I would be more than happy to see much heavier moderation from MtGS staff. The main area in which I post here has a separate standard anyways, and comparably fewer moderation issues despite accounting for a large percentage of site traffic.
The individual is always able to simply block and ignore some individuals they particularly dont want to read from.
Some people arguably cannot make that distinguishing, which is just sad and will produce problems in their lives everywhere and for all eternity.
Yeah, no. We're telling you that's precisely not the case; for all the complaining you do about hurt feelings on your end because someone called you a bigot or a Nazi, you're awfully quick to deprive other people of their rightful emotions. Even if you don't believe that maligning fantasy characters has real life consequences for the people they represent, people are asking you to just please stop sharing those opinions publicly. Atrocious suicide rates for certain minority groups should be ample proof that feelings do matter.
If you truly believe that you have to spread your real life politics into a fantasy game, then we argue entirely different positions.
I truly believe that other people are already spreading their real life politics into a fantasy game when they have to disparage representation at every turn.
I would be interested what you qualify as "bigoted language"...
Now that's a complicated question, and real room for us to engage in good faith. The gist of bigotry or racism is a power imbalance between those in positions of social / economic / political privilege and those in historically subordinated minority groups. Bigoted language further cements the status quo for those who are in power, and undermines the social / economic / political status of those who are not. When I refer to a "microaggression," I mean any seemingly small or trivial behavior or phraseology that, in the aggregate, actually has a harmful psychological effect on the groups in question.
I dont argue for direct insults as should be clear, but as said, its important to make a differentiation between the card game and actual real people.
I struggle to think of a legitimate reason why anyone would be bothered with a fictional black character pretty much anywhere, no matter what the excuse is. Ultimately, though, the problem is when you say something like "I don't like the fact that Kaya (or other token minority character) is on this plane," it makes real live people of color feel uncomfortable. Think of it like repeating an obviously racist joke in front of a good friend who belongs to one of those minority groups, and isn't receptive; does going "ha, JK" at the end really do anything to prevent or relieve hurt feelings, awkwardness, or alienation?
(If someone wants murder in their games, they are totally fine to have that, its a fantasy game, and the inability to separate the game from the real world is painfully idiotic)
Another straw man. We're not talking about violence, though if it were being perpetuated disproportionately against a minority group (cops in general, or lynching) I think we could consider that germane.
"You are not allowed to critique anything of a fictional character"
----
People that are totally fine calling anybody that comes in good faith a Nazi and think thats totally cool, but then go on a crusade to seek out any little possible out of the world excuse to be offended in the name of other people, or supposed minority groups of their own definition ; quite wild, as its a never ending cry for oppression, and the wish for a echo chamber in which any critique is simply silenced and not acknowledged or accepted.
So the entire argument comes down to:
"You are not allowed to critique anything of a fictional character"
You are but when your complaint is that a fictional character doesn't fit into a fictional world because of her skin color is holding an exclusionary opinion. And one which has an Impact on people. The assumption is that "black people don't fit in here" in a world where literally anything is possible. And that has the effect for some that they don't feel they fit in. And it wouldn't matter if a black person had that opinion or a white person as both have the same effect.
Now if you make a non-fiction/historically accurate piece of media set in long ago scandinavia I'd agree that a black character would feel out of place if it wasn't properly explained how and why they are there.But given that Kaldheim is A. a fictional world and B. The how she's there is explained (she's a PW) and the why is probably also going to be explained in the lore.l I don't see how it breaks the immersion other than "It's not normal to have black people here even when there is an explanation for that" and that to me seems like a bigoted opinion. And since its a fictional Universe in the first place there wouldn't need to be an explanation on why there are black people there anyways since you know the rules of a fictional universe can be whatever you want.
It's fine if thats your opinion but you then can't complain that others are of the opinion that you are bigoted as for them you hold a bigoted opinion.
Now if you make a non-fiction/historically accurate piece of media set in long ago scandinavia I'd agree that a black character would feel out of place if it wasn't properly explained how and why they are there.But given that Kaldheim is A. a fictional world and B. The how she's there is explained (she's a PW) and the why is probably also going to be explained in the lore.l I don't see how it breaks the immersion other than "It's not normal to have black people here even when there is an explanation for that" and that to me seems like a bigoted opinion. And since its a fictional Universe in the first place there wouldn't need to be an explanation on why there are black people there anyways since you know the rules of a fictional universe can be whatever you want.
To critique the existence of a black character in a viking inspired world should not be bigoted at all, as its a totally valid critique to have, which not everyone has to share, some might not be ok with Elves being in the same set as well, equally valid critique.
If we ever get a set with rainbows, unicorns and teddy bears dancing in cornfields, people will also critique that if it counteracts their fantasy expectations for a world.
To outright outlaw critique as people cannot accept it to exist is excluding an entire spectrum of the community (as plenty of people have a Viking world in mind thats more inlined with "Thor" or Assassins Creed Valhalla, and its totally natural to express their opinions and critique, while others either share or oppose them, and thats fine, as long as either side can express their opinions without being shunned, insulted and pushed away).
If some hand picked characteristics are pushed over others just to foster a false idea of a hyper sensitive construct of supposed racism is the wild claim.
To outlaw critique in such a way has the the effect that people will not speak their mind anymore, and it builds an echo chamber that suits a particular spectrum, not everyone and not inclusive at all.
Nobody is excluded by the critique, as its all about the game and the fictional characters.
Plenty of sets and settings in which it suits a lot better, with other assumptions and expectations.
To scream "bigot" and "nazi" out of innocent statements and feelings is just as excluding, as its simply an insult and nothing else.
Personal attacks like that are direct insults and nothing else (and you can be dead sure the person wont just let it stand if they are attacked personally).
At this point all you're doing is repeating yourself.
You're still demonstrably wrong. Please re-read my most recent posts (or all of them, for that matter), and see if you can't do a better job of interpreting my position that isn't thoroughly reductionist, willfully blind, and riddled with fallacies. I'm here if you have any questions.
