NEWS/OPINION — Nobody Cares That ARD Used the Soft N Word, Me Included
“The jailer who has the keys is never the prisoner.” — Unknown
A curious example of how SCP staff contort to exempt themselves from their own disciplinary standards.
No one would argue that SCP staff don’t employ taut restrictions on speech. These restrictions are not just for staff in public spaces, but for mere users in private ones too. This regulation of private speech hasn’t applied to staff in their private spaces until recently (and even then, it is enforced by the honor system… that or accountability by fear of whistleblowers). SCP users — delayed in awareness by months as a result of staff snuffing out information contrary to their image — have finally caught on to this discrepancy and brought it to staff’s attention.
Whereas it was first meant to help create an inclusive environment, staff’s control of speech is now a self-serving tool used to curate bad press or potentially bad press. When not in a defensive posture, this arm of staff’s political prerogative is to project their sensitivity as loudly as possible. They have made de facto diplomats out of those who interact with the site, made them into representatives of their great culture to the greater culture by a sort of implicit terms of service. Staff can’t tolerate an individual making politically incorrect statements because they feel that to abide it reflects poorly on the brand.
Thus they expose themselves and the users to an ever-expanding body of potentially offensive speech that must be disallowed and punished. They are under their own moral obligation to do so.
Or at least that is the impression they want to give.
To begin this story, we introduce SCP user and former staff member, A Random Day (ARD). ARD is a very talented writer and consistently puts out high-quality works. He is perhaps most known for his co-authorship of SCP-3000. While I believe he was the primary talent behind this article, I think his best work lies elsewhere. My favorite quality of his writing is that he knows how to do it succinctly and powerfully. He is efficient and methodical; able to do a lot with a little. Check out his writers workshop on monster skips.
He became staff and rose in the ranks to eventually be a Moderator. He is notorious for being staff and a straight guy, a seemingly rare occurrence (though other staff try to jokingly convince him that he‘s closeted). He stepped down from staff within the last year but remains active on the site.
I don’t really have anything personally against ARD besides the eminent shilling and self-absorption, but that’s characteristic of all SCP’s elites, who place too much stock in others’ excitement for their works. He’s like a yappy dog. There are worse shillers, but ARD is still in the top tier. Check out just a sample of these:
<ARD> folks go read a tale of mine that just hit 50: http://www.scp-wiki.net/autoerotic-assassination
<jarvis> ard: Autoerotic Assassination (written 9 months ago by A Random Day; rating: +51)
<ARD> you should check out !SCP-2820
<jarvis> ard: SCP-2820: Vaishnavastra (written 2 years ago by A Random Day; rating: +179)
<ARD> Apoplexic: yeah I am really pleased that I invented the first kind of GoI format to break 200 — even if it was a joke format lol
<ARD> !SCP-150, a collab between me and decibelles, is just a few points from hitting +100
<jarvis> ard: SCP-150: Ship of Theseus (written 7 years ago by The Raven, rewritten 2 months ago by Decibelles and A Random Day; rating: +96)
<ARD> give it a look!
<ARD> Big news folks
<CaptainKirby> ARD: ?
<DoctorCambrian> Whats the news ARD?
<ARD> !scp-150 just broke 100
<jarvis> ard: SCP-150: Ship of Theseus (written 7 years ago by The Raven, rewritten 3 months ago by A Random Day and Decibelles; rating: +100)
<ARD> .au a random day
<jarvis> ard: A Random Day has 45 pages ( 44 Originals, 1 Rewrites) ( 21 SCP Articles, 22 Tales, 2 GOI-Format Articles). They have 4313 net upvotes with an average of +95 . Their latest page is SCP-150: Ship of Theseus at +101 .
