In light of recent discussions and a lack of clarity on the admin team's stance, can the admin team make any public statement on their policy towards individuals who identify as fascist, exhibit fascist tendencies, or has promoted fascism? Additionally, can the admin team comment as to whether a decision has been made regarding Whole India's status as a member of this community, and if not, whether a discussion is currently taking place in the admin team?
Regarding admin policy towards fascism and the status of Whole India
- Thread starter Gorundu
- Start date
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
- Pronouns
- he/him/his
- TNP Nation
- Zemnaya Svoboda
- Discord
- Eluvatar#8517
We don't have a written policy on players with regard to fascism. Historically we have not considered anyone's political beliefs or ideology as such in moderating this forum or other venues: instead, we have taken action against conduct that made people feel unsafe or unwelcome. The most relevant written texts would be our terms of use and board rules.
I have consulted with several of the other administrators and am prepared to say that we are discussing Whole India and looking into their conduct.
I have consulted with several of the other administrators and am prepared to say that we are discussing Whole India and looking into their conduct.
- Pronouns
- He/Him, They/Them
So uh, it's come to my attention that admin apparently believes Whole India is not a fascist, despite Whole India saying they are a Nazi and saying they love Hitler.
Could admin please detail how they came to the determination that Whole India is not a fascist? And also why they believe someone who says such things like they are 'neutral on Jew killing' doesn't meet the standard of behaviour for banning from TNP?
Last edited:
So uh, it's come to my attention that admin apparently believes Whole India is not a fascist, despite Whole India saying they are a Nazi and saying they love Hitler.
Could admin please detail how they came to the determination that Whole India is not a fascist? And also why they believe someone who says such things like they are 'neutral on Jew killing' doesn't meet the standard of behaviour for banning from TNP?
This post has been moved to the correct thread.
This post has also been seen and admins are aware that this information has been requested. I specifically note this because I am not responding to the contents of this post. Details of a moderation investigation and discussions among moderation team members are considered confidential per the Board Rules, and as such majority agreement of the admins is required for any public response.
This one really seems like a no brainer to me. The proof is everywhere and it is quite explicit. The last time something similar to this happened, if I recall correctly, Admin mentioned their members being busy IRL in regards to why it took them so long to respond and then to act. I might be wrong, but either way, perhaps we should look into making new additions to the admin team; people who have more time for the job.
- Pronouns
- He/Him, They/Them
Forum Admin is perfectly capable of acting quickly when they feel like it - regardless of how busy they claim to be.
If they wanted to address this, they would've. Instead they stall and stall and stall and ignore people who reach out to see how discussions are progressing. On this and another outstanding issue - someone who I would classify as a danger to the community.
If they wanted to address this, they would've. Instead they stall and stall and stall and ignore people who reach out to see how discussions are progressing. On this and another outstanding issue - someone who I would classify as a danger to the community.
That baffles me. Like, I highly doubt that the members of the team are neo-Nazi sympathizers or whatever. So why stall? What's the point?
Because of WW2 and Nazis, British Empire became weak, because of which Indian subcontinent and others gained their independence. This reason could be behind his loving Nazis.....
So uh, it's come to my attention that admin apparently believes Whole India is not a fascist, despite Whole India saying they are a Nazi and saying they love Hitler.
Could admin please detail how they came to the determination that Whole India is not a fascist? And also why they believe someone who says such things like they are 'neutral on Jew killing' doesn't meet the standard of behaviour for banning from TNP?
The administration team typically issues a statement when a decision is made to ban a player from the forum. These are, thankfully, infrequent because we have such an excellent community. Folks generally follow the rules. On occasion we have had to ban certain players who we recognized were dangerous individuals. This was done to protect our members from RL harm.
I cannot recall ever having made a statement that admin is not going to ban someone. But that is the case with Whole India. We will not be issuing a ban at this point in time.
