Round removal was okay'd because I disapproved of a station name that was in reference to modern day politics over comms

[Purotozilla]

So, I was told to make a forum post regarding policy if I had an issue with what happened. On Manuel, during Round: 217511, the station was named "All Individuals Matter" which is a reference to "All Lives Matter". I showed disapproval towards it over comms. I wasn't attacking anyone. I just stated how the name of the station was a problem and that people know why, so I ended up being killed by someone who hunted me down over it. He was a heretic so I ended up not caring that he killed me. But, I was told by an admin that I was in the wrong for even showing disapproval over the station name, how it was innocent and that if I had just ahelped the name I would still be alive by now. Pretty much saying how my round removal would have been justified even if my killer wasnt an antag and how I brought it upon myself. It's weird how that station name is allowed, but simply me pointing out how its a problem is grounds for round removal. The first thing that comes up when you google "All Individuals Matter" is the "All Lives Matter" movement, so I don't believe for one second that it was a name with innocent intention. The admin in question doesn't matter IMO nor does the person who killed me or the captain who named the station, because this is a policy issue first and foremost. The separation between modern day politics and this game should be evenly enforced and that means station names that are political dogwhistles as well. So, hopefully this post clears up that policy. Honestly, I'm not surprised drop political dogwhistles and offhandedly reference modern day politics. It's SS13, people are gonna do that. But I am surprised that pointing out that stuff is grounds for round removal whilst the action itself isn't. That really needs to be cleared up and the main reason I am making this post.

[Archie700]

So, I was told to make a forum post regarding policy if I had an issue with what happened. On Manuel, during Round: 217511, the station was named "All Individuals Matter" which is a reference to "All Lives Matter". I showed disapproval towards it over comms. I wasn't attacking anyone. I just stated how the name of the station was a problem and that people know why, so I ended up being killed by someone who hunted me down over it. He was a heretic so I ended up not caring that he killed me. But, I was told by an admin that I was in the wrong for even showing disapproval over the station name, how it was innocent and that if I had just ahelped the name I would still be alive by now. Pretty much saying how my round removal would have been justified even if my killer wasnt an antag and how I brought it upon myself. It's weird how that station name is allowed, but simply me pointing out how its a problem is grounds for round removal. The first thing that comes up when you google "All Individuals Matter" is the "All Lives Matter" movement, so I don't believe for one second that it was a name with innocent intention. The admin in question doesn't matter IMO nor does the person who killed me or the captain who named the station, because this is a policy issue first and foremost. The separation between modern day politics and this game should be evenly enforced and that means station names that are political dogwhistles as well. So, hopefully this post clears up that policy. Honestly, I'm not surprised drop political dogwhistles and offhandedly reference modern day politics. It's SS13, people are gonna do that. But I am surprised that pointing out that stuff is grounds for round removal whilst the action itself isn't. That really needs to be cleared up and the main reason I am making this post.

Ok actually your killer was a heretic with you as a target for one.

I'll leave my thoughts on this in another post.

[Isratosh]

Code: Select all

[2023-10-26 03:30:28.891] GAME-SAY: Purotozilla/(Jimmy Holiday) "WOAAAHHHHH GUESS WE KNOW WHY SHE CALLS HERSELF CLARA "WHITE"" (Library (60,101,3))

I wasn't attacking anyone.

[Cheshify]

So what do you think can be changed policy wise (like for a rule, for wording, w/e)?

Dogwhistles are hard to enforce and catch because they are seemingly innocuous from someone without context, so what can we add to the rules to change things? If it's the denial of bigotry, we already have that as a cemented rule that we enforce with no levity.

What can we do here? We know your goal here, how can we reach that?

[Archie700]

For clarification I PMed the captain over it after your ahelp with another admin because it was eerily similar to the slogan. The captain only realized it when I hinted to them the link and was genuinely apologetic. I told them to be more careful of it.

This should have been ahelped, political things in the real world are an OOC issue and this was too similar to dismiss.

[Purotozilla]

For clarification I PMed the captain over it after your ahelp with another admin because it was eerily similar to the slogan. The captain only realized it when I hinted to them the link and was genuinely apologetic. I told them to be more careful of it.

This should have been ahelped, political things in the real world are an OOC issue and this was too similar to dismiss.

