Armageddon's slang and RL crossover

[Feco]

To be clear, I didn't mean to imply that anyone was specifically defending "necker." That's my point.

I completely understand the general argument against censorship, and I understand that's what everyone here is arguing.

But, I'm still interested if anyone is interested in defending their personal use of the word.

[Miradus]

You have entire clans whose core documentation is that they hate other races and outsiders.

Going to retcon all those?

One of the basic distinctions of racism is that its a minority group who is powerless in the face of institutionalized prejudices that actively discriminate against them.

*cough* Allanak *cough*

Can someone get triggered by this? Yes. And people have. And they left the game.

But if you rip it all out, you're going to be left with a really shitty setting. We'll all be sitting in the Gaj, except it won't be the Gaj anymore because all the world echoes about breeds and neckers and such will be ripped out, and we'll all be sipping our tea and using only scrubbed "safe words" to interact with each other.

[Nergal]

What bothers me is more the use of the popular slang of today, such things as trill, sus, on fleet, goat, I can't even, how bow dah, true dat, etc. This stuff is extremely distracting when seen during roleplay, it takes me right out of immersion. I do not really like the use of retard because it is a lazy attempt at writing as 99% of the time the player is using it to describe someone being utterly stupid. Be creative. The use of 'snerk' destroys any immersion I had the moment I see it.

This should be reported as a player complaint under Rule #1: The roleplaying requirement, if/when it actually happens. It's not within the scope of this discussion. We're talking primarily about pejoratives here.

In the past I have seen some horribly discriminating terms used by players ICly, things against most LGBTQ, but staff and other players have been really, really good about making that nigh extinct. I enjoy that I can play this game without too much sexism. There is always a little sexism, but it gets squeezed to death out of newbies and I would hope that teaches players a valuable lesson about the rest of the world as well.

Yes, I think sexism is not a huge issue within the game and most people are good about not letting it leak in from outside.

[Nergal]

Additionally, I find the notion that this thread was only posted to eventually ban words to be ridiculously accusatory and offensive.
1) Staff are allowed to put things up for discussion when they receive complaints. That's a thing that happens.
2) If we wanted to just outright ban stuff, we'd do it.

[Feco]

You have entire clans whose core documentation is that they hate other races and outsiders.

Going to retcon all those?

One of the basic distinctions of racism is that its a minority group who is powerless in the face of institutionalized prejudices that actively discriminate against them.

*cough* Allanak *cough*

Can someone get triggered by this? Yes. And people have. And they left the game.

But if you rip it all out, you're going to be left with a really shitty setting. We'll all be sitting in the Gaj, except it won't be the Gaj anymore because all the world echoes about breeds and neckers and such will be ripped out, and we'll all be sipping our tea and using only scrubbed "safe words" to interact with each other.

No one advocated removing offensive things as a rule.

I'm not claiming to have a set of objective principles by which to determine if words should be discouraged.

I am saying "necker" passes a sort of sniff test.  It's the general usage, the phonetic similarity, and the way people have made OOC nods via phrases like "my necka."

I'm just sharing my experiences, though.  I'm interested in others'.

[Armaddict]

Additionally, I find the notion that this thread was only posted to eventually ban words to be ridiculously accusatory and offensive.
1) Staff are allowed to put things up for discussion when they receive complaints. That's a thing that happens.
2) If we wanted to just outright ban stuff, we'd do it.

Such actions have been taken before, so apologies, but that's where I saw it leading.

Is it more to increase awareness that this could be seen this way, and hopefully see players be more careful/responsible around it?

[Nergal]

You have entire clans whose core documentation is that they hate other races and outsiders.

Going to retcon all those?

One of the basic distinctions of racism is that its a minority group who is powerless in the face of institutionalized prejudices that actively discriminate against them.

*cough* Allanak *cough*

Can someone get triggered by this? Yes. And people have. And they left the game.

But if you rip it all out, you're going to be left with a really shitty setting. We'll all be sitting in the Gaj, except it won't be the Gaj anymore because all the world echoes about breeds and neckers and such will be ripped out, and we'll all be sipping our tea and using only scrubbed "safe words" to interact with each other.

You're talking about themes, we're talking about specific pejoratives. This is a blatant slippery slope fallacy. Let's try to have a slightly smarter discussion than that.

