Conquer Club

CC zero tolerance policy on racism results in only a warning to a player that had received a prior abusive game chat warning. When a few of us question it they lock it. Take a look.

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=102185&p=2317756#p2317756

Yea, I was wondering why it was locked. More importance on it should've been given.

If what Spock posted in that thread is true (a previous warning), then he should MOST DEFINITELY be given a ban.


A wag of Colbert's finger at CC for that'n.

I don't have any CC case studies.

I haven't kept track of specific situations or events.

But I think I've kept up on most of the public conversations here at CC on this in the last six months. And I'm sure it is far from perfect. Yet, this matters a lot to me. Personally, and in a general sense. And from from the first months here, again from just general observations, I'm damn proud of the direction this site is going and the stance it seems we are taking on racist bull-shirt and sexual-orientation carp.

And I say "we" jefjef, cause it is about us. About what we each tolerate in game chat. And in threads. And in pm's. Not big brother CC. And If the site has been unfair or inconstant in certain cases (as, I'm going to guess that it has) then it is damn important to note that privately and publicly. Cause that's how things move forward. But truth be told, this is the most comfortable place on the Nets I have been in a long time with regard to those two issues mentioned above.

Cheers brother. Any time you wanna dubs partner give me a PM.

E.

well, let's take a look at this:

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=239&t=102185

That case is with markjam and his racist remarks. He only got warned instead of banned for the racist remarks, but the mod Evil Semp just gave him a warning, ignored Woodruff's excellent point that markjam was already warned, and then the thread was locked. First, there's a warning (which was already given), then a ban. But that didn't happened, why?

Would any of you mods care to explain that?

He was warned for his abusive trash talk in his game chats the first time around. There was no bigotry/racist remarks at that case back then. As what is said in the community guidelines, banter and some trash talking IS allowed in Game Chats, so don't waste time complaining about that. You may not be used to hearing or reading those "four-letter words", but some people do and will use them. This isn't a reason to open a complaint about the player; just kindly ask them to stop or ignore them. This was more of what he was guilty of at that time, but due to the reports and investigation, it looked like he was taking the game chat into the next level, so he was warned in order to cool down and to be more careful of what he says.

Bigotry is another thing. Whether it is a joke or not, this will be seen as a severe infraction. However, we hear you and we will clarify this with another admin if he deserves more than a warning for this.

Army of GOD wrote:If what Spock posted in that thread is true (a previous warning), then he should MOST DEFINITELY be given a ban.

If? IF? I'm so hurt. <sniffle>

king achilles wrote:He was warned for his abusive trash talk in his game chats the first time around. There was no bigotry/racist remarks at that case back then. As what is said in the community guidelines, banter and some trash talking IS allowed in Game Chats, so don't waste time complaining about that. You may not be used to hearing or reading those "four-letter words", but some people do and will use them. This isn't a reason to open a complaint about the player; just kindly ask them to stop or ignore them. This was more of what he was guilty of at that time, but due to the reports and investigation, it looked like he was taking the game chat into the next level, so he was warned in order to cool down and to be more careful of what he says.

Bigotry is another thing. Whether it is a joke or not, this will be seen as a severe infraction. However, we hear you and we will clarify this with another admin if he deserves more than a warning for this.

I do understand what you're getting at with this in saying that it's a different type of offense, King A, but let me put this maybe into a different perspective for you...

1) Markjam was warned for offensive language in the gamechat in his first offense (though it was hardly his first, as we all know).
2) Markjam has since then INCREASED THE LEVEL of offensiveness to racism. While technically a different offense, it's definitely of the same "nature".

The idea behind the warnings is to give someone notice that what they're doing is against the rules, JUST IN CASE they weren't aware of it. So if he is INCREASING what he's doing after the warning...I have a difficult time understanding why a warning would be justified, since the individual obviously didn't have any respect for the first warning he received. Given that, this warning will be likewise ignored.

Do you really have to have a warning to know that you're not supposed to use the "N" word?

Not sure how it is in foreign countries but here in america if you use that word in a public place you're going to regret it...

Even if i have to kick your ass myself

/me waits patiently for their response to Woodruff's very reasonable reply.


I'm betting they won't because as soon as they're cornered they remain silent---as we have all seen in other threads like this.

