Search:

[QUOTE=Firebringer;944931]Semi related to this thread but i know of someone who got banned for calling a mod a racist on MU. It was like two years ago. So lesson learned mods can call you racist and ban you, and you get banned when you call them racist. They got a perfect system =)[/QUOTE]
Don't take this personally, but I'd trust your statement only with a source, to see it for myself that there's really nothing more to the story.

I've learned to not take such statements at face value. Last time I did that, I was lead to wrongfully believe that the MU mods had bullied someone to suicide in the past - until I did my own "research" and saw that the proclaimed dead person has had alt accounts that they played on still years/months after the fact.

Originally Posted by Firebringer

Semi related to this thread but i know of someone who got banned for calling a mod a racist on MU. It was like two years ago. So lesson learned mods can call you racist and ban you, and you get banned when you call them racist. They got a perfect system =)

Don't take this personally, but I'd trust your statement only with a source, to see it for myself that there's really nothing more to the story.

I've learned to not take such statements at face value. Last time I did that, I was lead to wrongfully believe that the MU mods had bullied someone to suicide in the past - until I did my own "research" and saw that the proclaimed dead person has had alt accounts that they played on still years/months after the fact.

[QUOTE=Marshmallow Marshall;944860]Now, I don't want to ruin the fun, but aren't we currently beating the same point over and over with the same arguments (and with a consensual conclusion)?[/QUOTE]
Will you marry me?

Originally Posted by Marshmallow Marshall

Now, I don't want to ruin the fun, but aren't we currently beating the same point over and over with the same arguments (and with a consensual conclusion)?

Will you marry me?

[QUOTE=OzyWho;944453]
So what do we got here in the end? Here's my summary:

1. A justified ban due to a combination of
[INDENT]1.1. "We aren’t interested in discussing your opinions further. It’s about people being offended by what you’re saying and what their interpretation of your words is, not what your intention behind the words may be." - which is well in line in 99% of their bans.
1.2. Majority here, of those who read the debate, having the same interpretation as the mods on MU[/INDENT]
2. A questionable [I]extent[/I] of the ban - arguably against their own established rules

3. A public humilation with out of context quotes combined with denying the ability to defend himself.
4. An inexcusable aftermath of the ban, with not even allowing for an appeal.

That's about it for me how I view this atm.
Having said that, I'll drop this topic for at least a while if not for forever. I'm feeling a dissonance and I'm quite certain I'm having a lack of objectivity in this now.[/QUOTE]
I forgot one..
5. They technically lied to their community on two occasions:
[INDENT]5.1. They made it sound like Helz had the option for an appeal.
5.2. Their [URL="https://www.mafiauniverse.com/forums/threads/137-Public-Moderation-Log?p=4790291&viewfull=1#post4790291"]stated reason[/URL] for the ban does not correlate with their stated reason in their email to Helz. [/INDENT]


Their sincerity with the public is shown to be wanting.
Their post-ban treatment of those banned is questionable, though understandable to an extent.
The extent of this particular ban can be viewed as extreme, but it's under their "0 zero tolerance" policy.

Despite all those bad attributes, the ban itself goes in line with the line of thought of virtually all their bans.

For the extent of the ban, I've suggested them to have a list of punishments per crime. They and their community disagreed, so there's nothing more than can be done there.
Wrt their sincerity/openness with the public and their post-ban treatment of those banned - that's their mod teams business.

[MENTION=10617]Helz[/MENTION] for me, this settles every aspect of this topic that I think of atm.
Is there something else that you desire to get out of this?



[QUOTE=Oberon;944454]I don’t think anyone has actually expressed agreement with Helz getting banned? Rumox and oops both disagreed with what Helz said and both yet said they were complete bitches for banning him.[/QUOTE]
Yah, you misunderstood something about what I said.

Originally Posted by OzyWho

So what do we got here in the end? Here's my summary:

1. A justified ban due to a combination of

1.1. "We aren’t interested in discussing your opinions further. It’s about people being offended by what you’re saying and what their interpretation of your words is, not what your intention behind the words may be." - which is well in line in 99% of their bans.
1.2. Majority here, of those who read the debate, having the same interpretation as the mods on MU

2. A questionable extent of the ban - arguably against their own established rules

3. A public humilation with out of context quotes combined with denying the ability to defend himself.
4. An inexcusable aftermath of the ban, with not even allowing for an appeal.

That's about it for me how I view this atm.
Having said that, I'll drop this topic for at least a while if not for forever. I'm feeling a dissonance and I'm quite certain I'm having a lack of objectivity in this now.

I forgot one..
5. They technically lied to their community on two occasions:

5.1. They made it sound like Helz had the option for an appeal.
5.2. Their stated reason for the ban does not correlate with their stated reason in their email to Helz.

Their sincerity with the public is shown to be wanting.
Their post-ban treatment of those banned is questionable, though understandable to an extent.
The extent of this particular ban can be viewed as extreme, but it's under their "0 zero tolerance" policy.

Despite all those bad attributes, the ban itself goes in line with the line of thought of virtually all their bans.

For the extent of the ban, I've suggested them to have a list of punishments per crime. They and their community disagreed, so there's nothing more than can be done there.
Wrt their sincerity/openness with the public and their post-ban treatment of those banned - that's their mod teams business.

@Helz for me, this settles every aspect of this topic that I think of atm.
Is there something else that you desire to get out of this?

Originally Posted by Oberon

I don’t think anyone has actually expressed agreement with Helz getting banned? Rumox and oops both disagreed with what Helz said and both yet said they were complete bitches for banning him.

Yah, you misunderstood something about what I said.

