Search:

[QUOTE=Drizzt;942757]Well, you have made racism a crime in the mafia community. Now, will you consistently monitor the chat for infractions. Are you prepared to make a law you don't enforce?[/QUOTE]

Personally, I have seen no difference in the use of racial slurs. It has toned down over the years, but it is still present. Legislating the morality of speech, but not enforcing the rule of law, is a mistake. Before it was not your problem. Now you have identified the problem, created a solution, but are unwilling/unable to implement the solution. Now it is your problem, at least morally, because you made it your (staff) problem. This is just my opinion, and is a part of what I meant when I said, "open a can or worms" in my previous posting on free speech.

So where do you go? Mafia, the community and staff, made a stance against racial slurs, but like most (literally all) progressive measures against racism, it is all words without action- you might sleep better, but until you enforce the rule, you won't bring back advertising dollars to the site, and the community members you are trying to protect are now aware you are aware, which leads to expectations on enforcement.

Originally Posted by Drizzt

Well, you have made racism a crime in the mafia community. Now, will you consistently monitor the chat for infractions. Are you prepared to make a law you don't enforce?

Personally, I have seen no difference in the use of racial slurs. It has toned down over the years, but it is still present. Legislating the morality of speech, but not enforcing the rule of law, is a mistake. Before it was not your problem. Now you have identified the problem, created a solution, but are unwilling/unable to implement the solution. Now it is your problem, at least morally, because you made it your (staff) problem. This is just my opinion, and is a part of what I meant when I said, "open a can or worms" in my previous posting on free speech.

So where do you go? Mafia, the community and staff, made a stance against racial slurs, but like most (literally all) progressive measures against racism, it is all words without action- you might sleep better, but until you enforce the rule, you won't bring back advertising dollars to the site, and the community members you are trying to protect are now aware you are aware, which leads to expectations on enforcement.

Well, you have made racism a crime in the mafia community. Now, will you consistently monitor the chat for infractions. Are you prepared to make a law you don't enforce?

Well, you have made racism a crime in the mafia community. Now, will you consistently monitor the chat for infractions. Are you prepared to make a law you don't enforce?

[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;941834]I personally do not support the changing of words for any reason whatsoever, because that constitutes censorship. For instance, I once saw a typo in an email software I used very much. I was fine with it, until some sensitive snowflake reported the typo. Everyone was okay with the software saying "Calender" instead of "Calendar" before this grammar Nazi came along and started talking about how that "isn't the right spelling" and "words should be spelled correctly". Words and meanings change, and everyone knew that in context "Calender" actually meant "Calendar". Things were perfectly fine until some guy started complaining.

Long story short, the devs caved, and changed the word. This was technically a suppression of my free speech, because I did not consent to having the spelling be changed. Despite their efforts to censor me, I still use the spelling calender to this day. I also stopped using the software, and immediately threw my computer out of the window.

I vote no.[/QUOTE]

Personally, it does not affect me or my gameplay. In fact, most people probably would not even notice the change. The question is, would it avoid an unnecessarily negative aspect of the game, and attract players? If the community has taken a stance on racial slurs, why not clean up our own verbiage? At the very least, we could agree that if there is a trial by town, it is not a lynching - so the word "lynch" is simply not the right word. If a judge or marshall reveals, and no trial occurs, that is the definition of lynching.

Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead

I personally do not support the changing of words for any reason whatsoever, because that constitutes censorship. For instance, I once saw a typo in an email software I used very much. I was fine with it, until some sensitive snowflake reported the typo. Everyone was okay with the software saying "Calender" instead of "Calendar" before this grammar Nazi came along and started talking about how that "isn't the right spelling" and "words should be spelled correctly". Words and meanings change, and everyone knew that in context "Calender" actually meant "Calendar". Things were perfectly fine until some guy started complaining.

Long story short, the devs caved, and changed the word. This was technically a suppression of my free speech, because I did not consent to having the spelling be changed. Despite their efforts to censor me, I still use the spelling calender to this day. I also stopped using the software, and immediately threw my computer out of the window.

I vote no.

Personally, it does not affect me or my gameplay. In fact, most people probably would not even notice the change. The question is, would it avoid an unnecessarily negative aspect of the game, and attract players? If the community has taken a stance on racial slurs, why not clean up our own verbiage? At the very least, we could agree that if there is a trial by town, it is not a lynching - so the word "lynch" is simply not the right word. If a judge or marshall reveals, and no trial occurs, that is the definition of lynching.

[QUOTE=oops_ur_dead;941834]I personally do not support the changing of words for any reason whatsoever, because that constitutes censorship. For instance, I once saw a typo in an email software I used very much. I was fine with it, until some sensitive snowflake reported the typo. Everyone was okay with the software saying "Calender" instead of "Calendar" before this grammar Nazi came along and started talking about how that "isn't the right spelling" and "words should be spelled correctly". Words and meanings change, and everyone knew that in context "Calender" actually meant "Calendar". Things were perfectly fine until some guy started complaining.

Long story short, the devs caved, and changed the word. This was technically a suppression of my free speech, because I did not consent to having the spelling be changed. Despite their efforts to censor me, I still use the spelling calender to this day. I also stopped using the software, and immediately threw my computer out of the window.

