I. INTRODUCTION Spoiler Hey y'all! If you're a dirty Forum hobo like me who likes to troll the shoutbox and stalk the Report Abuse / Ban Appeal sections, you may have noticed that there have been a lot more threads in these sections lately, whether it be due to the growth of the server size, increase in Forum usage, or whatever. As more reports happen, and as more bans are dealt out, there also happens to be more unrest throughout the Forums (especially throughout the shoutbox) regarding how a Report Abuse thread is handled by Staff. To be perfectly honest, I think most of the criticism is unwarranted as they are nonsensical complaints emerging from personal grievances, mostly due to not reading the Terms & Conditions. And it truly tilts me whenever I'm having a pleasant chat with people on shoutbox and someone who got banned in game for Harassment cries about all the sensitive crybabies (see the irony?) in this server. That being said, I do also think many people have brought up very legitimate arguments at least in terms of how holistically speaking, there seems to be a bit of contention on how different levels of Harassment are given the same punishment, and how the criteria for a successful kill-stealing report is a bit too narrow and confusing. Regardless of anyone's opinions, I think there is a reason that so many people have been debating these issues throughout the Forums. As such, I wanted to compile some points of debate and data so that we can have a comprehensive thread as a way to jump start an honest, transparent discussion and tackle these issues together. Cool. Let's begin! II. HARASSMENT POLICY Spoiler People have brought up a lot of comments about how Harassment, Verbal Abuse, and general "Objectionable Behavior" is handled on this server, especially with the strict zero tolerance policy currently in place regarding offensive language. I think the most common lines of complaint I hear revolve somewhere around... "I was never warned that this was ban-worthy?" "How come I was banned, but this person wasn't?" "This is considered ban-worthy? What is wrong with this server? What is wrong with these players? What is wrong with the state of our society? What is wrong with me????" Anyways, the crux of the argument is this: "Why are minor offenders and malicious abusers being treated the same?" The point of any system of punishment is to encourage penitence. In other words, whenever a player uses language that is offensive to another player, they receive a punishment as a way for them to learn of their mistakes and not repeat it. Sometimes, an honest mistake would warrant a lesser punishment. A light slap on the wrist. Other times, a deliberately malicious and truly heinous action would require a much harsher punishment. A heavy spanking of the buttox. As such, my suggestion as a way to tackle at least a part of this issue is implementing a graduated banning system for a first offense Harassment. For example, this person should definitely serve a 3-day ban for going out of their way to verbally abuse someone. [P1] nice brain [P1] r****d [P1] go back to ur safe space But maybe this person only deserves a 1-day ban to serve as a warning, who was just talking to a friend in Leafre. [P1] sup [P2] hey n***a And maybe this person should receive a 7-day ban for them to really reflect upon their actions, which were completely unacceptable. Or maybe something this severe should be considered a Moderate Infraction with a harsher punishment code rather than a Minor Infraction (IE: Differentiating "Verbal Abuse" and "Offensive Language"). [P1] what an a*shole [P2] sry [P1] f**king c**t [P1] f**k this b***h [P1] how can you be this much of a dumbf***k [P1] the one flaw of mapleroyals [P1] everyone speaks f**king chinese These texts are all taken from actual Report Abuse threads, where each offender was banned three days for Harassment. The number of days for ban I suggested are not concrete suggestions; they're just examples to quantify my point. The specifics of a graduated banning system is something that would definitely warrant more discussion, especially from Staff. But the main point of this system is to simultaneously enforce the current zero tolerance policy on hateful language, while also taking intent and severity of each report into concern. I can definitely understand how the Staff believes that any type of word that discriminates against any group of marginalized people shouldn't be said in public. But I can also understand how many of the community members believe that a player who drops the n-word to their friend in All Chat read by a random passerby should not be held to the same level of punishment as a player who consistently stalks another player with repetitive derogatory slurs. We should also keep in mind that being a global server, words are perceived differently by diverse players who come from all walks of life. Although I agree that derogatory words definitely should not be used freely in