I don’t usually do this, but this issue has been eating at me for some time now and I think it’s time I brought into the matter some objectivity. I'm sorry if this isn't the appropriate place to post this; you'd think after two years I would know where this goes. Hehe; I trust it will be moved if needed. Copied, I hope. Still, I am disappointed that a hearing has not been offered after being told by a Division Leader that one was being arranged.
There was a decision made that was the wrong one; I firmly believe this. However, for the sake of the rest of the members of the community who are hanging on to their hope that the leadership is doing the right thing and that they are a part of something good, I am fighting this decision regardless of my membership in the community.
Preamble
The issue in question concerns a member of the community who used the term “nig-nog” in a semi-public forum area. La Resistance, a Lieutenant of XGC Backfire, posted in the XGC Backfire forums a comment towards Scanty81, a Sergeant of XGC Backfire. Being the former General of said clan, this would have been a concern for me had I been present. However, I was dealing with personal issues and was out of contact during these events.
The term was reported for review by XGC Halcyon, a Lieutenant of XGC Backfire and reviewed by XGC HOLIDAY XS and XGC WARHAMMER XD. After a brief review of the term in etymology and definition (as I am told by the two), the decision was made to ban La Resistance on account of racism.
Agreed, nowhere in the Honor Code does it specifically state that racist comments will result in the member being instantly and permanently banned from the community. Matter of factly, it is most clearly interpreted that the member should receive a warning followed by a ban if the member should repeat their actions.
However, and whoever denies this is a fool, there is a double standard that was implemented into the community where members that said or posted the word “nig.ger” would be subject to a zero-tolerance rule in which they would be instantly and permanently banned from the community. To my knowledge, this was neither agreed upon by the Council nor adopted into the Honor Code or other written form of regulations.
This did not stop it from being adopted by other leaders in the community and eventually spread out to the overall majority. A simple survey would confirm this, assuming members answered honestly.
Herein lies the problem: the leadership made a mistake. This is obvious. But what should the leadership uphold: the Honor Code or the double standard?
Elaboration
You see, regardless of whether or not the Council and Community Leaders agreed with this double standard, they apparently offered no objection to it. This form of complacency is the same as announcing its acceptance publicly. If the leadership were truly concerned with this practice or did not approve of it, rather than remain silent they should have made their feelings on the matter known.
Perhaps they did and it was simply disregarded by the rest of the community; with a community of over 30,000 members, I can understand the virtual impossibility to weed out all of these insubordinate members. However, I am unaware of any attempts to reprimand these members if such a decision ever was made.
Disregarding this fact, there is still the issue of racism. Is “nig-nog” a derogatory term in the United Kingdom? For that matter, is it an offensive term? Webster’s Dictionary defines the word as another term for a black person. The Oxford Dictionary defines it as a racial derogatory term. Both denote these definitions as being primarily used in the United Kingdom. Most online sources acknowledge the fact that the word’s popularity existed in the 1980’s and other online sources may cite additional definitions for the term. The majority fail to provide any type of source for these citations though, meaning that they are not viable for use in a judgment of this difficulty. Apparently the most popular reference that I have heard from leaders about the term is that it is a type of drink. I did not see the original statement made by La Resistance, but I do know he was referencing a person. Common sense would rule out inanimate objects as a definition of the term given its usage.
It would seem someone took offense to this post as well; otherwise, would it have been reported in the first place? La Resistance was a semi-reputable member of the community. He achieved the rank of Lieutenant and managed to bring several Recruits into the community. It was not as if he was disliked by any particular members of the community in such a way that they would be looking for an excuse to get him in trouble. Had the leadership “gotten all the details,” they perhaps would have seen things from the perspective of members who knew the member well, rather than base their own decision on La Resistance’s general reputation and the words that emerged from his mouth.
