08-26-2024, 12:27 PM
(This post was last modified: 08-27-2024, 01:13 PM by RyanHighman. Edited 3 times in total.)
Im gonna share a summary of what I put in the staff side of things:
-1 because of Goose’s history, but +1 for the actual incident. It seems like this guy was already slurring and was probably going to continue slurring even if Goose didn’t make the joke. I don’t think he fed into or caused the guy to slur.
Relevant rule quote: "...This includes baiting others into saying slurs or any other language not tolerated on Dinks, as well saying partial slurs or things that imply the usage of a slur..."
There is an argument to be made that goose didn’t bait them into saying slurs since it seemed that it was the person’s intention all along. The slurrer wasn’t “tricked” or “baited” into it. While Goose's joke could definitely be considered slur baiting in most other contexts, I dont know if this completely rises to that level here. I say this because I think it is a fair assumption that if you take the joke out of the equation, the slur would have still been said.
Overall +0 for removal of the warn. You did contribute to the chaos, even if just a bit. I dont disagree with the warn being handed out, but am neutral to its removal via this appeal.
Edit: Changing to a +1 after reading my own post again. If I can argue that the rule wasn’t broken, then history is irrelevant.
-1 because of Goose’s history, but +1 for the actual incident. It seems like this guy was already slurring and was probably going to continue slurring even if Goose didn’t make the joke. I don’t think he fed into or caused the guy to slur.
Relevant rule quote: "...This includes baiting others into saying slurs or any other language not tolerated on Dinks, as well saying partial slurs or things that imply the usage of a slur..."
There is an argument to be made that goose didn’t bait them into saying slurs since it seemed that it was the person’s intention all along. The slurrer wasn’t “tricked” or “baited” into it. While Goose's joke could definitely be considered slur baiting in most other contexts, I dont know if this completely rises to that level here. I say this because I think it is a fair assumption that if you take the joke out of the equation, the slur would have still been said.
Overall +0 for removal of the warn. You did contribute to the chaos, even if just a bit. I dont disagree with the warn being handed out, but am neutral to its removal via this appeal.
Edit: Changing to a +1 after reading my own post again. If I can argue that the rule wasn’t broken, then history is irrelevant.
Spread Kindness, Not Hate.
Creativity comes from a conflict of ideas.
Creativity comes from a conflict of ideas.
