Are we allowed to discuss the rules of the boards in this subforum?

http://imgur.com/a/Pfk3JTu

In the album you'll find my post, the justification given for removal, and the discord chat in which I talked to a moderator about it.

I understand that maybe the verse about dicks in butts was too far. Perhaps it was too graphic. But to say that the verse is an attack on gay people, simply because it uses a single word even when the author states he means no disrespect, shows a lack of reading comprehension and a leaden trigger finger on the moderator responsible. The fact this was upheld by a different moderator, is even more disturbing.

The post is about letting humor be, and subsequently not using DZK's humor as ammunition to denounce controversial jokes in general. The J. Cole verse is used as an example of very controversial humor which was used to spark thoughtful discussion, a terrible joke with a profound meaning. The verse is the justification for the removal of the post, and for my week long ban. So most of THIS post will be about the verse, and its implications. The removed post is minuscule compared to the problem that the moderators revealed.

POINT ONE The verse, as I think you'll find after thinking it through, is not an attack on %%%%%%s or gay people. Instead it challenges society's stigma against %%%%%%s/gay people. J. Cole uses the line about not meaning disrespect when he says %%%%%% to neutralize the word and distance himself from a homophobic point of view. Furthermore, we hear lines about male/female intercourse all the time in songs, but gay sex is blasphemy right?! Through the shock value of using the word %%%%%% and the line about dicks in asses, J. Cole shows us how homophobic we really are (literally says this in the verse). We cringe when we hear this verse. Why? J. Cole forces us to ask. If anything, the verse is the exact opposite of hate speech, encouraging society to examine its subconscious prejudice against gays.

POINT TWO This brings me to my point about the hate speech rule on the boards. As the verse clearly shows, certain traditionally derogatory words can have great effects for good when used in the right context. This is the crux of this point; you can't ignore context when discerning hate speech.

Just using a certain word is absolutely not a hateful attack. Can it be distasteful or offensive? Yes. But just about anything will be distasteful and offensive for somebody. Instead of basing a punishment on a single word, look at the word in its context. Use a holistic review to determine transgressions, or you risk hiding quotes like J. Cole's (which really is an incredible show of solidarity for gays).

In real life, words are usually said with an intonation. Skilled speakers and listeners can use tone to imply and infer meanings when implicit. There isn't such a way to derive meaning from a single word in a text medium while ignoring its context. It's just not possible.

POINT 3 It's a bad idea to try to ban hate speech. Notice I said "try," I'll circle back to why that's important.

Let people show each other that hateful speech is an antisocial behavior. This is a forum which is based on up and down votes. The best and/or most popular ideas are voted to the top, while the less popular or useful ideas are down voted. Good ideas are mostly supported by comments, and bad ideas are mostly denounced by comments. By removing the hateful speech of bigots, you deny the rest of us the opportunity to publicly show the wrong in hateful speech.

I understand this is the stance riot has taken, but as a manually moderated forum there should be more freedom in the ideas allowed here. In the game, since the dissolution of the tribunal, an AI has been responsible for moderating in game behavior. However here on boards, a handful of people are in charge of moderating content. There's really no excuse for basing moderation actions off of single words without looking at context, as a human naturally does.

If people are dead set on keeping controversial words off the boards, that's fine (even though you add to the stigma against the words by doing this). I understand this is a video game forum frequented by children. Just don't use an umbrella term like hate speech. Instead, clearly state in the rules banned words, and get rid of the hate speech rule; it's redundant. The golden rule already covers hate speech.

That said, here's the nail in the coffin for hate speech. What the hell is it? Your rules specify it as a either a direct or an indirect attack on a person or group on the basis of sexuality, ethnicity, or religion.

What criteria must a phrase meet to be judged hate speech?

The criteria is the offended's subjective feelings.

Who decides whether a phrase is an attack or just an insensitive utterance?

The person who decides what hate speech is, is the person who is so ruled by emotion that they would rather hide than rationally argue against hateful speech.

This is so subjective, it'd be silly to try to ban all the things that people find hateful. As the community grows, so too does the number of people who find previously kosher phrases now unacceptable. This is a problem that'll only get worse in the future, unless solved now. Of course we won't run out of words, but we'll lose part of our rainbow.

I don't pretend to have a perfect solution, but banning hateful speech is regressive. It enables self-victimization, and prevents the rational arguments against hateful speech from surfacing.

I can't blame you. I don't envy your position. There's a lot of hateful speech. But it is our duty as rational members of this community(moderators especially) to denounce hateful speech where we see it.

Thanks for reading this. I would greatly appreciate if you share this with other moderators. I would love to hear any viewpoints they might have on this topic, especially against me. (I typed this on my phone so it's not my best writing, I am sorry.) ((I wouldn't mind if a mod wants toedit the post to make it more clearly formatted.)) [slayer-jinx-catface]