Conquer Club

RenewIT...........Bigot [warned] BG

All previously decided cases. Please check here before opening a new case.

Moderators: Multi Hunters, Cheating/Abuse Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

[These cases have been closed. If you would like to appeal the decision of the hunter please open a ticket on the help page and the case will be looked into by a second hunter.]

Re: RenewIT...........Bigot [warned] BG

Postby greenoaks on Mon Nov 26, 2012 9:44 pm

Funkyterrance wrote:I'm somewhat surprised at this ruling...
GeneralRisk was baiting at the very least and his opponent just chose the "wrong" offensive term as retaliation, thus falling into a trap. Is this really how a situation is going to be handled, not considering circumstances in the least but simply warning one player for using a "more punishable" slur than the other? I happen to find the first slur more offensive and there is zero difference between the two as far as viability is concerned. A slur is a slur and I think the site needs to update its policies regarding them so as to not appear so dated and biased.

baiting is acceptable
User avatar
Sergeant greenoaks
 
Posts: 9977
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:47 am

Re: RenewIT...........Bigot

Postby agentcom on Wed Nov 28, 2012 5:54 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:
agentcom wrote:I hardly think being offended should be the "ultimate litmus test." Lots of people are offended by rape jokes. That makes them in bad taste, it doesn't make them bigotry. Same with the big "c-word." Please don't suggest that being offended is what is how we decide whether something is bigotry.


It's bigotry if it's offensive and it targets a specific group. The R-word satisfies both of them. The fact that it targets a specific group should have gone without saying, and I'm surprised that you felt it necessary to point out.

Second, is the retarded "community" really offended by this or just their parents? I have a feeling it's the latter.


I really think you should be careful with what you're saying here. It suggests that the community is just a bunch of incompetent children, which could hardly be farther from the truth. Many such people are self-sufficient adults, and the idea of being mentally handicapped doesn't just mean someone who is completely unable to form intelligible thoughts.

See this news article if you think this is not an important issue in the community.

To contrast, I don't think that anyone that I've ever heard say "retard" actually has any sort of animosity toward retarded people.


It's not just animosity that we have to be vigilant against. It's also treating such people as inferior or second-class humans.


You make excellent points on all three counts. I have terribly mixed feelings about how we handle "bigotry" on this site. And there are no easy answers or inherently "better" ways of dealing with it.

There is also the matter of personal importance of an issue. For me, geographic- and race-based bigotry is the most important. I'm not exactly sure where to put religion, but it's probably after the previously mentioned. Following that would be sexual preference, and mental ability would be far, far down on my list. There is a reason for this ordering. If I were to paint in very broad strokes, I would say that the sheer amount of human suffering caused by bigotry in these categories is roughly proportional to my antipathy toward the respective form of bigotry.

Also, words that insult personal intelligence are myriad. What distinguished "retard" from "dumb" or "moronic." Your response may be that it is a medically recognized condition. Well, first, so was "moron." Second, many things are medically recognized restrictions on the human body to function mentally or physically. However, "Dude you look like a cancer patient" probably shouldn't be classified as bigotry.

However, if this is the issue that strikes home for you, I understand a different ordering. Perhaps (and I'm not saying metsfan thinks this way), you feel that genetic traits are more important because they cannot be controlled. Perhaps one of the issues has personally affected you more. Regardless, everyone is going to have their own feelings. CC is in the unenviable position of turning those feelings into policy against a backdrop of competing interests, such as the "open forum" nature of the internet that is prized by many as an avenue for unrestricted or less restricted speech.
User avatar
Brigadier agentcom
 
Posts: 3980
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 8:50 pm

Re: RenewIT...........Bigot

Postby Metsfanmax on Wed Nov 28, 2012 6:26 pm

agentcom wrote:You make excellent points on all three counts. I have terribly mixed feelings about how we handle "bigotry" on this site. And there are no easy answers or inherently "better" ways of dealing with it.

There is also the matter of personal importance of an issue. For me, geographic- and race-based bigotry is the most important. I'm not exactly sure where to put religion, but it's probably after the previously mentioned. Following that would be sexual preference, and mental ability would be far, far down on my list. There is a reason for this ordering. If I were to paint in very broad strokes, I would say that the sheer amount of human suffering caused by bigotry in these categories is roughly proportional to my antipathy toward the respective form of bigotry.


