Does the escapist have an inclusiveness mission statement?

[daynestar]

Does (and if not, should) The Escapist have a inclusiveness mission statement or policy?

By which I mean a statement to the effect of 'The Escapist promotes an inclusive environment to all gamers regardless of gender, race or sexuality and condemns harassment, bigotry and prejudice in all forms'. I always assumed there was something to that effect, particularly as a few months ago Greg Tito as EiC kept referencing a 'zero tolerance policy' on harassment. I assumed this was actually an official policy of the site - but a search yields nothing beyond the forum code of conduct and the new-ish ethics policy.

Does this exist and if not, why not?
All the companies I have worked for or looked in to working for have had something along those lines, covering conduct of employees, recruitment policy and attitude towards its clients (I work in hospitality FYI). Even my old WoW guild had something like this.

If there isn't one and you think there should be, what do you think it should say?

It should be fairly clear the reason why I am asking this, as one of the new site contributors has controversial views on the LGBT community. Rather than criticising him directly (which has resulted in thread locks), I thought it pertinent to state what we think The Escapist should stand for (if anything).

 

[Queen Michael]

The main rule takes care of that part. It's "Don't be a dick."

 

[tippy2k2]

Code of Conduct (does no one read this thing anymore? It's right in there...)

Sexist, Racist or Perverted Remarks - Remarks such as these are often met with elevated penalties or bans

As for the new "He that shall not be named" (apparently because too many people can't discuss this specific topic like adults; how long before this one gets locked from people derailing into a bash "He that shall not be named" thread? Takin all bets! O/U is at post 65.5!), I imagine that having an opinion does not count as being against the rules.

 

[ZiggyE]

As for the new "He that shall not be named" apparently because too many people can't discuss this specific topic like adults (how long before this one gets locked from people derailing into a bash "He that shall not be named" thread? Takin all bets! O/U is at post 65.5!), I imagine that having an opinion does not count as being against the rules.

This is really the thing, isn't it? Complete inclusiveness doesn't just mean including gays and transsexuals, but it also means including people whose opinions you'd rather not hear. It seems this sentiment is lost on many who try to promote a pseudo-inclusive environment.

 

[JoJo]

The preamble to the Code of Conduct is probably the closest to what you are looking for:

The Escapist forums are different than most forums on the internet. We want our forums to be a place where everyone, regardless of who they are, can gather to socialize and talk with like-minded people in a safe and welcoming environment. In order to make that happen we have certain rules we ask all members of our community to adhere to. These rules will be vigorously enforced so that a handful of bad apples don't spoil it for everyone else.

Though it doesn't mention prejudice specifically, I would hope the "We want our forums to be a place where everyone, regardless of who they are, can gather to socialize and talk with like-minded people in a safe and welcoming environment," part with emphasis on 'everyone' and a 'safe and welcoming environment' would be enough to ensure this site isn't used to host prejudice or hate.

 

[daynestar]

Code of Conduct (does no one read this thing anymore? It's right in there...

The code of conduct covers what is and is not allowable in the forums. This is different to a site-wide mission statement which covers all content posted on the site. Content creators are not bound by the forum code of conduct.

For example the 'zero tolerance on harassment' policy that Greg Tito referred to affected not only the forums but resulted in an article being edited. This policy does not seem to be actually officially stated anywhere though. So, was this actually an Escapist thing, or a Greg Tito thing?

What I am getting at, is that I think this is just as important as an ethics policy and would help frame the debate regarding controversial content creators.

 

[Albino Boo]

The preamble to the Code of Conduct is probably the closest to what you are looking for:

The Escapist forums are different than most forums on the internet. We want our forums to be a place where everyone, regardless of who they are, can gather to socialize and talk with like-minded people in a safe and welcoming environment. In order to make that happen we have certain rules we ask all members of our community to adhere to. These rules will be vigorously enforced so that a handful of bad apples don't spoil it for everyone else.

