Conquer Club

Accused: ben1212

The accused are suspected of:

Severe PM Abuse

Game number(s): 16913115



Comments: read the chat and tell me if this behaviour is acceptable. If it is maybe I shouldn't be here

Game 16913115 it's rude but the game chat rules are pretty liberal. I don't see anything that crosses the line, you'll likely be told to foe him and move on so he can't join any future games of yours.

tin_box wrote:Accused: ben1212

The accused are suspected of:

Severe PM Abuse

Game number(s): Game 16913115



Comments: read the chat and tell me if this behaviour is acceptable. If it is maybe I shouldn't be here

easier to actually view the game if you post your complaint correctly. fixed.-Bj

tin_box wrote:Accused: ben1212
The accused are suspected of: Severe PM Abuse

yeah, sorry, this comes nowhere near the standard necessary to be considered abusive. the mods are going to tell you to foe him and move on, then someone is going to warn you about playing RonC, then someone is going to say "suck it up cupcake", then someone is going to say, "sorry about your little but," then the thread will get locked... good luck...

the black jesus has spoken...-Jésus noir

p.s.-suck it up, cupcake

According to chat, he ahs already foe'd you, so he won't be able to join any of your games and neither can you join his. Chat is not nice, but does not cross the line for CC.

mrswdk wrote:

IcePack wrote:Game 16913115 it's rude but the game chat rules are pretty liberal.

Are they? I seem to remember recently being banned for posting a single jokey message in a 1v1 game that my opponent took no issue with whatsoever, and yet now you're saying that one player throwing around multiple hostile insults is allowed within the liberal rules applied to game chat. Which is it?

Pretty liberal does not = racism / bigotry is allowed. The rules are pretty liberal, to a point.

mrswdk wrote:

IcePack wrote:Game 16913115 it's rude but the game chat rules are pretty liberal.

Are they? I seem to remember recently being banned for posting a single jokey message in a 1v1 game that my opponent took no issue with whatsoever, and yet now you're saying that one player throwing around multiple hostile insults is allowed within the liberal rules applied to game chat. Which is it?

there is a difference between violating the bigotry guidelines by hurling the most disgusting racist comment on the planet and the chat in the game in this complaint.

Subject: mrswdk/ EXCESSIVE RACISM [ka]

you obviously are not as bright as i thought you were, if you are trying to compare your use of the most basic/vile/racist word in the lexicon, with this complaint. please stop pushing your losing agenda all over the forum. the black jesus has spoken...-Bj

IcePack wrote:

mrswdk wrote:

IcePack wrote:Game 16913115 it's rude but the game chat rules are pretty liberal.

Are they? I seem to remember recently being banned for posting a single jokey message in a 1v1 game that my opponent took no issue with whatsoever, and yet now you're saying that one player throwing around multiple hostile insults is allowed within the liberal rules applied to game chat. Which is it?

Pretty liberal does not = racism / bigotry is allowed. The rules are pretty liberal, to a point.

In the game chat of the game posted in OP ben1212 derided OP for what he believed was his British nationality, which by your definition of bigotry is bigoted. And what's more, he did so intending to cause upset on the part of OP.

My point is that in my case no upset was intended and the guy I was playing against didn't actually care about what I said or feel the need to pursue anything further, whereas in the game reported in this thread the accused sought to upset his opponent to the point where his opponent has reported him. And your response is to say 'he's upset you but you ought to just suck it up and move on' - why is that not your response in all cases?

mrswdk wrote:

IcePack wrote:

mrswdk wrote:

IcePack wrote:Game 16913115 it's rude but the game chat rules are pretty liberal.

Are they? I seem to remember recently being banned for posting a single jokey message in a 1v1 game that my opponent took no issue with whatsoever, and yet now you're saying that one player throwing around multiple hostile insults is allowed within the liberal rules applied to game chat. Which is it?

Pretty liberal does not = racism / bigotry is allowed. The rules are pretty liberal, to a point.

In the game chat of the game posted in OP ben1212 derided OP for what he believed was his British nationality, which by your definition of bigotry is bigoted. And what's more, he did so intending to cause upset on the part of OP.

My point is that in my case no upset was intended and the guy I was playing against didn't actually care about what I said or feel the need to pursue anything further, whereas in the game reported in this thread the accused sought to upset his opponent to the point where his opponent has reported him. And your response is to say 'he's upset you but you ought to just suck it up and move on' - why is that not your response in all cases?

Well #1 I'm not a C&A mod so it doesn't matter what my response is, I just provided my opinion on the matter in this specific case and not yours.
#2 if they find that comment is bigoted under the rules they'll treat it as such.

I'm not sure "intention" is the best yard stick for measuring whether someone's guilty, if you kill someone but don't intend to you still get charged with mansluaghter etc might be a factor but not the only factor. Someone was offended by your comment and reported it and it clearly was against site rules.

It is bigoted under CC rules. I mentioned that as a fact, not as a theory for speculating about.

