Ortallus Banned

[Ganymede]

This begs for an explanation, so here it is.

Ortallus is not being banned for wishing death on another. We all know that the Hog Pit isn't a place for a good time. Wandering into there is wading into a black pit of despair and needless verbal lashings. And while stating one's wish that a person gets skullfucked is an awful image to bear, that's the sort of ugly shit that will be said there. It is, by calculation, a place for ugliness.

I am aware that some people may be genuinely ignorant of other races, genders, sexualities, gender identity, cultures, etc. In acknowledging this ignorance, as well as my own, there are times when a person may say some truly ignorant shit and then double-down on that shit by defending it, but these social constructs will not be broken down in one day by one post. That said, one of the few rules we have everywhere in this forum is for members to refrain from using derogatory slurs which are inherently racist, sexist, or steeped in a long history of discrimination.

In the spirit of the above rule, Ortallus is being banned for using the word "cunt" as a retort to others.

@ortallus said in MU* Gripes and Peeves:

@kanye-qwest said in MU* Gripes and Peeves:

This day is a gift

Yes, being the ginormous cunt you are, you thrive on this sort of thing, doncha?

@ortallus said in MU* Gripes and Peeves:

The rest of you cunts can die in a fire, I really don't care. You love and thrive on the toxicity that is fermented in this cesspit, and most of MUland beyond your doors knows it. When I've asked people recently if they were from MUSoapbox, they responded "Ugh, that shit hole?"

I recognize that other English-speaking nationalities, particularly Australians, do not consider this term as offensive as Americans do. But we have had this discussion in the past at length and to me it seems that allowing members to use this word is far outweighed by the potential insult and harm it may cause others. As far as I'm concerned, this is a gendered slur directed at women or those who identify as such. I might have considered it a slip, but --

@ortallus said in MU* Gripes and Peeves:

You were kind, so this will be the last thing I say to you, and I'm not going to attack you because you don't deserve it, but they do.

They. Do.

-- it seems clear to me that his pattern of conduct wasn't going to change. And I have neither the time nor the inclination to put up with anything but the usual petty bickering.

Watch your mouths, people, and don't fucking threaten to break the prime directive: don't make Ganymede work.

[Cobalt]

@ganymede Was wondering how long it would be until the next melt down.

[Ganymede]

I was hoping "never again," but I'm always sorely disappointed.

[Rucket]

@ganymede said in Ortallus Banned:

make Ganymede work

Hrm. I have a whole slew of ideas I could use some feedback on. taps chin

But reading the overall post, I guess I can see the reason, though I do feel like telling people to go sit in traffic is probably a bit over the line for what the Hog Pit should be

[Groth]

@saosmash said in Ortallus Banned:

I agree that the repeated and misogynistic threats/invocations of death and mutilation were probably bannable but I think that using the derogatory term that has been specifically delineated in this forum over several years as one of the few that is off limits is also bannable & and an easier and more immediately enforceable banning rule which seems to require the mods to have to do less work figuring out what behavior is over the line in the future.

I'm all about easy objective standards when it comes to placing trash in the appropriate receptacle.

I feel like this is landmine modding. There is to my knowledge no list of illegal words anywhere on this forum. There is no way a new poster can know which terms are allowed and which are not.

There is however a rules of engagement sticky in the hogpit which disallows misogyny and RL threats.

I also don't feel in general the need for specific offences is important. It is the kind of thing trolls use to argue they are not breaking any rules while being blatantly disingenuous. Mods should feel free to ban toxicity on their own free judgement regardless of specific words.

[Tinuviel]

@groth said in Ortallus Banned:

@saosmash said in Ortallus Banned:

I agree that the repeated and misogynistic threats/invocations of death and mutilation were probably bannable but I think that using the derogatory term that has been specifically delineated in this forum over several years as one of the few that is off limits is also bannable & and an easier and more immediately enforceable banning rule which seems to require the mods to have to do less work figuring out what behavior is over the line in the future.

I'm all about easy objective standards when it comes to placing trash in the appropriate receptacle.

I feel like this is landmine modding. There is to my knowledge no list of illegal words anywhere on this forum. There is no way a new poster can know which terms are allowed and which are not.

There is however a rules of engagement sticky in the hogpit which disallows misogyny and RL threats.

We've had this argument plenty of times, we're not going to have it again.

I agree that saying a word shouldn't get you banned - excepting in cases where a traditionally bigoted word is used to actually make an attack based on that word (the n-word, for instance) since word usage and intent isn't universal.

Thus it should come with a warning first, after which it's not the word it's the disobeying an instruction to stop doing something that is bannable. Easy.

In this instance, it's not even remotely the main issue that needed to be addressed, and I absolutely abhor the statement that it is the reason. It's like charging someone for jaywalking when they, in fact, murdered people in front of you.

ETA:

That says to me that I can go around threatening people, telling them they should be dead, assaulted, abused, etc... and that's all fine, but if I say a mean word, then I'm going to the naughty person room.

[Ganymede]

@tinuviel said in Ortallus Banned:

That says to me that I can go around threatening people, telling them they should be dead, assaulted, abused, etc... and that's all fine, but if I say a mean word, then I'm going to the naughty person room.

I am all for a discussion about this, but would respectfully request it occur elsewhere on the forum.

For an old traditionalist here, this was a difficult ruling to make because there have been far worse things stated in this forum's history.

But, please, can we continue this elsewhere? It is important, but this is not the right venue. I can clarify my ruling here, but policy debates ought to be somewhere else.

Thanks.

[Ganymede]

@groth said in Ortallus Banned:

There is however a rules of engagement sticky in the hogpit which disallows misogyny and RL threats.

The rule stated by Arkandel is:

"Misogyny, racism sexual harassment, doxxing, real-life threats and the such are not going to be tolerated, and they will result in action against your account."

It was under this rule that action was taken.

I feel like this is landmine modding. There is to my knowledge no list of illegal words anywhere on this forum. There is no way a new poster can know which terms are allowed and which are not.

We expressly refrained from putting such a list up because people can always find ways to skirt around a specific list. As for new posters, my records show that Ortallus' account has been around since early 2018, and this topic has come up numerous times since then. This is not new to them; they are or should be aware of the rules of engagement.

And, no, we're not going to make a list going forward. The Hog Pit is what the Hog Pit is. Those of us who enjoy it -- in the words of Ortallus, we "thrive" on it -- are charged with knowing how to play in it. I have had at least one member ask me to go and change a comment because this one naughty word was in it, and I did so, no questions asked. Why? Because they demonstrated a modicum of self-awareness even if they may not have agreed with the rule barring the word.

If we are at the stage where we -- not me, not Mietze, not Arkandel, but the community -- want to jettison this remnant of what might be considered a shameful past, so be it. Let's talk.

But I think it far more "landmine modding" to ban a person based solely on my (tyrannical) discretion than to have a rule with more specificity than "just because our resident robot thinks what you said may upset others" or "please do not make the robot work."

[Tinuviel]

@ganymede said in Ortallus Banned:

But, please, can we continue this elsewhere?

That's your job. Split this stuff off to somewhere else.

[Ganymede]

@tinuviel

@ganymede said in Ortallus Banned:

... don't fucking threaten to break the prime directive: don't make Ganymede work.

[Tinuviel]

@ganymede said in Ortallus Banned:

@tinuviel

@ganymede said in Ortallus Banned:

... don't fucking threaten to break the prime directive: don't make Ganymede work.