[QUOTE=aamirus;944446]Helz what you need to clarify is the usage of the term “black culture”. I don’t think anyone will disagree that the culture in gang-filled ghettos leads to a cycle of crime. But I do disagree with calling that “black culture”, even if a large percentage of black Americans live in such areas.

You yourself mentioned that things were similar for whites living in similar conditions in some European countries so I know you don’t equate it to being about race. And yet you still called it “black culture”, sort of contradicting yourself? “Asian culture glorifying academics” is just as problematic too. Japanese, Indians, Indonesians, and iraqis all have some united cultural drive to do well in academics? Again I get the stereotype you’re addressing but perhaps you just need to use some different wording?[/QUOTE]
First I thought that ammirus was right on point.
But on a second thought, this is only relevant for: [QUOTE=Helz;944367]
All that said- I would appreciate either poking them to just follow their established process [U]or telling me I am genuinely wrong[/U] so I can stop loosing sleep over this issue. I am really sick of feeling like shit over this and its not even about a video game.[/QUOTE]
Which we now know, thanks to the first sentence in #34, that Helz would only be interested from the MU mods and not from aynone else. In retrospect - this makes a lot of my posting here irrelevant too.





So what do we got here in the end? Here's my summary:

1. A justified ban due to a combination of
[INDENT]1.1. "We aren’t interested in discussing your opinions further. It’s about people being offended by what you’re saying and what their interpretation of your words is, not what your intention behind the words may be." - which is well in line in 99% of their bans.
1.2. Majority here, of those who read the debate, having the same interpretation as the mods on MU[/INDENT]
2. A questionable [I]extent[/I] of the ban - arguably against their own established rules

3. A public humilation with out of context quotes combined with denying the ability to defend himself.
4. An inexcusable aftermath of the ban, with not even allowing for an appeal.

That's about it for me how I view this atm.
Having said that, I'll drop this topic for at least a while if not for forever. I'm feeling a dissonance and I'm quite certain I'm having a lack of objectivity in this now.

Originally Posted by aamirus

Helz what you need to clarify is the usage of the term “black culture”. I don’t think anyone will disagree that the culture in gang-filled ghettos leads to a cycle of crime. But I do disagree with calling that “black culture”, even if a large percentage of black Americans live in such areas.

You yourself mentioned that things were similar for whites living in similar conditions in some European countries so I know you don’t equate it to being about race. And yet you still called it “black culture”, sort of contradicting yourself? “Asian culture glorifying academics” is just as problematic too. Japanese, Indians, Indonesians, and iraqis all have some united cultural drive to do well in academics? Again I get the stereotype you’re addressing but perhaps you just need to use some different wording?

First I thought that ammirus was right on point.
But on a second thought, this is only relevant for:

Originally Posted by Helz

All that said- I would appreciate either poking them to just follow their established process or telling me I am genuinely wrong so I can stop loosing sleep over this issue. I am really sick of feeling like shit over this and its not even about a video game.

Which we now know, thanks to the first sentence in #34, that Helz would only be interested from the MU mods and not from aynone else. In retrospect - this makes a lot of my posting here irrelevant too.





So what do we got here in the end? Here's my summary:

1. A justified ban due to a combination of

1.1. "We aren’t interested in discussing your opinions further. It’s about people being offended by what you’re saying and what their interpretation of your words is, not what your intention behind the words may be." - which is well in line in 99% of their bans.
1.2. Majority here, of those who read the debate, having the same interpretation as the mods on MU

2. A questionable extent of the ban - arguably against their own established rules

3. A public humilation with out of context quotes combined with denying the ability to defend himself.
4. An inexcusable aftermath of the ban, with not even allowing for an appeal.

That's about it for me how I view this atm.
Having said that, I'll drop this topic for at least a while if not for forever. I'm feeling a dissonance and I'm quite certain I'm having a lack of objectivity in this now.

[QUOTE=Firebringer;944448]I don't think Ozy is being fair on regards to Helz not responding to mods? From my understanding all communication was unavailable for appealing before others made a hissy fit, so his critisism that "Helz not replying to them" is strange. Or is this on the initial conversation that started it all.
[/QUOTE] I never talked about "Helz not responding to mods".



[QUOTE=Firebringer;944448]I don't know. Ozy writes in a way I don't always understand his points, and Helz points are all over the place in this thread that I don't understand what point he is trying to make. Arguments between the two don't even seem like they are in the same ballpark.[/QUOTE]
I agree.

Originally Posted by Firebringer

I don't think Ozy is being fair on regards to Helz not responding to mods? From my understanding all communication was unavailable for appealing before others made a hissy fit, so his critisism that "Helz not replying to them" is strange. Or is this on the initial conversation that started it all.

I never talked about "Helz not responding to mods".

Originally Posted by Firebringer

I don't know. Ozy writes in a way I don't always understand his points, and Helz points are all over the place in this thread that I don't understand what point he is trying to make. Arguments between the two don't even seem like they are in the same ballpark.

I agree.

[QUOTE=yzb25;944435]
I don't see why people are diverging so heavily away from the conduct of the mods into the specifics of the opinions actually being discussed. Unless you believe the views Helz shared actually are racist, grotesque or violate their Ts and Cs in some way, it's not really relevant. The judgement doesn't become more or less fair if the opinion is "correct" or "well-argued".[/QUOTE]
If people could stop giving support's on blind faith, that'd be great.
First there were 100+ posts on discord+forums agreeing with the MU mods, a witch hunt after Helz and his supporters.
Now there's witch hunt after MU mods.
On both sides most didn't bother looking into anything, just taking the word of whomever they're supporting.