<ARD> Nice
<ARD> it’s that time of year fellas
<ARD> where I promote an article of mine that’s close to hitting 100
<ARD> Fellas
<ARD> !scp-2820 — an article about a death ray with a god complex — is only 10 upvotes from breaking 200
<ARD> Let’s make it happen
<ARD> !SCP-2350 is about to hit 100 y’all
<jarvis> ard: SCP-2350: From the Mind of Malinalxochitl (written 8 months ago by A Random Day; rating: +100)
<ARD> Oh shit
<ARD> Let’s see if we can get it to 100 in less than a week
<ARD> .au a random day
<jarvis> ard: A Random Day has 46 pages ( 45 Originals, 1 Rewrites) ( 22 SCP Articles, 22 Tales, 2 GOI-Format Articles). They have 4598 net upvotes with an average of +99 . Their latest page is SCP-3640: Escape from the House of Mouse at +131 .
<ARD> Fuck me two upvotes away from +100 average
<ARD> DogTeeth, Mendelssohn — before doing anything else you should read !SCP-3220. It will literally take you a minute tops and it’s received critical acclaim for its brevity, Series 1 atmosphere, and density
<ARD> It can be read in under a minute
<ARD> and yet everyone from decibelle to djkaktus has praised it
<ARD> weryllium: I’m not saying everyone from clef to djkaktus has upvoted it but that’s actually exactly what I’m saying
<ARD> so which of you guys hasn’t read SCP-3220? It’s literally short enough to be read in a minute and has been upvoted by everyone from Clef to kaktus
<ARD> We’re less than 20 upvotes from 100 let’s make it happen
<ARD> InitHello: MobileMagnus read my new article that has received critical acclaim for its incredibly short length and vivid atmosphere <jarvis> ard: SCP-3220: Panopticon II (written 13 hours ago by A Random Day; rating: +44)
<ARD> If not for the fact that it was bumped off the LC by three different Cold posts I am sure it would have broken 50 overnight
And lastly, for good measure, here are a few quotes of his that capture his gist of himself, and his expectancy of privilege:
[2017–01–01 21:50:56] <ARD> I’d probably definitely have sex with a gender swapped version of myself
<ARD> does anyone have any SCP articles with numbers that end in 0 which they are willing to delete for me… so that I can have the slot
He’s a typical staffer otherwise as well, in that he is able to get away with things that non-staff aren’t. For ARD, what’s noteworthy is the extent to which he is able to get away with them.
One day, while I was combing through the chat logs of SCP’s NSFW side chat (#site12) that were leaked to me for review, I noticed that ARD — a regular in there as well as numerous staff and admins — shared a couple of links to images.
Now, you have to be very careful clicking on links to images if you are going to be in #site12… you just never know what kind of fetish you are going to get. But the context around these were not really sexual (only about half of the conversation in the NSFW chat is), so I clicked on it. And this is what I saw:
[2017–01–04 21:34:58] <ARD> http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/951/055/2f5.jpg [archive]
[2017–01–04 21:35:13] <ARD> http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/951/105/a79.png [archive]
To my surprise the staff in the chat — mods and admins — didn’t say anything negative about this. The users in the room didn’t say anything about it either.
It might seem unreasonable of me to assume that ARD would be in some hot water for this, and I’d agree with the reader on that. I am a free speech maximalist and not in the business of regulating what other people say. However, when placed next to the clear and established standards and expectations of SCP — particularly those expected by and of staff — that this didn’t cause some concern or response is a gaping instance of hypocrisy.
To demonstrate, here are examples of mundane users being kicked and/or banned for using the soft n-word:
[02:35] <ampy> ayy nigga
[02:35] <%Famine_> hi Servbutt
[02:35] <@Servbot> Ampy
[02:36] <ampy> Servbot
[02:36] <@Servbot> Hi famine
[02:36] <@Servbot> Ampy don’t ever fucking say that again
[02:36] <@Wogglebug> ^
[02:36] * ampy (~ampy@97D9C888.14268381.9F5497E6.IP) has left #site19 (bye bye)[source]
<blueprints> i was jk calm down nigga
<blueprints> …
ProcyonLotor has kicked blueprints from #site19 (And don’t use the n-word either.)[source]
00:02 Kaktus: nigz,
00:02 Kaktus: youre gonna have to change your nick there, buddy.