I apologise for locking the thread. I've been busy the last few days, and I need a bit of time to catch up on this conversation and reply to it.
Some of this conversation seems to no longer be about site concerns. I will reiterate the following:
This thread is not an alternate Debate Forum. Please keep all discussion focused on site concerns.
I do not wish to, and will try not to issue warnings/points in this thread. I do not want anyone to have any reservation or fear in bringing forward site concerns while here.
That said, egregious posts - attacks against other users, etc, still do not belong here.
I hope to make my way through this thread and answer any concerns arisen, however, there are a number of open tickets, so it may take some time to get back to this.
I would like to know how the forum intends to implement the policy on 'Inclusion in the MTG Salvation Community'.
Edit: There's been a lot of flaming and snide remarks made by users on the very principles this policy is based upon and I'm tired of seeing our threads devolve just because somebody doesn't like seeing a Black women be the face of a Viking-inspired set.
We will always do what we can to make MTGSalvation a safe place to foster respectful discussion about Magic. We do have to remember that this is a hobby that many people are passionate about, and when passions are high, things can get a bit heated. Moderators are here to try and salve and smooth over those times when things get a bit too passionate, as well as to respond to comments that go beyond the bounds of our community.
If you, or anyone else, finds comments they feel are unsafe, harmful, or go beyond the bounds of our community, we urge you to bring these comments to our attention with the Report feature, and include why you feel the comment is inappropriate.
Our moderators are volunteers, and are only human as well. Sometimes we make mistakes, or simply do not have the knowledge on certain matters. I once received a report based on a derogatory word which I had been previously unaware of, but was able to understand the context of from the explanation of the reporter as well as a bit of research. More explanation is always good.
People will always state their complaints and opinions, some might agree or disagree with (and yea for some a black women (Kaya) in a viking set is an immersion breaking issue, some might see it as a positive, others dont, people are different in their opinions, which isnt an issue, its the entire point of any inclusion, that some will disagree).
If a person take issue about a character being in the set because of their race. That is racism. There is no other word for it. It's literally the issue being discussed. Her race.
This is a fictional game, where Planeswalkers are travelers. They are foreign elements into ANY of these worlds they visit. That's the whole point of Magic. Jace can visit Ixalan, Sorin can visit Zendikar, Arlinn can visit Ravnica. To say that a foreign tourist ruins the immersion or historical accuracy of a world? Because of their RACE?
No. Those statements are not acceptable. It is literally an argument about exclusion based on race, which is the literal definition of racism.
Nevermind historical realities that the Vikings sailed all the way into the Mediterranean, and traded with, and fought, in that region. Considering that Vikings dealt with, dealt in, and took slaves, having Black characters would even NOT be out of context, if we were going for historical accuracy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_slave_trade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_expansion
The Norse also took Baltic, Slavic and Latin slaves. The Vikings kept some slaves as servants and sold most captives in the Byzantine or Islamic markets.[citation needed] The slave trade was one of the pillars of the Norse economy during the 6th through 11th centuries.[citation needed] The Persian traveler Ibn Rustah described how Swedish Vikings, the Varangians or Rus, terrorized and enslaved the Slavs taken in their raids along the Volga River.
The well-known Harald Hardrada would also serve the Byzantine emperor in Palestine as well as raiding North Africa, the Middle East as far east as Armenia, and the island of Sicily in the 11th century, as recounted in his saga in Snorri Sturluson's Heimskringla.[103]
Evidence for Norse ventures into Arabia and Central Asia can be found in runestones erected in Scandinavia by the relatives of fallen Viking adventurers. Several of these refer to men who died in "Serkland" (possibly Arabia).[104]
---
When a post gets completely of topic (or any claim somebody is a "nazi" should be outright removed, its a massive fuel to catapult any discourse out of the window).
Calling someone a Nazi is Flaming, and will be infracted. If you see this behavior occur, please report it.
The result of censoring any opinions and feelings is far worse than a community thats able to work their differences out in favor of the game.
As it is right now, the calls for censorship and moderation in favor of a unified mindset and not allowing any negative opinions about anything is harmful.
I disagree. Not every statement is equally correct, moral, or impactful. We are under no obligation, morally or otherwise, to allow a platform to every kind of speech or opinion. For example, outright hateful speech will never be permitted on this site. The question is thus not about "whether" we can or should moderate, but about "where."
Finding the line between allowing polite and insightful discussion can sometimes be tricky. Sometimes, such as with racism, it's not.
"You are not allowed to critique anything of a fictional character"
This is hyperbole. Of course not everyone will accept or connect with everything about every character. I have criticism on how many aspects of Magic have been handled, such as the retcon of Ugin, and how the Bolas arc ended.
However, when the critique of a character is based upon their race, or their gender, or their gender identity... That's not a critique. That's prejudice.
Since certain communities here are apparently allowed to decide for themselves what language is and is not considered racist, does that privilege extend to me? Can I declare by fiat that any words I use, no matter how discriminatory or likely to drive away other posters, are okay and should be sheltered from the report system?
First off, there's false equivalency here. The Mafia forum has already indicated a direction from moving away from the term 'lynch' which is the term you are objecting to. Secondly, there is the matter of context, usage, and history involved; as well as the cultural implications in areas which are not the United States, which you seem to be repeatedly ignoring.
What we have here is not a group deciding what is and is not racist, it is the understanding that the term has been used in a separate context with a different meaning. They have accepted that the term has charged usage outside of their context, and have made indications towards moving towards different usages.
Let me give you an alternate example, in the word "Retard." Retard is considered an pejorative and offensive word here on MTGS. We do not accept it as an insult, description, or even passing phrase. However, we also understand that the term holds history as a medical term, which though no longer widely acceptable even in that context, could hold legitimate usages. Despite the word having a legitimate context in medical history - the medical profession has moved onward and discontinued usage of the word due to the negative connotations, which came in from an outside context. However, that change occured over a period of time of phasing out the terminology.
