Page 1 of 1

[R] Ableist Slur in Gameplay (UDS)

PostPosted: Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:33 am
by Cormactopia Prime
viewtopic.php?p=36192892#p36192892

Numero Capitan wrote:P.S. I tend to ignore the looneys who show up on the sidelines, no offense intended

"No offense intended" doesn't negate that he directed an ableist slur against the mentally ill at other users.

EDIT: Per Frisbeeteria's post below, I'm unsure whether to categorize this as flaming, baiting, or trolling, but I believe it's actionable.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 06, 2019 9:45 am
by Frisbeeteria
Flaming is an offense against "named players / nations".
Cormactopia Prime wrote:at other users

That's too generic a pool to be considered flaming, and I'm not seeing any value in enforcing political correctness in terminology used. Not actionable.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 06, 2019 5:29 pm
by Cormactopia Prime
Frisbeeteria wrote:Flaming is an offense against "named players / nations".
Cormactopia Prime wrote:at other users

That's too generic a pool to be considered flaming, and I'm not seeing any value in enforcing political correctness in terminology used. Not actionable.

I'd like to request a second opinion, because if the ableist slur he'd chosen had been "retards" or "autists" instead of "looneys" I think the ruling would be different. And it shouldn't be, because an ableist slur is just as bad when it's referencing the mentally ill as it is when it's referencing the mentally disabled.

If I've misreported it as flaming when it was actually baiting or trolling, so be it, and I've updated the title of the thread to be less specific. But this isn't anymore "enforcing political correctness" than is disallowing any other ableist slur on these forums. There shouldn't be a double standard for mental illness.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 06, 2019 5:46 pm
by Luna Amore
Looney just isn't on the same level as retard or autist nor is it used the same. They don't carry the same weight.

I agree with Fris, not actionable.

PostPosted: Fri Sep 06, 2019 5:49 pm
by Audioslavia
Ninja'd by Luna, so this is a third opinion rather than a second.

I can't think of a rule that would be broken by off-handedly referring to a group as being 'loony'.

I understand your reasoning. Ableism is something we're sensitive to, but we're not going to throw the net so wide as to include words as comparatively innocuous as 'loony'.