[Three of Seven]

I'm sorry, but it's not being thin skinned to get upset over a torrent of abuse leveled towards you via private message, and public places like Facebook. Everyone is free to disagree with a decision taken, but that does not give them the right to tell another person to go to hell, or call them a disabled ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. Additionally, it's not really the done thing to out someones sexuality, while a fair few people in the UFP know I am a lesbian, it doesn't give someone the right to broadcast it on Facebook, it's not like I'm famous or in the public interest either.

I was one of the people who tried to help Strathkin at the start, gave him a lot of time and patients, while others were running thin of those, but he ignored all this and ignored all the things I had told him when he asked questions. He showed no interest in taking responsibility for anything.

This isn't a paid job, no one here in the community in should be subject to abuse for going about the tasks they have been given. Attack the argument, never the person.

[Taku]

Here's the deal:

Derogatory speech, hate speech, harmful speech, whatever you want to call it can only be harmful, hateful, or derogatory to the person or persons it is directed at. I cannot be offended for someone else. I can be offended by a statement directed at someone else, but if the person that the speech is directed at finds no fault with it, then I have to honor their feelings about it. I can be outraged and I can speak out, but I cannot be offended. The speech was not directed at me. Only the target of the insults has the right to be offended.

There have been times when hate was directed at people or groups and they have taken the epithets and embraced the words or the images and made them their own. I could not do that for them. That was their decision.

I'm not sure I'm making my point as clear as it is in my head.

Having muddled through all of that, it comes down to the feelings of the aggrieved. If the person being insulted or abused takes offence and makes that offence known and the harassment continues, then the abuser is most certainly at fault and must be dealt with. If, however, the recipient does not find the remarks degrading, then there is no reason to intervene.

If I call my gay friend a ♥♥♥♥♥♥, and some random stranger overhears it and takes offense at my use of a derogatory term but my friend is perfectly fine with it, my use of the word has caused no injury and the random stranger has no reason to tell me what I can and cannot say to my very dear friend. However, if my very dear gay friend took offence to being called a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ by that same random stranger, I would have every reason to pound said stranger to a bloody pulp.

Context. I think that's what I'm trying to get across.

[pip]

Wow. I'm not around much, but I'm really sad to see that you guys had to go through this. In the end, you gotta do what you gotta do.

Basics of any gaming clan is to be nice to the other kids. Not a hard rule to follow.

[Solace]

A quote that kept running through my mind as I read this thread - "The right to swing your fists ends where the other guy's nose begins."

Wise words.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm sorry, but it's not being thin skinned to get upset over a torrent of abuse leveled towards you via private message, and public places like Facebook. Everyone is free to disagree with a decision taken, but that does not give them the right to tell another person to go to hell, or call them a disabled ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥. Additionally, it's not really the done thing to out someones sexuality, while a fair few people in the UFP know I am a lesbian, it doesn't give someone the right to broadcast it on Facebook, it's not like I'm famous or in the public interest either.

I was one of the people who tried to help Strathkin at the start, gave him a lot of time and patients, while others were running thin of those, but he ignored all this and ignored all the things I had told him when he asked questions. He showed no interest in taking responsibility for anything.

This isn't a paid job, no one here in the community in should be subject to abuse for going about the tasks they have been given. Attack the argument, never the person.

You shouldn't have had to endure that kind of abuse to begin with. Honestly I don’t think I could have handled it as calmly as you have, while we’ve had our disagreements in the past, I would never had thought to spout that kind of abuse, in my mind it takes a really insensitive person to spout such vitriol.

[Haseo]

sorry to hear who ever was affected by this and hope your ok, i wasent around for most of it, but if you need someone to talk to im here for ya.

[casualsto]

The explanation effort at this point far exceeds any potential positive result's value as a return. I give up, as I don't understand context and saying something to someone that he/she is, is actually offensive when we feel like it. (That's the definition of context here).

I'm sorry for our borg girl's efforts going to waste, but some people... Can't be reasoned with as you use arguments solely.

[Blaster]

I am honestly quite shocked.

I never interacted, spoke to him, or saw his outbursts and rants but what I saw there was very shocking.

I have dealt with a few people on other games that are quite toxic, none of them as bad as this.

Thanks to the FEO for the transparency.

[Sul-Matuul]

Sweet lord have mercy.....what did I miss here?!?!?

That is some meltdown from a member, where the heck did that all come from? I know we'd had a few issues in SFO with him having ideas for policies that didn't quite make sense but I'd not seen any signs of such a massive change of attitude. Pretty spectacular tbh.

That said I've a few thoughts on the issues raised here:

1) Well played from the CL6 guys n' gals again for being fully open and honest about the situation. It really helps promote that openness and fairness I've seen all across UFP; it's what makes this such a fantastic community to be part of.