Yeah, in the future I will definitely ahelp when I see that. I appreciate the response. I personally didn't think you guys would take action if I ahelped it, but someone killing me over it I did deem as appropriate for an ahelp as that crossed the line. Him being a heretic with me as a target I totally get, I'm fine with that. The killing was just the precipice to starting the ahelp to begin with.

[Purotozilla]

Code: Select all

[2023-10-26 03:30:28.891] GAME-SAY: Purotozilla/(Jimmy Holiday) "WOAAAHHHHH GUESS WE KNOW WHY SHE CALLS HERSELF CLARA "WHITE"" (Library (60,101,3))

I wasn't attacking anyone.

That warrants round removal?

[Purotozilla]

So what do you think can be changed policy wise (like for a rule, for wording, w/e)?

Dogwhistles are hard to enforce and catch because they are seemingly innocuous from someone without context, so what can we add to the rules to change things? If it's the denial of bigotry, we already have that as a cemented rule that we enforce with no levity.

What can we do here? We know your goal here, how can we reach that?

I mean, all it took was a google search of the station name to link it directly to "All Lives Matter" and I got told in the ahelp I was wrong and brought any physical interaction upon myself for connecting the two. I think if something is pointed out as a political dogwhistle it should be a better safe than sorry policy instead of just brushing it off. At least a google search. Especially something that blatant. Cause the takeaway I got from this situation is that pointing out something is a dogwhistle IC is grounds for round removal whilst something eerily similar to a real world political slogan isn't and I know that's not how the whole staff feels. So, getting this more clear to all the other admins is the only way I can think of improving this situation. So someone else doesn't get the same takeaway I did.

[NoxVS]

So what do you think can be changed policy wise (like for a rule, for wording, w/e)?

Dogwhistles are hard to enforce and catch because they are seemingly innocuous from someone without context, so what can we add to the rules to change things? If it's the denial of bigotry, we already have that as a cemented rule that we enforce with no levity.

What can we do here? We know your goal here, how can we reach that?

I mean, all it took was a google search of the station name to link it directly to "All Lives Matter" and I got told in the ahelp I was wrong and brought any physical interaction upon myself for connecting the two. I think if something is pointed out as a political dogwhistle it should be a better safe than sorry policy instead of just brushing it off. At least a google search. Especially something that blatant. Cause the takeaway I got from this situation is that pointing out something is a dogwhistle IC is grounds for round removal whilst something eerily similar to a real world political slogan isn't and I know that's not how the whole staff feels. So, getting this more clear to all the other admins is the only way I can think of improving this situation. So someone else doesn't get the same takeaway I did.

If you were tasked with updating the rules to reflect whatever decision you think should be reached, what would you write into the rules? Concise, able to stand without a lot of context or examples. Pretend we are going to take exactly what you respond with and slap it in the rules page without any editing whatsoever.

[Purotozilla]

Hmmm. Well, there are a few things, but I can be kind of sloppy and formatting isn't my strongsuit. If something is reported as being a reference to modern day politics. To determine if it crosses the line into OOC. I'd say look for real world parallels, with a simple google search. Check note history to see if a player has gotten warnings about this before to see if its consistent with their behavior. Also, speaking of consistency since manuel is meant to be higher RP, it should also be consistent IC. Like if its in reference to politics within the universe of the game or a response to something already brought up IC, or like if you are a lawyer talking about how clowns are abused more often by sec, that makes sense. But, if you are and say something like "Assistants on the station only make up 10 percent of the population but commit 90 percent of the crime" that'd be a case where a simple google search would show something "innocuous" like that is just an immersion breaking dogwhistle, granted that is just a hypothetical example. Personally, I think that these OOC political references are done with the intent to disrupt roleplay, not a simple reference to a movie or real world historical figure, so that should also be taken into account. In the initial example that led to this post, it definitely takes me out of the immersion to see a station name that is extremely similar to a real life political slogan. I am no admin and I really have no experience with writing rules like this, but I feel like this is a step in the right direction towards getting a more robust solution.

[kinnebian]

Is this a complaint, feedback, ban request or policy thread?

[Purotozilla]

Is this a complaint, feedback, ban request or policy thread?

When I asked for a link on where on the forums this would best fit and I was given this one. If its better put somewhere else, then I'd be happy to move it and apologize for the inconvenience.

