(Mar 20, 2019, 11:53 PM)BlackDog Wrote: [ -> ] (Mar 20, 2019, 11:51 PM)Faustie Wrote: [ -> ]BlackDog, I think you're reaching a bit. It's not discrimination to say someone is of a certain race, and we're not going to lose all RP over this rule. It existed for a long time back when I was regularly playing and there was no noticeable change in RP before and after the rule was removed in the old community. If anything, the quality of RP steadily degraded, partly as the bottom-of-the-barrel would run around with continual racist RP (license plates and descriptions made racist, continual RP, etc. Not fun days).
By the wording of the policy, it indicates that it is a zero tolerance policy, No sexism of any kind, no racism of any kind, and no discrimination of any kind, am I correct on this?
Yes or no, and if no, please explain as its not what the wording states.
That is correct, but you're reaching with your definition of 'discrimination' and 'racism'. Saying that someone is of a certain race or group isn't racist. You aren't going to lose Chinese triad/Italian mafia RP at all. Plus, there's a lot of leeway and admin discretion when it comes to certain cases. You're not going to get permabanned because you say something about someone that mentions race - I doubt admins or mods will care. The rule will just ensure that people can't get away with serious OOC racism by pretending everything is IC. It's worth noting that a lot of RP still requires some effort and justification to be allowed, just as it used to be.
We could specify 'extreme' racism to the rule or something like that, but then you'd have the exact same argument - where do we draw the line at extreme and what does it mean? In practice the application of a rule is based on precedent and if someone is banned for something very minor when everyone else gets away with it, this would hopefully be picked up and reversed.
(Mar 20, 2019, 11:51 PM)Faustie Wrote: [ -> ]You're absolutely right in that legal risks are low for us, but they exist, and we've seen a competitor get into some serious trouble for not taking any legal risks seriously. None of us are laywers and we can't afford to burn a lot of money on legal advice, so we're erring on the side of caution. I highly doubt that many people here are lawyers either.
Aye, like what? If you're really scared of s127 (which, if you're scared of people being racist/discriminatory on here, you should be) then you may want to ban a lot more than just being discriminatory. Other than that, there is literally nothing on the UK hate crime law books that you could be held liable for. Oh wait, you can't be held liable for s127 either so the rule change is literally pointless.
However, it's worth noting that that's just one part - arguably the less important part - of the explanation that was just made for clarity. The main reason why this rule change was made is that both players/staff have had difficulty managing the blurred lines between IC/OOC, and this targets that. In regards to current IC actions, admin discretion will absolutely apply and most things would be a matter of precedent.
IC is IC. OOC is OOC. There is your blurred lines. If you get offended by something IC then, I'm sorry, but it's just a game bro, and a roleplaying one at that. Your character is a character, your character is not you. Insults levelled at your character are not insults levelled at you.
BlackDog, I think you're reaching a bit. It's not discrimination to say someone is of a certain race, and we're not going to lose all RP over this rule. It existed for a long time back when I was regularly playing and there was no noticeable change in RP before and after the rule was removed in the old community. If anything, the quality of RP steadily degraded, partly as the bottom-of-the-barrel would run around with continual racist RP (license plates and descriptions made racist, continual RP, etc. Not fun days).
The immortal Rabbie Burns couldn't have said it better with 'the best laid schemes of mice and men aften gang agley'. Just because you think BlackDog is reaching, doesn't mean staff won't try and prosecute that stuff until HR are forced to release some form of sentence guidelines. You've created a shitton of loopholes, basically.
Overall, in conclusion, there is literally nothing you could be held liable for at all and there is literally no reason to be afraid of UK hate crime or computer misuse legislation and if you are really afraid of it to the point of banning tiny wee things like this without a single Google search I would suggest you guys do consult legal advice.
BIG EDIT FOR THIS FAST MOVING THREAD
(Mar 20, 2019, 11:58 PM)Faustie Wrote: [ -> ] (Mar 20, 2019, 11:53 PM)BlackDog Wrote: [ -> ] (Mar 20, 2019, 11:51 PM)Faustie Wrote: [ -> ]-snip-
That is correct, but you're reaching with your definition of 'discrimination' and 'racism'. Saying that someone is of a certain race or group isn't racist. You aren't going to lose Chinese triad/Italian mafia RP at all. Plus, there's a lot of leeway and admin discretion when it comes to certain cases. You're not going to get permabanned because you say something about someone that mentions race - I doubt admins or mods will care. The rule will just ensure that people can't get away with serious OOC racism by pretending everything is IC. It's worth noting that a lot of RP still requires some effort and justification to be allowed, just as it used to be.
We could specify 'extreme' racism to the rule or something like that, but then you'd have the exact same argument - where do we draw the line at extreme and what does it mean? In practice the application of a rule is based on precedent and if someone is banned for something very minor when everyone else gets away with it, this would hopefully be picked up and reversed.