[Nergal]

Additionally, I find the notion that this thread was only posted to eventually ban words to be ridiculously accusatory and offensive.
1) Staff are allowed to put things up for discussion when they receive complaints. That's a thing that happens.
2) If we wanted to just outright ban stuff, we'd do it.

Such actions have been taken before, so apologies, but that's where I saw it leading.

Is it more to increase awareness that this could be seen this way, and hopefully see players be more careful/responsible around it?

Yes

[sleepyhead]

I didn't mean to accuse you of anything, Nergal, I'm just playing it safe and making sure I get my two cents in just in case it's on the table. I don't think anyone's going out of their way to think the worst of you or claim you're not allowed to do this; they're just speculating about where this discussion might eventually end up.

Maybe we've jumped the gun a bit with talk of banning words, but please don't think we're trying to insult you personally. We just don't know what kind of discussions are going on staffside.

[Armaddict]

No problems with that.  As noted, I find some of them silly.

I've asked this question on Discord a couple of times, but I was curious if any players feel that there's any potentially uncomfortable crossover between pejorative slang words used in Armageddon, and pejorative slang words used in real life. If so, what is it, and why?

I saw this as a staff data-return that if there were players who were sensitive to it, all other players would be told to accomodate.  Which is where I had the issue.  I have no issue with 'soft touches' on trends to steer them away as a consensus of playerbase through behavior.

[Kankfly]

I haven't read carefully everything else others have contributed to this thread, but here's my take on it:

Armageddon is a RPI, and prejudice is something that is a prevalant theme in this RP environment. While I'm all pro-equality and unity amongst mankind IRL, part of the reason why Arm attracted me was the prejudice. It doesn't mean it's because I'm a secret, in-the-closet prejudiced person IRL and I really need to hash it out IG, it's because the various form of prejudice IG enriches the stories and personalities of my PCs as well as all the other characters my PCs interact with.

I like to think of myself as a mature and insightful player that is able to seperate IC and OOC, and I trust my fellow players to be the same. If my PC happens to be racist against a certain IG racial/tribal/etc group, that is because I, as a player, wrote out my PC that way, and it's not because I'm translating some form of OOC prejudice into something IC. I do not feel victimized or insulted OOCly if I happen to play a race, and another PC threw a racial slur at me, because that is what that character is about, and it helps me to figure out how my PC will react to such situations.

For me, this is a non-issue. I'm not sure why this question is posed, but I feel like this problem isn't, and shouldn't be a problem at all. We hope to build a RP environment where certain things are explored: Corruption, betrayal, murder, greed, power, prejudice, etc. Our stories revolve around these themes, and it wouldn't have happened the way it did if we didn't have these themes at all. If there are players bothered by the racial slurs and slangs used, then perhaps a better solution is to encourage that these are all IC and shouldn't be taken into an OOC context. I can't tell you how many times whenever I see a character being prejudice/racist, it only makes me want to interact with that character more, because it feels so Arm-realistic to me.

[Miradus]

You're talking about themes, we're talking about specific pejoratives. This is a blatant slippery slope fallacy. Let's try to have a slightly smarter discussion than that.

Wrong.

Speech patterns help define themes. Necker, breed, southie, rinther, wall dweller, Black Pit, Stormer, gick, witch. All pejoratives, but also descriptive words, and all define themes.

Seriously, man. In this age of SJW and virtue signaling and trigger warnings ... the only way to have a smart discussion around this shit is to not have the discussion at all. Because now when a couple of people talk about their hurt feelings, you're just going to end up looking like an asshole when you don't go ban whatever it was that hurt their feelings.

[sleepyhead]

To be clear, I didn't mean to imply that anyone was specifically defending "necker." That's my point.

I completely understand the general argument against censorship, and I understand that's what everyone here is arguing.

But, I'm still interested if anyone is interested in defending their personal use of the word.

I keep telling you, I'm defending it. I think it's a good bad word. I know it doesn't really fit the sensibilities du jour and I always wondered if it would one day not be cool anymore and fall out of use either from being banned or just being deemed unacceptable by the playerbase. But I still like it for exactly the reasons other people hate it.

[Nergal]

I didn't mean to accuse you of anything, Nergal, I'm just playing it safe and making sure I get my two cents in just in case it's on the table. I don't think anyone's going out of their way to think the worst of you or claim you're not allowed to do this; they're just speculating about where this discussion might eventually end up.