public, there are many players who perceive these words to be simple American slang and do not realize them to be offensive slurs. I've had players ask in shoutbox for a list of words that are considered offensive in this server, as they honestly had no idea. Additionally, even many Americans come from specific communities (such as myself) where these slurs are in fact, used as everyday slang. Sure, a three-day warning ban may not be that big of a deal. But I think the important idea to consider is the principle behind the current equal treatment between those who make honest communicative mistakes, and those who truly seek to ruin the experience of other members in the community. I also admit that I think there's a lot of potential contention with this system, and one thing that immediately comes to mind for me is that it requires a lot of personal discretion from GMs. Although many other aspects of the T&C are also under personal discretion by Staff, this may lead to a lot of unintentional inconsistencies and would require even more taxing mental labor for all the Minor Infractions that occur on this server, so I would love to hear y'alls thoughts. III. KILL-STEALING POLICY Spoiler With any Ban Appeals, the most frequent excuse is "I didn't know it was a bannable offense." To which the most obvious response is "Well it's in the T&C which you agreed to before playing." Which totally makes sense, right? But how come when it comes to reporting kill-stealers, the onus is on the victim to explain the rules to the offender? I'm specifically talking about the bolded section of the kill-stealing report criteria below: You asking a person to leave as you would prefer that they didn't train there with you or loot your items, just saying: 'cc (plz)' is not accepted. You explaining to them that you are the mapowner, showing the ~mapowner by command and explaining killstealing is not allowed on MapleRoyals by the Terms & Conditions. Time stamps (using the ~servertime command) of at least two minutes apart OR a ~bosshp difference from each other where the person is still actively killstealing you despite your attempts to make them aware that killstealing you is unwanted. Based on what I've seen in the Report Abuse section, a lot of kill-stealing reports get closed because they do not properly follow these exact guidelines, mainly to do with explaining the T&C. I think far too often in these reports, there are obvious kill-stealers getting away with their actions because the victim didn't explain the T&C to the offender clearly enough. I've noticed a report where even the threat of a report (which implies that their actions break the rules) does not constitute as enough. Which I can understand, since it's not an explicit explanation of the rules as stated in the T&C. But I think this requirement should be done away with altogether. Because shouldn't the offender already be aware that kill-stealing will result in a ban, since they, like any other player, were responsible for reading and complying to the T&C before playing on the server? And like the breach of any other rules, shouldn't they have been aware of the rules before committing the crime? We don't require Harassment victims to remind their offenders of the T&C, so why do we require kill-stealing victims to do so? And to reiterate from before, English is not the primary language of many players in this server. It may be difficult to communicate to others in a clear and/or effective way that under the MapleRoyals T&C, kill-stealing is a bannable offense. I think the other criteria are definitely reasonable. The person should be clearer than just saying "cc pls" to a kill-stealer. The ~mapowner command is necessary to show proof of who actually had ownership over the map. Time stamps are necessary to show proof that the kill-stealing happened over an actually significant duration of time. And unedited screenshots are necessary to show proof that the evidence being offered has not been tampered with. Lastly, even if the current criteria were not to be changed, I think players can still benefit a lot when Staff respond specifically to which criteria was not met with each reports, instead of Staff simply informing a player that their report does not meet the criteria (I noticed that they do this sometimes, but not very frequently). I know from the Staff's point-of-view it may seem obvious on what qualifies as an acceptable report. But based on my personal readings of these cases, and based on the experience of players who have had multiple reports rejected, I think a bit of clarity on each report can help the community better understand the kill-stealing report policy, thus allowing Staff to ban more kill-stealers and discourage the practice. Because it's not that people aren't reading how to properly report kill-stealing. Based on the past 100 kill-stealing reports in the Forums, 79% were correctly formatted, but only 19% met all the criteria and led to a successful ban. This means that four in five people who reported a kill-stealer read and followed the instructions as listed in the kill-stealing report criteria thread. But only one in five people were able to fully comprehend and complete each requirement. That being said, I will qualify these statistics and throw out there that although most of them missed the "explaining kill-stealing as breaking the T&C" criteria (~60%), a good chunk of them also missed some of the more obvious criteria like ~mapowner or ~servertime (~25%). IV. MISCELLANEOUS SUGGESTIONS Spoiler Besides the two previous suggestions, I also have a couple of miscellaneous suggestions for the Forums that don't require in-depth analyses, but wanted to mention to hear feedback. 