00:03 nigz: yes
00:03 Kaktus: Shit’s not cool.
00:03 Tuomey: nigz: That was neither a yes, nor a no; I’m removing you for a while so you can read the chat guide
00:03 nigz: are you serous
00:03 Tuomey: and come back with a different name
00:03 Kaktus: Yeah, I’m serious.
00:03 — ChanServ has banned *!*Mibbit@synIRC-2A330F15.hsd1.ut.comcast.net
00:03 * nigz was kicked by ChanServ (Requested (Tuomey))<figz> sup
<figz> why u ban me?
<Kaktus> So that you wouldnt auto join, holmes.
<Kaktus> Gotta go read that chat guide.
<figz> what?
<Kaktus> The chat guide.
<figz> what rule did I break
<Kaktus> It’s required reading if you want to be in that room
<Kaktus> You had an offensive nick, for one.
<figz> how?!?!?
<Kaktus> Kind of surprised it wasnt on the auto kick list.
<Kaktus> figz, don’t be dense.
<figz> It had nothing to do with racism
<Kaktus> Yah, it did.
<figz> You guys are making it
<Kaktus> If not, it could pretty easily be construed that way
<figz> appear that way
<Kaktus> Ok, fine. You’re not a racist. How about this
<figz> Well then, wouldn’t be your fault
<Kaktus> when an op says change your nick
<Kaktus> you change your nick.
<figz> you didn’t give me a chance
<Kaktus> Regardless of whether or not you think it’s racist.[source]
Here’s a more recent one, where a user is permabanned for having “heavily implied a coded usage of the N word.” Here’s a google search of other disciplinary hits on O5, in case the reader would like more evidence that there is a double standard here that is being ignored.
It should be clear that if a newer user linked a picture on the IRC that was captioned with the soft N word, hell would break loose. No amount of backtracking or moral acrobatics would save such a person, such a regular user. It would be voted upon and they would be banned, either from chat or perma, and swift as a boot.
Not ARD though.
Upon the release of nearly a decade of chatlogs involving the author and SCP admin formerly known as Roget via KiwiFarms, the following was then discovered:
SCP uses IRC chat, and some of the clients that connect to IRC retain logs of all chats and DMs. These are some of those logs. Users can chat in different channels which they can also create. All start with the hashtag “#”. You see these in the center column titled “Conversation”.
So here, CorvusCarinus (who is ProcyonLotor, recently nominated for promotion to administrator, also the person seen banning someone for the soft n-word above; see my other post that includes him here), the author and admin formerly known as Roget, and ARD, are all in a chatroom whose name looks like a swastika.
Seems pretty damning until you realize it is a backwards swastika — a sauwastika. That makes it ok. Right?
There are some telling subtleties that give this a bad vibe. Here, Roget still refers to it as a “swastika”. ARD also uses alliteration to spell out a “kkk”, unless he hit three consecutive typos. He also seems to understand the social implications of being in such a channel, citing it as “semi-suicidal”.
Some think that the use of the sauwastika is not an instantly and unavoidably Nazi or Nazi-esque symbol, but a legitimate religious symbol; that it predates the Nazi appropriation of its sibling, the swastika, and that means use is acceptable. They may even ridicule others for making this equivocation.
I see the logic in this, but it’s odd to me that the same rationalization of an innocent religious symbol gone wrong wouldn’t then be applied to the swastika too. “The swastika was a religious symbol and the Nazis stole it. Go get educated.” So why doesn’t that hold water? Why can’t someone observe this technicality and use the swastika as they please?
Well it’s because the Nazi’s use of it created an association that is indelible. You unfortunately can’t go back because the cultural awareness is too ingrained. If the swastika, previously a symbol of good fortune, was ruined by the Nazi’s infecting it, then the same is probably true of its mirror image.