[Higgin]

If you were tasked with updating the rules to reflect whatever decision you think should be reached, what would you write into the rules? Concise, able to stand without a lot of context or examples. Pretend we are going to take exactly what you respond with and slap it in the rules page without any editing whatsoever.

Adding to rule 11 the bold text:

This means rather than warning or banning for quoting a usage such as "Griff McNazi got banned for calling somebody a faggot" or even things like "nigga pls" and "what are you faggots playing" which are generally not statements made to be bigoted, we'll focus more on statements like "you talk like a [insert stereotype]" or "x is a [insert slur]".

This also means that the tacit expression of support for or fellowship with positions, groups, or movements which are commonly understood to express bigotry, hate, or otherwise create a hostile environment for our players are not allowed.These may often be subtle and only intended for a sympathetic audience ["dog whistles"], ambiguous, or even unintentional.

While we start from a presumption of good faith, staff are empowered to investigate and make note of expression which reasonable people might, outside of any one incident, identify with bigotry and hate not welcome in our community. Staff may ask you to change in-game behavior or expression where they can and should articulate the association a reasonable person might make.

it's not that the guys cosplaying the SA or SS and doing cornball IC racism to nonhumans are actually nazis, but when they seem to be having fun with it and giving it a sympathetic read, it's pretty common sense that staff should be able to say "even if it's satirical, the first thing people are going to see is mockup genocidaires having a free run around the station, so cut it out and don't do it again"

E1: this was an actual case we dealt with in another server btw, this is the sort of language I wish we'd had on the books at the time and what basically came out of how we dealt with it

another example being the dude who kept labelling his sec gear with Z's, but then also ultimately couldn't stop blowing up in the Discord that the Ukrainians deserved getting invaded and blown to smithereens for tossing in with the west - the first thing was a very clear and salient allusion at the time, it was entirely consistent with the actual positions when he went mask-off, but I think in retrospect we would've been better off with the ability to have tapped him on the shoulder at the allusion and said "let's not" in-game

E2: It sucks that you preclude some innocent (even maybe very well-done or pointed) satire here, and it does invite a lot more interrogation by staff that might turn on people having different attitudes, beliefs, contexts, and degrees of sensitivity around this stuff. I don't have a great answer about how to deal with this except that wherever possible staff should triangulate with each other before making calls on less-obvious rule 11 violations.

E3: It's also worth noting that the section I propose is somewhat at odds with the section before it. I don't think throwing out real-life slurs which are commonly or predominantly used as real-life slurs should be allowed because even if it's unintentional, that's cold comfort to the person who shows up not having come from the early 00's Xbox Live high-pitched slurfest or 4chan where "-fag" was and still is a suffix.

[Vekter]

Code: Select all

[2023-10-26 03:30:28.891] GAME-SAY: Purotozilla/(Jimmy Holiday) "WOAAAHHHHH GUESS WE KNOW WHY SHE CALLS HERSELF CLARA "WHITE"" (Library (60,101,3))

I wasn't attacking anyone.

That warrants round removal?

My brother in Christ, they were a Heretic. Even on Manuel, they can remove you if you're a sac target.

[Purotozilla]

Code: Select all

[2023-10-26 03:30:28.891] GAME-SAY: Purotozilla/(Jimmy Holiday) "WOAAAHHHHH GUESS WE KNOW WHY SHE CALLS HERSELF CLARA "WHITE"" (Library (60,101,3))

I wasn't attacking anyone.

That warrants round removal?

My brother in Christ, they were a Heretic. Even on Manuel, they can remove you if you're a sac target.

Hey, I said multiple times already how that's fine and I understand he was a heretic. The issue I had is that I was told I brought valid attacks and round removal on myself for disapproving of an OOC station name and that the name was a non issue. It's a matter of equal enforcement. The round removal for heretic was valid, but I was told that regardless I still brought valid attacks upon myself.

[sinfulbliss]

I think the policy thread is asking “is it okay to drop reference to modern politics IC.” The fact he was RR’d by a heretic and all the IC details aren’t really relevant.

IMO, it’s all or nothing. Either all political shitposting is allowed, or no reference to anything political whatsoever is allowed. Admins shouldn’t be able to pick and choose.