That is what is happening here. They have a word within their context and definition, have accepted there is a charged connotation, and are now in the process of phasing out their vocabulary. At this time, we are allowing this change and phasing to occur naturally. Should this natural phase out stall or not occur in good faith, we shall revisit the topic, but at this juncture we do not see any reason to assume any sort of bad faith.
===
In any regard, this entire thing may soon be a moot point, so at current we are awaiting to see how this plays out.
What you neglect to realize (or admit?) is that it takes only one - just one! - person to feel unwelcome in order for that language to be problematic, regardless of context. I've asked a number of people if it mattered if I was BIPOC, and they admitted that, if true, that would indeed be an issue. It's a fairly obvious clue that such language is inherently racist if, when race is actually factored in, you would shy away from using it. The fact that race hasn't been factored in yet is oddly bizarre, considering the site's supposed commitment to inclusion. Your determination here effectively boils down to the following: either all BIPOC people take no issue with words like 'lynch' being used casually on these forums (such an assumption would be willfully blind, ignorant, or both); or it's somehow your prerogative to tell people what they should or should not find offensive. We no longer live in a world where the latter is acceptable, and the excuses you and the community are perpetuating are irrelevant, borderline dog whistles. Frankly, I don't care overmuch how the rest of the world views such a word; any number of Europeans could tell me that the n-word isn't offensive where they're from, and that wouldn't have the slightest impact on how we comport ourselves on this forum. If you're going to make another false equivalency claim to prove that 'lynch' has no such historical baggage, then you're only proving how far out of your depth you are.
--
Also: the very top of the Mafia forum still says Hang 'em high! That's just flagrantly tone-deaf. So... yeah, you don't get to use context as an excuse for this one anyways.
The phase out has arguably stalled; the community decided well before I came along to stop using 'lynch,' and I've been patiently championing its removal since late September. How much time is too much time to stop using a single word? Is it more than 4 months? Because that's where we stand right now, at a minimum.
What do you consider bad faith? Various forum members still have it in their sig; they refuse to edit it from their posts, and actively exclude people from their games who take issue with the word. I've been cussed out and threatened - in private - by a forum member I assumed was mature enough to at least engage in civil discourse on the matter, in a place where such discourse was both welcome and expected. Despite numerous reports, that player has not removed the word from their sig block. Good faith would be intervention from the moderation staff - mods with no conflicts of interest on the matter - in response to such reports; good faith would be said player following moderator requests to that effect.
The point is not yet moot, but if it will be soon that's all the more reason for the site owners and mod staff to act now. It's less a matter of 'if' than 'when,' insofar as the Mafia community's imminent departure from this site is concerned, so as a practical matter you have absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by officially disavowing racist language at this juncture. Perhaps here, when continued ad viewership is no longer a consideration, you can finally bring yourself to do the right thing.
I find it fascinating that its such a "important" goal to hunt down people for a single word and make demands to them to edit their signature and delete posts or re-edit posts long in the past just because someone suddenly decided that a word is for whatever reason not welcome anymore.
You can bet that the vast vast majority have no ill intentions what so ever, so the words themselves dont hurt anybody and they are also have no means to hurt anybody , and frankly, the vast majority of people wont care at all if they read "lynch" or any other words, they accept its a game with its own rules and flavor.
Anybody can feel offended by basically anything, its absolutely impossible to create a space in which everyone is welcome to the fullest extend and anybody is protected by being offended ... thats not a possible end scenario ... the only thing that is possible, is to create a space that fits your very own personal guidelines of what you want to accept and what you dont want to accept.
At some point its much more healthy to accept that other people have a different line to draw what they consider offensive, and that line should never be so much in one direction that it alienates a large portion of the actual people its supposed to serve.
----
Its one thing to point out a supposed problem (which they might not accept as such) , but its an entirely different animal to go ahead and enforce that by penalty and threatening to ban or moderate their personal presentation in a forum.
The broad statement:
"Don't discriminate or make people feel unwelcome."
Is something everyone can agree on, but everyone also has a different understanding on what it actually means.
Speaking your mind is welcome for some, others feel offended if you speak your opinion in their faces.
If you make it impossible for people to speak freely, they will not feel welcome at all, and simply leave if it bothers them too much.
So what you create is a space of people that accept to not speak their mind and never openly disagree with each other, as everyone fears to be threatened and shunned by their community for doing so.
----
I must say, the Mafia community is absolutely welcoming and friendly.
If someone is in such a degree offended by a word that it bothers them, its probably better if they move along and let the people have their fun.
If just 1 person thinks its offensive and 1000 other people have no issue at all, its highly questionable if these 1000 people should suddenly be considered offensive and "guilty", or you simply accept that this 1 person might maybe just integrate more openly and learns that they are personally welcome if they dont try to start a rabble for their personal pleasure to be offended (as thats how it feels, if a person is just artificially offended to wield that as a weapon to put themselves into a superior spotlight, that leaves anybody else in the dark ... thats a very ugly and unwelcoming world that people quite likely are trying to avoid by posting in this forum).
----
Leaving your real world troubles at the front door and embracing a game together is the most welcoming message to send.
I dont want to be in world in which everyone is constantly barraging the other on what they find offensive and how they have to change their language right now as they demand it ... it leads to silly and outright insulting language on its own that people then again feel not welcome in.
It's a fairly obvious clue that such language is inherently racist if, when race is actually factored in, you would shy away from using it. The fact that race hasn't been factored in yet is oddly bizarre, considering the site's supposed commitment to inclusion. Your determination here effectively boils down to the following: either all BIPOC people take no issue with words like 'lynch' being used casually on these forums (such an assumption would be willfully blind, ignorant, or both); or it's somehow your prerogative to tell people what they should or should not find offensive.
Yes, if race were factored in it is racist. That is why outside of the context of a Mafia game, where the term 'lynch' would be difficult to justify without a racial overtone/impact, and would be disallowed. The very argument you make can be used in favor on allowing the term, as the gameplay usage divests it of a racial connotation in that context.