We reviewed the evidence presented and made inquiries to obtain additional information. I personally spoke at length with Whole India, and shared statements from those conversations with the team.
In deciding whether to ban someone, there are two basic considerations. First, we look at rule-breaking. Do any of the statements made violate out current guidelines? Have there been previous warnings issued? Have they been on mod preview for past statements? It is true that WI said some terrible things.
The second consideration is whether or not the individual is a threat to members of the community. I truly do not want harm to come to anyone here. None of us does. So the heart of question is, does WI have a desire to hurt others?
Finding the answer may not be as easy as it looks. A clear-cut case would be someone who belongs to a RL neo-nazi organization and recruits or grooms others to join. That is certainly a bad actor who has no place here, and they would warrant a pre-emptive ban. Similarly, someone advocating genocide gets the boot.
But what do you do about the person who says, “I am a fascist,” and then says, “I used to be a fascist, but now I am not?” Do we ban them anyway, just in case the second statement is a lie? Or do we want to ban people because they used to have seriously messed-up ideas? What is the fair thing to do?
In Whole India’s case, our assessment was that he is not currently a dangerous person who would want to directly harm or see harm come to members of this community. Should any future activity indicate otherwise, we will revisit the issue.
As we work on our guidelines for community standards, we need to clarify what is and what is not acceptable. as well as where the line is between behavior that deserves an instant and permanent ban and that which is better addressed by warnings and temp bans, escalating as necessary. By more clearly defining this difference, we will be better able to evaluate cases like this one in the future.
I cannot recall ever having made a statement that admin is not going to ban someone. But that is the case with Whole India. We will not be issuing a ban at this point in time.
We reviewed the evidence presented and made inquiries to obtain additional information. I personally spoke at length with Whole India, and shared statements from those conversations with the team.
In deciding whether to ban someone, there are two basic considerations. First, we look at rule-breaking. Do any of the statements made violate out current guidelines? Have there been previous warnings issued? Have they been on mod preview for past statements? It is true that WI said some terrible things.
The second consideration is whether or not the individual is a threat to members of the community. I truly do not want harm to come to anyone here. None of us does. So the heart of question is, does WI have a desire to hurt others?
Finding the answer may not be as easy as it looks. A clear-cut case would be someone who belongs to a RL neo-nazi organization and recruits or grooms others to join. That is certainly a bad actor who has no place here, and they would warrant a pre-emptive ban. Similarly, someone advocating genocide gets the boot.
But what do you do about the person who says, “I am a fascist,” and then says, “I used to be a fascist, but now I am not?” Do we ban them anyway, just in case the second statement is a lie? Or do we want to ban people because they used to have seriously messed-up ideas? What is the fair thing to do?
In Whole India’s case, our assessment was that he is not currently a dangerous person who would want to directly harm or see harm come to members of this community. Should any future activity indicate otherwise, we will revisit the issue.
As we work on our guidelines for community standards, we need to clarify what is and what is not acceptable. as well as where the line is between behavior that deserves an instant and permanent ban and that which is better addressed by warnings and temp bans, escalating as necessary. By more clearly defining this difference, we will be better able to evaluate cases like this one in the future.
So you decided to take his statements at face value.
I'm sure this is going to go over well. For any who may now be planning to leave, it's been good.
A permanent ban from TNP with no opportunity for a second chance has always been reserved for the worst offenders. By and large, we believe that people can learn from their experiences and grow to become better than they were, and that the statements someone makes when they are a teenager do not permanently define them as individuals.
Whole India has told us that they do not support fascism nor hold fascist beliefs, and that they understand the problems with their previous statements. As GBM said, she spoke with Whole India at length, and in her judgement they are being truthful. Whole India has also been informed that they are under moderation's eye and on a short leash.
If Whole India has changed for the better, then their actions in TNP should bear that out. If they have misled us and go on to spread hateful ideologies, that will be treated as an additional offense and addressed accordingly.