1. Anonymous Section for Ban Appeals. As someone who clearly loves to gander through the juicy drama that is the Ban Appeals section, I also believe that people should have a right to go through this process without public scrutiny. Or at least without my personal scrutiny, I guess. 2. More Game Masters? I obviously don't know the specifics of the staffing procedure on this server, but considering the time it takes to respond to player queries, and considering that I see someone begging for GM assistance on shoutbox every five minutes (even though the bolded red letters at the top of the shoutbox explicitly tell you to not do that), I can't help but assume that more GMs on this server couldn't hurt. I've seen GM applications by a lot of super qualified and intelligent veteran players, and I think they may be able to take a lot of burden off the current staff. 3. Forum Moderators! Many years way back when before Royals, I used to play on DestinyMS and the good ol' O.G. OdinMS. Just like I do here, I frequented the Forums as a way to engage with the community, and both servers had Forum Moderators who, well... moderated the Forums. I don't remember much from may days on Odin, but during my brief stint as a Forum Moderator for DestinyMS before our swift and utter annihilation by Nexon lawyers, I'd like to think that our work in enforcing applicable harassment rules, maintaining orderliness in report and appeal formats, and encouraging basic decency in the Forums was helpful to the rest of the team in doing the work that they did. Exhibits A & B on why we could use Forum Moderators. RIP in peace my fragile ego. V. DISCLAIMER: PLS READ B4 U POST Spoiler I talked about a lot of things in this thread, so I think it's important to throw out a couple of disclaimers. Please read this before you post. Thank you! 1. This is not a debate about political correctness or sensitivity. Please do not clutter this thread with complaints of "petty crybabies" and whatnot in this server. 2. This is not an assembly for public shaming. Please do not clutter this thread with complaints of people you reported and think should have been banned, but weren't. 3. This is not a soapbox to air your grievances. Please do not clutter this thread with complaints of that time you insist you were "unjustly banned" by Kai for saying something stupid. That being said, I would definitely love to hear any insights from your personal experiences with the current Report Abuse system. As long as it's respectful and relevant to the issues at stake. Thanks everyone for taking the time to read through all of this. I look forward to everyone's thoughts!
Great input my friend. Anyhow, I generally agree with most points made here, besides the fact I honestly think it isn't our place as players to question the staff's hiring/recruiting decisions. I mean, look at how long Kai and Yanir have been interns for, and still are. Recruiting more new GMs will take more time and effort from the few veteran staff members, and since they are interns there's only so much they can do (no disrespect intended, I know both are working very hard and doing a great job). That might not even be the reason they aren't recruiting more GMs, as I said, it's not my place or any other player's to question.
The GM's won't implement a graduated banning system because it'll increase the amount of discretion needed by GM's, something they are trying to eliminate entirely.
Why dont we go back to the way the report abuse section used to be in the beginning? Let everyone have a say..seemed to work then.
A couple of thoughts, as someone who's been a GM on other servers in the past: There's a tendency for some staff members on private servers to give more leeway than others. I can't say for certain that this happens on Royals specifically, but it is a tendency. There are situations where something minor but punishable happens, and it's decided to reduce the punishment or let the offense slide entirely. Staff members may not realize they're doing this, or it may be a personal policy of lenience. This server's policy of tempbanning for most offenses, rather than permbanning, is extremely lenient and easygoing. I was a bit shocked, honestly, but it's grown on me. Just something to think about.