To belabor the point, politically circumspect corporations like Microsoft, Google, and Apple don’t feel the need to include the sauwastika along with their suite of obscure religious emojis:
I think we all know that there will never be a backwards swastika emoji, and I think we all know why. The word “sauwastika” isn’t even recognized by most word processors (this blog included), and recommends it be corrected to “swastika”.
The bottom line is that it is questionable, and unequivocally insensitive, and those involved know as much. People aren’t going to know or care that the shape is mirrored. They are going to see it and think “Nazi”. That’s why others have felt differently, and been offended by the symbol, which when it happens, it is taken as seriously as if it were a swastika. People might laugh at a stupid Nazi for messing up their shock graffiti but the messaging still comes through the idiocy, doesn’t it? Does a Jew whose car is tagged wake up in the morning and not feel so bad when they realize the swastika is backwards?
In my opinion, no one seriously relies on the split hair that the sauwastika is facing the opposite direction to excuse and tolerate its use. In today’s context, an apologist for this is reaching for straws; a know-it-all who flips you off and tries to hand wave it because “it was actually their ring finger”. In my average opinion, there should be enough of a cultural sensitivity to know that people won’t make the distinction or care.
Not ARD though.
So which side does SCP officially come down on? Best take it to “The Mann” himself to see. Here’s his reply to a concerned member in cahoots with this blog:
We should be proper journalists here: the story here is confirmed from staff chat logs. There really is a Nazi IRC chatroom that uses both the swastika and the sauwastika in the title; the latter is used in the same way a cringlelord might use mirrored symbols in their chiastic AOL Instant Messenger name, like “||oO{{tHe__ManN}}Oo||”. There really is an IRC channel that is just a swastika too. ARD did tell the rest of staff about the channel as he created it, how it had to do with mocking the ignorant white supremacists who often are too stupid to tell the difference, and shared it often in staff chats. It is true that the predominant religion of ARD’s ethnicity coincides with the religion the symbol is native to.
Maybe he really was claiming an uncreated channel on IRC to save it from the Nazis. On the other hand… Nazis already use this symbol in their channel names, don’t they? Haven’t they already appropriated it?
Mann’s apologetics suggest that ARD can’t possibly be antisemitic because he is Hindu (antisemitism being equivocated with white supremacy here). ARD is allowed “a joke that it is in poor taste”. Mann then relies on the intention of the joke, “clear”, in order to handwave any concern.
Would staff extend this benefit of the doubt to users? To non-staff? To those they dislike? Would they go to this great of a length, scavenging for crumbs of good-faith in the mud, for anyone else?
To answer the rhetorical just in case, here is a collection of users who were banned by staff for making Nazi/Hitler jokes, or having a connotation of antisemitism and Nazism:
19:12 → GOCfan joined (GOCfan@SCP-0oa.1qd.60.139.IP)
19:12 <GOCfan> Hi, I have a question
19:12 GOCfan → Guest67690
19:13 <•Hex> Guest67690: what’s up? How can staff help you?
19:14 <Guest67690> I recently applied to the site and was declined. I entered what I believed to be the correct passcode and my age
19:14 <•MalyceGraves> What username did you use?
19:14 <Guest67690> My wikidot, username?
19:15 <•MalyceGraves> Yes.
19:15 <Guest67690> Axis1939–45
19:15 <•MalyceGraves> Well, there you go.
19:16 <Guest67690> What is the issue? Numbers?
19:16 <•MalyceGraves> Seriously? You don’t see the problem with that, or why we might not appreciate it?
19:17 <Guest67690> Oh, the axis. It was only a username mate. Sorry but I just used that because I use it in other forums but they are fine with it
19:17 <•MalyceGraves> I really don’t care what other people think. You can use your nazi dogwhistles elsewhere, not here.
