Jump to content
Jimbo

PSA - Discrimination and Harassment at UO

Recommended Posts

Recently it seems that there may be some confusion about the seriousness of making a joke that can be interpreted as harassment.  

 

A discriminatory joke may be unlawful depending on its impact.  Even if no harm is intended.  

If no one is offended then it may be just passed off as poor taste.

 

Definition of Harassment:

Harassment is any improper conduct by an individual that is directed at and offensive to another person or persons, and which the individual knew or ought reasonably to have known would cause offence or harm.

Examples of Personal Harassment include racial slurs, discriminatory remarks about a person’s appearance, etc. In these cases, the victim feels hurt, humiliated, angry and upset.

 

Prohibited Grounds of Discrimination:

The eleven prohibited grounds of discrimination as defined by the Canadian Human Rights Act are: race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, mental of physical disability and conviction for which a pardon has been granted.

 

Intention vs. Impact
An important distinction to make is that it is the impact and not the intent that prevails. Even if the intention was only to poke fun, it’s what the victim feels that counts.

 

When in doubt just don’t make discriminatory comments.  It can be much more than just poor judgement.

And never make a discriminatory joke during an event with another community, or on the primary.

 

Supplimentary:

Where is it okay to offend someone with a discriminatory remark?  Answer:  No where.   Even the barracks must always be harassment free.  

 

Edit: spelling

Edited by Jimbo

Share this post


Link to post

To play devil's advocate, and I know, Jimbo, you're just looking at this from the perspective of the law.

 

If anyone is so thin-skinned that they can't handle being bullied or teased on the internet, they should turn off their computer and walk away.

Share this post


Link to post
 Even the barracks must always be harassment free.  

 

Unfortunately, that is where it all comes from, Jimbo. Like it or not.

Share this post


Link to post

Jimbo, I think this is something that need a proper policy discussion.

 

There are a few problems/clarification needed with the definition:

 

  • "improper" makes the entire definition circular. The whole point of defining what is harrassment is so that we can determine what falls outside the boundaries of acceptability in this community, i.e. to determine what is improper. Of course, the answer might be that this is matter of common sense to be determined by the community, in which case why have a definition at all?

 

  • "would cause offence or harm" - this would not capture a sitiuation where a person knew (or should have known) that something was likely to cause offence, but was not certain to do so. Which would be almost every situation this would cover in practice. Even at UO it is rare for people to out of their way to deliberately offend someone.

 

  • We are an interational community - we need to define our own set of unacceptable grounds, as this varies between the states of even the most commonly represented countries within the community.

 

  • What happens if we have someone who is unreasonably senstive (and this was known to the case within the community)? Under the current definition anyone offending them would fall foul of the rules.

 

  • Conversely, what is someone is thick skinned, can people go to town saying objectively discriminatory things because the person impacted would not subjectively be offended?

 

In short, I agree with the principle, but it very hard to define in practice without making the definition arbitrary, incomplete and potentially limiting to freedom of speech.

Share this post


Link to post

[...]

 

If anyone is so thin-skinned that they can't handle being bullied or teased on the internet, they should turn off their computer and walk away.

 

I might share an unpopular opinion regarding this, but just because interaction takes place on "the internet" should not grant people the right to say what they want without being accountable for what they said. Of course it is always way easier than directly interacting with people.

Respect and maturity should be applied regardless of the medium where interaction takes place and regardless of what kind of rules are defined by the community/ entity that hosts the services. It's like saying people that are bullied and teased in real life should just stay home and avoid the areas where they are offended if they can't handle that kind of treatment. Doesn't really work that way. Instead people need to start caring for what they say. Even freedom of speech is no excuse for that. Not if you are interacting in an environment with rules and standards.

You hear statements like the above all too often on the cyberspace and I still fail to see where people take this apparent naturalness from, that people have to be thick-skinned and that they need to be able to handle offensive statements.

 

Especially in a community with international audience and with rules in place, people need to be mature enough to understand that not every culture and every individual shares the same mentality. People coming from other cultures than your own might see things differently. They might get offended by something you consider a joke. And if you are unable to make a judgment whether something might be offending to others, than just don't sound up at all. Or do so in a private environment where you can talk with someone and you can tell instantly if they take it as a joke or not.

 

It is sad to hear that this kind of behavior seems to be the norm in the TS barracks channels in UO. Especially since a lot of the interaction in this community seems to be centered around those channels. If that behavior is acceptable in those channels where Regulars hang out regularly, then you should not be surprised if even the representatives of this community show this kind of behavior outside those channels too.

