View Topic

We already had an academic version of this discussion, but I wanted to bring it up again in the Citizen area because of some recent events that brought this debate back up in the Citizen Discord and makes me believe it needs to be more thoroughly debated and discussed as a community.

The other night, we had someone come to the regional Discord who expressed white supremacist views. They were ultimately administratively banned because in the process of doing so, they advocated for violence against Muslims, used racial slurs, and may have possibly been trolling, which apparently he was doing this in other regions too. However, what if this person sincerely believed what he was saying, and did so without crossing those lines? Should expressing racist, sexist, or homophobic views be consider cause for a ban (of either the administrative or government PnG variety), or should it be tolerated in the hopes that they can be turned around through debate and dialogue? What if they don't express their views, but they become known regardless (perhaps by mentioning it in a DM which is reported, or using symbols related to those views)? What if their views only become known after they become a Citizen, when they have more legal protections than someone who just enters the Discord? How does that balance out against the Wintrean principles of inclusion and allowing people to express themselves so long as they do so respectfully and civilly?

As Wintreath continues to reorganize and grow, it's likely that other people like this will show up, and it's important that we come to a consensus as a community about how we want to handle it.

I will reiterate what was said in the previous discussion that people with those views should not be banned on sight but given the chances that everyone else are given (or should be).
I would say that these people should still be allowed to express their views even if they could cause some harm.

(I personally think there is almost never a real reason to ban people but that is not really relevant in this case.)

I suppose it depends on how they express their view and in what context.

If it's in a manner that is obviously flaming or harassment, then yes, I'd agree that an administrative ban is necessary.

If they're civil, though, and only express their views if explicitly asked or in a debate/discussion topic, then I don't see the need for a ban.

If it's somewhere in between, then it probably depends on a case-by-case basis -- how often they bring it up, if it's not an appropriate time/place to talk about it, if it directs at individuals, etc -- and would more likely be a governmental ban.

And if they're "outed" as a bigot, then I don't think a ban would be fair since they'd kept it private up until that point -- that is, unless it was harassing someone through PM.

I agree with Kane and Gerrick. In this case, action was warranted. The dude was advocating violence. But someone else who was civil and polite should not be banned for having an opinion.

Yeah, I stand behind my posts from the previous discussion.

Unless the behavior warrants otherwise and those things pop out in threatening/flaming/violent manner, then they should be allowed to be here like everyone else.

In the case of what happened on Discord, I support the decision if they were advocating violence of any kind or were hitting any of the above mentioned areas...which it sounds like they did do so.

I highly doubt we will "convert" racists and homophobes, so to speak. I highly doubt we'll ever get rid of racism and prejudice. I just don't see what this would accomplish, though. The more we wall ourselves off from each other, the more communication breaks down, and the more we form conditions under which people are left to draw their own conclusions in their little echo chambers. If even one person's heart can be opened up to the possibility that a person's skin colour, culture, sexual orientation or perceived gender has no influence on the person's quality or humanity, then that's good enough for me. And you don't get to achieve that by summarily banning everyone who disagrees with you.

I'm surprised it hasn't come up here yet, but one of the arguments made in the Citizen Discord is that other regions would take a dim view of "harboring" people with such beliefs no matter how civil they were about it, and would likely shun us for not banning them. Any thoughts about that?

Hahahahaha, I suppose I shouldn't contribute to that particular discussion given my history.

Though I will say this, we had Govindia as a part of our community for years despite how we were perceived.

Hahahahaha, I suppose I shouldn't contribute to that particular discussion given my history.

Though I will say this, we had Govindia as a part of our community for years despite how we were perceived.

The argument was that it would be worse than the reaction to Govindia.

I don't know, it was just part of the argument on Discord and it hadn't been brought up here yet, so I wanted to make sure the entire debate was being considered.

I was always under the assumption that Wintreath looks more inwards than outwards, and thrives on its inclusive and accommodating atmosphere. I don’t know much about the NationStates aspect of Wintreath with defending and whatnot, but as far as I can tell, the predominant form of external interaction I have observed is cultural exchange, inviting people from other regions to join us in some fun and games. I don’t see why we have to worry about how others perceive us, I rather much prefer our insulated status thank you.

On to my personal opinion, unless there’s an explicit advocation of violence and clear intent to troll and make inflammatory remarks, if it’s an individual expressing genuine views that can be regarded as racist or homophobic, exposure to more tolerant viewpoints would help.

There are always going to be people who hate this region because of what it stands for...an open, personal, inclusive community that's open to all who can be civil and respectful of the community and the people in it. What we do or don't do in the future isn't going to change this, even if we were to drop our principles they would simply find something else to spin around to grind their axes.

But as reconfirmed here, stand for these principles we shall.

Undoubtedly, there will come a time where we will have to defend these principles, as we had to repeatedly defend them previously, and the best way we can do that is by doing everything we can to build, promote, and defend this region and what we stand for. The brighter our region is and the louder we speak our truth, the harder it will be for people who hate us to tarnish it with lies and slander. If you appreciate our principles, please consider taking part in these things if you aren't already...through a ministry, through the civil service, or through individual effort. There's a role for everyone to play in strengthening our region and community.

Haters gon' hate, anyway. We shouldn't be trying to please anyone.