I vote no.[/QUOTE]

We are beyond the censorship argument. That was last week. This is just the logical progression.

Originally Posted by oops_ur_dead

I personally do not support the changing of words for any reason whatsoever, because that constitutes censorship. For instance, I once saw a typo in an email software I used very much. I was fine with it, until some sensitive snowflake reported the typo. Everyone was okay with the software saying "Calender" instead of "Calendar" before this grammar Nazi came along and started talking about how that "isn't the right spelling" and "words should be spelled correctly". Words and meanings change, and everyone knew that in context "Calender" actually meant "Calendar". Things were perfectly fine until some guy started complaining.

Long story short, the devs caved, and changed the word. This was technically a suppression of my free speech, because I did not consent to having the spelling be changed. Despite their efforts to censor me, I still use the spelling calender to this day. I also stopped using the software, and immediately threw my computer out of the window.

I vote no.

We are beyond the censorship argument. That was last week. This is just the logical progression.

[QUOTE=rumox;941732]I'd just like to say the FM bot was originally changed simply just to troll someone who was shitting their pants over it being changed elsewhere, not to be more inclusive. However, it not being changed back can be an argument for us trying to be more inclusive so meh. Mod moderation is done more reactively than proactively, eg the racism/pedophile rule. Takes people doing it rampantly with enough people claiming their dislike for something to happen. Do people in the sc2arcade let alone the mod itself care at all about the word lynch?[/QUOTE]

I have heard it brought up various times over the years, so it is definitely noticed. As for our target populations, those affected may not report because the issue is kinda personal, and making a change is more us being aware that it IS a word that can create a culture around it. Once again, there are times (judge and marshall) when the word lynching is in fact appropriate. Other times, I can only see it making us look bad as a community. I wouldn't even think of bringing this topic up prior to the racism/pedo crackdown, but since we're dropping the hammer, we should at least talk about it.

Does anyone feel that limiting the word to marshall and judge (no trial and historically accurate) would create a more inclusive environment?

Another net benefit is reducing words trolls might see that triggers racial slurs.

Originally Posted by rumox

I'd just like to say the FM bot was originally changed simply just to troll someone who was shitting their pants over it being changed elsewhere, not to be more inclusive. However, it not being changed back can be an argument for us trying to be more inclusive so meh. Mod moderation is done more reactively than proactively, eg the racism/pedophile rule. Takes people doing it rampantly with enough people claiming their dislike for something to happen. Do people in the sc2arcade let alone the mod itself care at all about the word lynch?

I have heard it brought up various times over the years, so it is definitely noticed. As for our target populations, those affected may not report because the issue is kinda personal, and making a change is more us being aware that it IS a word that can create a culture around it. Once again, there are times (judge and marshall) when the word lynching is in fact appropriate. Other times, I can only see it making us look bad as a community. I wouldn't even think of bringing this topic up prior to the racism/pedo crackdown, but since we're dropping the hammer, we should at least talk about it.

Does anyone feel that limiting the word to marshall and judge (no trial and historically accurate) would create a more inclusive environment?

Another net benefit is reducing words trolls might see that triggers racial slurs.

[QUOTE=aamirus;941729]We made this change on the site for the forum mafia bot actually, I’m on phone but you can try to find the threads about it to see[/QUOTE]

I believe you, I acknowledge that FM changes are easier to make.

I know it is an old conversation/argument. But if you are making changes to be more inclusive, this would be the time to change it in the arcade mafia.

Originally Posted by aamirus

We made this change on the site for the forum mafia bot actually, I’m on phone but you can try to find the threads about it to see

I believe you, I acknowledge that FM changes are easier to make.

I know it is an old conversation/argument. But if you are making changes to be more inclusive, this would be the time to change it in the arcade mafia.

Looking at the word Lynch. Mafia uses the term sporadically to mean any town-created execution. In reality, if there is any trial, then perhaps execution is a better term. Lynching, from an academic standpoint, is what happens when the Judge and/or Marshall reveals there is no trial, just an execution. So, this may seem like nothing to most people on the site, but the verbiage has a negative connotation attached to it in the American South. Should we change it? Or at least to make it reflect the accurate usage of the word. As of now, it is used a lot, and it may signal an exclusive culture which is the opposite of what (I believe) staff is trying to accomplish.

Would the change be meaningful? Would the change be more inclusive and trigger less racism?

I in no way think we should abandon the term. History is History. Lynching happened, and we use it to mean death without a trial- except when we don't use it that way.

So why not accurately reflect that in the game?

Looking at the word Lynch. Mafia uses the term sporadically to mean any town-created execution. In reality, if there is any trial, then perhaps execution is a better term. Lynching, from an academic standpoint, is what happens when the Judge and/or Marshall reveals there is no trial, just an execution. So, this may seem like nothing to most people on the site, but the verbiage has a negative connotation attached to it in the American South. Should we change it? Or at least to make it reflect the accurate usage of the word. As of now, it is used a lot, and it may signal an exclusive culture which is the opposite of what (I believe) staff is trying to accomplish.

Would the change be meaningful? Would the change be more inclusive and trigger less racism?

I in no way think we should abandon the term. History is History. Lynching happened, and we use it to mean death without a trial- except when we don't use it that way.

So why not accurately reflect that in the game?