Every internet forum will attract its fair share of trolls and ignoramuses. It is important to not wear your emotions on your sleeves when surfing the internet.
However, when a forum falls victim to hate and racism to the extent that some members consider leaving the site entirely we, as a community, have to react. Our BGG moderators do a wonderful "policing" the site in accordance with BGG guidelines, but sometimes that is not enough. We as a community have to voice our discontent and give support to the victims.
works hard every month to give us the latest news, stats and gossip from the MMP camp. To me his contributions are invaluable and I would hate to lose him because of some racist bullshit.
Antonio, you have my full support and I advocate tougher BGG guidelines against racial slurs and other types of hate speach.
AMEN!! Antonio is one of the staples of BGG!! It is sad that racism has to enter into everything nowadays! Ignorant people's comments hurt many more people than they think they do. You would think that as we progress as a people, we would learn but I guess race and religion will always be an issue to SOME. And to you Antonio, know that you have WAY more admirers and friends on BGG than the very small minority of small minded, unthoughtful, and self centered people that sometimes pop up here.
I certainly don't leave thinking I've somehow been offended to the extent that it's going to physically manifest in a way that I can no longer live my life in the pursuit of happiness.
My patented 'Ayn Randism Detector" just topped out at 11.
Hmmmm, my patented 'Check With Reality Detector' maxed out when I actually read the enormous plethora of people who actually believe intangibles such as language / words can actually physically hurt or otherwise cause them to have a bad day without their consent, aside from provable libel and / or slander.
I'm surprised no one's Eleanor Roosevelt Detector went off on this platitude. Platitude though it may be, it has value in some situations.
This isn't one. IIRC, the objection was to the BGG refusal to exercise its institutional authority to remove offensive remarks by one member made about another member's nationality. Antonio B-D allegedly left BGG, but his profile says he was active today.
As I understand it, Antonio B-D was upset that BGG did nothing to remove the offensive language. In his view, the offensive language was wrong and contrary to BGG policy. The "hurt" was in the institution failing Antonio by saying its policy was hands-off to censorship.
In my opinion, the conflict is not as simple as "pick-a-side." There's value in free speech, just as there's value in one's identity. The medium of social networks makes offensive language less than a credible threat, and the offender can hardly "harm" the offendee in any real way.
So I do understand Antonio's offense and his hurt by BGG not doing what he wanted them to do. I also appreciate the value in BGG keeping its hands off postings. We all know the Admins do kick people off - wasn't there a Michael Barnes here at one time? So if the offender's language persisted, I do believe he would have been kicked out, too.
That said, the fact that Antonio B-D logged in today is proof that he hasn't left. In my view, that means taking his side as being a victim is revisiting a place Antonio B-D has since moved passed.
Hey, get your stinking cursor off my face! I got nukes, you know.
superflat wrote:
That said, the fact that Antonio B-D logged in today is proof that he hasn't left. In my view, that means taking his side as being a victim is revisiting a place Antonio B-D has since moved passed.
As I have said before, Antonio committed to monitoring the MMP P-500 geeklist he has been doing every month, thru the end of February.
I certainly don't leave thinking I've somehow been offended to the extent that it's going to physically manifest in a way that I can no longer live my life in the pursuit of happiness.
My patented 'Ayn Randism Detector" just topped out at 11.
Hmmmm, my patented 'Check With Reality Detector' maxed out when I actually read the enormous plethora of people who actually believe intangibles such as language / words can actually physically hurt or otherwise cause them to have a bad day without their consent, aside from provable libel and / or slander.
And yet it doesn't go off when faced with a philosophy that equates human liberty with protection of property.
That said, the fact that Antonio B-D logged in today is proof that he hasn't left. In my view, that means taking his side as being a victim is revisiting a place Antonio B-D has since moved passed.
As I have said before, Antonio committed to monitoring the MMP P-500 geeklist he has been doing every month, thru the end of February.
I didn't start it, but I recommend folks wear the Spain flag in solidarity with Antonio, and to publicly show their opposition to racist speech on BGG.
Let Antonio know we want him to stay. He's a former GotW, a great contributor, and one of BGG's true gentlemen.
Not a chance in hell am I doing this. I disagree with his leaving and his reasons for doing so.
Personally I don't think this should be about Antonio at all. Personally I think you should be making a geeklist about the person who made the comments in the first place and we should take out our anger on him. If he truly did say something awful then the thing to do is, if BBG admins won't do it, scare him/her off the site all together.
It this really is a "community" as people tell me then we should bond together to deal with the issue. If I in my own community had to deal with extreme racism than my friends would help me either kick the guy's ass or at least get him in legal trouble. We need to be comfortable to virtually kick ass when needed.
