- Joined
- Sep 17, 2019
- Messages
- 583
- Thread Author
- #1
The past week has been an absolute mess due to, what I consider to be, two very mild jokes in memetopia. In summary, I believe I have become the target of specific staff members, specifically because of bias held.
The one who posted a staff chat message, which has been posted below, who I have censored since this is a public post.
Potentially other staff members who may be directly (through personal vindictiveness) or indirectly (by believing the two listed above) in support of this.
- Talking with DeNuke to understand why this is happening and what for.
- Talking with RAD-X to understand why this is happening, and who to even talk to about it.
- Contacting the head of staff, Neonity, and receiving no response.
- Making a ban appeal, which was accepted. (Though this was for nothing, as will be shown soon.)
These were received, as seen, on the 22nd of July. I was not banned following these warnings. The ban came a while after, on the 31st of July if I were to go by a pic posted in just a second after the next one.
This was received today, August 4th, after a ban appeal had been accepted and I was unbanned. Keep in mind, there were no warnings before this ban, nor had I done anything (or at least thought I had done anything) to cause this.
This is what I can only assume followed the ban. Each of these points, and the images he posted, will be elaborated below.
Transcription of the pic since it is low quality:
I don't remember what channel this was in, but like everything else here, it was done in jest. I'm sorry if it didn't come off as funny. What is to be noted however is that no transphobia actually followed this. Nothing was posted in relation to this post.
At no point did I ever direct Scarlet to it, as this is a lie. I never said "Hey, go to Encyclopedia Dramatica." What I asked is what they thought of it. Note that nothing followed this question. I don't remember what Scarlet said in response. I don't know what Scarlet personally did when they read that, nor did I care beyond their response, to which I did not respond too. I don't see how this even remotely implies "transphobia" in the slightest.
There was no meme posted that could be construed as targetting trans individuals aside from the one I posted above, which as I have shown, wasn't transphobic at all. This statement is a lie.
I believe that I have been the subject of bias. I believe this bias is in regards to transgender individuals, as well as hatred towards me, personally. It should be noted that no single one of these should be seen as justification to assume, ultimately, that the staff are biased. It is the collection of all these combined which shows that there is bias among staff.
For context, I had already made a ban appeal that was accepted. This ban appeal was specifically over the warnings above, which I personally believe should only have resulted in one warning at most, but accumulated to 3- only to find out later that my ban was not only based on 3 warnings, but other things that they themselves listed, which I have shown above.
- From what I've shown above, we can see that a harsh stance is being taken in defense of LGBTQ standings, which is a hotly contested and political topic in the western world. Again, the emphasis is on the "harsh" stance. I've been warned three times, only one of which was really legitimate.
- We can see that multiple posts were used to support their claims, most of which were not offensive in the slightest, and was essentially an example of "pulling at straws" to make a point. There is no reason I could see for staff to do this other than a personal bias towards their beliefs.
- Knowing the status of (some of) those involved, while not certain, it can be reasonably suspected that there is an implicit bias to defend their own personal standing and status out of perceived grievances, or by unfairly punishing over what they perceive as a minor grievance.
1. All but one of the warnings given were not accurate and not supported by actual observation of the posts in question.
2. No ban message in regards to the ban surrounding this message, along with no ban time. It was safe to assume that this ban was indefinite, especially since it was likely done manually.
3. No indication was given as to what post I was being warned for. All I got were accusations and nothing more, which is why I lot of this report involves memory and gathering evidence.
4. No name was placed with the bans or warnings, making me unable to actually hold anyone accountable for it, even if they had happened to be legitimate.
5. I had made a ban appeal which was accepted. After being unbanned (which was not immediate as the appeal said it would be. I had to contact another staff member after 2-3 days to get unbanned.), I was banned once more after having done nothing.
6. This new ban said that the unbanning was "pre-emptively done", and that a role would be made to essentially bar me from what I assume to be most of the discord.
- Knowing Willard's dev pace, there is no reason to believe that this will be done shortly.
- Because I believe there to be bias in this decision, as evidenced above, there is no reason to believe that this will be done at all.
7. There is evidence of bias behind this decision.
In Summary: I believe I have been permanently banned from the Discord by specific staff members for what could only amount to one real warning for a mildly offensive meme due to an unrelated bias against me, as evidenced above. This report exists because an unban appeal was not honored after its approval, communication could not be made with Neonity, and there is evidence of things beyond just the ban that are influencing this.
