Back to Epicmafia

Revising The Hateful Comments Rule

over 6 years

I really like what I'm seeing with lucid (admin) being more active again. He brings with him the opportunity to make changes, as he owns the website and does all the coding. But before making big changes to the website and to rules, it's important to discuss the changes properly. Now I'm in no way implying that this doesn't get done or hasn't been done recently, but there are just a couple of things which I feel might have been overlooked amongst the changes. I feel like the ideas and progression have the right mindset, but that they've been just a little misplaced/misguided.

I'm talking about the new 'Racial Slurs' rule. The idea behind its creation, I'll infer, is to punish racial slurs heavily. There's no problem with that idea at all, it's great. But consider for a moment the 'Hateful Comments' rule:

Hateful Comments

Any form of severe or excessive hate speech or hateful language based on race, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, mental capabilities, and other personal circumstances.

Expires in 3 months

1. Warning
2. 12 Hour Suspension and 24 Hour Forum Suspension
3. 24 Hour Suspension and Forum, Comment, and Chat Ban
4. Site Ban

This rule seems to already encompass the idea of the 'Racial Slurs' rule. It says "based on race" among other things in the rule already.

Creating a new rule dedicated solely to racial slurs raises the question: "Why not create a separate rule for homophobic slurs? And one for religious hate? And for mental capabilities?" These questions are completely valid on the premise that only one form of hateful language, that being towards race, just had a separate rule created for it.

Now let's have a look at the new 'Racial Slurs' rule:

Racial Slurs

Malicious use of slurs against players that are based on race and/or ethnicity. We will show absolutely no tolerance towards racist and xenophobic ideals.

Expires in 6 months

1. Warning
2. Site Ban

It's clear that the idea behind the violation structure is to have low tolerance for these type of slurs. I completely agree with the notion that slurs need to have low tolerance. However, this idea being limited to racial slurs alone makes it seem as though the potential behind this good idea of low tolerance is being placed improperly. I feel like this idea would be better applied simply to the 'Hateful Comments' rule itself, which would help to mitigate all types of hateful comments and language, not just racial slurs. This would include having a 6 month violation expiry for all hateful comments and in the 'Hateful Comments' rule, not just for racial slurs and in the 'Racial Slurs' rule.

I argue that instead of creating a new rule dedicated solely to racial slurs, simply modify the 'Hateful Comments' rule into something such as:

Hateful Comments

Any form of hate speech or hateful language based on race, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, ableism, mental capabilities, as well as other personal circumstances.

Expires in 6 months

1. 24 Hour Suspension
2. 24 Hour Huspension AND Forum, Comment, and Chat Ban
3. Site Ban

OR

1. Warning OR 24 Hour Suspension AND Forum, Comment, and Chat Ban
2. Site Ban.

Whichever the moderator staff & lucid wish to implement.

In this way, the idea of having very low tolerance on all types of slurs is better justified. Note also that "severe or excessive" is removed, and "ableism" is added in. I admit that I am not the greatest writer, so if there are ideas in regards to this I think I speak for everybody when I say that we would be more than happy to entertain them. Also the second violation structure option may seem harsh, but at the same time, we do not want people who are going to break this rule more than twice on this website at all. The moderator staff can implement whichever of the two violation structures they see fit in accordance with lucid and his ideas for the website; but the idea here remains the same regardless of whichever violation structure is ultimately chosen.

The other option is to have 'Racial Slurs' violations count towards your number of 'Hateful Comments' violations. For example, Player1 has 1 'Racial Slurs' violation, and 1 'Hateful Comments' violation. A 2nd 'Hateful Comments' violation would lead to a site ban, because they already have 1 'Racial Slurs' violation which counts towards that total as well (or they would already be banned if the second violation structure in the revised 'Hateful Comments' rule was implemented). If this were not to be implemented, it would be possible for a user to have 2 'Hateful Comments' violations, 1 'Racial Slurs' violation, and still be unbanned. This doesn't seem to make sense, since 3 'Hateful Comments' violations would lead to a Site Ban... This is how we should structure these rules, as right now, we have a 1 violation maximum for 'Racial Slurs' before a ban, and a 3 violation maximum for 'Hateful Comments' before a ban. Racial slurs are hateful comments, so this simply doesn't make any sense.

The problem with this however is that it still doesn't implement an equal violation counter type of structure in regards to other types of hateful language or comments involving sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, mental capabilities, and other personal circumstances. For example, using hateful language/comments or a slur towards any of the domains I just mentioned would still currently be a 2 violation maximum before a ban, while using hateful language/comments or a slur towards race is at a 1 violation maximum. Hateful language/comments towards all of the domains in the 'Hateful Comments' rule should be equal, and they should all count towards each others' maximum (i.e. So you don't have a user with 1 'Racial Slurs' violation, 1 'Sexist Slurs' violation, 1 'Ableist Slurs' violation, etc., if each domain hypothetically had a separate rule). But the idea of having a separate rule for all of these different domains seems a bit silly, when we could have one rule that incorporates them all with the same low-tolerance that they all would and should have if they were separate. And guess what? We already do, and it's the 'Hateful Comments' rule. It seems easier to just implement the 2nd violation structure for the revised 'Hateful Comments' rule above rather than deal with all of this and rather than creating a new rule ('Racial Slurs'), especially when the idea here is the same and is shared by (or should be shared by) everybody: There must be a lower tolerance towards all hateful comments and language.