Thanks for your thoughts! And I suppose I wasn't clear with my tone about that suggestion, so I'll clarify that I wasn't questioning the current status of GM staffing in the sense of "0mg dis is so dumb y r u like this" but moreso out of genuine curiosity. I've seen servers literally fall apart from hasty hiring decisions (ever seen a GM get caught for duping? funny shit lol), so I respect that the administration here goes out of their way to make careful, comprehensive decisions. At the same time, I do think Royals being so well established for so long now allows for a selection from many qualified candidates if they were willing—especially considering like how you said, the current interns (along with the other GMs) seem to be quite overworked. Thanks for sharing. I don't remember much about in-game rules during Destiny, but we often immediately perma-banned trolls who spammed the Forums because it just wasn't worth the patience (our Forums were also lit af and got hella bots and trolls). But I think my point here (at least in terms of Section II) is less about leniency, but more about fairness. I'm not saying we should be more lenient with the 3-day ban, but that it should be graduated to match the crime. If that means making first offense punishments harsher with 3 days for minor accidental language but 7 days for serious verbal abuse, that's totally fair.
It hasn't happened often, but there have been times when someone was banned for a long period of time despite it being a first offence when it was really bad. I believe the person being reported was threatening to find the person and kill them or something completely out of line. On a whole though, I feel like giving out warnings wouldn't really be that great of an idea because it will again cause people to be like "HEY that guy got a warning, why don't I get one??" Another of the reasons why I disagree with separating harassment/verbal abuse reports into more specific types is also because a lot of those are just really subjective. For example, I personally don't think any of the examples given in the harassment section warrant a 7 day ban. But it really depends on the staff member that's reviewing the case and then it would kinda open up an even bigger can of worms of clarity and consistency. Overall, I feel like Royals is already pretty involved in harassment/abuse issues and I don't think they should get involved in it too much further. As far as killstealing, I'm not sure if you were around when people were complaining about it being too easy to get banned. It might be a bit more tedious, but this change in the ksing format was actually put into place because people wanted it to be absolutely positive that someone was ksing rather than perhaps accidentally casting a skill while passing through. While it may also be frustrating, I feel like if you don't get the format the first time, you'll at least know how to do it the 2nd time. I personally agree that we could probably do away with having to tell people that ksing is bannable (seeing as how ignorance is not an excuse to break the rules), but overall I think the format doesn't have an issue. There have been times when people have been banned unfairly due to a single, incriminating screenshot (which could have been a set up, unfortunate misclick, etc), whereas with the current system some people may get away with ksing initially, but usually don't last long. I've also noticed that people who ks often continue to do so, so it's only a matter of time before they get banned anyway. Anonymous Ban Appeals I'm kinda hit or miss on. One reason is that it really provides feedback for the rest of the community to see what is clearly not allowed. It leaves no doubt for people to be like oh, that thing will get me banned and I will probably be found out for it. I probably shouldn't do it. On the other hand, I can see why people might want to avoid public scrutiny why doing so. I guess ultimately I would prefer that they stay public so that we can see how things are dealt with as well, it's just an extra source of information. Furthermore, we also have the option to PM staff members, so I don't think they'd be mad if they PM'd them saying, hey I wanted to know if we could talk about this here because I don't want to receive backlash from the community/be harassed. As a player, I've seen people who have ran away with things like Gen20 though and everyone has smega'd not to run with them etc, so idk if having anonymous ban appeals would really do anything. Usually if you're getting banned, it's because you did something bad and someone found out about it. Either it's bad enough that you're perma'd or it's scummy enough that people will already know about it anyway. One reason I would argue for keeping them private though would be that people don't see how others get unbanned, but I think the current state of things is fine. As far as more GMs, it isn't just veteran, intelligent players that are needed. Looking at the applications, it might seem like people are qualified, but we as players don't have as much access to the game as the admins. They might have seen something or been told something about these players that might not make them a great fit for staff either for personal or professional reasons. While having more coverage would be great, it just isn't that simple to add staff members. Even while trying to choose trustworthy players, there have been bad apples before and because Royals has a pretty significant community, I don't think they want, nor should, add staff members just because. While it may be frustrating since we can't see all the reasons, I'm sure they themselves are aware of the need for GMs and would add if they found someone compatible. As far as forum moderators, it might