2) Hate speech of any nature, even written in jest, is totally unacceptable..
Spewing hatred all over PM's and message boards etc is just not acceptable, even if the person thinks it's all fun and games. We can't have anyone like that here, this is no the place for such vile people to hide. So getting rid of them is perfectly acceptable, I would absolutely do the same (and I have to deal with this sort of stuff in real life in my job too).

3) Giving someone warnings is fair. It gives them a chance to admit to being wrong and make amends. The fact this person continued on down that slippery slope to me indicates that no amount of warnings or strikes would have helped; but because due process was adhered to it was dealt with fairly for all to see. Nobody could accuse the leadership of being unfair in handling this situation.

4) Free speech is all well and good, this always gets brought up when ever moderation of a media comes into play. The big differences are that firstly you are here to play under UFP's rules. If you don't want to follow them then you have no place here sadly. If that means you must be slightly less "free" with your speech to remain here then that is what you must do; you don't have some universal, cosmic right to come on here and spew hateful obscenities at other members.
Secondly, whatever you believe you are free to say, it's the recipient that will determine if it is acceptable. On the internet you can't easily tell if someone is being sarcastic or whatever but the offense is in the eye of the beholder, not the person writing a statement. Something one person thinks is innocuous may offend many others. If you say I have red hair you may think it perfectly normal, I may take offense for some reason. It's not up to you to decide if that statement offended me or not. If I feel offended then it's up to you to ensure you don't do it again, change how you speak to me etc.
And some things are clearly unacceptable no matter how free you allow people to be. I don't care what your country's constitution says or whatever; using someones sexuality, race, disability or the like against them (which is evident in the context of use) if totally unacceptable....it makes you a piece of ♥♥♥♥ as a human if you think it's ok to be like that.

Finally....

5) Three is a girl??? I thought she was our secret lizard overlord in disguise.......

[Minnow Raydor]

What to say here hmm.. well think most of it has been said and I feel sorry for the people that had to take this abuse from such a troubled individual.

Best foot forward from here I hope never gets easier reading these cases.

[Rellimie]

Well, I guess I can finally block him in-game without feeling bad about it.

I did a while ago and I didn't feel bad.

[Rellimie]

Jesus, how bad was he in game? It's like there is an entire saga happening on there as well.

I play games to take a break from life and enjoy myself. I'm quick with pulling the trigger on the ban hammer when someone interferes with that. Nothing he said or did approached what happened here.

[Solace]

Jesus, how bad was he in game? It's like there is an entire saga happening on there as well.

From what I saw he would just rant about random things, mostly benign stuff, but he would interrupt conversations or just change track mid convo on a tangent.

[Mack]

That is some meltdown from a member, where the heck did that all come from? I know we'd had a few issues in SFO with him having ideas for policies that didn't quite make sense but I'd not seen any signs of such a massive change of attitude. Pretty spectacular tbh.

Honestly, the issues were way more than STO Staff saw. STO Command shielded most of it from CL4 as well, we were giving him warnings and a chance to improve upon given advice (this was even before strikes). He's been indirectly attacking me as well (but not in the way he attacked Three) and Bridger as you can see.

When we removed him from STO Staff, I did want to post to the team about it for transparency sake but I abstained from it. I thought he would return to CL3 and would not indulge into the kind of behavior he was showing us - because that's what he told me in confidence following the dismissal message I sent him. So I thought I'd rather let him return in peace and not post anything further that could reflect negatively upon him while he's still a part of this community.

Anyway, he decided to not be true to what he told, escalated things and here we are.

[Sul-Matuul]

Honestly, the issues were way more than STO Staff saw. STO Command shielded most of it from CL4 as well, we were giving him warnings and a chance to improve upon given advice (this was even before strikes). He's been indirectly attacking me as well (but not in the way he attacked Three) and Bridger as you can see.

When we removed him from STO Staff, I did want to post to the team about it for transparency sake but I abstained from it. I thought he would return to CL3 and would not indulge into the kind of behavior he was showing us - because that's what he told me in confidence following the dismissal message I sent him. So I thought I'd rather let him return in peace and not post anything further that could reflect negatively upon him while he's still a part of this community.

Anyway, he decided to not be true to what he told, escalated things and here we are.

Ah that's all good to know Mack. I've every confidence in you, Bridger and Nova handling such things fairly and tbh I hadn't even noticed he'd gone from the SFO team! Shows how much attention I've been paying recently!

I'm all in favour of transparency but I think if he gave you assurances of a peaceful transition down to CL3 again then there was no need to drag the whole team into the affair. Sadly he broke his promise to you and further action was required.

[Three of Seven]

5) Three is a girl??? I thought she was our secret lizard overlord in disguise.......

Yes, I am definitely not a lizard overlord, I promise...