Though it doesn't mention prejudice specifically, I would hope the "We want our forums to be a place where everyone, regardless of who they are, can gather to socialize and talk with like-minded people in a safe and welcoming environment," part with emphasis on 'everyone' and a 'safe and welcoming environment' would be enough to ensure this site isn't used to host prejudice or hate.

Hmm lets see so your are allowed to call some a fascists but thats not prejudice or hate

I watched the documentary yesterday, "Hitler 2.0" makes it sound like they have Farage sending immigrants to death camps rather than just increasing anti-illegal immigration raids. It seemed a fairly accurate representation of the admittedly impossible scenario of UKIP winning the 2015 general election and all that would follow to me, whatever your long-term views on whether the EU is beneficial or not clearly there would be short-term pain for leaving the EU as many business leaders have made clear, and protests on the street in the vein of Ferguson or Mark Duggan are very believable too.

Overall, the documentary seemed pretty fair-handed and bold enough to tackle the strain of racism that undeniably does exist in some UKIP circles, whether or not the upper echelons also feel that way.

Perhaps you you ought to take your own advice

 

[tippy2k2]

Code of Conduct (does no one read this thing anymore? It's right in there...

The code of conduct covers what is and is not allowable in the forums. This is different to a site-wide mission statement which covers all content posted on the site. Content creators are not bound by the forum code of conduct.

For example the 'zero tolerance on harassment' policy that Greg Tito referred to affected not only the forums but resulted in an article being edited. This policy does not seem to be actually officially stated anywhere though. So, was this actually an Escapist thing, or a Greg Tito thing?

What I am getting at, is that I think this is just as important as an ethics policy and would help frame the debate regarding controversial content creators.

Fair enough. There is almost certainly an employee inclusiveness statement (I've never had a job where that wasn't one of the "WELCOME!" docs you get) but I sincerely doubt they'd let us see it since usually that's a private thing between employees and employers (even though we all know it exists and we all know what it says). In fact, I'm pretty sure it's US law for something like that to have to exist but I could be wrong on that...

 

[JoJo]

The preamble to the Code of Conduct is probably the closest to what you are looking for:

The Escapist forums are different than most forums on the internet. We want our forums to be a place where everyone, regardless of who they are, can gather to socialize and talk with like-minded people in a safe and welcoming environment. In order to make that happen we have certain rules we ask all members of our community to adhere to. These rules will be vigorously enforced so that a handful of bad apples don't spoil it for everyone else.

Though it doesn't mention prejudice specifically, I would hope the "We want our forums to be a place where everyone, regardless of who they are, can gather to socialize and talk with like-minded people in a safe and welcoming environment," part with emphasis on 'everyone' and a 'safe and welcoming environment' would be enough to ensure this site isn't used to host prejudice or hate.

Hmm lets see so your are allowed to call some a fascists but thats not prejudice or hate

I watched the documentary yesterday, "Hitler 2.0" makes it sound like they have Farage sending immigrants to death camps rather than just increasing anti-illegal immigration raids. It seemed a fairly accurate representation of the admittedly impossible scenario of UKIP winning the 2015 general election and all that would follow to me, whatever your long-term views on whether the EU is beneficial or not clearly there would be short-term pain for leaving the EU as many business leaders have made clear, and protests on the street in the vein of Ferguson or Mark Duggan are very believable too.

Overall, the documentary seemed pretty fair-handed and bold enough to tackle the strain of racism that undeniably does exist in some UKIP circles, whether or not the upper echelons also feel that way.

Perhaps you you ought to take your own advice

Where did I say anything about fascism in that post? Racism and fascism are not the same thing, even if there's often overlap in the people who hold those views.

 

[Albino Boo]

The preamble to the Code of Conduct is probably the closest to what you are looking for:

The Escapist forums are different than most forums on the internet. We want our forums to be a place where everyone, regardless of who they are, can gather to socialize and talk with like-minded people in a safe and welcoming environment. In order to make that happen we have certain rules we ask all members of our community to adhere to. These rules will be vigorously enforced so that a handful of bad apples don't spoil it for everyone else.