P.S. The "No" option in the poll should say "No, I am not for this." instead of "No, I do not like this.". I'd want the Yes and No options to have equivalent wording if I could edit the options over.

tl;dr: There is no need for the 'Racial Slurs' rule. Revising the 'Hateful Comments' rule & its violation structure is better implementation for mods/lucid wanting to lower tolerance on hateful comments in general.

I'd like to know what you think. Please say why you voted what you voted in a post, thank you.
23
Yes, I am for this.
16
No, I do not like this.
5
Other
over 6 years
HAHAHAH ai civility reports ..... epic and also cool
over 6 years
Censor slurs in forums and games if you're gonna do it

Don't censor swears in games though imo
over 6 years
Why do we need words like this to be censored. The site is 13+. I feel like I like the idea of a civility score more but if it is used when people say sh*t/ p*ss then it isn't that good. It depends what kind of rewards you would get for having a civility score, maybe having a low one will mean you are given a warning and possibly banned if it continues to go down.
deletedover 6 years
both of in game and forums, it shouldn't be customizable imo.
over 6 years

Songin says


admin says


kizaru says


admin says

an alternative is i can build an AI system that can determine the offensiveness of your speech and give each person a civility score


why not censor/replace slurs with different words both of in game and forums? i was a member in a forum where words like "f*ck " were replaced with "fruit" e.g. what the fruit. it made raging and such seem less offensive and not shocking to read.


good idea, or just turn it into some emoji


Do what blizzard does. If you use a no-no word it changes the entire line into something like

"My mommy says it's bed time"
or
"I still wet my bed"


no way

ok, i'm down to build any of that. should it be in-game or in the forums? or perhaps i should make it customizable
deletedover 6 years
i love lucid now
over 6 years

admin says


kizaru says


admin says

an alternative is i can build an AI system that can determine the offensiveness of your speech and give each person a civility score


why not censor/replace slurs with different words both of in game and forums? i was a member in a forum where words like "f*ck " were replaced with "fruit" e.g. what the fruit. it made raging and such seem less offensive and not shocking to read.


good idea, or just turn it into some emoji


Do what blizzard does. If you use a no-no word it changes the entire line into something like

"My mommy says it's bed time"
or
"I still wet my bed"
over 6 years

kizaru says


admin says

an alternative is i can build an AI system that can determine the offensiveness of your speech and give each person a civility score


why not censor/replace slurs with different words both of in game and forums? i was a member in a forum where words like "f*ck " were replaced with "fruit" e.g. what the fruit. it made raging and such seem less offensive and not shocking to read.


good idea, or just turn it into some emoji
deletedover 6 years

admin says

an alternative is i can build an AI system that can determine the offensiveness of your speech and give each person a civility score


why not censor/replace slurs with different words both of in game and forums? i was a member in a forum where words like "f*ck " were replaced with "fruit" e.g. what the fruit. it made raging and such seem less offensive and not shocking to read.
over 6 years
some of you people really need to learn how to get along, this is ridiculous
over 6 years
an alternative is i can build an AI system that can determine the offensiveness of your speech and give each person a civility score
over 6 years
WELL then. o ___ O
over 6 years

Carmen says


Jeff says

when people started saying they think it’s ok to want to fûck “mature” 14 year olds


except i never said that, i just said i liked her dominant personality

like holy shi­t, the fact people are using this as a way to call me a pedo is really sad and disgusting


shut up pedo lol!
over 6 years
Sometimes I get more entertainment from EpicMafia arguing about world issues and morality than I do playing the actual game
over 6 years

dyke says

dont ask me what im talking about i have no idea i just felt like saying that


your username is offensive
over 6 years

Jeff says

when people started saying they think it’s ok to want to fûck “mature” 14 year olds


except i never said that, i just said i liked her dominant personality

like holy shi­t, the fact people are using this as a way to call me a pedo is really sad and disgusting
over 6 years
Well if they are going to make insults have more penalties, at least make it fair for all types of insults, if not, it will seem like racism is more serious than any other types of insults, which is not true as transphobia is the most severe here on my state, where the life expectancy of a transexual is the half of a cis person. So it heavily depends of the place, but in a world wide community like ours we should make them all equal.
over 6 years
banned for no punctuation on main
over 6 years
dont ask me what im talking about i have no idea i just felt like saying that
over 6 years
seems you're the ones upset my dudes
over 6 years
Im offended by ur lack "?" in your question. No punctuation should be treated differently hence your question should be banned.
over 6 years
here to post about how i'm morally perfect
over 6 years
answer the question cuck
over 6 years
hhfkdjdgldbhlsbsj
over 6 years

Flygon says

WHY in a game that is heavily centered around using words am i expected to watch what words i say? SJWs stay losing....


Be flygon. He isnt SJW. He isn't offended. Be flygon.