Not a chance in hell am I doing this. I disagree with his leaving and his reasons for doing so.
Personally I don't think this should be about Antonio at all. Personally I think you should be making a geeklist about the person who made the comments in the first place and we should take out our anger on him. If he truly did say something awful then the thing to do is, if BBG admins won't do it, scare him/her off the site all together.
It this really is a "community" as people tell me then we should bond together to deal with the issue. If I in my own community had to deal with extreme racism than my friends would help me either kick the guy's ass or at least get him in legal trouble. We need to be comfortable to virtually kick ass when needed.
I didn't change my flag to show support for Antonio's actions on leaving the site. I changed my flag because what the guy asked for was "to publicly show their opposition to racist speech on BGG". for that reason alone I will gladly wear the flag.
While I try to view things from a relative (and tolerant) point of view, I guess I'm not too good at it. I believe some things are just wrong and should be stood up against. While most people's prejudice is pretty well engrained and we probably won't change anyone's mind, I would just as soon see them keep their rotten opinions to themselves. Racism sucks!
I think to delete the comments is to suggest that such abhorrent views do not exist. I like the flag and hide system BGG uses, and we would not be nearly as aware of such remarks had this not occurred. I think Racism is better stood up against by allowing us, as a community, to stand against it.
"Fools talk, cowards are silent, wise men listen."
It is sad that member of our community, five year geek veteran, and golden meeple has to leave us. I always consider boardgames to be joining people, not dividing. It was one of reasons that brought me in that hobby.
Boardgamers should be boardgamers, openminded and without prejudice. No matter where they were born or live, nationality, religious belief, gender or age, family status or sexual orientation,... There should be no insults, racism, ignorance.
Do not quit this wonderfull community just because there is a small minority of trolls here. Ignore them. Warn them about their ignorance and stupidity.
Don't be drag, just be a queen Whether you're broke or evergreen You're black, white, beige, chola descent You're Lebanese, you're orient
Whether life's disabilities Left you outcast, bullied or teased Rejoice and love yourself today 'Cause baby, you were born this way
No matter gay, straight or bi Lesbian, transgendered life I'm on the right track, baby I was born to survive
No matter black, white or beige Chola or orient made I'm on the right track, baby I was born to be brave
I'm beautiful in my way 'Cause God makes no mistakes I'm on the right track, baby I was born this way
One planet, one species I don't like the word race when it comes to humans for obvious reasons).
We're all different, and yet all the same. And when we travel abroad, every single one of us becomes "a foreigner". Go gigure.
It's the character of a person that counts, nothing more. Not his hair colour, where he comes from, how he dresses, what he likes to eat, or what kind of games he plays.
Fear of the unknown and ignorance, coupled with pride and prejudice make a perfect recipe for racism. So don't be afraid.
Antonio - please don't leave over such comments, even though I know how it must feel. No one should be called what you were called, and no one has the right to do that. But leaving would just become a "victory" for those who oppose human rights and the love for respect!
Do not give in. And stay. There are way more people who like you than those who don't.
one of my favorite quotes: "There’s no such thing as a Latino race. There never has been. There never will be. There’s only one race, and that’s what the show brought out. That is the human race, period."
While I completely agree with the comments made by Edward James Olmos on a spiritual and moral level, I think it also important to remember some distinctions in the "vehicle(s)" we use to accomplish those ends. The U.N. is just as rife with corruption, greed, and angst as any "sovereign" govt from the individual nations around the world and the U.N. does not currently represent anything close to what this actor is trying to get across.
As we "race of humans" struggle (but evolve) to recognize our "oneness" as a species we must still remain vigilant about individual freedom in the process. We certainly don't need any sort of centralized power-structure controlling all the rules if those rules plainly violate individual based initiative pursuits where there is no direct violation of Person, Property, or Liberty (Like many U.N. mandates do). Obviously, those who believe in freedom and personal sovereignty must work towards making a better world regardless of race. We need cooperation with trading partners and the lowering of trade barriers. We DO need a forum to exchange ideas (the best use for the U.N. I see at present), but not to pass laws that supersede a nation's national sovereignty without consent. In our modern world, we need bodies to handle weights, measures, and standards; allocation of spectrum space; designation of air corridors; postal regulations, etc. It is a boon to have organizations that can coordinate world efforts to eradicate diseases when they break out or libraries for the recording and dissemination of scientific discoveries of benefit to all mankind. We clearly need to work as individual nations within our own sovereign laws to coordinate among developed nations to alleviate poverty, plant forests, purify water, and stimulate agriculture to third world nations. But here comes the but....
But, while global cooperation of this nature is essential to all "races", it may be accomplished by mutual accords between nations that preserve their own national identity, national beliefs, and national sovereignty. Obviously we must all try to find mechanisms to enable us to live together in peace on planet Earth and I know that this actor is doing his best from his perspective to facilitate this world-view with his comments, but it certainly does NOT require the undermining of my own country's economic or political sovereignty. Nor does it require us to embrace some overarching utopian world vision in which all "become as one race" in order to achieve these worthwhile goals. Yes, we all belong to the "human race" but organizations such as the U.N. and several others are simply using celebrities such as this to push what amounts to Global government and they are preying upon the sincere desires of these people who want to live on a planet which can exist peacefully on a global scale. I'm afraid that most people (including these actors) won't see the Corporatocracy and the power-elite who are behind these organizations for what they really are---A means to turn this diverse world and its' peoples into a giant global gulag with the now available technology that no Totalitarian Socialist State, dictator, or tyrant has ever had until now.
Again, I do appreciate the clip and I do agree at heart with what Olmos is saying....but.
I think Edward James Olmos' heart is in the right place and that's certainly the ideal. On the other hand, just asserting something doesn't necessarily make everyone believe in it either, and "there is no race" is often used as a way to say "you mention race (especially as it is used to advantage me), and I'll tell you you're crazy" or "any hardships you suffer are only perceived, not real".
I think Edward James Olmos' heart is in the right place and that's certainly the ideal. On the other hand, just asserting something doesn't necessarily make everyone believe in it either, and "there is no race" is often used as a way to say "you mention race (especially as it is used to advantage me), and I'll tell you you're crazy" or "any hardships you suffer are only perceived, not real".
The hardships are most certainly real, but I think the idea here is to show that those hardships are 100% human constructed. The proper way to make this point is to simply say "there is no scientific support for the concept of more than one race of humans".
That doesn't make racism go away.
I'm not sure how one disbelieves a virtual scientific fact, but it's not like that sort of thing is unheard of with regards to the beliefs and opinions of certain groups.
I know some people will get angry at me for posting this, but I mainly want to start a discussion how to treat these incidents in the future.
As with all things, when people give attention to something it gets important. The same thing applies to the originale article. By leaving Antonio unintentionally gave the original article way more importance and power. And by starting this geeklist this again was multiplied exponantially. By doing all this the original intention of such comments is honored in every way possible. Power is given to those who get the most attention (Actors are a great example in this aspect) and that is exactly what is happening here (although on a smaller scale).
In my opinion it is better to just flag such articles and comments and for the rest to just ignore it. In this way such opinions do not get the widespread attention they get now.
I do not condone racism and never will, but I do not support some symbolic support like this (And I know by posting this in a way I do)
The human race, to which so many of my readers belong, has been playing at children's games from the beginning, and will probably do it till the end, which is a nuisance for the few people who grow up. - GKC
While I think a geeklist is a bit overkill (there were 2 other threads supporting Antonio) I share Antonio's concern for the apathy initially shown by the admin(s) and now by some of the community that those offended should just get tougher skin.
The offending game designer publicly stated his opinion in more than one post that Spaniards and Italians were categorically sub-species that crawled on their bellies. Apparently, other sites and forums have banned him for continually expressing this opinion. Yes, it is a bit alarming that so many people are defending his expression and the admins here hesitated to censor such an opinion on the principle that "he has a right to his opinion."
It is one thing to say a person has done a stupid thing. It is a worse and different thing to say that the person is themselves stupid. It is intolerable to say that a person, or group of people are less than human, and not deserving of human rights.
People ask how horrors, genocide, concentration camps, and slavery existed. I submit the body of our responses here in this community as an example. It is not a "valid opinion" or "protected free speech" in a reasonable society.
Quote:
Just as the night rises against the day, the light and dark are in eternal conflict. So too, is the subhuman the greatest enemy of the dominant species on earth, mankind. The subhuman is a biological creature, crafted by nature, which has hands, legs, eyes and mouth, even the semblance of a brain. Nevertheless, this terrible creature is only a partial human being. Although it has features similar to a human, the subhuman is lower on the spiritual and psychological scale than any animal. Inside of this creature lies wild and unrestrained passions: an incessant need to destroy, filled with the most primitive desires, chaos and coldhearted villainy. A subhuman and nothing more! Not all of those, who appear human are in fact so. Woe to him who forgets it!
-German Propaganda Pamphlet
Quote:
The Negro a beast, but created with articulate speech, and hands, that he may be of service to his master—the White man.
-Pamphlet, published in 1900
Quote:
4. A free negro of the African race, whose ancestors were brought to this country and sold as slaves, is not a "citizen" within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States.
-Dred Scott decision
This is not merely an offensive statement. It is the foundation and justification of every violation of human rights in our history.
Antonio hasn't even completed his threatened 'month away to consider his position', he was logged and posting on BGG yesterday. He hasn't left, nor was he ever going to, he was resorting to emotional blackmail to get the admins to bend to his will.
Much like he tried to do in this thread when he asked for a refund for his 2012 microbadge:
Please note that I am not asking for any "punishment" to the person who made the comments, nor I am asking for a "crusade" against racism.
Well he got a crusade all right.
And now we have people posting Nazi propaganda as examples of what happens when you let freedom of speech run to it's logical conclusion, forgetting two things; 1) Speech was anything but free in Nazi Germany, 2) BGG is about a hundred million miles from the Reich.
The admins posted a warning, hid the posts and locked the thread. To even find these comments you had to drill through two threads and open a hidden post.
Yes it was offensive but what more do you want? Fighting racism on BGG has got to be one of the easiest fights in the world precisely because there are barely any racists here. What is offensive has no objective measure, the admins are clearly worried that by setting a precedent everyone will want what they don't agree with removed.
I conclude with some advice Antonio gave me on a different thread:
abendoso wrote:
I sense there are two differing opinions. You don't like many of the threads. My solution for you is not to click on them. Your solution is to hide them from you, but also from those that are interested on the thread, and those that have not decided whether they are or not interested.... In Spain we have the expression "Matar moscas a cañonazos" (to kill flys with cannonballs) to express when someone uses over the top solution for an easy problem.
I'm not sure what you're asking of me in your desire to equate liberty and property for discussion purposes.
I just think elevating property to the same level as individual liberty (which is enshrined in the US constitution, I believe) is such an egregious offense to our Creator-borne humanity that the two cannot be appropriately juxtaposed. Property and the laws that protect it can never be equal to human rights, and any system that enshrines such is preaching false freedom.
I'd argue people who use hyphens to identify themselves are speaking culturally, not politically. As such, you should have no objection. But I suspect you do, correct?
As for your assertion that you're concerned with the law, it seems in your above posts (re: taxation & hate speech, among others) you aren't. In fact you suggest there that the law is/would be wrong. Why uphold the law to support your argument about citizenship, but reject it when applied to other issues? Besides, if US law states that anyone born on its soil is a citizen, and you hold the law of citizenship in such high esteem as to reject people's hyphenates (from a legal perspective), shouldn't you also support anyone born on US soil's right to be a citizen?
I've been observing this conversation for a while, and I would like to add a couple points:
1. The U.S constitution Amendement XIV, Section 1. speaks specifically about the states' inability to deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. As is well known in our country, possession is 9/10 of the law. Why is this so? It is because the rights of a person are most often infringed with regard to one's possessions. Additionally, Amendment IV protects against illegal search and seizure of someone's home or property. These are written into our constitution because the founding fathers knew that being able to speak your mind was not enough of a guarantee of liberty. The ability to hold on to what you and your family have worked for (your home, your vehicles, land, business, etc.) is also your guarantee of liberty because no one can come and take it from you. (The exception to this is eminent domain, but it allows seizure of land by the government only if the one who's land is seized is fairly compensated for this act, given land or cash equal in value to what has been taken).
2. Since you brought Creator-borne humanity into the discussion, please see how often money and possessions are spoken of in the Bible (my personal frame of reference, yours may be different). In the Old Testament, numerous laws were given to the Israelites regarding their possessions, how they are to be protected and how those who damage or steal those possessions are to be punished. Jesus also spoke at length about possessions and money in the New Testament. The reason for this is that what we do with what we have (or others have) speaks volumes about who we are. You cannot have a complete discussion about liberty of the person if one's possessions are not also addressed.
3. In regard to your assertion of selectively applying laws, please understand that the constitution and its amendments are the framework under which all other laws of government should be made in the US. Hate speech laws (which are a VERY slippery slope) do fly in the face of the supreme law of the land. I do not approve of hate speech in any form, but I cannot restrict a person's right to speak their mind. Hate speech laws are very selectively made and are applied unequally to the people they were intended to protect. In a sense, selective justice for those who we see fit to apply it to. So I agree that there have been laws that have been made and upheld that directly defy over-arching laws and principles, and I also believe those laws to be wrong. They should be challenged and struck down in the court system; and they would be, if the court did their constitutionally defined job.
4. Currently, it is true that anyone born here has the right of an American citizen. Their parents, however, do not have those rights if they are not citizens. The baby has a right to be here, but the parents do not unless they have a green card, a visa or are naturalized. This is a situation that needs to be addressed, and is currently being debated heavily in our country by both sides of the argument. If the parents are here illegally, then the country literally has the right to allow the child to stay and force the parents to go home. That is a situation that no one wants, but is becoming the choice that we are increasingly being forced to make with the never ending influx of illegals.
5. As for hyphenations: in my experience, the only people I have met who hyphenate their culture/ethnicity are those who are looking to set themselves apart from others in some way. I have a friend from high school that referred to himself as an Italian-American. He was overflowing with Italian pride, but he was second generation American. I do not hold his cultural affinity against him, as I believe its good to be in touch with where you came from. The problem was, that his culture was about 50% or more of what he talked about. He was obsessed with it (and The Godfather). After a while, it became a bit off-putting. Is that a big deal? No, just a minor annoyance. He was still my friend. What is a big deal is when a bunch of like minded people get together (Italian-Americans, Christian-Americans, LGBT-Americans, KKK-Americans) and lobby for legislation that benefits only their group as opposed to the populace as a whole. And yes, I know that is what lobbyists do, and is their right by Amendment I of the Constitution. My point here is that these people are not looking to bring people together, but are looking for preferential treatment for their group as opposed to or at the expense of others. That is why I, personally, am also against the whole hyphenation-nation philosophy.
The Bible does indeed talk a great deal about possessions. Most notably Luke 12:33
Quote:
Sell your possessions and give to the poor. Provide purses for yourselves that will not wear out, a treasure in heaven that will not be exhausted, where no thief comes near and no moth destroys.
I'm just saying it would be nice to hear an American conversation about human rights *without* property rights. I for one think there's a huge difference in importance.
Every non-native (i.e. Indian) person in the USA is themselves or the descendant of an illegal immigrant. For those people to label others "illegal" is cynical & disengenous at best, racist at worst. A Mexican who comes across the border today is just as American as the Mayflower passengers.
No one is "forcing" anyone to make the choice to separate children from their parents on the basis of nationality. It is a decision made and the people who support such a disgusting move need to step up and say they think it's a good idea. One would also have to pretty much turn their back on the example of God's love and compassion entirely to make that monstrous decision.
Every non-native (i.e. Indian) person in the USA is themselves or the descendant of an illegal immigrant.
Not true. Some are legal immigrants or descendants of legal immigrants.
Inasmuch as white men have constructed laws to make it so, yes.
I've also just realised this is a geeklist, not the RSP forum (I've been following by subscription on a very small screen, and hadn't noticed). I'd be happy to continue this conversation there, but as it stands it is against BGG rules, so I'm stepping out from here on in.
Bah! Racism is lazy hatred born from ignorance. I believe you should always spend time to get to know a person before you decide whether you like them or not, and in which case their 'race' doesn't even come into the question. It seems to me like such common sense that I feel I shouldn't have to say this, but there is only one race, which is the Human Race! Duh! Admittedly it has its fair share of detestable members, but don't judge them on their colour or which part of the world they come from. If life is suffering, then all we can do to make a difference in this world is try to ease the suffering of others. Racism ultimately harms us all.
I basically begged the designer not to release this expansion as it is pretty racially insensitive for reasons I'm not going to go over again.
But hey, I'm sure their best friends are black and the world probably could use another game with spear chuckers and voodoo priestess' beating on drums right?
Edit: I argued Saracens and Moors to be perhaps a more suitable replacement.
I think we should argue about whether the focus should be on ice cream or the submarine. Clearly, it's the ice cream.
I'm late to the party, but if you mean submarine sandwich, there are times I will prefer the sandwich to the ice cream.
Nope--submarine. As in underwater boat. They didn't want to let us on until I suggested the bottle of pop in line behind us was more hazardous to the voyage.
I'm part of a species who's learned how to realize that others' shortcomings, opinion, beliefs, and expressions don't have any bearing on who I KNOW I am; therefore, all of the extreme fits over someone saying something that someone else finds vile and "offensive" doesn't amount to a hill of beans. When someone stoops to name-calling racism, my last desire is to run to the Thought Police or hire a lawyer. My first thought is, "Well, maybe one day that person will evolve enough to gain some understanding of how incorrect their perception is about me". But it certainly doesn't do any good to force someone to realize this, because it's just not going to happen. Human beings are just too hardwired for freedom.......even the racist ones.
). So its no trouble for me to add my support.