be nice to have a few more, but I feel like the staff members are fairly active on the forums as well so it isn't very high priority. On that note, it might be nice to have a few more, but I think despite a few bad apples, Royals has a pretty decent community. Plus, there's no guarantee that a moderator would always be on to see something like what happened in the example, and i'm sure people could just take a full screen ss and report it if it really was bothersome, especially with the new warning point system on the forums. These are just my views and some them were kinda rushed since I'm writing them up in between work. I think for the most part though a lot of the grievances are just due to differences in personality. And I don't think there's anything wrong with being more or less sensitive than anyone else, but I feel like the things that we do have in place are already pretty good at reaching a decent compromise. I feel like any more involvement would make me personally feel like I'm being watched over by a babysitter. I guess it's kind of like this for me; Yes, you are allowed to feel upset if something bad happens, but just because you get upset doesn't mean you're entitled to everything (I really wanted to use the word anything here, but you are entitled to some things within the limits of the rules). It just means you're upset, whether it's for a good reason or not. On the flip side, you can say all the rude, toxic things you want. You have the physical capability to do so and no one is stopping you, but that doesn't free you from the responsibility of your actions since there are again, set rules that specifically state that it won't be allowed. On a separate note to touch on the policy of leniency/borderline bans;; From my experience, I kind of view each GM as an individual enforcer of the rules rather than a whole entity, if that makes sense. To make a kind of loose analogy, GMs are kinda like the police of this game and make sure people aren't hacking, are following the rules etc. And while all GMs represent MapleRoyals as a whole, they are also their own person and have their own individual beliefs and understandings. Kind of like how police in real life represent ____PD, but ultimately use their own discretion to hand out a ticket or not. For example, if I was going 1 mile over the speed limit,got pulled over, and was given a ticket, I could argue that it's really petty and borderline and that I easily could have been given a warning. Ultimately though, I'm still technically breaking the rules so I have to take responsibility for it. Now, most cops probably won't ticket me for 1 mph over, or even 5, but there are some that will and if that does happen, I really don't have anything to say except take responsibility for it. I feel like borderline bans/reports are kind of the same idea. I know the GMs talk to each other about complicated issues, but if it's honestly cut and dry, no matter how borderline "bad" it might be, there's really no reason to have a 2nd input and GMs should be trusted to make their own decision on those cases.
ME READING THIS POST So the idea of separating Harassment and Verbal Abuse or giving out Warnings, like most of the crap I originally wrote, were just examples. What I've been trying to do is offer examples to help think critically about the principle itself: If some offenses are worse than others, why are they all being treated the same? Regardless, I do definitely agree with you that consistency is a huge concern, which is why I mentioned it in the original post as well. In a way, it seems like people who commit these kinds of offenses will be butthurt about being punished regardless of how the punitive system is set up. As for kill-stealing, my issue isn't formatting. You bring up a good point about people being banned too easily in the past, and I agree with that. Essentially, my only issue with the current system is the victim having to explain the Terms & Conditions to the offender, which is the reason most kill-stealing reports are rejected. Sure the offender will probably just go on and do it again until they're eventually caught, but why not try and remediate the issue in the first place? I think you make a good argument about Ban Appeals, but I still think at least the option to post anonymously should be allowed. If players can go out of their way to PM a Staff member regarding their ban, why not make the entire process of anonymity accessible in the first place? Sure a person may be blacklisted by the community or judged by the public anyways, but I think players should be given an accessible way to have a private conversation about their ban regardless. I'm also not a fan of the way other members can "like" certain appeals or GM responses, which can make it feel all the more like a public shaming galley. Not that I can really criticize, since I literally do exactly that lmao. But even if we were to establish an anonymous section for Ban Appeals, I do think there will be enough players posting non-anonymously as a way for other players to learn about how the Staff handles various offenses. And for staffing concerns, that more or less answers my questions. As someone without much experience in the Royals community, I purposely placed it as a minor suggestion as a way to gain some clarity on staff perspectives. I know my original post is probably not very well organized despite having all those pretty sections, considering that it is mostly a giant wall of jumbled text. So I wanted to clarify for everyone reading that this thread is not about "you should do this, this, and this instead of that." It was mainly about "here are the complaints that a lot of players have brought up, what are the main issues at stake and what can we do about them?"
