Sign a pledge against bigotry in the gaming community


Recommended Posts

Most of us have had the misfortune of interacting with the hate speech-spewing jerks on Xbox Live or elsewhere while trying to enjoy a good game. The bigotry encountered online is obnoxious at best and hurtful at worst, and perhaps the most frustrating aspect is that there is no intrinsic connection between online gaming and hate speech.

Enter Gamers Against Bigotry, which has relaunched recently after spreading the word at SXSW. On the GAB site you can sign a pledge to refrain from using bigoted language while gaming. Were it only that, it seems like the message would be lost on those who truly need to hear it, but the organization has plans to take the pledge numbers to developers and rally for more effective ways to deal with offenders. It's a lofty goal, but it's a righteous one.

Read more at http://www.destructoid.com/sign-a-pledge-against-bigotry-in-the-gaming-community-248823.phtml#mM3BaozXI8wP4zoz.99

Sign the pledge...Or, ya know, don't.

I'd be more for a pledge that was for banning all 14 year olds with their super high pitched voices from playing M rated games like Call of Duty. That would stop about 90% of it right there.

Valiant goal though I guess. Although I won't sign it myself I wish these people luck.

you want to ban "hate speech". I think you wanting to violate my freedom is hate speech so ban yourself please!

Actually according to the ToS you agree to when you sign up for xbox live or other online games you don't have a right to "hate speech" as you put it. Most games have rules against it. It's just a matter of if those rules are enforced or not.

For example in Guild Wars 2. There is a swear filter in that game, however the presence of a swear filter does not in any way, shape, or form, give people the right to say whatever they want. Cursing, bigotry or otherwise. People just assume it does and it's quite amusing when they get banned for it and say "but there's a swear filter!" (yes, anet does actually full ban a lot of people for swearing repeatedly in public channels). It clearly states in the ToS, code of conduct, etc that those things are not tolerated and can result in the termination of your account.

You can do and say what you want. Yes. But just like everything else in life don't be surprised when there are consequences for your actions.

  • Like 3

I've seen many fun reactions on this exact topic across various boards now. And there's always someone claiming that they have freedom of speech on their side. But these are the people not knowing what freedom of speech actually means in a legal matter. There is and always will be limitations to the freedom of speech, out in the world there is laws about slander and racism etc. In the gaming world there is the ToS, that in multiplayer games usually have a section about hate speech not being allowed / a banable offense.

So it's sad to hear a 14 year old kid, being allowed to play while he spews out racist slurs, homophobic comments and what not. He won't get banned unless it's really, really extremely bad. The companies know that these are the kids paying for their game, using their parents credit cards to buy the newest DLC's etc.

I see this petition as more of a cry for help to the gaming industry - The companies need to rise up, there needs to be consequenses for peoples actions. A shame it won't help one bit.

  • Like 2

you want to ban "hate speech". I think you wanting to violate my freedom is hate speech so ban yourself please!

Do you know what free speech is? Obviously not...

Your argument isn't even valid.

I'd be more for a pledge that was for banning all 14 year olds with their super high pitched voices from playing M rated games like Call of Duty.

Well in the UK it is illegal, but there is no way to enforce the law.

Anyway i find it pretty funny listening to people taking it so seriously, and i find it even funnier when its actually directed at me personally.

Actually according to the ToS you agree to when you sign up for xbox live or other online games you don't have a right to "hate speech" as you put it. Most games have rules against it. It's just a matter of if those rules are enforced or not.

For example in Guild Wars 2. There is a swear filter in that game, however the presence of a swear filter does not in any way, shape, or form, give people the right to say whatever they want. Cursing, bigotry or otherwise. People just assume it does and it's quite amusing when they get banned for it and say "but there's a swear filter!" (yes, anet does actually full ban a lot of people for swearing repeatedly in public channels). It clearly states in the ToS, code of conduct, etc that those things are not tolerated and can result in the termination of your account.

You can do and say what you want. Yes. But just like everything else in life don't be surprised when there are consequences for your actions.

Only problem is that no ToS out there is above the law. No matter what they say. I know some companies have said in their ToS that you can sue them as well but that isn't stopping you and ToS is nothing in court if there's a law stating the opposite.

Also I agree that companies need to start enforcing the age ratings more strictly, that would already cut down the bull**** by half.

Rather than wasting time with pledges, how about we all collectively stop caring so much about what some random internet person said.

Some kiddie said something mean because he was mad you kept killing him ingame? Big deal, so what?

Next time you encounter someone spewing homophobic "slurs", roleplay a stereotypical gay guy and start hitting on them. They'll either shut up or massively ragequit in the most hilarious fashion.

  • Like 2

Only problem is that no ToS out there is above the law. No matter what they say. I know some companies have said in their ToS that you can sue them as well but that isn't stopping you and ToS is nothing in court if there's a law stating the opposite.