I don't disagree with your ordering and its justification. But ordering to begin with, presupposes the idea that we cannot target all instances of bigotry equally. I don't think this is true on Conquer Club. All that we have are words, and it's equally easy (or difficult) to enforce what specific words are allowed.

Also, words that insult personal intelligence are myriad. What distinguished "retard" from "dumb" or "moronic." Your response may be that it is a medically recognized condition. Well, first, so was "moron." Second, many things are medically recognized restrictions on the human body to function mentally or physically. However, "Dude you look like a cancer patient" probably shouldn't be classified as bigotry.


This remark is valid too. The pejorative words used to refer to such people have changed over time. It wasn't always "retard," and probably won't always be "retard." But this is just the nature of the beast; that's the word people do use now, and it is currently seen as offensive. The main difference is that I do think people form a specific connection to people with mental disabilities when they use that word, as opposed to "moron" (although this may be a reactionary result of the fact that the community got upset about the term in the first place). I can't prove this in all cases, but I think it is prevalent.

However, if this is the issue that strikes home for you, I understand a different ordering. Perhaps (and I'm not saying metsfan thinks this way), you feel that genetic traits are more important because they cannot be controlled. Perhaps one of the issues has personally affected you more. Regardless, everyone is going to have their own feelings. CC is in the unenviable position of turning those feelings into policy against a backdrop of competing interests, such as the "open forum" nature of the internet that is prized by many as an avenue for unrestricted or less restricted speech.


Actually, this is not an issue in which I have a personal stake (in the sense that I don't have friends or family that have such conditions). I just strongly object to bigotry in general. For me, it's always the intent that matters. If someone uses the word "retard" as an insult, in an attempt to link you to someone with a mental disability, with the unspoken assumption that it's bad or wrong to be that way, I consider that bigotry. That being said, it's usually really hard to tell whether someone was intending to make this connection or not, so an outright ban is the cleanest way to go about it. I don't like censoring free speech in general, but if we're going to have a bigotry rule, we should surely be consistent with it.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Metsfanmax
 
Posts: 6722
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2007 11:01 pm

Re: RenewIT...........Bigot [warned] BG

Postby greenoaks on Wed Nov 28, 2012 9:40 pm

i'm with mets here.

i dont get why we can comment on someone's intellect but not their sexuality. insults are insults.

either we tell everyone to suck it up cupcake or no smacktalk allowed at all. to say one group needs protection but not all the others is wrong.
User avatar
Sergeant greenoaks
 
Posts: 9977
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:47 am

Re: RenewIT...........Bigot [warned] BG

Postby jefjef on Thu Nov 29, 2012 12:16 am

greenoaks wrote:i'm with mets here.

i dont get why we can comment on someone's intellect but not their sexuality. insults are insults.

either we tell everyone to suck it up cupcake or no smacktalk allowed at all. to say one group needs protection but not all the others is wrong.


Whats not to get? There is a large obvious difference between an insult and bigotry/racism...
This post was made by jefjef who should be on your ignore list.
Image
drunkmonkey wrote:I'm filing a C&A report right now. Its nice because they have a drop-down for "jefjef".
User avatar
Colonel jefjef
 
Posts: 6026
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 8:41 pm
Location: on my ass

Re: RenewIT...........Bigot [warned] BG

Postby greenoaks on Thu Nov 29, 2012 3:47 am

jefjef wrote:
greenoaks wrote:i'm with mets here.

i dont get why we can comment on someone's intellect but not their sexuality. insults are insults.

either we tell everyone to suck it up cupcake or no smacktalk allowed at all. to say one group needs protection but not all the others is wrong.


Whats not to get? There is a large obvious difference between an insult and bigotry/racism...

it is all name calling. the only difference is one is politically incorrect and the other is not.

both can hurt someone's feelings, cause depression and end in suicide.
User avatar
Sergeant greenoaks
 
Posts: 9977
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:47 am

Previous

Return to Closed C&A Reports

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users