As for the dogwhistle question, that would really only be an issue if it’s a political statement to begin with, in which case it would fall under OOC IC anyway (given headmins rule on this). That’s the better way to handle it because banning people for rule 11 over something as vague as the issue in the OP (I’m not convinced that’s even a dogwhistle for anything) would open up the floodgates for banning for any little comment that rubs an admin the wrong way (e.g. many people think Christianity is a dogwhistle for bigotry, but obviously the chaplain shouldn’t be banned for preaching the gospel).

[Higgin]

IMO, it’s all or nothing. Either all political shitposting is allowed, or no reference to anything political whatsoever is allowed. Admins shouldn’t be able to pick and choose.

There's no getting rid of politics. Even if you remove any discussion of it IC and OOC, it's going to appear in how people approach the game and each other. You can find politics, often unexamined, in almost anything but the most aesthetic content like art and music (and even then.) Banning all political shitposting doesn't get rid of politics.

It's also false to say it's all or nothing - some positions and issues in politics are matters of technical disagreement over, say, speed limits and school levies (though these can be traced back to issues of fairness and justice, too.) Others are much more explicitly about who counts and gets basic consideration as a human being (such as to whom it is acceptable for the police to do violence, and for what.)

The fact that we disallow bigotry already puts it on staff to make calls about this stuff. Even if it's not perfectly or exhaustively defined, they have an "outer limit" of humanity and the responsibility to get rid of people who try to drag the boundaries inward. The "no bigotry" rule in a nutshell exists to exclude a tendency that would exclude people from being able to play and enjoy the game as much as anyone else. It's the paradox of tolerance that tolerating intolerance makes a less tolerant society.

As for the dogwhistle question, that would really only be an issue if it’s a political statement to begin with, in which case it would fall under OOC IC anyway (given headmins rule on this). That’s the better way to handle it because banning people for rule 11 over something as vague as the issue in the OP (I’m not convinced that’s even a dogwhistle for anything) would open up the floodgates for banning for any little comment that rubs an admin the wrong way (e.g. many people think Christianity is a dogwhistle for bigotry, but obviously the chaplain shouldn’t be banned for preaching the gospel).

To me, this is why it's so important that you start from a presumption of good faith, check your perceptions with other staff, and as much as possible don't go looking for trouble over less-than-explicit speech.

The point of a dogwhistle is that it's subtle and only heard by the intended audience. In this case, it obviously wasn"t; if the player had ahelped it, then, the burden is on staff to judge whether or not it's worth looking into further and whether or not a reasonable person might see the station name and get the wrong idea about what flies here - making that call alone or with others is still dubious, but it's less likely to be one person's skewed perspective if you've got a few more in there.

Then, rather than saying "you named the station as an allusion to the real-world All Lives Matter slogan, an opposing symbol to the Black Lives Matter movement's position that black and brown people in the U.S. are the subjects of systemic oppression and violence for their skin color, why are you a racist?"

just ask, "why did you name the station x?" and if it was reasonable or obvious enough that you got to having a conversation about it, "can you understand how this might look to others?" and "do you mind if I change it to something else? and if not, what would you prefer?"

"Thank you, please avoid naming any stations like this and pass it on if you see somebody do it in the future."

---

wrt the chaplain example,

you can get both some incredibly hateful and oddball shit from the Bible about literal Sodomites as well as "do unto others what you would have them do unto you," "let him without sin cast the first stone," and stuff like Matthew 25 which includes "what you have done for the least of mine, you have also done for me" which are the basic ideas of a universal deontological ethics put into words nearly two thousand years before Kant picked up a pen (and which exist across a lot of other even older traditions)

in the same way, there's a big difference between a chaplain who goes out and larps as the Westboro Baptist Church by harassing all the they/them characters or writes "PRO-CHOICE = PRO-MURDER" in front of the bridge as a Catholic vs. somebody who goes around bothering people for wearing mixed fabrics and working on Sundays.

There's room to make reasonable distinctions about this stuff that respect that a lot of people come to play online games to get away from an outside world where they might face discrimination and abuse over totally morally arbitrary characteristics.

E1: just because it might have gotten lost - the problem isn't that the station name was OOC. Naming it Britney Spears's "Toxic"station 13 is OOC but probably wouldn't have been grounds for a conflict anyone would have feelings about after the fact. That's why I don't think OOC in IC is really sufficient for this sort of thing.

