the fact that you're trying to make a mountain out of a molehill with trying to say that one image means a whole religion is proof that your intent was to be controversial aka annoying rather than actual religious support.
Re: CC Religious Discrimination
Posted: Wed Nov 14, 2012 11:42 ambedub1 wrote:Funkyterrance wrote:I think that timing ought to be considered into the equation. Did the appearance of the swastika correlate with some discussion or has it been a longtime avatar? The former suggests it was put up to irritate while the latter suggests it represents the owner's belief system.
This isn't a case-by-case basis where we establish courts and start trials and initiate inquisitions into the individuals who wish to display a religious symbol. We don't examine each person, and decide whether we feel they are allowed to do something or not. We don't try to determine their motivation, their meaning, their reasoning. Doing such a thing is completely unacceptable. Who are you to judge others?
What we do is acknowledge that the symbol is fine, there is nothing wrong with it. We allow anybody to wear it for whatever reason they so choose. We do not discriminate against a single religion, we do not discriminate against a single image, we do not discriminate against single individuals. We treat all holy symbols the same, we treat all individuals the same.
If you'd like me to describe for you all my entire belief system, my rejection of religions, my transformations, my acceptance of religions, my examination and attempts at enlightenment of others thoughts and belief systems, I might. It's really none of your business though, and I don't feel it necessary to defend myself against your inquisitions. By defending and explaining myself, I only lend credence to your misguided delusion that you are allowed to judge others; that you can discriminate against them based upon your own feelings and intuitions.
How do you think i feel, when I try to wear a symbol, and am immediately met with intolerance, bigotry, and hate? How do you think I feel to be discriminated against? How do you think it feels to expression your religious belief, and me told it's not allowed? That others are fine to express their beliefs, but I cannot?
This isn't about me. It's about a single symbol, from a single religion, that is not offensive, that causes no harm. It is about CC's intolerance to a religions holy symbol.
I don't see where I'm judging anyone, tbh. I feel no particular way about your avatar in itself. I'm just adding my opinion regarding the circumstances. CC is a community, not a court of law as you pointed out and rulings are enacted in regard to the fairness of said community as a whole. I'm not sure why you feel you should have some unalienable right regarding your avatar? This doesn't apply to anyone else, so why to you?
There is no "CC Bill of Rights" but there are guidelines and from what anyone can tell, you put up that avi to intentionally annoy people/make some kind of statement at the risk of offending a good deal of members.