I myself need the case to be put under scrutiny before I support either.
My own interpretation is in #7, however I said I don't understand most of what was even said.
Now as it stands, thanks to #18+#19+#20, it seems that even the people here share the same interpretation as the mods on MU? Which atm is the majority of people looking into it themselves?
Combine that with Helz not replying to them, and it's objective to support the ban?

I can't agree with the aftermath of it all though - that lost the MU mods credibility for me.

I wish Helz to take care of his mental health.
I wish others to not go on blind faith witch-hunts. Though I suppose that's what communities do, judging by both MU and SC2Mafia?

Originally Posted by yzb25

I don't see why people are diverging so heavily away from the conduct of the mods into the specifics of the opinions actually being discussed. Unless you believe the views Helz shared actually are racist, grotesque or violate their Ts and Cs in some way, it's not really relevant. The judgement doesn't become more or less fair if the opinion is "correct" or "well-argued".

If people could stop giving support's on blind faith, that'd be great.
First there were 100+ posts on discord+forums agreeing with the MU mods, a witch hunt after Helz and his supporters.
Now there's witch hunt after MU mods.
On both sides most didn't bother looking into anything, just taking the word of whomever they're supporting.

I myself need the case to be put under scrutiny before I support either.
My own interpretation is in #7, however I said I don't understand most of what was even said.
Now as it stands, thanks to #18+#19+#20, it seems that even the people here share the same interpretation as the mods on MU? Which atm is the majority of people looking into it themselves?
Combine that with Helz not replying to them, and it's objective to support the ban?

I can't agree with the aftermath of it all though - that lost the MU mods credibility for me.

I wish Helz to take care of his mental health.
I wish others to not go on blind faith witch-hunts. Though I suppose that's what communities do, judging by both MU and SC2Mafia?

Those racist laws are no longer a thing. Segregation law is a law of the past. How do they affect [B]today[/B]?

And to be safe, it was supposed to address #18, #19, #20 - correct?

Those racist laws are no longer a thing. Segregation law is a law of the past. How do they affect today?

And to be safe, it was supposed to address #18, #19, #20 - correct?

I still don't see how a law from 60 years ago affects the prison populations today.

Don't you really see how many inferences one has to make to even attempt to follow your thoughts process? Either that or I'm more dumb than I ever realized.

I'm sorry that my best efforts of advising to speak understandably fell on deaf ears.

I still don't see how a law from 60 years ago affects the prison populations today.

Don't you really see how many inferences one has to make to even attempt to follow your thoughts process? Either that or I'm more dumb than I ever realized.

I'm sorry that my best efforts of advising to speak understandably fell on deaf ears.

[QUOTE=Helz;944420]Uhh.. I am not even sure where to start with this one.

Segregation laws were laws making it criminal to do basic stuff. Like "Being black and dating a white woman"

My point that calling that a crime does not make the individual immoral but rather the system is pretty clear. I can provide specific examples but I feel like its kinda stupid for me to do so. I am making a very valid and clear position here about how saying something is a crime does not mean its derogatory to the individual while also pointing out that my argument was not hateful to a racial group simply because I was arguing that systemic racism created through laws was itself immoral.

If you would like I could go grab some law books and dig some stuff up for you but honestly.. just.. wtf dude? I do not understand why you keep reframing the issue as irrational or that the entirety of the MU community supports it. If its a big deal to you I can PM you on the subject in a few weeks when I am back from work but I think there is a very real issue going on here.[/QUOTE]
I hope your confusion about my confusion will motivate you to speak more understandable in the future. Nobody is out to get you.

Just to be clear, that mention of a law that was 60 years ago - is it supposed to address anything that MM or Oberon or oops said? As far as I understand, they're addressing the "black culture makes you go to prison" argument? I don't think a law from 60 years ago is relevant if so.

Originally Posted by Helz

Uhh.. I am not even sure where to start with this one.

Segregation laws were laws making it criminal to do basic stuff. Like "Being black and dating a white woman"

My point that calling that a crime does not make the individual immoral but rather the system is pretty clear. I can provide specific examples but I feel like its kinda stupid for me to do so. I am making a very valid and clear position here about how saying something is a crime does not mean its derogatory to the individual while also pointing out that my argument was not hateful to a racial group simply because I was arguing that systemic racism created through laws was itself immoral.

If you would like I could go grab some law books and dig some stuff up for you but honestly.. just.. wtf dude? I do not understand why you keep reframing the issue as irrational or that the entirety of the MU community supports it. If its a big deal to you I can PM you on the subject in a few weeks when I am back from work but I think there is a very real issue going on here.

I hope your confusion about my confusion will motivate you to speak more understandable in the future. Nobody is out to get you.

Just to be clear, that mention of a law that was 60 years ago - is it supposed to address anything that MM or Oberon or oops said? As far as I understand, they're addressing the "black culture makes you go to prison" argument? I don't think a law from 60 years ago is relevant if so.

People listening to you aren't supposed to follow your inferences magically out of thin air dude..

People listening to you aren't supposed to follow your inferences magically out of thin air dude..

[QUOTE=OzyWho;944416]
Tbh, I personally would appreciate if you provided specific examples to go along with your future statements. Like "The most overt example is segregation." is not a specific example. For all I know you're pulling it out of your rear.[/QUOTE]
I stopped being lazy and googled it. My amazing deduction skills figured out googling "segregation law".

It's:
[I]De jure segregation mandated the separation of races by law, and was the form imposed by slave codes before the Civil War and by Black Codes and Jim Crow laws following the war. De jure segregation was outlawed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968.[/I]

Ok what the actual fuck? It's a law over half a century old. How the F is it remotely relevant to the topic of [B]today's[/B] prison population and culture influence on it?