[Archie700]

With respect to the station name, the reasons I ended up making the call:

1. The phrase in question was very similar to a very controversial phrase, as I said earlier.

2. The controversial phrase in question is in reference to a counter-movement to another movement in the USA, and since many of our playerbase comes from the US, it's likely someone has heard of it.

3. Said movement is well-known due to the large amount of attention and even people from other countries are aware of it due to the massive coverage it has.

Part of the problem is that not everyone has the same knowledge, so it falls on interpretation and based on what we know.

[sinfulbliss]

There's no getting rid of politics. Even if you remove any discussion of it IC and OOC, it's going to appear in how people approach the game and each other. You can find politics, often unexamined, in almost anything but the most aesthetic content like art and music (and even then.) Banning all political shitposting doesn't get rid of politics.

It's also false to say it's all or nothing - some positions and issues in politics are matters of technical disagreement over, say, speed limits and school levies (though these can be traced back to issues of fairness and justice, too.) Others are much more explicitly about who counts and gets basic consideration as a human being (such as to whom it is acceptable for the police to do violence, and for what.)

This isn't a very helpful definition of politics for the purposes of this thread. Obviously what I meant by "all or nothing" is the reference to specific subjects people mostly agree are political. Movements like BLM or this All Lives Matter thing would be obviously political. Arguing over speed limits IC would definitely not be.

Sometimes it's more important to have a narrow but useful working definition of something than a technically accurate but useless definition that encompasses everything.

The point of a dogwhistle is that it's subtle and only heard by the intended audience. In this case, it obviously wasn"t; if the player had ahelped it, then, the burden is on staff to judge whether or not it's worth looking into further and whether or not a reasonable person might see the station name and get the wrong idea about what flies here - making that call alone or with others is still dubious, but it's less likely to be one person's skewed perspective if you've got a few more in there.

The admin team leans one direction incredibly strongly on the political compass. I don't think a couple extra opinions is going to create the unbiased enforcement you think it will. That's why it needs to be all or nothing.

"The wrong idea about what flies here" - you're already implying from the outset the "All Lives Matter" movement is necessarily racist and breaks rule 11. I don't know much about it nor do I care, but I am fairly confident the people who are a part of it would disagree with that characterization. So once again it is a political disagreement, and political disagreements shouldn't be the subject for rule 11 bans under the guise of "dogwhistles" to demonize the person you disagree with and justify a ban - or even a bwoink!

E1: just because it might have gotten lost - the problem isn't that the station name was OOC. Naming it Britney Spears's "Toxic"station 13 is OOC but probably wouldn't have been grounds for a conflict anyone would have feelings about after the fact. That's why I don't think OOC in IC is really sufficient for this sort of thing.

If the goal then is to ban anything OOC that people would have strong feelings about, I completely disagree with that enforcement. Hugboxing the game so no one could theoretically get offended is incredibly lame and honestly people should grow a thicker skin if they can't hear the word "abortion" IC without slapping ahelp and having a mental breakdown.

The issue is that if enforcement is based on what OOC content "people have strong feelings about," you enable the adminteam to essentially selectively ban politics they disagree with (viz. have strong feelings about) but allow everything political they agree with (viz. enjoy and like). Britney Spears isn't political so you can escape this issue by revising it as such:

"Overtly political content will be considered OOC in IC."

[kieth4]

I think there are a lot of complexities here and I'm not entirely sure how to handle it.

A lot of of political things are just ok funny and no one cares e.g
Albanian sec singing red and black I dress eagle on my chest proud to be an Albanian. This is very obviously political but for the many times I've done it no one cares, the same can be said for gimmicks like IRA sec which once again is very political but admins do not give a single fuck.

We can then move to things like, "lizard lives matter" or "nonhuman lives matter" which are obviously reflections of a more controversial irl movement that does have many takes like "all lives matter" for example, but this is being pushed into an ic context.

If we take political shit and push it ic is it still political? Like, if in this case can you not make it an ic thing "all lives matter" because lizards, moths catgirls and etherals are violated ic. This can very obviously be an in universe thing? I didn't even realise the link to the other shit (I am not american).

