SUMMARY
Discord is asking Partners to sanitize our servers of speech not fit for "everyone." This policy extends to the "r-word" (even in the context of a self-depreciating joke) and the "n-word with an a" (even in the context of posting song lyrics on hip-hop servers). Although many Partners, including those with predominantly African American communities, have continued to voice concern about this policy, Discord has not addressed those concerns directly or stated that it has any intention of changing the policy.
A representative of Discord Trust & Safety was notified directly on March 23rd that one of the Discord Staff outlining this policy to Partners has pages of hateful and disparaging Tweets using #FuckCisPeople, #CisPeople, and #Cis on the public-facing Twitter account linked in her Discord profile. The Tweets were discussed on the Discord server for Partners on March 24th and March 27th. The Staff temporarily made this Twitter account private on March 28th, but it was made public again on March 29th with none of the controversial Tweets removed. The Staff in question is still regularly and consistently communicating with Partners in an official capacity using a Staff account linking said public Twitter account.
Partners are expected to abide by the CoC's strict speech guidelines across all of our social media because our "behavior may reflect on Discord." Discord gives Partners 48 hours to remove reported content because Trust & Safety adheres to the same deadline. 113 hours passed between Trust & Safety being notified about the #FuckCisPeople Tweets on March 23rd and the Twitter profile temporarily being made private on March 28th. Now that it is public again, it has been 160 hours, and none of the Tweets have been removed.
Although I suspect I will be de-Partnered for submitting this post to /r/pcgaming, it is only a matter of time before someone else does the same in a less reputable sub, and I believe that Discord -- not the individuals it employs -- should be taken to task over this latest example of a disturbing double standard in its core values and ethics. Not only has Discord failed to respond to Partner concerns adequately, but it has failed to moderate even its own staff accordingly under its own guidelines. This raises serious concerns for Discord communities about what standard our speech will be evaluated under, and by whom.
BACKGROUND
Last week I posted a thread on /r/DiscordApp about CoC changes for Partners, which is now locked. Discord never responded to the thread and the only direct acknowledgment I've seen about the concerns raised in it is denial that we are being asked to "blanket ban" certain words. This denial is given in the absence of any statement adding, retracting, clarifying, or expounding upon past Staff statements to the contrary.
AN EGREGIOUS DOUBLE STANDARD IN VALUES
"As a Discord Partner and effectively a face of the Discord community, your behavior may reflect on Discord. You should be on good behavior on the Discord platform, across other social media platforms, and in real life." (Discord Partner CoC)
On March 23rd, /r/JoeRogan DMed a representative of Discord Trust & Safety (hereinafter referred to as "Safety Boss") notifying him that the public-facing Twitter account linked on the Discord profile of another Staff member (hereinafter referred to as "Help Boss") contained a prolific history of disparaging Tweets using the hashtags "#FuckCisPeople", "#CisPeople", and "#Cis" between 2014-2018. Here are some examples of those Tweets. Help Boss was one of the Discord Staff appointed to answer Partner questions about the new CoC and many of the quotes in my CoC thread came from her. /r/JoeRogan provided direct links and screenshots of these public Tweets to Safety Boss.
Safety Boss acknowledged his concern:
Safety Boss: "I'll pass the feedback/info along." (March 23rd)
One full day later, when it was seen that the Tweets were still public and the Twitter account was still linked in Help Boss' profile, /r/JoeRogan vocalized his frustration at the perceived double-standard by linking to one of the #FuckCisPeople Tweets in #Ask-The-Team. Discord Partners condemned the Tweets for their contents. No members of Discord Staff did the same.
Later in the day, Safety Boss acknowledged these concerns:
Safety Boss: "[...] We definitely care about the feedback and take it to heart. [...] I keep up with this channel! [...] I'll be sure to share that feedback with the team as a whole." (March 24th)
Four days later, when it was seen that the Tweets were still public and the Twitter account was still linked on Help Boss' profile, /r/JoeRogan once again asked in #Ask-The-Team to address what had by now become a flagrant and egregious example of Discord's double standards.