And where do you guys define discrimination and racism? If I created a Catholic Church group that didn't allow women into it's ranks as that is the real life status (discriminatory or not) would that be discrimination?
Also, what is stopping you guys from picking up IC 'serious/extreme' racism and just saying 'you're clearly doing that to get away with the OOC racism rule?'
I DON'T EVEN
(Mar 20, 2019, 11:51 PM)Faustie Wrote: [ -> ]It's not discrimination to say someone is of a certain race, and we're not going to lose all RP over this rule. It existed for a long time back when I was regularly playing and there was no noticeable change in RP before and after the rule was removed in the old community. If anything, the quality of RP steadily degraded, partly as the bottom-of-the-barrel would run around with continual racist RP (license plates and descriptions made racist, continual RP, etc. Not fun days).
You're referencing a time where I literally had my own friend call me a faggot and he got banned for a month in his first hour despite me telling the admin it was my friend.
You're also making claims that you see no change in RP, but you yourself have been the most inactive staff member on the team for your own personal reasons. Please don't claim to know what you don't know. Thanks.
(Mar 20, 2019, 11:48 PM)Lord Octagon Wrote: [ -> ] (Mar 20, 2019, 11:35 PM)Judge Rage Wrote: [ -> ]So to be in full compliance with UK law now, I suggest that we ban all guns from the server as well as ban all threatening speech, after all Section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 states;
Quote:(1)
A person is guilty of an offence if he—
(a)
sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or
(b)
causes any such message or matter to be so sent.
(2)
A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he—
(a)
sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false,
(b)
causes such a message to be sent; or
©
persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network.
(https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/200...ection/127)
Well shit, looks like we can't swear, we can't threaten each other, we can't say anything mildly offensive both IC or OOC.
I'm also quite interested in how people connected to LL could be construed as racists for something said clearly not by them on their platform? The CEO of Google isn't a racist because someone put racist content on YouTube?
Lmao, preach it. This is just an excuse for the 'executives' of LL to push a pro-left agenda that serves nothing but to allow themselves to sleep better at night knowing that no 12yr olds are saying the n-word on their platform.
Are you guys asking for this server to die faster???
This also bans racism against religions. If I recall from your past posts, I saw you're against religion based discrimination. Are you not for this change?
Can I become a dictator and say "Homosexuality is a crime", as is the case over ONE THIRD of the planet?
(Mar 20, 2019, 11:59 PM)Nev Wrote: [ -> ] (Mar 20, 2019, 11:51 PM)Faustie Wrote: [ -> ]It's not discrimination to say someone is of a certain race, and we're not going to lose all RP over this rule. It existed for a long time back when I was regularly playing and there was no noticeable change in RP before and after the rule was removed in the old community. If anything, the quality of RP steadily degraded, partly as the bottom-of-the-barrel would run around with continual racist RP (license plates and descriptions made racist, continual RP, etc. Not fun days).
You're referencing a time where I literally had my own friend call me a faggot and he got banned for a month in his first hour despite me telling the admin it was my friend.
You're also making claims that you see no change in RP, but you yourself have been the most inactive staff member on the team for your own personal reasons. Please don't claim to know what you don't know. Thanks.
Admin discretion definitely needs to improve for cases like that, but it's HR to go to for that.
Read again please, I'm referencing the time I was active back then and saw a degrade, not making claims about current RP. I can't claim to know what RP is like currently except based on what I'm told - you're right there.
(Mar 20, 2019, 11:53 PM)greg Wrote: [ -> ]make it so if you buy donator on limelight you get the n word pass
Somebody make this guy Business Advisor
(Mar 21, 2019, 12:00 AM)Doctor Internet Wrote: [ -> ]This also bans racism against religions. If I recall from your past posts, I saw you're against religion based discrimination. Are you not for this change?
Nice strawman. Why on Earth would I support this? I don't believe in banning racism/sexism/whatever statements in OOC or IC but I guess, for the sake of some more sensitive people, I would concede for a ban on that stuff in OOC. But why should any of that be banned IC?
I get hate for professing a faith in Christ in real life, why would I cry from being called a papist on a GMod server? I've only ever complained about the double standard of people complaining about Christianity but being defensive of Islam - and I have familial reasons for personally not liking Islam.
In conclusion, no. This is a bad, bad rule change and fuck your leftist agenda.
(Mar 21, 2019, 12:00 AM)Faustin Wrote: [ -> ]Can I become a dictator and say "Homosexuality is a crime", as is the case over ONE THIRD of the planet?
No because that would make the bossmen of Limelight criminally accountable for the deaths of all gays and they would need to be transported to Gitmo.
Yes, that is how stupid the logic behind this rule is.