The whole reason there is a distinction made between murder and manslaughter, and then between different types of manslaughter, is because a lack of intent is considered to be sufficiently mitigating that if there's no intent, the offense is a lesser offense. If we stick with your metaphor then ben1212 committed a murder while I committed a manslaughter, and yet you are saying that ben should be let off whereas I deserved to be punished.

Where did I say he SHOULD be let off? I said what I thought would likely happen.
What I would say in both cases is if they rule in both cases that it's against the rules then you'd go up a step in your disciplinary ladder.
They already ruled on your case.
They haven't here. Whether it's a fact or not will be determined by the team in charge of up keeping the rules. If it's their first offense they'd get a warning.

Edit:

Bigotry includes racism, sexism, ageism, homophobia/sexual orientation bashing, religion bashing, lack of religion bashing, or wishing violence on any group of people, etc.
Bigotry takes into account historic events, emotional baggage and generally accepted associations with a term, phrase or intent - posting "White Power" in a topic has a history and is bigoted, posting "Green Power" makes you an environmentalist

The sites bigotry guidelines ^

I am well aware of what the CC guidelines says. Strictly speaking bigotry is intolerance of ideas, but given that CC uses the term to cover general intolerance of all differences then intolerance of nationalities is included, so yes ben1212 is being a bigot in that game chat.

You keep claiming you know the site rules and can predict how the site rules will be applied in this case, but then doubling down saying things like 'this is only my opinion' and 'I have no idea if he should be let off or punished'. If you don't actually know how the rules will be applied here and aren't actually involved in the decision then why are you wading in as if you do? I was under the impression you were speaking on behalf of CC, but apparently you're not. With the greatest respect I'd rather just wait and see what a moderator has to say.

The guidelines don't really cover making fun of a nation. The only thing it could fall under would be "violence against a specific group" but he wasn't making threats against people of UK, but making fun of their intelligence etc.

I'm allowed to share my opinion, and how I see the rules being applied to help inform users. You are free to disagree all you like. "Leave your message"? You responded to my comment not the other way around. You wanted to continue your cause here, which is fine. But don't expect to question my comment / opinion without a reply. Official or not.

I don't think you have a bigotry case against the rules which is why I said I thought the OP would be told FAMO. But when C&A mods post I guess we will find out.

And as I said, if 'anything which might upset and/or insult someone on the grounds of their gender, race etc.' is bigotry*, then insulting someone on the basis of their nationality is bigotry.

*and that's the definition you have to use for my ban to have been for bigotry

mrswdk wrote:And as I said, if 'anything which might upset and/or insult someone on the grounds of their gender, race etc.' is bigotry*, then insulting someone on the basis of their nationality is bigotry.

*and that's the definition you have to use for my ban to have been for bigotry

It doesn't say nationality, but the rules do clearly state racism. You can make fun of Americans without specifically targeting a race within America. But if you cross the line and start targeting races, then it seems like it falls under the rule. The only part of the rule that falls under nationality would be violence towards, which in this case did not occur.

Bigotry includes racism

mrswdk wrote:And as I said, if 'anything which might upset and/or insult someone on the grounds of their gender, race etc.' is bigotry*, then insulting someone on the basis of their nationality is bigotry.

*and that's the definition you have to use for my ban to have been for bigotry

if you would actually go into the bigotry guidelines, xenophobia is covered. some may consider this post by a british man pretending to be a chinese woman, xenophobic:

Subject: Polymorphic victories medal

mrswdk wrote:Englis not my first language, why you so races

not shocking considering your other recent racist actions. kind of clear that you have no idea what is and isn't racist. however, back to the matter at hand. the chat in this game falls far short of racism/bigotry/xenophobia, etc... it doesn't even meet the "RonC STANDARD" for abusive language/chat. the user is going to be told to foe and move on. however, the foe feature has already been utilized, as stated above. so, not much more to do here other than a mod to come in here and tell the user what has already been stated and to tell you that you are beating a dead horse and that every case can not be compared to yours. have a great day...-Bj

p.s.-watching you spiral out of control is not nearly as much fun as i thought it would be. at least when i spiraled out of control, i gave a show. i kind of pictured you hitting Wicked or Insomnia Red levels of losing it... sigh... we can all dream our little dreams.

This chat doesn't violate our guideline for game chat. Crude yes but over the top no. Marking this CLOSED.

I would like to encourage all posters when posting to read your post from the perspective of those who will read the post. Lets not insult someone with name calling or snarky remarks. If your intention is to be helpful do it in a less condescending way. Also if you are pushing your own agenda go to the proper forum.

The bigotry guidelines cover homophobia, racism, sexism and all manner of discrimination, so it is strange that someone engaging in mean-spirited xenophobia (as ben1212 did) should be given a free pass. Sometimes even the sugggestion of bigotry results in a ban, other times bigotry is allowed to slide as 'just crude game chat'. There is absolutely no consistency to this ruling.

Evil Semp wrote:This chat doesn't violate our guideline for game chat. Crude yes but over the top no. Marking this CLOSED.

nice swift decision, Evil... nice job... you put the "closed" in "closed C&A" reports... keep up the good work...-Bj