Excellent points here and I agree with all the suggestions. The context in which a word is used is arguably more important than the use of the word itself. A lot of these blanket bans issued for the use of vulgar words never took into account the context in which the player used the word. Moreover I'd further like to point out that the offending players in a lot of the cases did not say the word to cause harm to anyone. Banning people without even giving them a verbal in game warning does a disservice to this community. In fact I'd go as far to say that it actually does the exact opposite of what the administration is trying to do.(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect)
I like the post overall and agree with many things... I agree with the KS point, where it seems like the people doing the KSing are getting away with an 'ignorance claim' whereas people getting banned for language and such are expected to have read the T&C and know better. I know you said you agree that derogatory words should not be used in public on this game however it still seems like you are defending them, sorry if I'm wrong. There's a reason there is buddy chat, guild chat, whispers... you don't NEED to speak like that in All chat, or at least if you do don't do it in the middle of a town or something go somewhere actually private. I don't care if you are just talking to your friend, I do not want to be playing a game and have to see words like f*g or ni***. What happened to people where they can't just say 'hey dude' 'hey bro' now you have to use a racist term? I don't get it. Maybe I'm just old fashioned but I never understood how the desensitization of the N word has become such a big thing. People actually trying to defend their use of this word, stating they meant it in a friendly way or they changed the last letter, etc. etc. Most of which are younger kids who don't even know the impact that word has on a lot of people (not an excuse with all the social media and access to the internet, there's no reason you wouldn't know that it is a bad word). I think a ban for that word is perfectly reasonable if only to hopefully stop them from making the same stupid mistake and using that word in public where you could possibly get a lot more than just a ban (aka the crap beaten out of you). There is nothing friendly about a word used to put down an entire race of people. My little brother uses that word too and it drives me nuts and now he knows to not use it around me anymore. People who use it simply need to grow up. I would be completely against any change to the bad language rule other than it getting harsher. This is a joke, right? Context doesn't matter when their are rules in place, otherwise someone would have to use their own judgment every time it happens and think 'Hmmm were they just being funny or were they being racist...?' and that is ridiculous. There is no language I have seen bans for on this server other than specific derogatory words that reference a specific group of people... so you really are just trying to defend THOSE words here and I think that is pretty messed up. The only thing I agree with you on is that a person should know why they got banned without having to make a ban appeal. They shouldn't just get randomly banned and have no clue why.
Let's take a look at the different scenarios in which the n-word is used. If a person were to use the word as an expletive as opposed to a racial epithet then that person should not be punished for simply trying to better convey their message to an audience. For instance if a news reporter were to say the word on live television to better explain the situation for which it was used would that be so wrong? The intent was not to cause harm but rather it was to better express his/herself to his/her viewers. President Obama's actually used the word as has news reporters multiple times on live television without any repercussions. For both those situations however, the context in which the word was used is key. (Obama uses n-word: http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/22/polit...ace-relations-marc-maron-interview/index.html) (Don Lemon using n-word live: ) Another point I'd like to address is the assumption that I am defending the use of the n-word when used in an epithetic manner. That is clearly not my intention here. Rather I'm looking at a more broader view of what it is the ban is trying to accomplish. If the point of banning the word is to surpress it's usage and to educate others of it's cultural and historical significance for African-Americans; then blanket banning the word outright I'd argue would be self-defeating. Aiming to educate rather than enforce has historically had better results compared to an outright blanket ban of anything. That's why you see popular social platforms aiming to promote freedom of expression even in its most despicable and hate filled iteration because ultimately the social community will punitively punish the offender. Moreover the word itself has really begun to change from what it used to be back in the 20th century. From a linguistic perspective in a lot of instances the word has become a term of verbal inclusion and endearment between certain sects of the population. The meaning of words change. That is a fact. Dick used to be short for Richard, gay used to mean happy, HOMOPHOBIC SLUR used to (still in come cases) denote a cigarette. EDIT: ^ You see that? I can't even make an argument properly without being censored.