Though it doesn't mention prejudice specifically, I would hope the "We want our forums to be a place where everyone, regardless of who they are, can gather to socialize and talk with like-minded people in a safe and welcoming environment," part with emphasis on 'everyone' and a 'safe and welcoming environment' would be enough to ensure this site isn't used to host prejudice or hate.

Hmm lets see so your are allowed to call some a fascists but thats not prejudice or hate

I watched the documentary yesterday, "Hitler 2.0" makes it sound like they have Farage sending immigrants to death camps rather than just increasing anti-illegal immigration raids. It seemed a fairly accurate representation of the admittedly impossible scenario of UKIP winning the 2015 general election and all that would follow to me, whatever your long-term views on whether the EU is beneficial or not clearly there would be short-term pain for leaving the EU as many business leaders have made clear, and protests on the street in the vein of Ferguson or Mark Duggan are very believable too.

Overall, the documentary seemed pretty fair-handed and bold enough to tackle the strain of racism that undeniably does exist in some UKIP circles, whether or not the upper echelons also feel that way.

Perhaps you you ought to take your own advice

Where did I say anything about fascism in that post? Racism and fascism are not the same thing, even if there's often overlap in the people who hold those views.

Ah yes that well known international liberal Adolf Hitler.

 

[JoJo]

The preamble to the Code of Conduct is probably the closest to what you are looking for:

The Escapist forums are different than most forums on the internet. We want our forums to be a place where everyone, regardless of who they are, can gather to socialize and talk with like-minded people in a safe and welcoming environment. In order to make that happen we have certain rules we ask all members of our community to adhere to. These rules will be vigorously enforced so that a handful of bad apples don't spoil it for everyone else.

Though it doesn't mention prejudice specifically, I would hope the "We want our forums to be a place where everyone, regardless of who they are, can gather to socialize and talk with like-minded people in a safe and welcoming environment," part with emphasis on 'everyone' and a 'safe and welcoming environment' would be enough to ensure this site isn't used to host prejudice or hate.

Hmm lets see so your are allowed to call some a fascists but thats not prejudice or hate

I watched the documentary yesterday, "Hitler 2.0" makes it sound like they have Farage sending immigrants to death camps rather than just increasing anti-illegal immigration raids. It seemed a fairly accurate representation of the admittedly impossible scenario of UKIP winning the 2015 general election and all that would follow to me, whatever your long-term views on whether the EU is beneficial or not clearly there would be short-term pain for leaving the EU as many business leaders have made clear, and protests on the street in the vein of Ferguson or Mark Duggan are very believable too.

Overall, the documentary seemed pretty fair-handed and bold enough to tackle the strain of racism that undeniably does exist in some UKIP circles, whether or not the upper echelons also feel that way.

Perhaps you you ought to take your own advice

Where did I say anything about fascism in that post? Racism and fascism are not the same thing, even if there's often overlap in the people who hold those views.

Ah yes that well known international liberal Adolf Hitler.

You clearly misread my post, since I was disagreeing with the Hitler comparison that ToastiestZombie made to the fictional Farage of Channel 4's documentary.

 

[Colour Scientist]

I drew one up a while ago.

People of any race, sex, religion, sexual orientation or gender identity are welcome at the Escapist.

Except for Homers, fuck those guys.

I guess we could have one Homer though.

 

[ZiggyE]

This is really the thing, isn't it? Complete inclusiveness doesn't just mean including gays and transsexuals, but it also means including people whose opinions you'd rather not hear. It seems this sentiment is lost on many who try to promote a pseudo-inclusive environment.

Yes, how dare I not want to be belittled, mocked, and marginalized in my own community. Its not like I don't experience that everyday in every other aspect of my life. How terrible of a person I am for wanting to spend my time on a site like that, I should be much more tolerant of the opinions of people who don't think that I have the right to exist.

OT: The "Don't be a dick" rule covers most of it. Trans inclusiveness has been skyrocketing in the past two years in particular.

Hey dude, if that's what you want, then fine, but don't try to pass it of as "inclusive".