KraphtOne wrote:Not sure how it is in foreign countries but here in america if you use that word in a public place you're going to regret it...

Unless your black. You forgot that qualifier.

You people make me want to vomit all over you. You complain that CC too readily jumps towards banning people for what they say, and then in the same breath complain because you don't like something someone said and you want CC to take action.

Aradhus wrote:You people make me want to vomit all over you. You complain that CC too readily jumps towards banning people for what they say, and then in the same breath complain because you don't like something someone said and you want CC to take action.

I agree. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

I'm not sure I would vomit on them; I'm not a big fan of vomitting.

Well I thought it was a bad call and should be reviewed. The general comments do infract a CC guideline of making it fun for others, but sometimes this is deemed OK, and generally consistentally so. This guy crosed the line by a mile...
The racism line is clear. So this guy crossed all the lines - hope CC looks again..it's impossible to be 100% consistent, and to keep everybody happy.. but really - just shoot the guy

thegreekdog wrote:

Aradhus wrote:You people make me want to vomit all over you. You complain that CC too readily jumps towards banning people for what they say, and then in the same breath complain because you don't like something someone said and you want CC to take action.

I agree. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

I'm not sure I would vomit on them; I'm not a big fan of vomitting.

i put a toothbrush to the back of my throat whenever i am hung over to vomit.

cc needs to reconfigure things. when they had all of this talk back in the day, i stayed out of it, cuz i knew this would happen....

nippersean wrote:Well I thought it was a bad call and should be reviewed. The general comments do infract a CC guideline of making it fun for others, but sometimes this is deemed OK, and generally consistentally so. This guy crosed the line by a mile...
The racism line is clear. So this guy crossed all the lines - hope CC looks again..it's impossible to be 100% consistent, and to keep everybody happy.. but really - just shoot the guy

I think the rules on racism are fine and are applied consistently.

It's the more nebulous stuff that bothers me. That and the deletion of Flame Wars.

Aradhus wrote:You people make me want to vomit all over you. You complain that CC too readily jumps towards banning people for what they say, and then in the same breath complain because you don't like something someone said and you want CC to take action.

I do? I just searched and I've never even used the word ban in any of my posts.

Well I disagree with the warning but I can totally see why it was locked.

the.killing.44 wrote:Well I disagree with the warning but I can totally see why it was locked.

why was it locked 44. do tell.

who gives a flying f*ck... CC is bent like a f*cking roundabout anyway... no use complaining about it..

thegreekdog wrote:

Aradhus wrote:You people make me want to vomit all over you. You complain that CC too readily jumps towards banning people for what they say, and then in the same breath complain because you don't like something someone said and you want CC to take action.

I agree. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Let's not be using too broad of a brush now, folks...you might get paint all over yourselves.

Woodruff wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

Aradhus wrote:You people make me want to vomit all over you. You complain that CC too readily jumps towards banning people for what they say, and then in the same breath complain because you don't like something someone said and you want CC to take action.

I agree. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Let's not be using too broad of a brush now, folks...you might get paint all over yourselves.

Meh. Absolutely everyone makes gross generalizations.

thegreekdog wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

Aradhus wrote:You people make me want to vomit all over you. You complain that CC too readily jumps towards banning people for what they say, and then in the same breath complain because you don't like something someone said and you want CC to take action.

I agree. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Let's not be using too broad of a brush now, folks...you might get paint all over yourselves.

Meh. Absolutely everyone makes gross generalizations.

Well then why try, right?

Woodruff wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:

Aradhus wrote:You people make me want to vomit all over you. You complain that CC too readily jumps towards banning people for what they say, and then in the same breath complain because you don't like something someone said and you want CC to take action.

I agree. Their hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Let's not be using too broad of a brush now, folks...you might get paint all over yourselves.

Meh. Absolutely everyone makes gross generalizations.

Well then why try, right?

Joke man, joke. Read again. Unless you got the joke, then disregard.

My beef is not with you. My beef is with the people who flame and then report those who flame.

ronc8649 wrote:

the.killing.44 wrote:Well I disagree with the warning but I can totally see why it was locked.

why was it locked 44. do tell.

jefjef started going off-topic…

I agree with the logic here for this case.

Well done, king a, well done.