I get what you are trying to say. The difference is that the people on this server who use that word are usually under the age of 18 (I've never heard anyone use that term, even 'friendly' past high school) and are NOT news reporters reporting on the term. I am more than OK to accept a reporter using the word when talking about the significance of the word, the use of the word by someone, etc. That is EXTREMELY different than some random tween on a private server saying 'whats up n***' to their friend. And trust me, ask any person who takes offense to that word if they agree the word has 'changed in meaning' lately. If by changed meaning you mean teens who think they are cool and listen to rap music and just spout out anything they hear, well then yea that's changed. I don't agree that it takes anything away from the derogatory meaning though. I just don't get why people think they are cool using that word, and can't come up with anything other than a word that was used in a discriminatory way.
I love how you keep trying to make the use of the N-word acceptable on a Maplestory private server. Reasons when it's "okay": If you're reporting fact. Court transcripts are a classic example of this. Fiction and non-fiction writing. Huckleberry Finn is another classic example. The reason it's not censored is because by doing so, you remove the educational-learning aspect about the impact this word has had, especially in America, over the last 200 years. Not to mention it was written what, 140 years ago? Hello. Music and comedy. I'm a firm believer in there being no limits in either of those venues. The difference? No one has to publish your music, and satire/comedy is as old as the air we breath. You're supposed to feel a wide range of emotions, and ya know what? Good comedy leaves no rock undisturbed. It's not individually hateful without picking on everyone at some point. Not to mention, no one has to hire you either. Reasons why it's not acceptable here: This is a Maplestory Private server. I can't imagine, ANY situation, where the use of the word in all chat or a smega should be accepted. It's been said again and again that it's use in guild/friend chat is entirely different. You can remove hateful friends and guildies, you can't remove them (on your own) from the game in all chat. Why? If you get caught, you're of course gonna claim it's innocent. "I didn't mean it that way!" Freedom of speech doesn't apply in any way For one, this server is based in the UK not the US Two, we aren't on a public side walk. You agree to the ToS before playing, which means you already agreed the Mods have full right to ban anyone for anything. Three. My favourite, you have zero rights to be here. Playing this game is a privilege, one that can be removed at any movement. This ties into number 2. Four, and lastly, free speech is not all inclusive when it does apply. I cannot scream fire in a crowded movie theater. Other examples exist, feel free to look them up, hate speech is one of those not covered under free speech. I don't know. I guess I just don't get it. There are any number of words that are generically used for expletives. You do not need to use a word that's entire history save for the last like 20 years, is grounded in a deep seated hatred for a group of people whose only difference is skin colour. A hatred that still permeates our culture today. For gods sake, people wanted to impeach Obama because they held the opinion that his birth certificate was suspect, but Trump has done everything in the book to warrant treason, and those same people are suddenly HUGE fans of Russia and his undisclosed secret meetings are just great. I HATE the term "White Privilege", and that's what people use to describe this. It's a lot more simpler. People are just racist. They still have racist views and it shows through their political views. There's a MILLION other examples of this. By the by, your intention when using a word means jack. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Also, at your last part, yes, the British term for a cigarette is a homophobic slur. You're trying to justify the use of one word because another word has a long history of documented use as a common item. That does not change it's history. If I said such word in all chat. Regardless of the chat before and after, there's no way to objectively tease out which way you meant it. You don't know which Royalers are gay and will take offense with it. You don't know which Royalers are black and will take offense to the N word, and don't even try to tell me that because some rappers of African descent have found using the N-word empowering in their work, it does NOT mean every black person is suddenly cool with it's use. I truly wish you'd stop with this. It's not going to change. It makes my heart ache because you're trying SO hard to make a word that has no place here to be accepted so what, so you can use it jokingly? Great, now people can use it with the intention of being hurtful. The server will be so much better (end sarcasm). The reason this server is so great is the staff actually cares. I hope you finally put this to bed. If not, well, I'm looking forward to the day you use one of these words (or ANY number of hateful slurs that you ALWAYS bring up in this argument) and you get banned for it. I know that's not very civil of me to say, but you've actually managed to upset me about this on some deeper level. I have a long history with racism and I don't tolerate it, and I'm glad this server doesn't either.