Maybe we've jumped the gun a bit with talk of banning words, but please don't think we're trying to insult you personally. We just don't know what kind of discussions are going on staffside.

I don't feel accused or insulted. It offends my intelligence more than anything. But it's absurdly fatalist to look at a staff-started discussion and decide that staff are going to do whatever they're going to do and that there's nothing players can do about it. We're the game's DMs by some measure of player consensus (in that players agree to play the game under the staff chosen from among the playerbase).

The logical extension is that sometimes, DMs will make choices along the lines of what players want, and sometimes, DMs will make choices along the lines of what is sensible based on their interpretation of what the setting needs. I obviously want player input on this matter or I would not have put the matter up for discussion. Whether I value that input ultimately depends on how it's presented, however.

[Nergal]

You're talking about themes, we're talking about specific pejoratives. This is a blatant slippery slope fallacy. Let's try to have a slightly smarter discussion than that.

Wrong.

Speech patterns help define themes. Necker, breed, southie, rinther, wall dweller, Black Pit, Stormer, gick, witch. All pejoratives, but also descriptive words, and all define themes.

Seriously, man. In this age of SJW and virtue signaling and trigger warnings ... the only way to have a smart discussion around this shit is to not have the discussion at all. Because now when a couple of people talk about their hurt feelings, you're just going to end up looking like an asshole when you don't go ban whatever it was that hurt their feelings.

If you don't want to have the discussion, then don't.

[Miradus]

...But it's absurdly fatalist to look at a staff-started discussion and decide that staff are going to do whatever they're going to do and that there's nothing players can do about it. We're the game's DMs by some measure of player ...

Are you the same person who just posted this?

"2) If we wanted to just outright ban stuff, we'd do it."

Not going to win in a pissing contest against an imm, but you should absolutely know that your words carry more weight in this discussion than other people's and when you bring it up then it's an unspoken possibility of leading to a ban, a retcon, or something else.

That's why I stand on my advice of not having this conversation at all. If someone is going around deliberately being offensive to trigger people then deal with that on a one on one.

[sleepyhead]

I didn't mean to accuse you of anything, Nergal, I'm just playing it safe and making sure I get my two cents in just in case it's on the table. I don't think anyone's going out of their way to think the worst of you or claim you're not allowed to do this; they're just speculating about where this discussion might eventually end up.

Maybe we've jumped the gun a bit with talk of banning words, but please don't think we're trying to insult you personally. We just don't know what kind of discussions are going on staffside.

I don't feel accused or insulted. It offends my intelligence more than anything. But it's absurdly fatalist to look at a staff-started discussion and decide that staff are going to do whatever they're going to do and that there's nothing players can do about it. We're the game's DMs by some measure of player consensus (in that players agree to play the game under the staff chosen from among the playerbase).

The logical extension is that sometimes, DMs will make choices along the lines of what players want, and sometimes, DMs will make choices along the lines of what is sensible based on their interpretation of what the setting needs. I obviously want player input on this matter or I would not have put the matter up for discussion. Whether I value that input ultimately depends on how it's presented, however.

Well, that's what we're doing: giving player input! If I ever thought it was a foregone conclusion I'd just type a few annoyed words and be done with it. I never had any reason to think you were anything but sincere when you asked for our opinions on the matter.

We can be a little fatalistic sometimes, but again, you have to remember that a lot of the time we are missing half the discussion (and even when we're not, we think we might be). And when a person in power conducts a survey, I think it's natural to assume that they're doing it to help them decide what kind of policy to enact. It's wrong to assume your motives and especially wrong to assume more and more steps based off hasty conclusions, but I think it's normal based on how in the dark we are about staff discussions and intentions.

[650Booger]

I'm still interested if anyone is interested in defending their personal use of the word.

I intend to continue calling elves neckers, yes.  I don't feel a need to defend myself about it, either.  the burden is on you to convince me why it should not be used, and I have not read anything convincing.

[Nergal]

...But it's absurdly fatalist to look at a staff-started discussion and decide that staff are going to do whatever they're going to do and that there's nothing players can do about it. We're the game's DMs by some measure of player ...

Are you the same person who just posted this?

"2) If we wanted to just outright ban stuff, we'd do it."