Also I agree that companies need to start enforcing the age ratings more strictly, that would already cut down the bull**** by half.

Above the law... I don't think it means what you think it means. Above the law means making things legal that are illegal. ToS have you give up your right to something, which is not illegal. If you sign a ToS, which in these cases playing the game is you signing it, you are giving up rights. You have the right to give up your rights in exchange for something.

Yeah maybe my English isn't so good to express what I actually meant but I'm pretty sure you understood what I meant by it.

For example, MS services agreement states this:

"IF YOU LIVE IN THE UNITED STATES, SECTION 10 CONTAINS A BINDING ARBITRATION CLAUSE AND CLASS ACTION WAIVER. IT AFFECTS YOUR RIGHTS ABOUT HOW TO RESOLVE ANY DISPUTE WITH MICROSOFT. PLEASE READ IT."

This would never work in the EU. I'm not even sure how can it work in the USA, you're practically giving away your right that is given to you by laws set in place. (Maybe there are no particular laws or there are loopholes, not sure as I don't know their laws that much in the first place). Which actually implies that their ToS is "above" the law which is in no way possible.

It's funny how it's usually the bigots that shout "you're violating my freedom of speech" most loudly. It's not a legal requirement to be a jerk just because you can. In fact if you think it's necessary to live your life as a bigot, you're the one that has something wrong with you.

  • Like 1

Hate to say it, they are actually giving these types of people even more power by starting this website to begin with.

By acknowledging their idiotic behavior has a negative affect, it encourages them to do it even more.

Truth of the matter is, idiots exist. Racist ones on top of that. Not much to do about it other then ignore them entirely.

For awhile I had everyone muted on Live except my friends. Worked out pretty good.

The perfect video for describing the problem.

WARNING, loud high pitched 14 year olds and swearing. If you watch it don't have your volume very high. :rofl:

These kids have 0 right to behave like this. Really, they don't even have the right to play the game. The sad part is "adults" aren't exempt from that kind of behavior either.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • I've been on Deezer for over a decade, but glad that Tidal joined them in fighting AI slop. Can't stand such takes as Spotify's: "Spotify's CEO recently pushed back against listeners who call AI music "slop," urging people to stop using the term and instead embrace the creative potential of AI music."
    • “Could” … in the IS the healthcare is run by insurance companies that make indecent profits denying basic treatments to people that are paying money for nothing. Besides, where are all the Trump epigones who were stating that the tariffs were going to paid by foreign companies and not the US citizens? …
    • Microsoft Teams gets smarter at spotting sneaky meeting bots by Usama Jawad Microsoft Teams is set to receive a couple of new features soon, including a dedicated Recap app and a rather controversial location tracking functionality. The Redmond tech giant has also explained how it has made online communication and collaboration a lot more performant this year. Now, the company has detailed more secure bot admission mechanisms, as first reported by us in March 2026, and now available in Teams. As the use of AI has expanded across enterprise environments, Microsoft has begun allowing users to integrate bots into their meetings for various tasks, such as note-taking. While this has a tangible productivity benefit for users, Microsoft has highlighted how misconfiguration has allowed bots to join meetings that they shouldn't. This has created security and privacy risks, which Microsoft is now combating using a new Teams admin policy that allows organizers to control how external bots access meetings. Admins can leverage a policy called Manage external bots and their access to meetings. The default configuration is "When detected, require approval before joining", which places detected bots in a lobby before they are explicitly admitted into the meeting. The other option disables the experience. Microsoft has also requested admins to only allow organizers and co-organizers to manage access to a meeting, so that other people don't randomly allow bots into meetings. Teams will now be able to leverage infrastructure signals to intelligently detect and distinguish between bots and humans. Microsoft will soon also trial a registration experience for independent software vendors (ISVs) to build a system that registers a bot with Microsoft, so it is marked as a "known" bot. Teams will also categorize bots as trusted and suspected threats so that organizers can quickly identify which bots they want to allow into a meeting. Additional safeguards to block accidental admission of a bot into a meeting include: No one-click Admit option for identified bots Confirmation prompts when admitting participants that include bots Warnings when organizers choose Admit all, and bots are included Microsoft has begun rolling out this experience, and it will be retiring the current CAPTCHA verification implementation. In the future, the company plans to roll out new capabilities like allow-lists, organization-wide policies, admin reports, audit logs, and more granular controls.
    • With the current hardware prices Microsoft should lift the restriction. Then if you have the correct TPM then allow you to use X feature, if you don't have the correct TPM then don't but still actually let you run windows. 11. With a disclaimer during install that X features would be unavailable.
    • It's good for recycling of course. But commence inflation of a second hand RAM bubble and price gouging on DDR 4 inventory in 3... 2... 1...
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      BA the Curmudgeon earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Conversation Starter
      rosiecharles earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • First Post
      KMilenkoski1202 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      538
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      266
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      151
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      98
    5. 5
      macoman
      66
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!