I do not want a game where ic roleplay and ic politics are completely banned because there may be some reflection to one or other political movements irl

[sinfulbliss]

I think there are a lot of complexities here and I'm not entirely sure how to handle it.

A lot of of political things are just ok funny and no one cares e.g
Albanian sec singing red and black I dress eagle on my chest proud to be an Albanian. This is very obviously political but for the many times I've done it no one cares, the same can be said for gimmicks like IRA sec which once again is very political but admins do not give a single fuck.

We can then move to things like, "lizard lives matter" or "nonhuman lives matter" which are obviously reflections of a more controversial irl movement that does have many takes like "all lives matter" for example, but this is being pushed into an ic context.

If we take political shit and push it ic is it still political? Like, if in this case can you not make it an ic thing "all lives matter" because lizards, moths catgirls and etherals are violated ic. This can very obviously be an in universe thing? I didn't even realise the link to the other shit (I am not american).

I do not want a game where ic roleplay and ic politics are completely banned because there may be some reflection to one or other political movements irl

I agree with this. Allowing all forms of political expression as long as it can make IC sense somehow should be okay.

[Higgin]

Sometimes it's more important to have a narrow but useful working definition of something than a technically accurate but useless definition that encompasses everything.

Agreed.

Stuff we 'mostly agree is political' is also useless though. It's a moving target. How about this?

"Anything which concerns the material real-life distribution of who gets what, when, and how between different identifiable and self-identifying groups."

Who owns the Donbass? Political. Who gets treated the same by the police? Political. Who's allowed to show up or express their views on TV? Political.

The guy screaming 'all liggers must die' on Common? Not political. The guy who says "we must secure the existence of xenobio and a future for golem children"? Not political.

The admin team leans one direction incredibly strongly on the political compass. I don't think a couple extra opinions is going to create the unbiased enforcement you think it will. That's why it needs to be all or nothing.

"The wrong idea about what flies here" - you're already implying from the outset the "All Lives Matter" movement is necessarily racist and breaks rule 11. I don't know much about it nor do I care, but I am fairly confident the people who are a part of it would disagree with that characterization. So once again it is a political disagreement, and political disagreements shouldn't be the subject for rule 11 bans under the guise of "dogwhistles" to demonize the person you disagree with and justify a ban - or even a bwoink!

"Unbiased enforcement" with reference to the Overton window of real-life politics isn't something I particularly care about. If the admin team were perfectly representative of the American public in the distribution of their attitudes and those views were all treated with equal validity, the identification of discrimination against and protection of all sorts of different identities, some of which may be overrepresented in an online roleplaying community, would be all over the fucking road.

I would rather the admin team have a common set of values, and I would rather those values be more progressive than not to accommodate more people who have as much business playing the game and enjoying it as I do.

The point of getting multiple sets of eyes on it isn't to make sure you're getting some sort of conservative-progressive fairness doctrine thing - it's to make sure you're not reading too much out of a single data point or idiosyncratic hang-up from one staff member's experience. It's not to dilute or average the values of the most conservative or progressive people involved.

WRT the "All Lives Matter" thing - I don't even call it a movement because on its own, it's not. There's an area of open academic controversy about whether or not you can separate racial attitudes from conservative politics, mostly focused on studying the U.S., but generally both sides agree that explicit racism (and other forms of bigotry though less so) are not socially desirable or as accepted as they once were. They don't disagree that decreasing social acceptability shunts more of the prejudice that exists into acceptable forms; but whether or not you can have conservative or reactionary politics totally separate from prejudice/implicit bias and instead only coming from high-minded ideology is an open question.

Given what the "All Lives Matter" position entails, though, and the evidence on which it stands, I don't really have a problem with saying that favorable or sympathetic references to it should be closed off.

If the goal then is to ban anything OOC that people would have strong feelings about, I completely disagree with that enforcement. Hugboxing the game so no one could theoretically get offended is incredibly lame and honestly people should grow a thicker skin if they can't hear the word "abortion" IC without slapping ahelp and having a mental breakdown.

The goal is not to ban anything OOC that people would have strong feelings about. When people have understandably strong feelings about something because it might reasonably convey the sense that other players in the community see them or those they care about as less than human, the goal is to not provide a safe space or rehab facility for assholes who feel entitled to that expression at the expense of other people just trying to enjoy the game.