Not going to win in a pissing contest against an imm, but you should absolutely know that your words carry more weight in this discussion than other people's and when you bring it up then it's an unspoken possibility of leading to a ban, a retcon, or something else.

That's why I stand on my advice of not having this conversation at all. If someone is going around deliberately being offensive to trigger people then deal with that on a one on one.

You're bringing up overly-restrictive nonsense like SJW - a term I find laughable since it says more about the person using it than the person targeted by it - about a simple discussion trying to sample players' feelings on a particular matter, then you're trying to restrict the discussion by suggesting it shouldn't have come up in the first place. If you're triggered by my attempt to poll the playerbase, then don't read the thread.

Like I said earlier: if I wanted to approach this from an angle of banning words, I would have collected a list of words I don't like, and the OP would have been "Here's words I don't like. <list of words> Don't use them again or you'll be banned."

[Riev]

Nergal, I would suggest taking a step back as the vocal Imm, and please stop in-fighting with a vast minority of people in the discussion. For what its worth, you throwing your weight around about how you could ban things if you wanted to, puts a real sour taste in the mouth of me, as a player, and says more about your style as a producer of this game than it does about the game's direction.

On topic, I agree with what seems to be the general majority, in that the pejoratives aren't an issue. I don't think things like "cool" or "awesome" are anachronistic, or 'ruin mah immerzions' or anything, but I think they're the words of people who  currently lack proper descriptive words. We aren't all writers, some people are attracted to the theme and HAVEN'T written three books and read all of GRR Martin's books. I think its perfectly alright that either staff give a gentle remind that "we're in a desert world, something being 'cool' isn't really a term we generally use" and let them come up with a better way to say it.

I feel that sometimes its forgotten that not everyone who plays this game has the same grasp of language, the flowery emotes, or the roleplaying styles we all agree with. But if you want to be sure these kinds of things don't bleed in, make it known. Don't expect people to 'just know'.

I remember having a problem in Tuluk, on a sponsored role, because I didn't understand why a Templar would care about calling someone "Chosen" when it wasn't documented, it wasn't a big deal, and it was kind of something the playerbase just made up. But apparently I was incredibly in the wrong, and chastised over it, because I was "acting like a southerner". If you want rules, make rules. If you want guidelines, make guidelines. If you want people to follow your rules and guidelines, MAKE SURE THEY KNOW THEM. All else is just flavor.

[Feco]

I'm still interested if anyone is interested in defending their personal use of the word.

I intend to continue calling elves neckers, yes.  I don't feel a need to defend myself about it, either.  the burden is on you to convince me why it should not be used, and I have not read anything convincing.

How would you feel if "porch tregil" caught on?  I feel the same way about "necker," for whatever reason, as I would about that.  I assume it's the mix of the way it would be/is used, and the obvious similarity of the terms.

I'd question the judgment of anyone who thought "porch tregil" was okay to use in game.

"Offensive" doesn't capture what I think of it, though.  Obviously words like "nigger" are offensive, and I recognize that, but I'm not feeling offended.  I'm thinking it's more jarring, stupid, and out if place.

This is based on my experience with the word, though.  Maybe yours are different.  This isn't a court of law where you have to play the burden of proof game.  You're being invited to share.

And again: I'm not claiming to have an objective set of principles that outline why.  Mostly because I haven't given it that much thought.

[Nergal]

Nergal, I would suggest taking a step back as the vocal Imm, and please stop in-fighting with a vast minority of people in the discussion. For what its worth, you throwing your weight around about how you could ban things if you wanted to, puts a real sour taste in the mouth of me, as a player, and says more about your style as a producer of this game than it does about the game's direction.

I wasn't throwing my weight around at all. On the contrary, I was stating my intentions about the thread.

This is me throwing my weight around:

Staff would like to see players stop using the word necker to refer to elves, and stop using sexist insults framed against people (e.g. bitch, dick, cunt). We'll be taking the word bitch out of the curses helpfile for its lack of thematic sense. We do not find the word necker to be as thematic as other established words for elves such as sharpear and it is not in the curses helpfile. There is clear evidence that the word "necker" is used as a stand-in for the word "nigger", and regardless of whether it started that way or devolved to hold that place in that game over time, staff believe that this is the best way forward.

We will give players a month or so to phase such words out of their characters' vocabulary. By August we will expect such words to not be in use anymore, and approach players who do use them on an individual basis.

Thread locked.