What about the claims of XGC being a mature gaming community? As an 18 and older community, members are assumed to have reached an age of accountability. That is, they are expected to know what is and isn’t socially acceptable by the standards of all the people they interact with, regardless of their race, nationality, age, or sex. In the United States, and apparently the United Kingdom as well, it is socially unacceptable to make comments that can be interpreted as racist in a public form of communication. In this case, the thread the post was made in was accessible by ALL members of the forums that belonged to a clan-based user group. Had this been in a private form of communication, such as a private message or e-mail, we would not have this issue. But since La Resistance decided it should be posted in a public forum, the entire event was left open to interpretation by anyone who should discover it rather than the person it was intended for.
But perhaps I am being too critical. People make mistakes. But then again, perhaps the leadership shouldn’t have allowed those they taught and trained to become so critical.
The leadership also has claimed that perhaps the child didn’t know what the term meant. Then perhaps the 15-year-old should not be in the community. And before I am criticized for allowing the member in the community, he had already been accepted before I became General of XGC Backfire, let alone involved in it since my original transfer to XGC Royalty in November 2007. I have had several members of XGC Backfire confirm that La Resistance is not 18 and therefore should not be allowed in a mature gaming community.
Regardless of the age factor, I and more than likely other Section Leaders can confirm his immaturity in handling other situations, specifically his desire to become a Captain. I use the term desire lightly. I have had several encounters with this member with attempts to pressure me into giving him a promotion, including one threat to leave the community and take other members with him. Ambition and insubordination are not synonymous.
Summary
In short, the leadership has a choice to make. Either they choose to uphold a double standard and fully implement it into their Honor Code and other regulations, and as a result ban La Resistance from the community, or they choose to uphold their original Honor Code and offer everyone who has been wrongly banned a chance to re-enter the community. The problem started there, not with this and I would urge the readers of this document to seriously consider what I have presented. If I did not love this community as much as I do, I would not have spent so much time, energy, and consideration in all that I have done for it.
I would hope the readers of this have realized that I am attempting to be as objective as possible in my arguments. I will admit to some subjectivity, but anyone who knows me, knows La Resistance, and knows what I have discussed here will understand this.
I hope that the leadership and members of this community alike make up their own decisions about this issue rather than let someone else lead them blindly.
Humbly Yours,
XGC Advent
There was a decision made that was the wrong one; I firmly believe this. However, for the sake of the rest of the members of the community who are hanging on to their hope that the leadership is doing the right thing and that they are a part of something good, I am fighting this decision regardless of my membership in the community.
Preamble
The issue in question concerns a member of the community who used the term “nig-nog” in a semi-public forum area. La Resistance, a Lieutenant of XGC Backfire, posted in the XGC Backfire forums a comment towards Scanty81, a Sergeant of XGC Backfire. Being the former General of said clan, this would have been a concern for me had I been present. However, I was dealing with personal issues and was out of contact during these events.
The term was reported for review by XGC Halcyon, a Lieutenant of XGC Backfire and reviewed by XGC HOLIDAY XS and XGC WARHAMMER XD. After a brief review of the term in etymology and definition (as I am told by the two), the decision was made to ban La Resistance on account of racism.
Agreed, nowhere in the Honor Code does it specifically state that racist comments will result in the member being instantly and permanently banned from the community. Matter of factly, it is most clearly interpreted that the member should receive a warning followed by a ban if the member should repeat their actions.
However, and whoever denies this is a fool, there is a double standard that was implemented into the community where members that said or posted the word “nig.ger” would be subject to a zero-tolerance rule in which they would be instantly and permanently banned from the community. To my knowledge, this was neither agreed upon by the Council nor adopted into the Honor Code or other written form of regulations.
This did not stop it from being adopted by other leaders in the community and eventually spread out to the overall majority. A simple survey would confirm this, assuming members answered honestly.
Herein lies the problem: the leadership made a mistake. This is obvious. But what should the leadership uphold: the Honor Code or the double standard?