[dendydoom]

there is no rule that can be written that's succinct, clear and to the point yet covers all the nuances of what construes politics. our aim is to eject the expression of bigotry from the community, which is often couched inside political beliefs, from both sides of the aisle.

by adding "is this political?" to the list of questions that admins have to answer when dealing with a situation will add more political chin wagging, not less. internal discussions, appeals, peanut debates, etc will all go the route of "but was this *really* political?" and it will be a nightmare.

here's what i'm asking myself when i see a situation like this ingame: "is this person trying to make the round better for other players or worse?" oftentimes that's not always clear, so it requires further investigation, more evidence, discussing it with the player, etc. people can do political-style gimmicks and make an excellent round. i've seen the captain get "impeached", other crew run "for president of space", we have uprisings, anti-corporate/capitalist sentiment, space communist russians, the space IRS, all that kind of stuff that's in good fun. but i've also seen a lot of "i want to upset X group of people" and they will use whatever means or messaging, political or otherwise, to translate it into game terms and affect those people. i don't care what methods those people are using to shit up the game, i will be asking them to stop.

every admin will vibe check this stuff differently, and it does little good to extrapolate each part of the investigation and examine it in its own vacuum - because that's not how it's considered by admins. we collate all the evidence, take a big step back, look at the overall picture, go "hmm" a lot, then make a decision that we think will be best for the round. these types of calls are hard to make - and they're often the ones that get a supportmin ping in bus to discuss it between multiple admins.

[kieth4]

For those that don't know, supportmin is a self assigned discord tag for admins which can be pinged to help on servers or in discussions or w/e

[dragomagol]

Code: Select all

[2023-10-26 03:30:28.891] GAME-SAY: Purotozilla/(Jimmy Holiday) "WOAAAHHHHH GUESS WE KNOW WHY SHE CALLS HERSELF CLARA "WHITE"" (Library (60,101,3))

I wasn't attacking anyone.

The station name was something similar to an IRL policitally-charged slogan
You made a comment about race, continuing and amplifying the effect of the slogan instead of reporting it
You were called out IC for the above
You got killed by a heretic

When you're making the implication that something someone does IC is because they are white, what did you think would happen?

[iwishforducks]

Code: Select all

[2023-10-26 03:30:28.891] GAME-SAY: Purotozilla/(Jimmy Holiday) "WOAAAHHHHH GUESS WE KNOW WHY SHE CALLS HERSELF CLARA "WHITE"" (Library (60,101,3))

I wasn't attacking anyone.

The station name was something similar to an IRL policitally-charged slogan
You made a comment about race, continuing and amplifying the effect of the slogan instead of reporting it
You were called out IC for the above
You got killed by a heretic

When you're making the implication that something someone does IC is because they are white, what did you think would happen?

they only commented on their last name. i dont really see how they commented on their race at all?

[dragomagol]

Code: Select all

[2023-10-26 03:30:28.891] GAME-SAY: Purotozilla/(Jimmy Holiday) "WOAAAHHHHH GUESS WE KNOW WHY SHE CALLS HERSELF CLARA "WHITE"" (Library (60,101,3))

I wasn't attacking anyone.

The station name was something similar to an IRL policitally-charged slogan
You made a comment about race, continuing and amplifying the effect of the slogan instead of reporting it
You were called out IC for the above
You got killed by a heretic

When you're making the implication that something someone does IC is because they are white, what did you think would happen?

they only commented on their last name. i dont really see how they commented on their race at all?

Why do you think they made the comment? Do you think it would have been the same if they said "Guess we know why they call the captain Clara Hendrickson?"

[iwishforducks]

Why do you think they made the comment? Do you think it would have been the same if they said "Guess we know why they call the captain Clara Hendrickson?"

it would not have been the same, because the irony of the situation is that someone named the station a politically charged dog whistle that's sometimes used by white racists, and the person-naming-the-station's last name is white. nowhere does the person's race come into the equation

[Cheshify]

We need to handle this case-by-case and can't make any broad bans of language beyond banning the expression of bigotry, which we already do.
Dogwhistles are specifically very difficult to detect so placing a blanket ban without nuance would be unproductive.

Cheshify- I wrote it
Fikou - ok
TheBiblemelts - ya