Staff in Question
NeonityThe one who posted a staff chat message, which has been posted below, who I have censored since this is a public post.
Potentially other staff members who may be directly (through personal vindictiveness) or indirectly (by believing the two listed above) in support of this.
Preemptive Actions
In an effort to avoid making this thread, I took the following actions to try and fix the situation:- Talking with DeNuke to understand why this is happening and what for.
- Talking with RAD-X to understand why this is happening, and who to even talk to about it.
- Contacting the head of staff, Neonity, and receiving no response.
- Making a ban appeal, which was accepted. (Though this was for nothing, as will be shown soon.)
The Bans/Warnings in Question
These were received, as seen, on the 22nd of July. I was not banned following these warnings. The ban came a while after, on the 31st of July if I were to go by a pic posted in just a second after the next one.
This was received today, August 4th, after a ban appeal had been accepted and I was unbanned. Keep in mind, there were no warnings before this ban, nor had I done anything (or at least thought I had done anything) to cause this.
This is what I can only assume followed the ban. Each of these points, and the images he posted, will be elaborated below.
Timeline of Events
Due to me being banned from the server as of now, it has proven difficult to establish a timeline of events because the posts I made that are the center of all of this were so minor in my eyes that I didn't even make note of it. All I can go off is what was provided to me from the staff chat. All the evidence below was acquired from a staff member who was kind enough to show me what exactly I was banned for since the warnings were given and the posts immediately removed.First Post of Contention
This post is what I believe caused the first warning, that of "Racism". According to the staff chat above, it is stated that Neonity believes I "made" a meme about George Floyd. This is what I assume the image was, as I remember posting it, though I did not make this. This is actually from tenor gifs.Personal Opinion
I don't see why this was marked as "Racist". Low brow and maybe offensive to those who liked George Floyd, I can see, but not racist. Nothing in this meme implies hatred towards, or bigotry towards any race.Second Post of Contention
This post is what I was warned for "Transphobia" over. I remember this clearly because I was warned shortly afterwards.Transcription of the pic since it is low quality:
"I say 'Was that you?' because this isn't the first time I've been served up this Incredibly embarrassing piece of shit MS paint drawing. No reason to assume she's lying about drawing it? So yeah, you suck at art, never put mouse to mousepad in any art program again."
"'Hey look at this terrible crime against art that looks nothing like you, aren't you triggered????' Ya sure if that helps you feel less like the failure you are I guess lol"
"'Hey look at this terrible crime against art that looks nothing like you, aren't you triggered????' Ya sure if that helps you feel less like the failure you are I guess lol"
Personal Opinion
I also don't see why this was labelled as "Transphobia". Nothing in this meme states or implies transphobia. The most it is, is insulting towards a specific person for being ugly, but this person is not involved in our community at all, nor is there presence even of note in our community.Third Post of Contention
This post is what I assume I was warned for "Antisemitism" for. I do not have the video itself, but it's essentially a charicature of a "chud" being told that he'll never solve a Trigonometric problem by an old charicature of a jewish person. The video then shows the chud working and explaining through the problem and solving it using formula, followed by him stating "Take that, Mr. Zog!" (which CAN be seen as antisemitic, because of its conspiracy-related origin), and the jewish person saying "Noooo too high IQ!"Personal Opinion
I understand that this may be offensive, though I personally only found it to be mildly so. Knowing that, I completely understand the warning for it. However, it was never my intent for this to convey any message of hate, bigotry, or antisemitism. This is a meme. It was done in jest. As far as I'm also aware, no one responded with personal offense towards it. So again, I understand the warning, but I wouldn't understand any claims beyond "You posted an offensive meme." such as, as stated in the ban above of, "common bigotry and unnecessary hatred." I don't feel that I need to explain why Black Humor (link attached) is not considered indicative of the personal beliefs or intentions of those who use it.Other Points of Contention
These posts are what were provided above in the staff chat as to support the claim that I am a "bigot" with "unnecessary hatred."I don't remember what channel this was in, but like everything else here, it was done in jest. I'm sorry if it didn't come off as funny. What is to be noted however is that no transphobia actually followed this. Nothing was posted in relation to this post.
