I don't believe my eyes!!

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Sun May 13, 2001 3:48 pm

@Wave: done. Good it was removed so quickly.

@all: I may be very naive since I live in a country where the current discussion regarding homosexuality is whether or not adoption of children should be allowed or not. Registered partnership, which is equal to marriage in terms of the law, has been available for gay people for many years.

I realise this subject might be more controversial here at GB than in Western Europe. But I disapprove of the solution that the people who are targets for other peoples prejudiced opinions are the ones who get silenced.

@Fable: I don't agree with you that we can presume the original posting was not sincere.

fable · Post by **fable** » Sun May 13, 2001 3:56 pm

The topic of same-sex "marriages" in online games came up when I was DMing in one of those massively multiplayer whohaa's a year or two ago. We'd had different sex marriages, before, quite a few of 'em, in fact. They could "pay" using realm currency for a DM-arranged wedding (in which they had a large hand at determining the extra items), or find a local "priest" to do a wedding, or simply announce themselves as wedded--oddly enough, almost exactly corrolating to the Common Law position that was prevalent in most of Europe until the late Middle Ages.

The same-sex stuff arrived late in the day, and threw us a bit, but we ultimately decided to go ahead and treat it like any other marriage: same rules for ceremonies, same rules against interolopers bent on disturbing things. We didn't get many requests. The whole issue in any case is pretty strange--I mean, how can anyone be certain about the sex of somebody on line? There's no substitute for reallife. IMO, people who seek warmth and companionship from a computer game's characters are in serious need of counseling. I'm not suggesting they are misfits; but modern societies lack the community-based safety nets that used to attempt to give a sense of belonging and social worth to individuals. Computer games are no substitute.

@C Elegans: "I don't agree with you that we can presume the original posting was not sincere."

I'm not suggesting that you can, or should, conclude that, C Elegans. That's my conclusion, drawn from my own personal experiences in dealing with trolls and as a moderator. It looks very apparent to me. To others, that obviously isn't apparent. There's no way of knowing who is right, and the question is moot at this point.

[ 05-13-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Sun May 13, 2001 4:43 pm

@Buck Satan:

I will try to put myself in your shoes for a moment. I understand you want to please everybody, and this is of course impossible. Maybe it was better for the majority of the users that you closed the thread. I understand you hate to ban members and close threads. Banning people for expressing their views is of course discrimination of those who are prejudiced towards others.

BUT, MPO is this: If a member posts insulting or discriminating opinions about others, that member should be warned, just like I've seen you and the other moderators do several times. If that member continues to post offensive material, posts or part of posts should be deleted and the member warned again or, depending on degree, banned. I think each individual should take responsibility for following the rules in a context (in this case GB) where he/she by free will has choosen to participate. If the member cannot/does not want to refrain from insulting others, I would prefer banning that member/s before closing threads because a topic is controversial to a minority of people who both are prejudiced and absolutely *must* insult the targets for their prejudice.

Buck, think like this: 40 years ago, if there had been a post about a black man wanting to romance Jaheria, he would have probably have received some insulting replies because interracial marriages were controversial among some groups then. Do you think it would have been right to close down that thread because racists complained and flamed him?
Apart from my own opinions, I have a suggestion: state more clearly why you close the topic down. As it stands now, it's a bit vague, who is going to be insulted and why? It could be interpreted like you wish to protect homophobic users from being insulted or angry by having to read a post about gay romances, and I presume that is not what you are referring to.

ThorinOakensfield · Post by **ThorinOakensfield** » Sun May 13, 2001 4:51 pm

Originally posted by Darkpoet:
<STRONG> I wonder why my name got posted in there. The little b@stard. </STRONG>

Nick_**** i mean Nick_Dude posted that.

On a serious note: I am kind of against homosexuality. I believe it is wrong, but I'm not like one of those people who hate a homosexual or am prejudice, but I just think its naturally wrong.

[ 05-13-2001: Message edited by: ThorinOakensfield ]

cheesemage · Post by **cheesemage** » Sun May 13, 2001 4:53 pm

I think he knew that

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Sun May 13, 2001 5:41 pm

Originally posted by ThorinOakensfield:
<STRONG>On a serious note: I am kind of against homosexuality. I believe it is wrong, but I'm not like one of those people who hate a homosexual or am prejudice, but I just think its naturally wrong.
</STRONG>

This kind of statement, I have no problem at all with. You are entiteled to your opinion, I don't agree, but agreeing is not the point.
Personally, I see no discrimination, no insult and no disrespect in the way you expressed yourself above. (Of course I can't speak for everybody, I'm not even gay myself, but this is my personal reaction.)
If everybody could keep it at this level, there would be much less problems.

cheesemage · Post by **cheesemage** » Sun May 13, 2001 6:18 pm

lets just be glad it didnt get worse, i am not gay butpeople are thats their choice and doesnt affect me

fable · Post by **fable** » Sun May 13, 2001 6:57 pm

One quick note: I don't envy Buck in such a situation. It's a tough call, and no matter what he does, he catches flack for it. I do think we might cut him some slack, given the imponderables involved.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » Mon May 14, 2001 5:32 am

Of course this once again happens when I am not online. Let me quickly say a couple of things.