Your attribution of a stance to the site is likewise incorrect. You are falsely attributing an extreme stance to the site to argue against, and that is incorrect, and also the literal definition of a straw man argument.
We have also received no indication that this issue is as prevalent as you make it out to be. So far it does seem that other users are able to identify that the context of the game term is separate from racial connotations.
In addition, even wikipedia does not refer to lynching as a racially charged word. While it explicitly and up front states that lynching of African Americans was common and prevalent, it also shows that lynching has connotations and prevalence across the entire world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching
That said, wikipedia DID however also tag lynching as part of their series on discrimination, which does show the word to be racially charged.
Also: the very top of the Mafia forum still says Hang 'em high! That's just flagrantly tone-deaf. So... yeah, you don't get to use context as an excuse for this one anyways.
The phase out has arguably stalled; the community decided well before I came along to stop using 'lynch,' and I've been patiently championing its removal since late September. How much time is too much time to stop using a single word? Is it more than 4 months? Because that's where we stand right now, at a minimum.
This is something to look into. I will admit that we have not discussed what the ideal timeline would be within the staff, and this does seem to be an important piece of information in order to determine what the timeline would look like.
What do you consider bad faith? Various forum members still have it in their sig; they refuse to edit it from their posts, and actively exclude people from their games who take issue with the word. I've been cussed out and threatened - in private - by a forum member I assumed was mature enough to at least engage in civil discourse on the matter, in a place where such discourse was both welcome and expected. Despite numerous reports, that player has not removed the word from their sig block. Good faith would be intervention from the moderation staff - mods with no conflicts of interest on the matter - in response to such reports; good faith would be said player following moderator requests to that effect.
There will always be individuals who, for one reason or another, are resistant to change. Ideally, once the general Mafia group has accepted and transitioned on, we would start to officially send reminders and warnings, and eventually infractions to stop using the term. The mod staff will discuss what an ideal timeline should be.
The point is not yet moot, but if it will be soon that's all the more reason for the site owners and mod staff to act now. It's less a matter of 'if' than 'when,' insofar as the Mafia community's imminent departure from this site is concerned, so as a practical matter you have absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by officially disavowing racist language at this juncture. Perhaps here, when continued ad viewership is no longer a consideration, you can finally bring yourself to do the right thing.
What, precisely, is there to gain? What I see is an action that will have no discernable impact, short of being a position of spite on the way out the door.
When/(if) the Mafia community leaves, I would personally prefer to simply move on from it, and archive the forums. With the Mafia forum gone, this resolves the issue, as there would no longer be a context for the use of the word 'lynch,' and we would be able to unilaterally make it unacceptable. Should users wish to reopen a Mafia forum in the future then, we would be able to do so with a fresh start, and caveat the term as unacceptable from the very beginning. This seems a much more practical solution.
I find it fascinating that its such a "important" goal to hunt down people for a single word and make demands to them to edit their signature and delete posts or re-edit posts long in the past just because someone suddenly decided that a word is for whatever reason not welcome anymore.
You can bet that the vast vast majority have no ill intentions what so ever, so the words themselves dont hurt anybody and they are also have no means to hurt anybody , and frankly, the vast majority of people wont care at all if they read "lynch" or any other words, they accept its a game with its own rules and flavor.
Anybody can feel offended by basically anything, its absolutely impossible to create a space in which everyone is welcome to the fullest extend and anybody is protected by being offended ... thats not a possible end scenario ... the only thing that is possible, is to create a space that fits your very own personal guidelines of what you want to accept and what you dont want to accept.
I need to address a few things here:
Just because a person or group of people do NOT find something offensive, does not mean that it is not offensive.
'Lynch' is a term with racial connotations within the United States.
People are still threatened with lynching in the United States, and these acts ARE hate crimes, and ARE racially charge. Though ultimately found to be a case of misunderstanding, the NASCAR incident this past year shows that a noose IS problematic, that intentionally putting a noose IS a hatecrime, and also showed the support of many people coming together who realized this.
Words absolutely CAN hurt people.
There is a line that needs to be drawn, and generally speaking that line would get drawn between where an individual gets offended, and where something is an recognized offence to a larger group of people as a whole.
Furthermore, as stated above even Wikipedia includes their article on lynching as part of their series on discrimination. See the right hand bar. This further shows that the term is racially charged. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching
When being called a racist is worse than engaging in racism...well, no wonder why we still have problems <shrug>
Of course, people find fault where there is none, redefine words to fit their warped understanding, and then make serious accusations where there shouldn't be, as if they thrive off of contention...
Point proven to TheOnlyOne652089! No wonder why we still have problems.
Seriously, freaking kudos to bobthefunny for having to deal with so much stupidity on this forum, let alone this thread.
People find fault where it's been hiding in plain site, ignored all along for the continued benefit of the privileged class; words will always be redefined to fit the advancement of society and our growing understanding of the world around us; and serious elucidation is attempted when and where it needs to be, even on a website dedicated to cardboard, because awareness and education are paramount in battling the ongoing barriers to equity for historically subordinated minority groups.
To live in the past is to shroud yourself in darkness against the dawning of a more enlightened era, and in that darkness all one can perceive is their own blindness.
To live in the past is to shroud yourself in darkness against the dawning of a more enlightened era, and in that darkness all one can perceive is their own blindness.
To put your own view above others and demand they change according to your image of the future is anything but a bright future.
If something is good, its worth conserving. Why should you keep burning down bridges forever and ever, just to build new bridges and repeat the cycle of destruction and reinvention, if the existing bridges are perfectly fine, put work into making them stronger and conserve them for the future, as we learn from the past, if we choose to not ignore the past and repeat the same mistakes over and over again (or making it even worse).
Advocating for oppression, suppression and banning other opinions is not enlightenment, its backwards into the dark ages, when church and rulers did the same to prevent other opinions toppling their rule.
Having as many different opinions as possible and a living discussions of free minds is much more valuable than forcing everyone into the same mindset and banning what some claim as "wrong think" (as the definition of what is labeled as "wrong think" is all about whos in charge, and thats incredible dangerous).
Banning words is a problem.
If truth is spoken, people will always feel offended, as it shakes their own world view, and thats not a bad thing, its the entire point of rethinking your own position.
If someones opinion is making you angry, you should question yourself if you are not on a road of cruelty and violence, as thats what anger ends up in.
Cruelty and violence will never spread peace and happiness, it just destroys parts of humanity.
Having a different opinion is fine, the ability to communicate to each other without hitting each other with clubs is always preferable.
Feeling offended (even by proxy) and using that to oppress peoples words is just using a club and hitting them, thinking that will do any good.
Instead, the supposed offender will just get angry at you, and all you produced is a growing hate against yourself.
This produces more problems than it wants to solve, and even worse, it does so under the mantle of helping ... help who exactly?
The very same people throw grave insults around all the time, advocating for other opinions to be banned and moderate according to their world view, as they cant handle other peoples opinions, the sheer existence of another opinion is already offensive to that breed of mindset, thats neither healthy for them or anybody else.
----
Its more important than ever to be able to accept other opinions.
And opinions can be harsh, thats not offensive, thats just the true and honest opinion, and theres nothing more valuable than being told the honest truth in your face, as its the only way to learn about what people really believe and think.
If someone tells you what they think and the response to that is hitting them with clubs and shunning them, the only thing you get is that people wont tell you what they think anymore, and leave you alone in the shadows, till one day, you wake up surprised how all the people started to conspire against you.
And you cant change what people truly believe and think by enforcing your own view upon them.
You can put out information you believe to be facts, they can read them or not, if they change their mind, fine, if they dont, thats also fine.
Banning words is always a weapon to oppress people and their opinion, its a method to drive people away, and doing so is a snowball for more banning, and its too easy to keep hacking away and ban more, especially if the opposition gets weaker and it becomes a frenzy.
----
People too easily feel compelled to White Knight all causes, no matter if its actually worthwhile to do so.
If there is not real problem, making them up is also a widespread issue.
If something is not celebrated, its not hated, plenty of room in between to like or dislike something.
In a world like ours, where only a 5-star rating is acceptable, and even a 4-1/2 star rating is already an expression of hate is quite showing the extreme of where people draw their lines.
People that are so sheltered from other opinions that the sheer existence of them is offending them, thats wild, even more so if people believe themselves to be on a moral-crusade to enforce and bring "enlightenment" to the people, if they want it or not ... its a moral spiral downwards.
(Fake Woke, trending hard everywhere its not suppressed, worth a watch)
I will be stepping down as an Administrator of this site in the near future. Due to circumstances beyond this site, I have found myself unable to dedicate the time and energy necessary towards the tasks and responsibilities required of me here. This is not fair nor healthy for anyone involved, so I will be stepping down on April 11th. You may still see me around the forums after that time, and I hope you will still say a friendly hello and join in the discussion.
This thread will be unpinned and locked from that time forward.
I will be stepping down as an Administrator of this site in the near future. Due to circumstances beyond this site, I have found myself unable to dedicate the time and energy necessary towards the tasks and responsibilities required of me here. This is not fair nor healthy for anyone involved, so I will be stepping down on April 11th. You may still see me around the forums after that time, and I hope you will still say a friendly hello and join in the discussion.
This thread will be unpinned and locked from that time forward.
ShadowLancer will remain an active Administrator, and we will be looking to see if any of our active moderators are willing to step up to a more global role. As soon as I have more information, I will share it.
The individual is always able to simply block and ignore some individuals they particularly dont want to read from.
Works well enough, without going overboard.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
Yeah, no. We're telling you that's precisely not the case; for all the complaining you do about hurt feelings on your end because someone called you a bigot or a Nazi, you're awfully quick to deprive other people of their rightful emotions. Even if you don't believe that maligning fantasy characters has real life consequences for the people they represent, people are asking you to just please stop sharing those opinions publicly. Atrocious suicide rates for certain minority groups should be ample proof that feelings do matter.
I truly believe that other people are already spreading their real life politics into a fantasy game when they have to disparage representation at every turn.
Now that's a complicated question, and real room for us to engage in good faith. The gist of bigotry or racism is a power imbalance between those in positions of social / economic / political privilege and those in historically subordinated minority groups. Bigoted language further cements the status quo for those who are in power, and undermines the social / economic / political status of those who are not. When I refer to a "microaggression," I mean any seemingly small or trivial behavior or phraseology that, in the aggregate, actually has a harmful psychological effect on the groups in question.
I struggle to think of a legitimate reason why anyone would be bothered with a fictional black character pretty much anywhere, no matter what the excuse is. Ultimately, though, the problem is when you say something like "I don't like the fact that Kaya (or other token minority character) is on this plane," it makes real live people of color feel uncomfortable. Think of it like repeating an obviously racist joke in front of a good friend who belongs to one of those minority groups, and isn't receptive; does going "ha, JK" at the end really do anything to prevent or relieve hurt feelings, awkwardness, or alienation?
Another straw man. We're not talking about violence, though if it were being perpetuated disproportionately against a minority group (cops in general, or lynching) I think we could consider that germane.
I think a little extra moderation would only serve to elevate the discourse here, considering how it's usually brought low (and by whom).
Then you must really enjoy the pleasure of my company, seeing as how you've yet to put me on ignore.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
"You are not allowed to critique anything of a fictional character"
----
People that are totally fine calling anybody that comes in good faith a Nazi and think thats totally cool, but then go on a crusade to seek out any little possible out of the world excuse to be offended in the name of other people, or supposed minority groups of their own definition ; quite wild, as its a never ending cry for oppression, and the wish for a echo chamber in which any critique is simply silenced and not acknowledged or accepted.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
You are but when your complaint is that a fictional character doesn't fit into a fictional world because of her skin color is holding an exclusionary opinion. And one which has an Impact on people. The assumption is that "black people don't fit in here" in a world where literally anything is possible. And that has the effect for some that they don't feel they fit in. And it wouldn't matter if a black person had that opinion or a white person as both have the same effect.
Now if you make a non-fiction/historically accurate piece of media set in long ago scandinavia I'd agree that a black character would feel out of place if it wasn't properly explained how and why they are there.But given that Kaldheim is A. a fictional world and B. The how she's there is explained (she's a PW) and the why is probably also going to be explained in the lore.l I don't see how it breaks the immersion other than "It's not normal to have black people here even when there is an explanation for that" and that to me seems like a bigoted opinion. And since its a fictional Universe in the first place there wouldn't need to be an explanation on why there are black people there anyways since you know the rules of a fictional universe can be whatever you want.
It's fine if thats your opinion but you then can't complain that others are of the opinion that you are bigoted as for them you hold a bigoted opinion.
To critique the existence of a black character in a viking inspired world should not be bigoted at all, as its a totally valid critique to have, which not everyone has to share, some might not be ok with Elves being in the same set as well, equally valid critique.
If we ever get a set with rainbows, unicorns and teddy bears dancing in cornfields, people will also critique that if it counteracts their fantasy expectations for a world.
To outright outlaw critique as people cannot accept it to exist is excluding an entire spectrum of the community (as plenty of people have a Viking world in mind thats more inlined with "Thor" or Assassins Creed Valhalla, and its totally natural to express their opinions and critique, while others either share or oppose them, and thats fine, as long as either side can express their opinions without being shunned, insulted and pushed away).
If some hand picked characteristics are pushed over others just to foster a false idea of a hyper sensitive construct of supposed racism is the wild claim.
To outlaw critique in such a way has the the effect that people will not speak their mind anymore, and it builds an echo chamber that suits a particular spectrum, not everyone and not inclusive at all.
Nobody is excluded by the critique, as its all about the game and the fictional characters.
Plenty of sets and settings in which it suits a lot better, with other assumptions and expectations.
To scream "bigot" and "nazi" out of innocent statements and feelings is just as excluding, as its simply an insult and nothing else.
Personal attacks like that are direct insults and nothing else (and you can be dead sure the person wont just let it stand if they are attacked personally).
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
You're still demonstrably wrong. Please re-read my most recent posts (or all of them, for that matter), and see if you can't do a better job of interpreting my position that isn't thoroughly reductionist, willfully blind, and riddled with fallacies. I'm here if you have any questions.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
Some of this conversation seems to no longer be about site concerns. I will reiterate the following:
I hope to make my way through this thread and answer any concerns arisen, however, there are a number of open tickets, so it may take some time to get back to this.
Thank you,
-bobthfunny.
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
If you, or anyone else, finds comments they feel are unsafe, harmful, or go beyond the bounds of our community, we urge you to bring these comments to our attention with the Report feature, and include why you feel the comment is inappropriate.
Our moderators are volunteers, and are only human as well. Sometimes we make mistakes, or simply do not have the knowledge on certain matters. I once received a report based on a derogatory word which I had been previously unaware of, but was able to understand the context of from the explanation of the reporter as well as a bit of research. More explanation is always good.
If a person take issue about a character being in the set because of their race. That is racism. There is no other word for it. It's literally the issue being discussed. Her race.
This is a fictional game, where Planeswalkers are travelers. They are foreign elements into ANY of these worlds they visit. That's the whole point of Magic. Jace can visit Ixalan, Sorin can visit Zendikar, Arlinn can visit Ravnica. To say that a foreign tourist ruins the immersion or historical accuracy of a world? Because of their RACE?
No. Those statements are not acceptable. It is literally an argument about exclusion based on race, which is the literal definition of racism.
Nevermind historical realities that the Vikings sailed all the way into the Mediterranean, and traded with, and fought, in that region. Considering that Vikings dealt with, dealt in, and took slaves, having Black characters would even NOT be out of context, if we were going for historical accuracy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_slave_trade
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_expansion
---
Calling someone a Nazi is Flaming, and will be infracted. If you see this behavior occur, please report it.
I disagree. Not every statement is equally correct, moral, or impactful. We are under no obligation, morally or otherwise, to allow a platform to every kind of speech or opinion. For example, outright hateful speech will never be permitted on this site. The question is thus not about "whether" we can or should moderate, but about "where."
Finding the line between allowing polite and insightful discussion can sometimes be tricky. Sometimes, such as with racism, it's not.
This is hyperbole. Of course not everyone will accept or connect with everything about every character. I have criticism on how many aspects of Magic have been handled, such as the retcon of Ugin, and how the Bolas arc ended.
However, when the critique of a character is based upon their race, or their gender, or their gender identity... That's not a critique. That's prejudice.
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
First off, there's false equivalency here. The Mafia forum has already indicated a direction from moving away from the term 'lynch' which is the term you are objecting to. Secondly, there is the matter of context, usage, and history involved; as well as the cultural implications in areas which are not the United States, which you seem to be repeatedly ignoring.
What we have here is not a group deciding what is and is not racist, it is the understanding that the term has been used in a separate context with a different meaning. They have accepted that the term has charged usage outside of their context, and have made indications towards moving towards different usages.
Let me give you an alternate example, in the word "Retard." Retard is considered an pejorative and offensive word here on MTGS. We do not accept it as an insult, description, or even passing phrase. However, we also understand that the term holds history as a medical term, which though no longer widely acceptable even in that context, could hold legitimate usages. Despite the word having a legitimate context in medical history - the medical profession has moved onward and discontinued usage of the word due to the negative connotations, which came in from an outside context. However, that change occured over a period of time of phasing out the terminology.
That is what is happening here. They have a word within their context and definition, have accepted there is a charged connotation, and are now in the process of phasing out their vocabulary. At this time, we are allowing this change and phasing to occur naturally. Should this natural phase out stall or not occur in good faith, we shall revisit the topic, but at this juncture we do not see any reason to assume any sort of bad faith.
===
In any regard, this entire thing may soon be a moot point, so at current we are awaiting to see how this plays out.
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
Don't discriminate or make people feel unwelcome.
What you neglect to realize (or admit?) is that it takes only one - just one! - person to feel unwelcome in order for that language to be problematic, regardless of context. I've asked a number of people if it mattered if I was BIPOC, and they admitted that, if true, that would indeed be an issue. It's a fairly obvious clue that such language is inherently racist if, when race is actually factored in, you would shy away from using it. The fact that race hasn't been factored in yet is oddly bizarre, considering the site's supposed commitment to inclusion. Your determination here effectively boils down to the following: either all BIPOC people take no issue with words like 'lynch' being used casually on these forums (such an assumption would be willfully blind, ignorant, or both); or it's somehow your prerogative to tell people what they should or should not find offensive. We no longer live in a world where the latter is acceptable, and the excuses you and the community are perpetuating are irrelevant, borderline dog whistles. Frankly, I don't care overmuch how the rest of the world views such a word; any number of Europeans could tell me that the n-word isn't offensive where they're from, and that wouldn't have the slightest impact on how we comport ourselves on this forum. If you're going to make another false equivalency claim to prove that 'lynch' has no such historical baggage, then you're only proving how far out of your depth you are.
--
Also: the very top of the Mafia forum still says Hang 'em high! That's just flagrantly tone-deaf. So... yeah, you don't get to use context as an excuse for this one anyways.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
The phase out has arguably stalled; the community decided well before I came along to stop using 'lynch,' and I've been patiently championing its removal since late September. How much time is too much time to stop using a single word? Is it more than 4 months? Because that's where we stand right now, at a minimum.
What do you consider bad faith? Various forum members still have it in their sig; they refuse to edit it from their posts, and actively exclude people from their games who take issue with the word. I've been cussed out and threatened - in private - by a forum member I assumed was mature enough to at least engage in civil discourse on the matter, in a place where such discourse was both welcome and expected. Despite numerous reports, that player has not removed the word from their sig block. Good faith would be intervention from the moderation staff - mods with no conflicts of interest on the matter - in response to such reports; good faith would be said player following moderator requests to that effect.
The point is not yet moot, but if it will be soon that's all the more reason for the site owners and mod staff to act now. It's less a matter of 'if' than 'when,' insofar as the Mafia community's imminent departure from this site is concerned, so as a practical matter you have absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by officially disavowing racist language at this juncture. Perhaps here, when continued ad viewership is no longer a consideration, you can finally bring yourself to do the right thing.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
You can bet that the vast vast majority have no ill intentions what so ever, so the words themselves dont hurt anybody and they are also have no means to hurt anybody , and frankly, the vast majority of people wont care at all if they read "lynch" or any other words, they accept its a game with its own rules and flavor.
Anybody can feel offended by basically anything, its absolutely impossible to create a space in which everyone is welcome to the fullest extend and anybody is protected by being offended ... thats not a possible end scenario ... the only thing that is possible, is to create a space that fits your very own personal guidelines of what you want to accept and what you dont want to accept.
At some point its much more healthy to accept that other people have a different line to draw what they consider offensive, and that line should never be so much in one direction that it alienates a large portion of the actual people its supposed to serve.
----
Its one thing to point out a supposed problem (which they might not accept as such) , but its an entirely different animal to go ahead and enforce that by penalty and threatening to ban or moderate their personal presentation in a forum.
The broad statement:
"Don't discriminate or make people feel unwelcome."
Is something everyone can agree on, but everyone also has a different understanding on what it actually means.
Speaking your mind is welcome for some, others feel offended if you speak your opinion in their faces.
If you make it impossible for people to speak freely, they will not feel welcome at all, and simply leave if it bothers them too much.
So what you create is a space of people that accept to not speak their mind and never openly disagree with each other, as everyone fears to be threatened and shunned by their community for doing so.
----
I must say, the Mafia community is absolutely welcoming and friendly.
If someone is in such a degree offended by a word that it bothers them, its probably better if they move along and let the people have their fun.
If just 1 person thinks its offensive and 1000 other people have no issue at all, its highly questionable if these 1000 people should suddenly be considered offensive and "guilty", or you simply accept that this 1 person might maybe just integrate more openly and learns that they are personally welcome if they dont try to start a rabble for their personal pleasure to be offended (as thats how it feels, if a person is just artificially offended to wield that as a weapon to put themselves into a superior spotlight, that leaves anybody else in the dark ... thats a very ugly and unwelcoming world that people quite likely are trying to avoid by posting in this forum).
----
Leaving your real world troubles at the front door and embracing a game together is the most welcoming message to send.
I dont want to be in world in which everyone is constantly barraging the other on what they find offensive and how they have to change their language right now as they demand it ... it leads to silly and outright insulting language on its own that people then again feel not welcome in.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
Yes, if race were factored in it is racist. That is why outside of the context of a Mafia game, where the term 'lynch' would be difficult to justify without a racial overtone/impact, and would be disallowed. The very argument you make can be used in favor on allowing the term, as the gameplay usage divests it of a racial connotation in that context.
Your attribution of a stance to the site is likewise incorrect. You are falsely attributing an extreme stance to the site to argue against, and that is incorrect, and also the literal definition of a straw man argument.
We have also received no indication that this issue is as prevalent as you make it out to be. So far it does seem that other users are able to identify that the context of the game term is separate from racial connotations.
For reference, this debate here, seems to agree with this overall sentiment:
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/387223/is-lynch-considered-a-racist-word
In addition, even wikipedia does not refer to lynching as a racially charged word. While it explicitly and up front states that lynching of African Americans was common and prevalent, it also shows that lynching has connotations and prevalence across the entire world:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching
That said, wikipedia DID however also tag lynching as part of their series on discrimination, which does show the word to be racially charged.
I will look into this.