Originally Posted by OzyWho

Tbh, I personally would appreciate if you provided specific examples to go along with your future statements. Like "The most overt example is segregation." is not a specific example. For all I know you're pulling it out of your rear.

I stopped being lazy and googled it. My amazing deduction skills figured out googling "segregation law".

It's:
De jure segregation mandated the separation of races by law, and was the form imposed by slave codes before the Civil War and by Black Codes and Jim Crow laws following the war. De jure segregation was outlawed by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Voting Rights Act of 1965, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968.

Ok what the actual fuck? It's a law over half a century old. How the F is it remotely relevant to the topic of today's prison population and culture influence on it?

[QUOTE=Helz;944409]Something that keeps getting misinterpreted...[/QUOTE]
By now I think it should be clear that it's your fault?

Whenever there's a misinterpretation, I feel like it's the responsibility of the one talking to prevent that. That's my general take that some agree and others disagree. But in this scenario a large majority seemed to not get you, even here on SC2Mafia. Yes? Idk because it's still too complicated all for me.

I wish to point you towards [URL="https://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showthread.php/48622-Communicating-is-tough?p=924371&viewfull=1#post924371"]Importance of Simplification[/URL], again.
Especially:
[B]Sometimes we inadvertently write sentences that can be interpreted in more than one way. When something's written in simple manner, there's less chance for ambiguity.[/B]

Tbh, I personally would appreciate if you provided specific examples to go along with your future statements. Like "The most overt example is segregation." is not a specific example. For all I know you're pulling it out of your rear.
Or this "When norms are punished it doesnt equate to the individual being immoral but rather the system being immoral." - it literally doesn't tell me anything and idk wtf you're talking about.
Similarly to how in your "debate" you link to a study link but fail to give any form of summary of how you came to your inference. How's anyone to take it serious and not nefarious? Even now idk how a study that speaks about "Social categorization occurs spontaneously, without much thought to our part" to you doing a social categorization yourself.

While on the topic, [URL="https://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showthread.php/48228-Double-Standards-in-Racism-and-Sexism?p=919058&viewfull=1#post919058"]pulling a Jordan Peterson[/URL] doesn't give you credibility either. It loses you it.

I just can't stress the importance of speaking understandable enough.

Originally Posted by Helz

Something that keeps getting misinterpreted...

By now I think it should be clear that it's your fault?

Whenever there's a misinterpretation, I feel like it's the responsibility of the one talking to prevent that. That's my general take that some agree and others disagree. But in this scenario a large majority seemed to not get you, even here on SC2Mafia. Yes? Idk because it's still too complicated all for me.

I wish to point you towards Importance of Simplification, again.
Especially:
Sometimes we inadvertently write sentences that can be interpreted in more than one way. When something's written in simple manner, there's less chance for ambiguity.

Tbh, I personally would appreciate if you provided specific examples to go along with your future statements. Like "The most overt example is segregation." is not a specific example. For all I know you're pulling it out of your rear.
Or this "When norms are punished it doesnt equate to the individual being immoral but rather the system being immoral." - it literally doesn't tell me anything and idk wtf you're talking about.
Similarly to how in your "debate" you link to a study link but fail to give any form of summary of how you came to your inference. How's anyone to take it serious and not nefarious? Even now idk how a study that speaks about "Social categorization occurs spontaneously, without much thought to our part" to you doing a social categorization yourself.

While on the topic, pulling a Jordan Peterson doesn't give you credibility either. It loses you it.

I just can't stress the importance of speaking understandable enough.

[QUOTE=Helz;944409]
But something should change in how the global community is afraid to even speak about the site that hosts the championships.[/QUOTE]
I mean, me personally, I don't care about the champs and dislike how we have had most of our reps go because they were voted and felt like they had to, not because they wanted to.
The first 3 reps stopped playing FM basically immediately after their champs game if not mistaken?
I'd prefer to not vote or suggest anyone next years before they themselves say that they want to go. I'm glad that this year's reps were both interested themselves.

Originally Posted by Helz

But something should change in how the global community is afraid to even speak about the site that hosts the championships.

I mean, me personally, I don't care about the champs and dislike how we have had most of our reps go because they were voted and felt like they had to, not because they wanted to.
The first 3 reps stopped playing FM basically immediately after their champs game if not mistaken?
I'd prefer to not vote or suggest anyone next years before they themselves say that they want to go. I'm glad that this year's reps were both interested themselves.

[QUOTE=Helz;944382]
I can not help but wonder how many other people have been railroaded like this. If I am not genuinely being treated differently their moderation culture is really fucked up. [/QUOTE]
In the sense of bypassing their own rule about not banning from site (or discord itself if discord general rules have been followed) for what happens in #debate - you're not the first.
In the sense of denying an appeal - I don't see how you could be. They'd need more staff for appeals to become manageable, and I've never heard of an appeal going through if such has happened (though I'm relatively new?). At least imho.


[QUOTE=Helz;944382]At the end of the day mods are not the community, they just exist to protect the community and although I love many respects of MU that attitude is something that has kept me out of it.[/QUOTE]
It wasn't just the mods agreeing. Everyone (from MU) who bothered commenting on it, on either forums or discord, agreed with the mods.
I have doubts how many of them checked up on anything, as they looked eager to just trash on someone, but it was community consensus nevertheless. At least judging by the few who voiced their opinions (which was more people than mods ftr).

Originally Posted by Helz

I can not help but wonder how many other people have been railroaded like this. If I am not genuinely being treated differently their moderation culture is really fucked up.

In the sense of bypassing their own rule about not banning from site (or discord itself if discord general rules have been followed) for what happens in #debate - you're not the first.
In the sense of denying an appeal - I don't see how you could be. They'd need more staff for appeals to become manageable, and I've never heard of an appeal going through if such has happened (though I'm relatively new?). At least imho.

Originally Posted by Helz

At the end of the day mods are not the community, they just exist to protect the community and although I love many respects of MU that attitude is something that has kept me out of it.

It wasn't just the mods agreeing. Everyone (from MU) who bothered commenting on it, on either forums or discord, agreed with the mods.
I have doubts how many of them checked up on anything, as they looked eager to just trash on someone, but it was community consensus nevertheless. At least judging by the few who voiced their opinions (which was more people than mods ftr).

[QUOTE=Helz;944382]
The chat log you gave started mid way though the conversation but I appreciate it.[/QUOTE]
I mean, if you wish I can send you from when [url]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-41692593[/url] was posted like over 36h earlier. But it talked about Pearson, books, information, voting, politics. I really don't see the relevance though.

You did say [I]"I desperately need to just go to sleep at this point, but I feel the need to point out how religions and power structures are two very different things"[/I] just before you left in that convo. But it's like 26 hours earlier and the only related on the topic post.
I really feel like the convo that was 26-36h before when this convo started is an entirely different one.

Originally Posted by Helz

The chat log you gave started mid way though the conversation but I appreciate it.

I mean, if you wish I can send you from when https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-41692593 was posted like over 36h earlier. But it talked about Pearson, books, information, voting, politics. I really don't see the relevance though.

You did say "I desperately need to just go to sleep at this point, but I feel the need to point out how religions and power structures are two very different things" just before you left in that convo. But it's like 26 hours earlier and the only related on the topic post.
I really feel like the convo that was 26-36h before when this convo started is an entirely different one.

[QUOTE=OzyWho;944373]
[table="class: outer_border"]
[tr]
[TD]
[COLOR="#FF0000"][02-Apr-21 12:39 PM] Helz#8260
On the most basic level- Asian culture glorifys academic success. African American culture glorifys sucess in sports


[COLOR="#00FF00"][02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907
how does that relate to prison populations[/COLOR]


[02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Helz#8260
Compare the same cultural drives with crime culture[/COLOR]
[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]
[/QUOTE]
For judging only this, which caused the ban, I want to share a personal story. Not really story though..
In my small town that I grew up - it was glorified the idea to beat up anyone who's not from around here.
It's not as bad anymore as it used to be, but well over half a century - if anyone visited our town to party or something, they'd be beat up for no other reason than for not being from around. I remember a bunch of 12 year olds waiting for a foreign kids volleyball team to get out in order to beat them up. They didn't, they chickened out, but that's how glorified the whole idea was.

Gang culture is s thing in America AFAIK, and due to history and economics - it's mostly minority groups.

Denying how growing up in different place makes you a different person, and calling such an idea as bigotry - I think is not very rational.

Having said that, I wouldn't call that "debate" chat a debate. Idk what it was, but it wasn't debate. One side spoke incomprehensible and with imho bad argumentation, the other I don't think tried to understand (not [I]really[/I] at least).

Originally Posted by OzyWho

[02-Apr-21 12:39 PM] Helz#8260 On the most basic level- Asian culture glorifys academic success. African American culture glorifys sucess in sports [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907 how does that relate to prison populations [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Helz#8260 Compare the same cultural drives with crime culture

For judging only this, which caused the ban, I want to share a personal story. Not really story though..
In my small town that I grew up - it was glorified the idea to beat up anyone who's not from around here.
It's not as bad anymore as it used to be, but well over half a century - if anyone visited our town to party or something, they'd be beat up for no other reason than for not being from around. I remember a bunch of 12 year olds waiting for a foreign kids volleyball team to get out in order to beat them up. They didn't, they chickened out, but that's how glorified the whole idea was.

Gang culture is s thing in America AFAIK, and due to history and economics - it's mostly minority groups.

Denying how growing up in different place makes you a different person, and calling such an idea as bigotry - I think is not very rational.

Having said that, I wouldn't call that "debate" chat a debate. Idk what it was, but it wasn't debate. One side spoke incomprehensible and with imho bad argumentation, the other I don't think tried to understand (not really at least).

"We aren’t interested in discussing your opinions further. It’s about people being offended by what you’re saying and what their interpretation of your words is, not what your intention behind the words may be."

I swear I called it somewhere :laugh:

"We aren’t interested in discussing your opinions further. It’s about people being offended by what you’re saying and what their interpretation of your words is, not what your intention behind the words may be."

I swear I called it somewhere

[QUOTE=Helz;944367]Its been a while and I probably should have made this thread long ago. I honestly didn't simply because I believed the MU staff wanted the issue to die from public sight before giving me an appeal but it looks like they just have no intention of ever giving me an appeal.
[/QUOTE]
I could have told you that beforehand. Ohh wait.. I did. :blink1:
But tbh, this makes sense for their ever-lasting "zero tolerance on bigotry".

But was it bigotry though? Idk. I never bothered to look into it due to how incomprehensible the text is for me personally. But a thing of note here is that everyone who bothered commenting on it agreed that it was. Everyone except me and SJ - and I didn't even read.

If it was only the mods saying that, that'd be an issue. But as it stands - it's the consensus of their community.


[QUOTE=Helz;944367]I was perma-banned in the middle of a conversation in the discord of MU. A few things are of note:

-I was in the Serious discussion / Debate section of the discord (which is the appropriate place to have the discussion)[/QUOTE]
I don't think they believe it was a honest debate. I think they're more of the impression that you pulled a "I'm just debating!" card. [I][URL="https://slate.com/technology/2018/07/the-askhistorians-subreddit-banned-holocaust-deniers-and-facebook-should-too.html"](Which is not exactly a new thing on the internet)[/URL][/I]

For others, this was Amy's final straw:
[table="class: outer_border"]
[tr]
[td][02-Apr-21 12:36 PM] Mixolydia#8907
Alright, sure, I'll bite. Let's use your example of Asian-American admissions to Ivy League schools, and attempt to draw a comparison between that and minority prison populations.

There are a number of both empirical studies and anecdotal sources (which I'm not going to source, because it's 4:30 AM and I'm not defending a doctoral thesis, so please bear with me) that indicate that quite a few factors go into why a disproportionate amount of our prison population is black or hispanic: chief among these are the prejudices of law enforcement officers and the criminal justice system as a whole, backed by laws such as mandatory minimum sentences and harsh drug laws designed in the 70s and 80s and _specifically_ targeted at drugs used primarily by minority communities.

In my mind, this doesn't track with how you presented your Ivy League argument at all. You posited something along the lines of Asian-Americans having a culture of academic achievement, thus implying that while you did believe there was a cultural and thus racial difference involved in the process, you also feel that it was merit-based.

The problem is that if you're saying the above two scenarios are comparable, you're either saying they're both merit-based, which would be a blatantly racist sentiment in the prison scenario, or you're suggesting that the marginalized group in each is being specifically and directly marginalized (as opposed to the non-marginalized group simply gaining some sort of advantage), which would be pretty absurd in the Ivy League argument.

I cannot see a way in which these two scenarios are legitimately similar except "the minority is the bigger number".


[02-Apr-21 12:36 PM] Pawnshop Dragon#8291
Similar to what? What does that matter unless I have claimed that racial and economic disparity are the sole ways to determine systemic racism?


[02-Apr-21 12:36 PM] Pawnshop Dragon#8291
You've also not *shown* them to be similar anyways, you just keep saying it.


[02-Apr-21 12:37 PM] Helz#8260
I feel like you created a giant strawman there.


[02-Apr-21 12:38 PM] Helz#8260
My point that ivy league education had bearing on systemic racism was not associated with prision populations outside of how cultural drives function


[02-Apr-21 12:38 PM] Helz#8260
Which I still maintain are valid

[02-Apr-21 12:39 PM] Mixolydia#8907
how does cultural drive relate to prison populations


[02-Apr-21 12:39 PM] Helz#8260
In that they hold true to the same racial distribution of sports teams


[COLOR="#FF0000"][02-Apr-21 12:39 PM] Helz#8260
On the most basic level- Asian culture glorifys academic success. African American culture glorifys sucess in sports


[COLOR="#00FF00"][02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907
how does that relate to prison populations[/COLOR]


[02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Helz#8260
Compare the same cultural drives with crime culture[/COLOR]


[02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] euklyd#0776
don't u get it amy, african american culture glorifies violent crime


[02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] euklyd#0776
oh


[02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907
aha


[02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907
wow


[02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] euklyd#0776
he said it out loud


[02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907
you said the quiet part out loud


[02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907
yeah, i don't need this shit on this server


[02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] euklyd#0776
he really did say it


[02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907
thanks for playing, better luck next time


[02-Apr-21 12:41 PM] Mixolydia#8907
mod note: Helz has been permanently banned because (please read everything up there^)[/td]
[/tr]
[/table]
From the wording "he finally said it!" - I think we can infer that they were waiting for Helz to [I]finally say it directly without beating around the bush[/I].

[QUOTE=Helz;944367]-There was no warning of any kind from moderators or so much as a hint that the conversation was considered a breach of their rules[/QUOTE]
Amy has free reign over their #Debate channel.
However, it's straight up said in their rules that she cannot ban you from the server nor the site.
[CODE]The moderation staff is ceding full control of the #debate channel on the Discord server to Makaze. They will be the sole arbiter of corrective action within that space. They cannot ban you from the server at large, but they CAN remove your access to that channel.[/CODE]
To ban you - it must have been the decision of their entire mod team, and there must had been a majority vote. [I](though, given the speed of it all, I doubt how many of them looked at it actually)[/I]

[QUOTE=Helz;944367]-The conversation was driven into a taboo subject intentionally by moderators and other members[/QUOTE]
As far as I can tell, you started it? You just beat around the bush and they kept questioning you.
I say that without having read it though. Just looked at Amy's "final straw" that I quoted above.


[QUOTE=Helz;944367]-I had to report myself to request an appeal and I was flatly denied without any consideration. At this point I overtly voiced I had no access to any other method of communication and was not given the MU email to appeal (as their established community guidelines suggest is their norm)[/QUOTE]
I guess this is what they mean by "zero tolerance". :huh:


[QUOTE=Helz;944367]-When I pointed out I had no access to the conversation log and they were taking my statements out of context my communications were also ignored[/QUOTE]
For anyone interested, here's the log: [I](I didn't add the previous conversation that Helz replied to that started it all, as I don't think it's relevant.[/I]
[ATTACH]28115[/ATTACH]

Realistically though, you could have even just joined the discord server with an anonymous "non claimed" account?