/r/JoeRogan: "Can we address why a Staff member is using hate speech publicly, calling for violence? Or is that swept under the rug like the rest of it? [Help Boss] still [has] publicly available Tweets connected to their work Discord account. Using Discord's platform as a starting point, I can click on [Help Boss]'s profile, see her connections, click on her Twitter, and find hate speech. Explain how that is not relevant?"
Help Boss: "I fucking hate cis straight religious people and I seriously hope the fucker responsible drowns." (Mar 26, 2016)
Discord Partner: "As a white straight religious cis person, that makes me super duper uncomfortable. ??"
DISCORD DOESN'T CARE HOW PARTNERS FEEL ABOUT STAFF HATE SPEECH
One Discord Partner said that as a religious person, the views expressed in the Tweets made her feel very uncomfortable. I spoke with this Partner, who is a Muslim, on March 29th and believe her reaction was genuine.
I asked this Partner if any member of Discord Staff reached out to her in the days since the Tweets were shared to condemn their contents, renounce them as being representative of Discord's values, or to make her feel more comfortable coming to Staff for help. She said no.
There are many Staff roles on the server for Discord Partners and every Partner I've spoken with has only a vague idea of what any of them signify (there is no description on the server or website). Out of these Staff roles, I counted the following Staff online throughout the day after Help Boss's public Tweets were posted and discussed.
x1 Discord Staff with the "Hype Floof" role
x1 Discord Staff with the "Hype Knight" role
x1 Discord Staff with the "Safety Boss" role
x8 Discord Staff with the "Help Boss" role
x18 Discord Staff with the "Discord Devs" role
Out of these 29 online Discord Staff, not one condemned the views expressed in the Tweets. Not one renounced those views as being representative of Discord, its values, or those of its Staff and employees. Not even Help Boss disavowed these views as being reflective of currently-held beliefs or values.
In fact, rather than address these concerns and commit to removing the Tweets or privatizing her account, Help Boss instead asked Partners to take their opinions "about posts she made 6 years ago" to another channel.
Help Boss: "It would be nice if you could keep this chat to actual questions for Discord staff. You can say whatever you want about posts I made 6 years ago, but please do it in a channel that isn't oriented around getting responses to support issues. [...] So if it belongs anywhere it's in Feedback. [...]"
The Tweets were from 2016 and the channel this discussion took place in was #Ask-The-Team. There is a separate channel called #Help.
Discord Partner: "'Feedback' implies just one way communication. We would like to see a reply, hence 'ask.'"
Help Boss: "Technical questions are now appearing in feedback and other channels, because you have effectively decided to hijack this chat to talk about my personal 'hate speech,' and that's not what this server is for. At all."
Discord Partner: "Why are the Tweets still there? [...] Why was no effort made to remove these Tweets?"
Safety Boss: "This isn't the appropriate place for issues with staff members. If you must, the best place would be abuse@discordapp.com -- you won't get a detailed response but we do read everything sent there."
PARTNERS HAVE 48 HOURS TO REMOVE COMMUNITY CONTENT
160 HOURS WASN'T ENOUGH TO REMOVE ONE STAFF HYPERLINK TO HATE SPEECH
Many Partners feel the 48 hour deadline for removing reported content on our servers is unreasonable given the scope and controversy of what we are being asked to moderate. Discord is known to issue vague warnings, and Safety Boss acknowledged that while Partners would be "pointed in the right direction" of reported content, they should not expect to be told which users posted it for "privacy reasons." As one Partner described his own past experience with Discord T&S, "the delay in e-mail responses and [...] overall vagueness [is] hardly helpful."
Dismissing these Partner concerns, "Hype Queen Supreme" explained that Discord's own Trust & Safety timeline is 48 hours, so Discord "abide[s] by that rule for all of [its] users."
Discord boasts in its "35 Reasons to Work at Discord" video that it sees performance reviews as "rigid and ineffective," so its employees "talk to each other on an ongoing basis" instead. Safety Boss has stated that most Discord employees work on-site.