This was used as part of the claim of transphobia. This is an outright lie. Again, I do not have access to the Discord, but anybody can verify this should the post not have been deleted. What exactly was said, as close to as I remember, was:
Encyclopedia Dramatica is a satirical wiki site which makes obviously satirical posts about all sorts of things. Its defining attribute is that it doesn't hold itself to any rules over vulgarity, and so will use all sorts of language to convey satire about a wide, wide range of topics. It does not "explicitely target trans people," it targets literally everybody and everything. This is a misunderstanding at best, and an outright lie at worst. I suspect that it is a lie, because it is being used in support of another lie.
At no point did I ever direct Scarlet to it, as this is a lie. I never said "Hey, go to Encyclopedia Dramatica." What I asked is what they thought of it. Note that nothing followed this question. I don't remember what Scarlet said in response. I don't know what Scarlet personally did when they read that, nor did I care beyond their response, to which I did not respond too. I don't see how this even remotely implies "transphobia" in the slightest.
There was no meme posted that could be construed as targetting trans individuals aside from the one I posted above, which as I have shown, wasn't transphobic at all. This statement is a lie.
Evidence of Bias
I believe that I have been the subject of bias. I believe this bias is in regards to transgender individuals, as well as hatred towards me, personally. It should be noted that no single one of these should be seen as justification to assume, ultimately, that the staff are biased. It is the collection of all these combined which shows that there is bias among staff.First Evidence: Prejudiced Perspective
As stated above in that staff chat, they state that I am posting memes to target trans individuals, and I quote, "probably more shit I haven't even seen yet." This is an assumption. This is further supported by the following statement, in which they claim that I "made" a "racist" George Floyd meme, and then states that it is "100% in-character". This shows that there is already a bias based on a perspective which cannot actually be verified, which is then being used to justify punishment.Second Evidence: Personal Beliefs
I do not want to assume what the beliefs of someone else are, as has been done to me, without proper evidence. What I will do however is look at the language and nature of my punishment to show why there might be a bias towards specific beliefs that would cause them to act irrationally in regards to what I have done.For context, I had already made a ban appeal that was accepted. This ban appeal was specifically over the warnings above, which I personally believe should only have resulted in one warning at most, but accumulated to 3- only to find out later that my ban was not only based on 3 warnings, but other things that they themselves listed, which I have shown above.
- From what I've shown above, we can see that a harsh stance is being taken in defense of LGBTQ standings, which is a hotly contested and political topic in the western world. Again, the emphasis is on the "harsh" stance. I've been warned three times, only one of which was really legitimate.
- We can see that multiple posts were used to support their claims, most of which were not offensive in the slightest, and was essentially an example of "pulling at straws" to make a point. There is no reason I could see for staff to do this other than a personal bias towards their beliefs.
- Knowing the status of (some of) those involved, while not certain, it can be reasonably suspected that there is an implicit bias to defend their own personal standing and status out of perceived grievances, or by unfairly punishing over what they perceive as a minor grievance.
Why I Believe that the Punishment is Unfair
1. All but one of the warnings given were not accurate and not supported by actual observation of the posts in question.2. No ban message in regards to the ban surrounding this message, along with no ban time. It was safe to assume that this ban was indefinite, especially since it was likely done manually.
3. No indication was given as to what post I was being warned for. All I got were accusations and nothing more, which is why I lot of this report involves memory and gathering evidence.
4. No name was placed with the bans or warnings, making me unable to actually hold anyone accountable for it, even if they had happened to be legitimate.
5. I had made a ban appeal which was accepted. After being unbanned (which was not immediate as the appeal said it would be. I had to contact another staff member after 2-3 days to get unbanned.), I was banned once more after having done nothing.
6. This new ban said that the unbanning was "pre-emptively done", and that a role would be made to essentially bar me from what I assume to be most of the discord.
- Knowing Willard's dev pace, there is no reason to believe that this will be done shortly.
- Because I believe there to be bias in this decision, as evidenced above, there is no reason to believe that this will be done at all.
7. There is evidence of bias behind this decision.
In Summary: I believe I have been permanently banned from the Discord by specific staff members for what could only amount to one real warning for a mildly offensive meme due to an unrelated bias against me, as evidenced above. This report exists because an unban appeal was not honored after its approval, communication could not be made with Neonity, and there is evidence of things beyond just the ban that are influencing this.
Last edited:
