hsiale wrote:NoPunIn10Did wrote:But we're also not going to punish every player who insults another player or uses a bit of mild profanity. Start by contacting the mods and see what they say, but understand that part of Diplomacy's own definition of sportsmanship is going to be quite different from what is used in most other contexts.
And as long as this continues, Diplomacy is going to remain a club for older, mostly white males. While so many people who could have been good players don't join because they cannot feel comfortable here. I would say a good line should be: it is fine when you insult the game actions (e.g. by calling someone a traitor), it is not fine when you insult the player themselves. Do you all really think that it's better to be able to call your opponent names than to have twice as many possible opponents?
Also, if we are happy with mild profanity, I think the Terms of Use should mention that the website is intended for 18+, or maybe at least 13+.
The 13+ is probably a good designation, at least for the general userbase. Schools games (whose players can't directly interact with normal players) are moderated by teachers and can hypothetically support younger players.
Again though:
mild profanity. Start throwing in a bunch of racist, homophobic, sexist, or otherwise bigoted insults, and you're moving away from that territory, IMO; you're much more likely to see mod action once the incident is reported.
As to the problem of Diplomacy being a "club for older, mostly white males," that is absolutely something that the hobby as a whole should work toward correcting. Having a more diverse playerbase will give the game a better chance for a thriving future. However, I don't think a game whose very essence is manipulation, negotiation, and betrayal is a good match for a setting that bans all profanity.*
Diplomacy is not a game suited for social norms about good sportsmanship, and that can easily be one of the reasons why people who play it specifically enjoy it. Making it a more restricted, polite space undercuts that selling point and very likely would not bring about "twice as many possible opponents."
I'm also not sure any
Diplomacy site regulates communication to the extent that
all profanity is verboten. Outside of video games that specifically cater to kids, I'm not aware of other online games that do that either (including games with much more diverse communities), particularly not for games that allow in-game communication at all. And per playing face-to-face, I'm not convinced the non-white and non-male players have a bias against profanity in general, though they absolutely (and rightfully) are more likely to call people out on bigotry.
*If anything, the concept of politeness in society tends to slightly favor populations that already hold social power, so I'm not convinced that banning profanity would actually make the table a more equal one. The most polite players, who discuss things "rationally" and rarely (if ever) curse, are just as often likely to hold more bigoted views than the average willing-to-curse person. That's a tangent, though, and less applicable to Diplomacy specifically.