 

Setting up clear and official statements as stated above probably will have little use due to the problems outlined by IAJT. Instead people should probably just be sensitized about this topic. In my opinion mature and respectful interaction is the way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
  • "improper" makes the entire definition circular. The whole point of defining what is harrassment is so that we can determine what falls outside the boundaries of acceptability in this community, i.e. to determine what is improper. Of course, the answer might be that this is matter of common sense to be determined by the community, in which case why have a definition at all?
  • "would cause offence or harm" - this would not capture a sitiuation where a person knew (or should have known) that something was likely to cause offence, but was not certain to do so. Which would be almost every situation this would cover in practice. Even at UO it is rare for people to out of their way to deliberately offend someone.
  • We are an interational community - we need to define our own set of unacceptable grounds, as this varies between the states of even the most commonly represented countries within the community.
  • What happens if we have someone who is unreasonably senstive (and this was known to the case within the community)? Under the current definition anyone offending them would fall foul of the rules.
  • Conversely, what is someone is thick skinned, can people go to town saying objectively discriminatory things because the person impacted would not subjectively be offended?
In short, I agree with the principle, but it very hard to define in practice without making the definition arbitrary, incomplete and potentially limiting to freedom of speech.

 

 

 

IAJT,

 

in short UO could create it's own definitions for acceptable or improper comments regarding race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, mental or physical disability.  That process would be very complicated and I doubt if would be very helpful.  It would be much simpler to just be sensitive when making remarks that may be discriminatory.

 

If no-one in the group is offended about the remark then there is no issue.  If anyone in the group is offended then the remarks should cease and an apology should be provided.

 

It is fairly simple. I brought the issue forward because I do not believe UO supports harassment under the rational that people should able to take a little joke.  I also wanted to emphasize that harassment that is not defined by intention.  Jokes that are delivered innocently can still be very harmful.

Share this post


Link to post

If UO is to become a hugbox, then I'm fucking done with it. The internet is not real life, and unlike a job or school you can shut it down and walk away any time you like.


 


Everyone has the right to use the primary, play at UO events, or be in UO public channels and not be attacked and I have no issue with Slider's ban, it was, I believe, the right action in the circumstance. Barracks channels are another matter, however. Having spoken with Impulse in the past, and he can correct me if I'm wrong or he changed his opinion, he has always taken a laissez faire attitude to barracks channels. They are the domain of the people that own them, unless they really cross over the line. They are a place for people to relax and vent if they wish. I genuinely do not care if I offend someone in the barracks channel, other than the channel owner, and I think it would be the height of rudeness to try and overrule them if they are happy with the tone and content of the conversation. It's the equivalent to walking into someone's house and trying to control the conversation.


 


Further what UO did not need is fucking tone policing after one incident. One distasteful comment, which was dealt with very quickly, the first in months, if not years, does not make UO a hotbed of harassment or racism. This thread is patronising and does a great deal to damage the relaxed atmosphere that UO has.


Share this post


Link to post

I am staggered and shocked by any suggestion that UO should collectively pen a Code of Conduct-shaped noose to hang ourselves with. For shame. We're all adults and people should both act like adults when the time is right and chill the fuck out in turn.

 

We need more condescending PSAs like we need a LOL160_European_Migrant_Crisis_V1, mind you. I don't know if I have enough wodka to drown the memory of this thread.

Share this post


Link to post

The barracks channels are peoples rooms, sure they are open but trying to regulate what someone does in their room is stupid.

 

In my several years at this community I have seen 3 instances of racism/discrimination all of these were instances of "knowing your audience" people making inappropriate jokes infront of the wrong people.

 

If someone says something that offends you then you should take it up with then.

If you are still unsatisfied by the response or their attitude then call in the admins

 

As I said, in my 2/3 years here I have seen the admins need to come in 3 times!

 

TL;DR The system as it is is working, dont fix something that isnt broken

Share this post


Link to post

So basically Kingslayer and Wolfie are advocating to be allowed to be a bully and if people don't like being bullied they can leave. That sounds like the perfect way to run a large public community.

 

Actually fuck sarcasm. You guys are idiots and I'll speak from experience.

 

I was a member of a HUGE forum/music community for 10 years. It was in the top 100 largest forums on the internet, had tens of thousands of active members per day, the off topic forum would turn over sometimes 2-3 times a day with new threads. It was incredibly active. Over the years though a clique (well multiple cliques) of bullies started to harass new and even long term members and slowly the place became intolerable. That forum is basically dead now save for the final clique of internet tough guys and girls that still basically just circle jerk there. Even I quit this year after they started making up rumors about myself and another female member.

 

This was a community that UO will never be in terms of size and activity, and it died because of people being dicks to each other. That will happen at UO. If you want to be a jerk to people and have no repercussions then you should leave now. It is easier to grow a community where someone can come in and not instantly be harassed based on their race, gender, religion, whatever than it is to adopt an attitude of "don't be a pussy" which in itself is a bullying tactic.

Share this post


Link to post

For the amount we actually play our core game, is this really necessary? The more politicized and touchy-feely this community becomes, the less people actually want to play here. I'm not active on the forums because of things like this.

 

Everyone here is allegedly an adult, rather than getting offended, just move on. Unless someone is spamming shit regularly, it really shouldn't be an issue.

Share this post


Link to post

You guys are idiots and I'll speak from experience.

 

Wow harrassment and bullying ban he.

 

Don't be absurd, Nou. You know your example doesn't correlate to here. At UO we can and do ban consistently problematic users, and that's next to impossible at an open forum where anyone can sockpuppet up and troll all day.

Share this post


Link to post

Everyone here is allegedly an adult, rather than getting offended, just move on. 

This right here.

 

We are on the Internet. Some people are taking this far too seriously.

Share this post


Link to post

This right here.

 

We are on the Internet. Some people are taking this far too seriously.

 

Adults don't make racist/jingoist insults against random people. If you can't refrain from insulting someone you barely know based on their religion, sexual identity, gender, or race then you aren't really an adult. Adults shouldn't have to tolerate children being dickheads to them.

Share this post


Link to post

Adults don't make racist/jingoist insults against random people. If you can't refrain from insulting someone you barely know based on their religion, sexual identity, gender, or race then you aren't really an adult. Adults shouldn't have to tolerate children being dickheads to them.

Broken record here to reaffirm that we are on the Internet and some people are taking this far too seriously.

Share this post


Link to post

So basically Kingslayer and Wolfie are advocating to be allowed to be a bully and if people don't like being bullied they can leave. That sounds like the perfect way to run a large public community.

 

Actually fuck sarcasm. You guys are idiots and I'll speak from experience.

 

I was a member of a HUGE forum/music community for 10 years. It was in the top 100 largest forums on the internet, had tens of thousands of active members per day, the off topic forum would turn over sometimes 2-3 times a day with new threads. It was incredibly active. Over the years though a clique (well multiple cliques) of bullies started to harass new and even long term members and slowly the place became intolerable. That forum is basically dead now save for the final clique of internet tough guys and girls that still basically just circle jerk there. Even I quit this year after they started making up rumors about myself and another female member.

 

This was a community that UO will never be in terms of size and activity, and it died because of people being dicks to each other. That will happen at UO. If you want to be a jerk to people and have no repercussions then you should leave now. It is easier to grow a community where someone can come in and not instantly be harassed based on their race, gender, religion, whatever than it is to adopt an attitude of "don't be a pussy" which in itself is a bullying tactic.

Wow, this is hilarious coming from you. Firstly at no point did I advocate bullying, and I can only assume you put words in my mouth in bad faith. Venting in frustration in a private channel is not bullying. If it becomes a problem that is carried to a person outside of that, be it in public channels, the forums, the game server, or people are going to other channels to attack that person, then yes it's an issue that needs to be dealt with. Saying rude things about a person in private is not, and people should not have to look over their shoulder if they let off some steam.

 

Secondly it's massively hypocritical of you to accuse others of bullying and rumour-mongering when you are the greatest example of these things at this community. Need I remind you of the numerous baseless accusations you made that people, particularly groups that used to hang out in the batcave or the world control room, were out to ruin the community? Or the occasions that you have tried to bully the community into getting your own way when you are unhappy with a decision, even if the community has voted on it? On more than one case you have threatened to throw your toys out of the pram and stop us using ACRE, most notably when the community voted to remove 29 palms.

 

Or we could go through your skype history. All those comments about people of certain political persuasions being retarded, people from the south being inbred fucktards, people from New Jersey and New York deserving to die on 9/11 because they were idiots, or whatever lewd comment you have about girls you've been perving at the gym or some ex, I'm pretty sure they'd count as discrimination.

 

The ironic thing is that if a strict code of conduct was enforced, you'd probably be the first to suffer.

Share this post


Link to post
This was a community that UO will never be in terms of size and activity, and it died because of people being dicks to each other. That will happen at UO. If you want to be a jerk to people and have no repercussions then you should leave now. It is easier to grow a community where someone can come in and not instantly be harassed based on their race, gender, religion, whatever than it is to adopt an attitude of "don't be a pussy" which in itself is a bullying tactic.

 

I can't say I don't agree with you...cliques are ever more present here and their influences are starting to spill over to the public side more than before.

 

Yes, I made the comment, yes, I know it was inappropriate, no, I am not fighting the ban, but rather, I'm making my own observations based on what I've seen in past 2 years (before that, it's been better, IMO).

Share this post


Link to post

If no-one in the group is offended about the remark then there is no issue.  If anyone in the group is offended then the remarks should cease and an apology should be provided.

 

 

 

Jimbo, I disagree. We should not moderate our behaviour for the easily offended, nor should we make remarks that we know are going to be offensive then cover it with the fig leaf of an apology.

 

If your point is, use common sense to avoid saying something which it likely to be offensive to someone in the community, then I agree. But if you are going to seek to cloak that in legal language then it has to work properly.

Share this post


Link to post

I can't say I don't agree with you...cliques are ever more present here and their influences are starting to spill over to the public side more than before.

 

Yes, I made the comment, yes, I know it was inappropriate, no, I am not fighting the ban, but rather, I'm making my own observations based on what I've seen in past 2 years (before that, it's been better, IMO).

 

Oh you mean when Zedic would constantly tell people to go kill themselves? Yea that was better. Remember that new guy who posted an intro thread, perfectly reasonable and nice sounding, Zedic told him to go kill himself just out of the blue and he stormed off? Yea that is exactly the shining example of the standard of maturity UO should embrace.

 

Kill yourself.

 

Wow reported in less than a minute. Someone doesn't get irony.

Edited by Nou

Share this post


Link to post

It's time to squash the misguided idea that the barracks are a free for all where you are immune from prosecution and totally unaccountable for any of your words or actions.

 

The SOP is this:

 

Channel Owners are free to manage their channel within community SOP and Charter guides.

 

Furthermore, all forum SOP is applicable to TeamSpeak.

 

As game moderators we do not go out of our way to police barracks channels and we trust the channel admins to mind their own house. However, do not mistake levity as tacit permission to act like a mong. SOP still applies, and you can still be held accountable if it becomes necessary.

Edited by Overlord

Share this post


Link to post

It's time to squash the misguided idea that the barracks are a free for all where you are immune from prosecution and totally unaccountable for any of your words or actions.

 

The SOP is this:

 

Channel Owners are free to manage their channel within community SOP and Charter guides.

 

Furthermore, all forum SOP is applicable to TeamSpeak.

 

As game moderators we do not go out of our way to police barracks channels and we trust the channel admins to mind their own. However, do not mistake levity as tacit permission to act like a mong. SOP still applies, and you can still be held accountable if it becomes necessary.

 

Then it is truly unfortunate that those same GMs and FMs, that own the channels and act as they please to others inside, say that anything goes in barracks.

Edited by Slider

Share this post


Link to post

 

It is fairly simple. I brought the issue forward because I do not believe UO supports harassment under the rational that people should able to take a little joke.  I also wanted to emphasize that harassment that is not defined by intention.  Jokes that are delivered innocently can still be very harmful.

 

So you are saying UO deal with it through the mechanism of talking it out and apologizing rather than "policing" and escalating it to an instant ban? Correct?

That allows people who made a sharp comment or silly joke to understand their boundaries when in the presence of this highly-offended person. I mean #triggered person.

Share this post


Link to post

Oh look someone making a joke about triggered people on a forum full of veterans. Class act Rye.

Share this post


Link to post

Oh look someone making a joke about triggered people on a forum full of veterans. Class act Rye.

 

I am highly-offended that you assume my post was aimed towards the veterans of this group. My offense levels are so high right now I'm going to explode.

Shit I mentioned explode. Let's not take that out of context too, shall we?

 

It was actually aimed towards the PC and Tumblr-like mentality of those taking "offense" to small things where the hashtag and term "triggered" is used.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...