Surely the community backlash (AS MUCH AS YOU GUYS WANT TO ADMINISTRATE WE PAY THE BILLS) is suggesting this may not be the best decision made?
Also I'm still failing to see the legal argument for this which I'm attempting to deconstruct cause there is literally nothing on the books Limelight Gaming Limited could be held liable for.
Also, not quite sure if you guys know what Limited Company means (you should do yous run one) but it means there ain't much financially or legally the officers themselves personally can be held liable for, and this is one of those situations.
Limiting freedom of speech (although hate speech and with discriminatory background) is not the way this community should be going. IC is IC. The more we aceept that IC situations should be handled IC the better.
Seems to not be in the community’s interest either. Big 00f I say
(Mar 21, 2019, 12:04 AM)Faustie Wrote: [ -> ] (Mar 20, 2019, 11:59 PM)Nev Wrote: [ -> ] (Mar 20, 2019, 11:51 PM)Faustie Wrote: [ -> ]It's not discrimination to say someone is of a certain race, and we're not going to lose all RP over this rule. It existed for a long time back when I was regularly playing and there was no noticeable change in RP before and after the rule was removed in the old community. If anything, the quality of RP steadily degraded, partly as the bottom-of-the-barrel would run around with continual racist RP (license plates and descriptions made racist, continual RP, etc. Not fun days).
You're referencing a time where I literally had my own friend call me a faggot and he got banned for a month in his first hour despite me telling the admin it was my friend.
You're also making claims that you see no change in RP, but you yourself have been the most inactive staff member on the team for your own personal reasons. Please don't claim to know what you don't know. Thanks.
Admin discretion definitely needs to improve for cases like that, but it's HR to go to for that.
Read again please, I'm referencing the time I was active back then and saw a degrade, not making claims about current RP. I can't claim to know what RP is like currently except based on what I'm told - you're right there.
This is utter bullshit.
Another
grey area "defined by a member of staff". So in every single situation, a member of staff will decide something else than another. This is what we need. Not that we have more than enough of those.
"HR is going for that" - Taking care of this problem like the inactivity problem? Either we will never hear of this in the next 10 years or the result won't be published to the community and will stay internal because "sick MI6 stuff".
(Mar 21, 2019, 12:07 AM)Lord Octagon Wrote: [ -> ] (Mar 21, 2019, 12:00 AM)Doctor Internet Wrote: [ -> ]This also bans racism against religions. If I recall from your past posts, I saw you're against religion based discrimination. Are you not for this change?
Nice strawman. Why on Earth would I support this? I don't believe in banning racism/sexism/whatever statements in OOC or IC but I guess, for the sake of some more sensitive people, I would concede for a ban on that stuff in OOC. But why should any of that be banned IC?
"an intentionally misrepresented proposition that is set up because it is easier to defeat than an opponent's real argument."
I wasn't misrepresenting your position to attack it, I was just genuinely confused.
(Mar 21, 2019, 12:19 AM)Judge Rage Wrote: [ -> ]Surely the community backlash (AS MUCH AS YOU GUYS WANT TO ADMINISTRATE WE PAY THE BILLS) is suggesting this may not be the best decision made?
Also I'm still failing to see the legal argument for this which I'm attempting to deconstruct cause there is literally nothing on the books Limelight Gaming Limited could be held liable for.
Also, not quite sure if you guys know what Limited Company means (you should do yous run one) but it means there ain't much financially or legally the officers themselves personally can be held liable for, and this is one of those situations.
Community backlash is always concerning, but if you try and see it from our point of view we've become a bit numb to it? Can make it fairly difficult to steer any kind of direction that won't upset someone. So many developments/map changes/directions have had backlash every time and the development team at least has become numb to it. Not too sure about admins but I imagine there's a lot there too. Things would probably work better if people were more chill 99% of the time and reserved the backlash for the occasions it's warranted. If this is one of those occasions, great, happy to listen to those making genuine points (such as yourself) and of course things can and may change, but only if everyone involved acts chill (as opposed to ranting about leftist agendas or proclaiming a new map is the doom of LL). Easy to rant, not so easy to deal with all the bullshit and reach a decent decision.
Please don't give so much weight to the legal argument - it's more about the IC/OOC thing. Yes, the legal part is there but the reason we clarified is precisely because we have to play it safe. There's a lot of potentially relevant laws, precedent and public opinion are always changing, and we're not lawyers. We're aware of the meaning of limited company - not overly worried about personal risk (outside of witch hunts or ridiculous legal precedent), but there may well be some risk to LL itself which would be a shame. If we could afford decent legal advice we may well take a different decision - but we can't.
The points that BD and a couple of others have made do have weight. We could modify the new rule to account for that so people are less worried about all RP being ruined. Probably start with just a small discussion as some people are open to talk about things whereas others just kind of scream loudly. Always open to feedback though.