curbing racism on the internet

[Darko]

Just the other day there was a guy on Dr. Phil (can't stand Dr. Phil or his show but that's beside the point) who was being racially discriminated and harassed on XBox live. He was even being threatened and several people were saying very racial and offensive things which he forwarded to Microsoft. They apparently told him that they could do nothing about it unless the person in question was reported by 10 other people. Personally, I think that's absurd and careless on Microsoft's part. It could be (and was) argued that this harassment was violating the man's constitutional rights. "I'm going to kill you and your family." at least warrants some looking into, but up to that point nothing had been done to them aside from a slap on the wrist.

I do agree that it's not fair that video games and gamers are being given such a bad name because of what some people do. [I mean, if you can't control yourself and are going off an racist rants over a stupid Madden game, you probably should get your ass off the sofa and seek some anger management.] But unless stricter measures are taken against these people, we’re always going to have this problem.

I think the first thing they should do is enforce a stricter policy on online gaming. No warnings. You do it once, you're done.

Things like XBox live have become a window for people to spread their hate and whether or not they will act on their racist threats is anyone's guess. I think it's foolish to oversee things like this. Will they wait until someone is actually hurt or killed before they start taking bigger steps to remedy the situation?

Edit: I found a clip of the show I was talking about: http://youtube.com/watch?v=T75XVnyNoS0 [As usual, the comments are an embarrassment to humankind]
_________________
For the first time I feel as though I am reborn

RIP Gabriel J. Figueroa 1987-2007

[Calvin]

The internet is simply a communication medium, and unless a person is doing something to break laws on free speech, such as inciting panic or actually engaging in or planning some illegal activity, than their right should be protected. People should be held accountable for what they say in public spaces such as the internet--but saying racist things, while in bad taste, is not illegal. Writing out plans to murder a person of a different color, however, is illegal, and should be prosecuted.

So, people should be punished and sites should be taken down for committing illegal activities, and not for doing something that is widely despised, but is still acceptable in the eyes of the law.

To Leb: Jowy is simply saying that there is some ambivalence when it comes to the issue. Obviously there can be Jewish folks who are not descended from Hebrews just as there can be white Muslims. Because many Jews share the same ethnic traits, it is perfectly reasonable to assume that many people would be racist against their ethnicity, and not because of their religion.
_________________

I changed the number on my phone so you can't call me up at home, and you can't say those
things to me, that make me fall down on my knees.

[Yvl]

[Jowy Atreides]

Is it necessary to insult me personally? If I didn't understand something, I would simply admit it.

I take issue with your claim that a Jew is only someone who practices the religion, not your point that Jews don't have to be a part of the ethnic group. I agree that religious Jews who are not part of the ethnicity shold also be considered "Jews."

What do you call a non-religious ethnic Jew then? It seems clear to me that they are also Jews, regardless of their faith.

[Leb]

Who insulted you personally? I can't make out what you're trying to say in some parts, and in others you're arguing something that I... haven't argued. If something has gone over your head, then obviously you wouldn't realize it-- that's the point of the phrase. I think I see the problem, however.

You seem to think that I'm saying "Jew" can't refer to the ethnicity of the descendants of Israelites, but I'm only making the argument that it doesn't need to apply, and doesn't apply at all in most cases. To say the word "Jew" has an ethnic connotation by default is what I'm arguing against.

[Jowy Atreides]

No, I can pretty much understand when something is beyond my current comprehension. If there was a topic about the relationship between the monotheisms in the 16th century, I would know it's something I wouldn't care to know, and is simply beyond me.

That, and the insinuation that I simply read the Wikipedia article without criticially thinking was insulting, to me. I'm no theologian, by any measure, but I don't bother posting unless I grasp what's going on.

"That's religious persecution. Jews are not a race; they are people who practice Judaism."

This is where I disagree. You didn't say it includes more than ethnicity, you said ethnicity has nothing to do with it, which is incorrect. But, in your most recent post, you seem to contradict previous statements, claiming that there is an ethnic dimension to determining Who is a Jew?, which has been my point all along.

Jews are a race, a religion, and/or some combination thereof. If you don't disagree with this position, then we agree.

[Hawk Thanatos]

[Leb]

Okay, first of all, if you think a race and an ethnic group are the same thing, I... wow. I don't even know where I should begin, Hawk.

Secondly, the word I described already has a valid definition in the word "Jew." Last I checked, anyway--

[Aurelien]

Okay I'll step in and stop this non-sense about the meaning of Jews with people trying to play sarcasm to insult one another. Sick of this, and this needs to end.

NOW!

Back on topic, please.
_________________



~City-States of Jowston and Tinto Republic~
06.06.2004 - 20.01.2008

[Amyral]

The internet isn't a public space, therefore it's not bound by the constitution. In private property, free speech, free press, religion, etc can all be curbed for any reason and the internet is a private space. Therefore, there's no reason to call up free speech or anything. Microsoft can make any rule restriction racist speech on X-Box live if they want, as it's deemed their private property. The internet itself may be a communication medium, but all the sites are private property, owned by someone.

With that said, I think the only way to to curb the random racism (ie: that which is said solely by the anonymity) on the internet is to remove said anonymity, which is neither really possible nor really desirable. Even then, that wouldn't really stop it all, as those who are not ashamed of it would still be free to be as racist and bigoted as they wish.

[Luceit]

This article has good intentions, but it's very much faulty.

[kuwaizair]

[Tullaryx]

[Jowy Atreides]

The dictionary.com definition includes more than what you used, and we already agree that religious, non-ethnic Jews (i.e., a black guy like Sammy Davis, Jr., who converted to Judaism, should be considered Jewish, to some degree) should also be considered Jews, so the point is moot. However, I don't know if you were talking to me or Hawk, so I don't know if I even need to give a response.

I think it's difficult to define the internet as either public or private: websites themselves are usually private, but the internet is like a swath of land: it can be put to public or private use, but "land" itself is neither public or private. It is something which has yet to be given that kind of distinction.

Free press, like the website of The New York Times, for example, includes anything written, so free speech and press issues do come up, fairly often on the internet.

Also, private property is subject to laws, and, as the supreme law of the U.S., the Constitution has dominion over private land, to some extent. They can't tell you what color your drapes should be, but you can't have a yard of spikes, or something that may harm someone.

For example: there's a video from Brazil called 2 Girls 1 Cup (note: only links to a Wikipedia article) which features some pretty graphic stuff, and someone registered as a legal officer for the man who made the video was arrested in Florida, and sentenced to 3 years unsupervised probation.

Child pornography is also illegal, as it should be, and a lot of people have been arrested for either watching it, or attempting to make a video themselves. The internet is usually the medium through which these individuals are found.

[Leb]

Again, the point was missed, but since I was talking to Hawk and the matter is supposed to be dropped... we'll leave it at that.

I'm not sure what correlation there is between land and the internet, however. The internet is subject to laws, just as a person is even on their own private property. Drapes aside, we are all held accountable for our actions-- internet or not.