First of all, I used the n-word as an example to respond to the previous post in which I was addressing. I do not have a fetish for the word nor is it apart of my everyday lexicon. Second, a lot of your argument seems to go off tangent and fails to look at the crux of the issue here. I'll reiterate again that I am not defending the use of ethnic slurs as epithets. What I am defending however is that fine line between when players should be banned and when they shouldn't. I want the administration to look at the context in which the word is used then issue bans accordingly. The way the system is set up now you're banned regardless of context. If I was to quote a passage from Hucklyberry Finn as per your example or any other publication that makes use of the word I'd be banned simply because it's been uttered despite my intentions. So what your saying is to ban so as to not insult anyone else? Well here's a list of other words that should be added to the blanket ban as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_slurs Anyone claiming offense to any of those words should be able to have the offender banned simply because he/she uttered the word regardless of the context in which it was used. Does that not seem dangerous to you? And you're right this is a private server owned by Matt. What he says goes however, that does not mean that we can't suggest alternatives to the current rules in place. Perhaps that's why IEatEmoKids posted this thread within the feedback subsection of the forums. This is a place to openly discuss, argue, and propose changes to the status quo. I appreciate your civility wherever it cropped up within your post.
You should reread my post more carefully. I'm saying context is irrelevant because there's no reason for the word to be used on Royals. Huckleberry Finn is a published works and that is it's own context. You can quote Twain without the use of the word. This isn't a school, the education aspect is moot, and regardless of how you want to pretext it's use I still stand behind the fact that there's a time and place for everything and Royals is as a whole, not the place for it. Also, Since you didn't read my original post, it makes sense you haven't read anything that the GM's have said either in the past. I remember 2 distinct situations where different GM's said that the use of almost ANY of those words is bannable. The need just hasn't arisen because people don't say them.
I was hoping to not go down this route, but I suppose it was inevitable. I just want to throw out there that the two arguments are not mutually exclusive. You can still evaluate the context even if you deem the act inherently wrong. I understand how it can be perceived that my original post seems to be defending offensive language. However, I want to clarify that for me it's less about excusing the use of offensive language, and more about holding intentional verbal abuse more accountable (although both things should and need to be considered).
One of the biggest issues though is the fact, as mentioned before, someone could easily have meant it rudely and then say it was a joke. GMs would then have to look at it and spend time trying to see the context of it and why it was said and if it was bannable. It's honestly just not worth it. It's a huge waste of time when things could be made simpler by just not allowing the use of it in all chat. There is literally no good reason to allow it except that people want to be able to. And it's not like you can't say it at all, just say it in guild or buddy. Furthermore, intent does not always excuse the outcome. I didn't intend to break the rules/offend someone/be racist/etc, but sometimes that's what happens. Intention, while important and plays a role in maybe setting the severity of an issue, should not determine whether or not it affected someone negatively. You just don't get to decide how the other person feels. You can have 0 malice behind it, but if what was said hurt me, you don't get to decide for me if it's something I should be bothered about or not. That's something for me to determine. I honestly don't see why people find the need to argue about this. It's not like you can't say it at all. Just keep it civil in all chat where people can't avoid things they don't want to read. It's all about courtesy and I don't think we should have to sacrifice the comfort and piece of mind of people just so you can say a word that really isn't necessary.