Elaboration
You see, regardless of whether or not the Council and Community Leaders agreed with this double standard, they apparently offered no objection to it. This form of complacency is the same as announcing its acceptance publicly. If the leadership were truly concerned with this practice or did not approve of it, rather than remain silent they should have made their feelings on the matter known.
Perhaps they did and it was simply disregarded by the rest of the community; with a community of over 30,000 members, I can understand the virtual impossibility to weed out all of these insubordinate members. However, I am unaware of any attempts to reprimand these members if such a decision ever was made.
Disregarding this fact, there is still the issue of racism. Is “nig-nog” a derogatory term in the United Kingdom? For that matter, is it an offensive term? Webster’s Dictionary defines the word as another term for a black person. The Oxford Dictionary defines it as a racial derogatory term. Both denote these definitions as being primarily used in the United Kingdom. Most online sources acknowledge the fact that the word’s popularity existed in the 1980’s and other online sources may cite additional definitions for the term. The majority fail to provide any type of source for these citations though, meaning that they are not viable for use in a judgment of this difficulty. Apparently the most popular reference that I have heard from leaders about the term is that it is a type of drink. I did not see the original statement made by La Resistance, but I do know he was referencing a person. Common sense would rule out inanimate objects as a definition of the term given its usage.
It would seem someone took offense to this post as well; otherwise, would it have been reported in the first place? La Resistance was a semi-reputable member of the community. He achieved the rank of Lieutenant and managed to bring several Recruits into the community. It was not as if he was disliked by any particular members of the community in such a way that they would be looking for an excuse to get him in trouble. Had the leadership “gotten all the details,” they perhaps would have seen things from the perspective of members who knew the member well, rather than base their own decision on La Resistance’s general reputation and the words that emerged from his mouth.
What about the claims of XGC being a mature gaming community? As an 18 and older community, members are assumed to have reached an age of accountability. That is, they are expected to know what is and isn’t socially acceptable by the standards of all the people they interact with, regardless of their race, nationality, age, or sex. In the United States, and apparently the United Kingdom as well, it is socially unacceptable to make comments that can be interpreted as racist in a public form of communication. In this case, the thread the post was made in was accessible by ALL members of the forums that belonged to a clan-based user group. Had this been in a private form of communication, such as a private message or e-mail, we would not have this issue. But since La Resistance decided it should be posted in a public forum, the entire event was left open to interpretation by anyone who should discover it rather than the person it was intended for.
But perhaps I am being too critical. People make mistakes. But then again, perhaps the leadership shouldn’t have allowed those they taught and trained to become so critical.
The leadership also has claimed that perhaps the child didn’t know what the term meant. Then perhaps the 15-year-old should not be in the community. And before I am criticized for allowing the member in the community, he had already been accepted before I became General of XGC Backfire, let alone involved in it since my original transfer to XGC Royalty in November 2007. I have had several members of XGC Backfire confirm that La Resistance is not 18 and therefore should not be allowed in a mature gaming community.
Regardless of the age factor, I and more than likely other Section Leaders can confirm his immaturity in handling other situations, specifically his desire to become a Captain. I use the term desire lightly. I have had several encounters with this member with attempts to pressure me into giving him a promotion, including one threat to leave the community and take other members with him. Ambition and insubordination are not synonymous.
Summary
In short, the leadership has a choice to make. Either they choose to uphold a double standard and fully implement it into their Honor Code and other regulations, and as a result ban La Resistance from the community, or they choose to uphold their original Honor Code and offer everyone who has been wrongly banned a chance to re-enter the community. The problem started there, not with this and I would urge the readers of this document to seriously consider what I have presented. If I did not love this community as much as I do, I would not have spent so much time, energy, and consideration in all that I have done for it.
I would hope the readers of this have realized that I am attempting to be as objective as possible in my arguments. I will admit to some subjectivity, but anyone who knows me, knows La Resistance, and knows what I have discussed here will understand this.
I hope that the leadership and members of this community alike make up their own decisions about this issue rather than let someone else lead them blindly.
Humbly Yours,
XGC Advent
jk jk