[QUOTE=Helz;944367]-After the fact conversations on the issue by the community were cut off. Multiple citing the banned (me) should/can email the moderators to discuss the issue. I then reported myself again saying if I have that right I would like to exercise it and that was straight up ignored.
-Superjack then argued with them enough on the issue they finally gave him the email address to give to me (muheadmod@gmail.com) and when I emailed them and explained my position I was told "We aren’t interested in discussing your opinions further. It’s about people being offended by what you’re saying and what their interpretation of your words is, not what your intention behind the words may be."[/QUOTE]
Yeah...
Me personally, I doubt the sincerity of a decision when it's prohibited to be taken under scrutiny. Talking about bans is allowed only in private with the mods, but when at least I try - "I'm not going to discuss this" is the response you get.
They're far from perfect, though I can see the practical aspect of it just due to the sheer amount that they have moderate they should draw a line somewhere?


[QUOTE=Helz;944367]-I then pointed out how the definition of racism is 'prejudiced or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group', how in multiple respects this definition does not fit even given their own responses and how if their ban qualifications are 'bigoted or racist' and I am neither that the punishment should not apply. I never got a response[/QUOTE]
I guarantee you, if Amy for example responded to this - her response would be one word: [I]rationalizations[/I]. Because that's what she said after you were gone, which I believe you can see in that zip file above. :blink1:


[QUOTE=Helz;944367]-Ossie spoke with them on my behalf and although I was not allowed to speak in my defense or given any context to the statements they declared racist they did admit to intentionally denying me an appeal because they thought I was a troll. I do not see how that is possible given I wrote articles for MU ([url]https://www.mafiauniverse.com/forums/threads/3561-8-Macro-Meta-Crunching-%28by-Helz%29[/url]) and had worked with them to establish cross community games with 0 infractions over many years but I suppose they had to justify their behavior somehow.[/QUOTE]
Here it's pretty obvious that they were acting hasty and never even thought about it twice?
You shouldn't take this personally, that they banned you on an impulse and actively decided to never look back, because I do believe that they have to do that in some cases to keep their sanity due to the volumes that they have to moderate. I'd even guess that they've even made it a regular habit because of it.


[QUOTE=Helz;944367]-At this point I have probably asked them 10+ times if I would be allowed to publish that article I have been working on for years with no response which is just petty. Simply having some balls and saying no is something I could at least respect rather than waiting to see how good it is before voicing some moral / ethical grounds.[/QUOTE]
This is just low, ngl.
Literally their only incentive against this is because it might make them look bad that they banned someone credible? My guess is that they just don't take you serious tbh. Try again when you've got the article ready? ^.^


[QUOTE=Helz;944367]
All that said- I would appreciate either poking them to just follow their established process or telling me I am genuinely wrong so I can stop loosing sleep over this issue. I am really sick of feeling like shit over this and its not even about a video game.[/QUOTE]
I've provided the discussion that got you banned, though didn't add the previous discussion to which you were originally replying to.
You can try and ask for a honest feedback from other people that are not MU staff or their agreeing regulars. As for myself, the text wasn't even understandable to me - so I can't even begin to try and judge it.

Originally Posted by Helz

Its been a while and I probably should have made this thread long ago. I honestly didn't simply because I believed the MU staff wanted the issue to die from public sight before giving me an appeal but it looks like they just have no intention of ever giving me an appeal.

I could have told you that beforehand. Ohh wait.. I did.
But tbh, this makes sense for their ever-lasting "zero tolerance on bigotry".

But was it bigotry though? Idk. I never bothered to look into it due to how incomprehensible the text is for me personally. But a thing of note here is that everyone who bothered commenting on it agreed that it was. Everyone except me and SJ - and I didn't even read.

If it was only the mods saying that, that'd be an issue. But as it stands - it's the consensus of their community.

Originally Posted by Helz

I was perma-banned in the middle of a conversation in the discord of MU. A few things are of note:

-I was in the Serious discussion / Debate section of the discord (which is the appropriate place to have the discussion)

I don't think they believe it was a honest debate. I think they're more of the impression that you pulled a "I'm just debating!" card. (Which is not exactly a new thing on the internet)

For others, this was Amy's final straw:

[02-Apr-21 12:36 PM] Mixolydia#8907 Alright, sure, I'll bite. Let's use your example of Asian-American admissions to Ivy League schools, and attempt to draw a comparison between that and minority prison populations. There are a number of both empirical studies and anecdotal sources (which I'm not going to source, because it's 4:30 AM and I'm not defending a doctoral thesis, so please bear with me) that indicate that quite a few factors go into why a disproportionate amount of our prison population is black or hispanic: chief among these are the prejudices of law enforcement officers and the criminal justice system as a whole, backed by laws such as mandatory minimum sentences and harsh drug laws designed in the 70s and 80s and _specifically_ targeted at drugs used primarily by minority communities. In my mind, this doesn't track with how you presented your Ivy League argument at all. You posited something along the lines of Asian-Americans having a culture of academic achievement, thus implying that while you did believe there was a cultural and thus racial difference involved in the process, you also feel that it was merit-based. The problem is that if you're saying the above two scenarios are comparable, you're either saying they're both merit-based, which would be a blatantly racist sentiment in the prison scenario, or you're suggesting that the marginalized group in each is being specifically and directly marginalized (as opposed to the non-marginalized group simply gaining some sort of advantage), which would be pretty absurd in the Ivy League argument. I cannot see a way in which these two scenarios are legitimately similar except "the minority is the bigger number". [02-Apr-21 12:36 PM] Pawnshop Dragon#8291 Similar to what? What does that matter unless I have claimed that racial and economic disparity are the sole ways to determine systemic racism? [02-Apr-21 12:36 PM] Pawnshop Dragon#8291 You've also not *shown* them to be similar anyways, you just keep saying it. [02-Apr-21 12:37 PM] Helz#8260 I feel like you created a giant strawman there. [02-Apr-21 12:38 PM] Helz#8260 My point that ivy league education had bearing on systemic racism was not associated with prision populations outside of how cultural drives function [02-Apr-21 12:38 PM] Helz#8260 Which I still maintain are valid [02-Apr-21 12:39 PM] Mixolydia#8907 how does cultural drive relate to prison populations [02-Apr-21 12:39 PM] Helz#8260 In that they hold true to the same racial distribution of sports teams [02-Apr-21 12:39 PM] Helz#8260 On the most basic level- Asian culture glorifys academic success. African American culture glorifys sucess in sports [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907 how does that relate to prison populations [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Helz#8260 Compare the same cultural drives with crime culture [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] euklyd#0776 don't u get it amy, african american culture glorifies violent crime [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] euklyd#0776 oh [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907 aha [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907 wow [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] euklyd#0776 he said it out loud [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907 you said the quiet part out loud [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907 yeah, i don't need this shit on this server [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] euklyd#0776 he really did say it [02-Apr-21 12:40 PM] Mixolydia#8907 thanks for playing, better luck next time [02-Apr-21 12:41 PM] Mixolydia#8907 mod note: Helz has been permanently banned because (please read everything up there^)