Acknowledging these facts, I submit the following timeline of events and ask Discord to provide its Partners and users with an explanation as to why Help Boss was not compelled -- either through her own action or the direction of her employer -- to delete the Tweets, conceal them from view, or remove the Twitter link from her profile in a 160 hour period involving three separate notifications about the content.
March 23rd - 160 hours since first notification of concerns.
Safety Boss, who is a representative of Discord Trust & Safety, is personally notified that the Twitter account linked on Help Boss' profile has a public and recent history of what should meet Discord's definition of Hate Speech.
Safety Boss: "I'll pass the feedback/info along." (March 23rd, 6:25PM PST)
March 24th - 146 hours since second notification of concerns.
Help Boss' Tweets are brought up in the Discord Partners server and acknowledged by Safety Boss a second time.
Safety Boss: "Gotcha, I'll be sure to share that feedback with the team as a whole." (March 24th, 4:55PM PST)
March 27th - 41 hours since third notification of concerns.
Help Boss' Tweets are brought up a second time in the Discord Partners server. Safety Boss is notified a third time about the Tweets and Twitter link.
Safety Boss: "This isn't the appropriate place for issues with Staff members. If you must, the best place would be abuse@discordapp.com -- you won't get a detailed response but we do read everything sent there. [...]" (March 27th 10:16AM PST)
HOW DOES DISCORD VALUE AND EVALUATE SPEECH?
Discord's Partner CoC states that it "wants our Partnered servers to be welcoming to all users." If this is the intended goal of the CoC policy's restrictions on speech, I ask Discord to answer the following questions for its users.
1.) In the interest of being "welcoming to all users," I ask for Discord to explain why it wishes to silence users -- particularly those of African American descent -- from using the "n word with an a" in acceptable contexts other leading social media platforms allow; such as the discussion of hip-hop, quoting of song lyrics, or even the greeting of a friend. Would Discord please explain to its users why this speech is unacceptable under the company values that influenced the formation of this policy, while the following speech from "Help Boss" is seemingly condoned?
Help Boss: "Cis men are a scourge and they need to be stopped" (March 16th, 2016)
2.) In the interest of being "welcoming to all users," I ask for Discord to explain why it wishes to silence users -- particularly those who are Twitch Partners, content creators, radio and talkshow hosts -- from using the "r-word" in contexts other leading social media platforms allow; such as self-depreciating jokes, discussion arising from those jokes, or even discussion about the social acceptability of the word in general. I ask Discord to explain why it wishes to silence these contexts even in the creation of content put on other platforms. Would Discord please explain to its users why this speech is unacceptable under the company values that influenced the formation of this policy, while the following speech from "Help Boss" is seemingly condoned?
Help Boss: "Hey did you know did you know did you know cis people are fucking garbage" (June 7th, 2016)
3.) In the interest of being "welcoming to all users," I ask for Discord to explain how it arrived at a policy so prohibitively restrictive on speech as to disallow the contexts described above, and why it has seen fit to push the burden of enforcing it onto Partners with a "take it or leave it" stance that does not appear to value our concerns. Would Discord please explain to its Partners why they should have confidence in how their speech under these guidelines will be evaluated, when it is being done under the same roof where the following speech from "Help Boss" is seemingly condoned?
Help Boss: "Straight people put their filthy lifestyle front and center in everything that they do and I'm tired of it being shoved in my face." (June 8th, 2016)
CONCLUSION
It is common and accepted knowledge that Discord has a legal right to restrict speech on its platform however it sees fit. This does not mean there is no place for feedback from its users on policies that have not yet gone into effect. The new CoC only applies to Partner servers for now, but it does set a precedence and carry profound implications for speech across the platform for every user. If you use Discord and have an opinion on how it is forming and applying the policies discussed in this thread, then I encourage you to share your thoughts here, and I thank you for doing so.
[link] [comments]
from reddit: the front page of the internet https://ift.tt/2HPns1r
No comments:
Post a Comment