So, maybe throughout all of the thread, I got confused on what’s actually being proposed and possibly implemented by RGL.
My understanding is that the proposed rule is: Punish RGL players for racist/bigoted behaviors, even if those behaviors occur off RGL, if evidence of such is presented to RGL.
The criteria and evidence needed for “racist” or “bigoted” behaviors should be relatively high for off-platform occurrences, compared to on-platform. For example, repeated usage of slurs, aimed at an individual or group of individuals who have not consented. Sufficient context to understand the usage would need to be provided as well.
IMO, with this interpretation, this is not an overreach. If the evidence standards were not reasonably high, then I can see it leading to more of the bad faith reporting being successful.
Maybe my understanding of this is incorrect or insufficient?
If I may poorly attempt to steel-person the arguments:
Proposal: Ban/Punish RGL Players that exhibit bigoted behaviors, even if such behavior occurs outside RGL platforms, if sufficient evidence is provided.
Criteria for minimal punishment:
- Behavior must occur starting from the day this rule is implemented.
- Evidence must show timestamps of behavior.
- Evidence must show a repeated pattern or extreme individual case of bigotry towards an individual or a group.
- Evidence must provide as much context as reasonably possible.
- Discourages players who behave in a racist/bigoted capacity outside of RGL from doing so, IF they wish to remain in RGL
- Gives RGL the ability to keep a distance from these players should they be reported, protecting their image.
- Grants players who are more sensitive to or are otherwise bothered by these behaviors a higher probability that they will not encounter it in their interactions with RGL players.
- Causes additional workload that the staff may be unequipped to handle
- Can lead to targeted campaigns against individuals or groups, seeking and presenting evidence from external sources
- Is overreach, as the evidence is produced outside of RGL’s platform, and thus may in some way affect behavior outside of the platform.
- This rule would lead to too many players being banned, and thus the death of the league.
- Workload can be distributed such that higher-evidence higher-profile cases are prioritized, and low-evidence lower-profile cases are less so.
- Since each case is handled individually, as part of the fuller investigation cycle, the staff can consult with the accused and determine if this is the case.
- Since RGL has no interaction with the player outside of the platform, the players’ decisions to risk a ban by continuing bigoted behavior is theirs alone. I.E. Private interactions made known or public are no longer private, and can negatively affect the league.
- If there would be too many bans, maybe the league has been dead inside all along. That aside, given a high enough bar of evidence, most of the teens and babbies who use the very unfunny words would be fine, and thus so would the league.
- Does not discourage those who don’t care about RGL from these behaviors. Those who DO wish to remain in RGL may continue their behavior and encourage others to join, as an “F U” to RGL.
- RGL does not need to protect its image from these individuals, as it is too small for it to be a concern, unless a high profile case makes its way into the public sphere.
- Players sensitive to these behaviors should, as individuals, “grow a thicker skin” or distance themselves from players that behave in bigoted fashions outside of RGL.
Anyway, that’s about all I can essay. I’m on the fence, leaning towards “Let’s vote on it, with the stipulation we’d vote on it again a season later if passed.” Which is me leaning towards implementing something like this. Because ultimately, I think the outcome would probably be that the edgy-but-well-meaning youth will be fine, and the actual bigots would have to be much more selective about who they exhibit that type of behavior around, thus doing it around less people, thus normalizing it less, thus making the community overall more accepting/tolerant of humans and less accepting/tolerant of bigotry.