1. Buck made exactly the right decision. I know that it is a hard one, but I would have closed the topic as well. The thread would only have resulted in flames. The closing of that topic does in no way reflect the way that the people at GameBanshee think or feel about gay or lesbian people.

2. @Fable, It is at time hard to decide whether a post is serious or not. However as a member/moderator/administrator you have to give the poster the benefit of the doubt. Especially in these cases you can only assume that the post is serious.

3. I wonder how long it will be till games such as BG2 will open itself up to the gay-community. It is a simple fact of life that a certain percentage of the population is gay. TV shows are increasingly accepting this: Friends, Ellen, etc. I hope that it is just a matter of time till game designers also take this into account.

Anatres · Post by **Anatres** » Mon May 14, 2001 7:08 am

I missed it entirely. May have been interesting.

My attitude is that I don't embrace the concept of 'diversity' as the healthy evolution of society or civilization. I also believe that discrimination is a cultural tool for narrow minded zealots.

'Free speech' carries a huge burden. Few realize this. But then again that's why there are slander and libel laws (at least here in the US). Unfortunately one cannot exercise one's right to seek redress in the court over what is posted on the internet. Enter Buck, Flagg, Deacon and the other Administrators and Moderators. They are the final arbitors of the content of this forum. Their actions (closing/deleteing threads and banning posters) need to be fully supported by all of us. Lest this forum for discussion, debate, fun and community dissapears entirely.

fable · Post by **fable** » Mon May 14, 2001 7:49 am

@Flagg: It is at time hard to decide whether a post is serious or not. However as a member/moderator/administrator you have to give the poster the benefit of the doubt. Especially in these cases you can only assume that the post is serious.

My first remarks, here, never dealt with suggested actions. I was expressing disbelief over the intent of the poster--not what to do with his/her post. The two issues aren't related, as I see 'em. I can be (and have been) highly skeptical of the intent behind a given post, without desiring to take any action against either the poster, or the post. Lee's post, after all, was not a flamer. He showed no disrespect to the BG community, at large or individually. I have no evidence that he was trying to outrage anyone. There was just something "wrong" about the sense of it, and I was conveying my opinion, here. My philosophy up on the board I used to moderate was when in doubt, wait. If someone was a troll, they'd hang themselves. Assuming they weren't, no harm was done.

The responses to Lee's post, on the other hand, were outrageous. IMO, Buck made the best of a bad situation, stopping a "pile-on" mentality among some people who exhibited a pattern of reactions that ran from a highly misplaced sense of fun to outright homophobia. I'm also glad he stopped it when he did. No way was it going to get any better.

I suggest it was a no-winner because nobody comes away from such a thing feeling good about their participation--except, perhaps, Thorin, who had the humanity to apologize to Lee. For which I'll buy a hat and doff it to him, anyday.

fable · Post by **fable** » Mon May 14, 2001 7:50 am

Argh, a doublepost. Well, Flagg, I hope you don't mind listening in stereo.

Flagg · Post by **Flagg** » Mon May 14, 2001 12:43 pm

@Fable, I totally agree with what you are saying. You'll be getting no argument from me on this on.

I especially agree that trolls will hang themselves in the end.

josh · Post by **josh** » Mon May 14, 2001 11:08 pm

Whoa! You don't visit this site for a couple of days and you can miss quite a lot. Guess its kinda too late to find out what happened.

Nightfire · Post by **Nightfire** » Wed May 16, 2001 12:19 pm

Ugh. Such situations are always nasty, and believe me, as a gay woman I'm speaking from a lot of experience here. Keeping that in mind, I must admit that I was shocked and dismayed when the thread was closed because it looked like it was Lee who was being censored, not so much the 'phobes who had no business barging into that thread ... just as a gay woman or man would have no business invading one of the many straight romance threads with disparaging comments.

I didn't reply right away because I needed to collect my thoughts a bit, plus, as a new poster here (though long-time lurker) I wanted to see the responses of the regulars first. And what can I say, I'm pleasantly surprised.

Thanks for all the positive comments, people.

(Aside: C Elegans, if you do see this, let me add my voice to the chorus of people who asked you not to leave the board. I'm new here, but I liked your style and leve-headedness a lot.)

Buck, I understand that moderators don't have it easy sometimes, and believe me, I don't envy you (not just in this situation, but generally speaking)! I'm glad you and your colleagues here are dedicated to keeping threads civil (and on topic for the forum, if applicable).

But I honestly do not think that you can be expected to act as some kind of net nanny for people who are too damn lazy to watch their own kids (a major fault in a parent, IMO), or who have so little self-control that they "cannot" simply skip posts that they may find offensive, but that are otherwise perfectly civil.

It is, as you said, plain impossible to make everyone happy, to ensure that there are no "controversial" posts. I'm just worried that closing the topic will send the wrong message to certain kinds of people who cannot muster the maturity that conversations of any kind require -- especially on the 'net, since the anonymity, the general lack of direct consequences, has the potential to bring out the worst in some people. Even if it's not your intention (and I don't think it was), the gaybashers got what they wanted, in a way.

<shrug>

I'm rambling, I guess. Happens quite a bit. I only wish I could make insult-hurling idiots or close-minded zealots understand just how much their actions and attitudes can hurt people ... people who don't do any harm to the idiots and zealots themselves, or anyone else.