From the wording "he finally said it!" - I think we can infer that they were waiting for Helz to finally say it directly without beating around the bush.

Originally Posted by Helz

-There was no warning of any kind from moderators or so much as a hint that the conversation was considered a breach of their rules

Amy has free reign over their #Debate channel.
However, it's straight up said in their rules that she cannot ban you from the server nor the site.

Code:

The moderation staff is ceding full control of the #debate channel on the Discord server to Makaze. They will be the sole arbiter of corrective action within that space. They cannot ban you from the server at large, but they CAN remove your access to that channel.

To ban you - it must have been the decision of their entire mod team, and there must had been a majority vote. (though, given the speed of it all, I doubt how many of them looked at it actually)

Originally Posted by Helz

-The conversation was driven into a taboo subject intentionally by moderators and other members

As far as I can tell, you started it? You just beat around the bush and they kept questioning you.
I say that without having read it though. Just looked at Amy's "final straw" that I quoted above.

Originally Posted by Helz

-I had to report myself to request an appeal and I was flatly denied without any consideration. At this point I overtly voiced I had no access to any other method of communication and was not given the MU email to appeal (as their established community guidelines suggest is their norm)

I guess this is what they mean by "zero tolerance".

Originally Posted by Helz

-When I pointed out I had no access to the conversation log and they were taking my statements out of context my communications were also ignored

For anyone interested, here's the log: (I didn't add the previous conversation that Helz replied to that started it all, as I don't think it's relevant.


Realistically though, you could have even just joined the discord server with an anonymous "non claimed" account?

Originally Posted by Helz

-After the fact conversations on the issue by the community were cut off. Multiple citing the banned (me) should/can email the moderators to discuss the issue. I then reported myself again saying if I have that right I would like to exercise it and that was straight up ignored.
-Superjack then argued with them enough on the issue they finally gave him the email address to give to me (muheadmod@gmail.com) and when I emailed them and explained my position I was told "We aren’t interested in discussing your opinions further. It’s about people being offended by what you’re saying and what their interpretation of your words is, not what your intention behind the words may be."

Yeah...
Me personally, I doubt the sincerity of a decision when it's prohibited to be taken under scrutiny. Talking about bans is allowed only in private with the mods, but when at least I try - "I'm not going to discuss this" is the response you get.
They're far from perfect, though I can see the practical aspect of it just due to the sheer amount that they have moderate they should draw a line somewhere?

Originally Posted by Helz

-I then pointed out how the definition of racism is 'prejudiced or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group', how in multiple respects this definition does not fit even given their own responses and how if their ban qualifications are 'bigoted or racist' and I am neither that the punishment should not apply. I never got a response

I guarantee you, if Amy for example responded to this - her response would be one word: rationalizations. Because that's what she said after you were gone, which I believe you can see in that zip file above.

Originally Posted by Helz

-Ossie spoke with them on my behalf and although I was not allowed to speak in my defense or given any context to the statements they declared racist they did admit to intentionally denying me an appeal because they thought I was a troll. I do not see how that is possible given I wrote articles for MU (https://www.mafiauniverse.com/forums...-%28by-Helz%29) and had worked with them to establish cross community games with 0 infractions over many years but I suppose they had to justify their behavior somehow.

Here it's pretty obvious that they were acting hasty and never even thought about it twice?
You shouldn't take this personally, that they banned you on an impulse and actively decided to never look back, because I do believe that they have to do that in some cases to keep their sanity due to the volumes that they have to moderate. I'd even guess that they've even made it a regular habit because of it.

Originally Posted by Helz

-At this point I have probably asked them 10+ times if I would be allowed to publish that article I have been working on for years with no response which is just petty. Simply having some balls and saying no is something I could at least respect rather than waiting to see how good it is before voicing some moral / ethical grounds.

This is just low, ngl.
Literally their only incentive against this is because it might make them look bad that they banned someone credible? My guess is that they just don't take you serious tbh. Try again when you've got the article ready?

Originally Posted by Helz

All that said- I would appreciate either poking them to just follow their established process or telling me I am genuinely wrong so I can stop loosing sleep over this issue. I am really sick of feeling like shit over this and its not even about a video game.

I've provided the discussion that got you banned, though didn't add the previous discussion to which you were originally replying to.
You can try and ask for a honest feedback from other people that are not MU staff or their agreeing regulars. As for myself, the text wasn't even understandable to me - so I can't even begin to try and judge it.