 

[Daystar Clarion]

This is really the thing, isn't it? Complete inclusiveness doesn't just mean including gays and transsexuals, but it also means including people whose opinions you'd rather not hear. It seems this sentiment is lost on many who try to promote a pseudo-inclusive environment.

Yes, how dare I not want to be belittled, mocked, and marginalized in my own community. Its not like I don't experience that everyday in every other aspect of my life. How terrible of a person I am for wanting to spend my time on a site like that, I should be much more tolerant of the opinions of people who don't think that I have the right to exist.

OT: The "Don't be a dick" rule covers most of it. Trans inclusiveness has been skyrocketing in the past two years in particular.

Hey dude, if that's what you want, then fine, but don't try to pass it of as "inclusive".

Being intolerant of bigots isn't the same as simply being intolerant.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Hey dude, if that's what you want, then fine, but don't try to pass it of as "inclusive".

Inclusive

(Oxford dictionary)

inclusive
Line breaks: in¦clu|sive
Pronunciation: /ɪnˈkluːsɪv /
Definition of inclusive in English:
ADJECTIVE

1Including all the services or items normally expected or required:
menus stating fully inclusive prices
MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES
SYNONYMS
1.1 (inclusive of) Containing (a specified element) as part of a whole:
all prices are inclusive of VAT
MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES
SYNONYMS
1.2 [POSTPOSITIVE] Including the limits specified:
between the ages of 55 and 59 inclusive
MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES
1.3Not excluding any section of society or any party involved in something:
only an inclusive peace process will end the conflict
MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES
1.4(Of language) deliberately avoiding usages that could be seen as excluding a particular social group, for example avoiding the use of masculine pronouns to cover both men and women.

Am I missing something? I don't think it's too much that trans people are included in the fabric of what gaming constitutes. Given that trans people are also gamers wishing to talk about games from a transgender perspective. Given that this is a discussion that happens across pop culture/modern culture lines elsewhere, why would we think gaming is off bounds?

Given the amount of vitriol had when Magic the Gathering released a transgender hero card (a fantasy trading card game, for fuck sake), it seems petty and intellectually dishonest to say that such a conversation is unmerited. Not talking about problems we have is not conducive to creating solutions, after all.

If we understand the premise that compulsory suffering is worse than assumed suffering. People complaininghow Christians are being persecuted, somehow, in the US ... even when Christians make up near 100% of the power base. Compared with someone facing near inevitable discrimination and a 50/50 chance of attempting suicide, and 4 times more likely to be homeless, and 7 times more likely to occupy a position of breadline poverty or lower, just for being trans .... what do you think is a more apt conversation to have in terms of granting greater agency to humanity?

The point of inclusiveness is not drowning out minority voices in a sea of vitriolic bile by a much larger group of people content with locking up trans people in mental 'health' facilities. It's about treating people as equals in potential agency, regardless of what part of the community they belong to.

It's not about opinions, but rather a pursuit or drive to grant humans basic agency in the ideal that it is conducive to the goals of liberty.

(EDIT)Inclusivity is not about the propagation of further discriminatory voices that serve to further disengage certain segments of a community. It's about leaving said voices to grant a segment of people equal right to agency. Allowing people their equal right to their will to power to craft their own fate.

Given that there are far more voices denigrating trans people than actual trans voices, it's not simply saying ... "10% of the population hate you ... there are .3% of total population of trans people ... therefore 33 denigraters to one trans person = fair diaspora of opinion."

 

[ZiggyE]

Hey dude, if that's what you want, then fine, but don't try to pass it of as "inclusive".

Don't try to pull that "its wrong to be intolerant of bigots" bullshit. Anybody who isn't either being facetious or has an ounce of sympathy can point out whats wrong with it. Whats next, its wrong for not bringing on a Klan member to tell us all about how blacks and jews are responsible for everything wrong in the world?

Being intolerant of bigots isn't the same as simply being intolerant.

And who decides what makes a bigot? You? Sorry, but I've learned to distrust the judgement of so called "progressives". Seems a convenient silencing tactic to label someone a bigot when they say something you don't agree with.