This is something to look into. I will admit that we have not discussed what the ideal timeline would be within the staff, and this does seem to be an important piece of information in order to determine what the timeline would look like.
There will always be individuals who, for one reason or another, are resistant to change. Ideally, once the general Mafia group has accepted and transitioned on, we would start to officially send reminders and warnings, and eventually infractions to stop using the term. The mod staff will discuss what an ideal timeline should be.
What, precisely, is there to gain? What I see is an action that will have no discernable impact, short of being a position of spite on the way out the door.
When/(if) the Mafia community leaves, I would personally prefer to simply move on from it, and archive the forums. With the Mafia forum gone, this resolves the issue, as there would no longer be a context for the use of the word 'lynch,' and we would be able to unilaterally make it unacceptable. Should users wish to reopen a Mafia forum in the future then, we would be able to do so with a fresh start, and caveat the term as unacceptable from the very beginning. This seems a much more practical solution.
I need to address a few things here:
I suggest you look over the history of lynching to better understand FB's position and stance:
https://www.naacp.org/history-of-lynchings/
Furthermore, as stated above even Wikipedia includes their article on lynching as part of their series on discrimination. See the right hand bar. This further shows that the term is racially charged.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching
Calling someone alt-right was uncalled for FB, and comes awfully close to a personal attack.
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
The Vorthos community will await the consequences of the Eldrazi Titans' deaths/sealing. We will keep the watch.
“The wind whispers, ‘come home,’ but I cannot.”
— Teferi
Of course, people find fault where there is none, redefine words to fit their warped understanding, and then make serious accusations where there shouldn't be, as if they thrive off of contention...
Point proven to TheOnlyOne652089! No wonder why we still have problems.
Seriously, freaking kudos to bobthefunny for having to deal with so much stupidity on this forum, let alone this thread.
EDH DECKS
Currently under construction
MAGECRAFT STORM
-Veyran, Voice of Duality-
Protection from Degeneracy
Do not pray for an easy life. Pray for the strength to endure a difficult one.
To live in the past is to shroud yourself in darkness against the dawning of a more enlightened era, and in that darkness all one can perceive is their own blindness.
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
To put your own view above others and demand they change according to your image of the future is anything but a bright future.
If something is good, its worth conserving. Why should you keep burning down bridges forever and ever, just to build new bridges and repeat the cycle of destruction and reinvention, if the existing bridges are perfectly fine, put work into making them stronger and conserve them for the future, as we learn from the past, if we choose to not ignore the past and repeat the same mistakes over and over again (or making it even worse).
Advocating for oppression, suppression and banning other opinions is not enlightenment, its backwards into the dark ages, when church and rulers did the same to prevent other opinions toppling their rule.
Having as many different opinions as possible and a living discussions of free minds is much more valuable than forcing everyone into the same mindset and banning what some claim as "wrong think" (as the definition of what is labeled as "wrong think" is all about whos in charge, and thats incredible dangerous).
Banning words is a problem.
If truth is spoken, people will always feel offended, as it shakes their own world view, and thats not a bad thing, its the entire point of rethinking your own position.
If someones opinion is making you angry, you should question yourself if you are not on a road of cruelty and violence, as thats what anger ends up in.
Cruelty and violence will never spread peace and happiness, it just destroys parts of humanity.
Having a different opinion is fine, the ability to communicate to each other without hitting each other with clubs is always preferable.
Feeling offended (even by proxy) and using that to oppress peoples words is just using a club and hitting them, thinking that will do any good.
Instead, the supposed offender will just get angry at you, and all you produced is a growing hate against yourself.
This produces more problems than it wants to solve, and even worse, it does so under the mantle of helping ... help who exactly?
The very same people throw grave insults around all the time, advocating for other opinions to be banned and moderate according to their world view, as they cant handle other peoples opinions, the sheer existence of another opinion is already offensive to that breed of mindset, thats neither healthy for them or anybody else.
----
Its more important than ever to be able to accept other opinions.
And opinions can be harsh, thats not offensive, thats just the true and honest opinion, and theres nothing more valuable than being told the honest truth in your face, as its the only way to learn about what people really believe and think.
If someone tells you what they think and the response to that is hitting them with clubs and shunning them, the only thing you get is that people wont tell you what they think anymore, and leave you alone in the shadows, till one day, you wake up surprised how all the people started to conspire against you.
And you cant change what people truly believe and think by enforcing your own view upon them.
You can put out information you believe to be facts, they can read them or not, if they change their mind, fine, if they dont, thats also fine.
Banning words is always a weapon to oppress people and their opinion, its a method to drive people away, and doing so is a snowball for more banning, and its too easy to keep hacking away and ban more, especially if the opposition gets weaker and it becomes a frenzy.
----
People too easily feel compelled to White Knight all causes, no matter if its actually worthwhile to do so.
If there is not real problem, making them up is also a widespread issue.
If something is not celebrated, its not hated, plenty of room in between to like or dislike something.
In a world like ours, where only a 5-star rating is acceptable, and even a 4-1/2 star rating is already an expression of hate is quite showing the extreme of where people draw their lines.
People that are so sheltered from other opinions that the sheer existence of them is offending them, thats wild, even more so if people believe themselves to be on a moral-crusade to enforce and bring "enlightenment" to the people, if they want it or not ... its a moral spiral downwards.
(Fake Woke, trending hard everywhere its not suppressed, worth a watch)
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
I will be stepping down as an Administrator of this site in the near future. Due to circumstances beyond this site, I have found myself unable to dedicate the time and energy necessary towards the tasks and responsibilities required of me here. This is not fair nor healthy for anyone involved, so I will be stepping down on April 11th. You may still see me around the forums after that time, and I hope you will still say a friendly hello and join in the discussion.
This thread will be unpinned and locked from that time forward.
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice
Retired EDH - Tibor and Lumia | [PR]Nemata |Ramirez dePietro | [C]Edric | Riku | Jenara | Lazav | Heliod | Daxos | Roon | Kozilek
---
#BLM
#DefundThePolice