19:17 •MalyceGraves banned *!GOCfan@SCP-0oa.1qd.60.139.IP (+b)
19:17 ← Guest67690 (GOCfan@SCP-0oa.1qd.60.139.IP) was kicked by •MalyceGraves: Get out
19:18 → Guest27172 joined (thelounge@SCP-9eh0e1.uaschools.org)
19:18 <Guest27172> Hi, why was I kicked? Also why did you just accuse me of being a Nazi?
19:18 <•Karakatt> MalyceGraves
19:18 •MalyceGraves banned *!thelounge@SCP-9eh0e1.uaschools.org (+b)
19:18 ← Guest27172 (thelounge@SCP-9eh0e1.uaschools.org) was kicked by •MalyceGraves: Now ban evasion[source]
This was a permaban. Why did staff ban the individaul prior to knowing if they were Hindu or not? Would staff have excused this individual if they claimed that they were Hindu? Or not-white? Or that they were staking the username so as to prevent actual Nazis from taking it first? Instead, something similar on the face of it is here called “a dogwhistle”, and the user “a Nazi”. It is clear that staff are not interested in the particulars of something’s controversial use, when considering users.
The following is a relevant and salient example. Here is a user who was banned for being in the aforementioned swastika IRC chat room:
“Summary: thinks later SCPs look like they were written by middle schoolers and is a nazi” — Tuomey Tombstone
In this instance, the user draws attention to himself in chat by sharing that they think newer articles’ quality is subpar. This incited argumentation by site users, and the individual received a warning from staff:
21:29 b4s8ken: So why do all of the latest scp’s look like they’re written by middleschoolers?
21:29 Hyperfluid Which ones?21:31 b4s8ken Look at the writing style of http://www.scp-wiki.net/scp-008 for instance, compare that to http://www.scp-wiki.net/scp-2935 which is the highest voted SCP in 2016
21:33 Avacyn Many of the series 1 scps only still exist because they have had a decade of upvotes to bolster them
21:35 b4s8ken Ok
21:35 b4s8ken Then lets use this example
21:35 b4s8ken http://www.scp-wiki.net/scp-110321:37 Hyperfluid To br fair b4s8ken djkaktus has a style that lends to a story rather than an object
21:37 b4s8ken “_”21:37 AbsentmindedNihilist wait, how EXACTLY are these written by middleschoolers
21:37 AbsentmindedNihilist explain.21:39 b4s8ken sigh
21:39 Hyperfluid B4s8ken explain your point of view and I’ll listen
21:39 AbsentmindedNihilist yeah
21:40 AbsentmindedNihilist bc like
21:40 AbsentmindedNihilist my logic is
21:40 AbsentmindedNihilist first of all, we’re actually physically older, collectively, than we were in 200821:44 djkaktus 4:29 PM <b4s8ken> So why do all of the latest scp’s look like they’re written by middleschoolers?
21:44 djkaktus This is the part where I say nut up or shut up homie
21:44 AbsentmindedNihilist we have a higher focus on story, narrative development, and character interaction.
21:44 djkaktus Since you used me as an example
21:44 AbsentmindedNihilist djkaktus is GROWN
21:44 Tuomey wait, what
21:44 Tuomey scrolls up
21:44 djkaktus And i contributed to 008 too, so.
21:45 salvagebar djkaktus is a smoll kaktus
21:45 AbsentmindedNihilist those skills are writing skills that develop with time and practice.
21:45 Tuomey b4s8ken: don’t be a dick about people’s writing
21:45 AbsentmindedNihilist they are not skills you find in middle school writing.
21:45 AbsentmindedNihilist logic’d
21:45 Hyperfluid Jesus we are kinda also being dicks here to b4s8ken
21:45 djkaktus I’m just curious as to what about 2935 feels like it was written by a 13 year old.
21:45 AbsentmindedNihilist same, tbh
21:45 djkaktus That’s all.21:46 Hyperfluid B4s8ken explaining your point of view would help
1:47 djkaktus I get the feeling we aren’t going to get a response from this, so
[source]
The user does not speak again in the chat. Despite this, staff kicks the individual:
21:49 *** b4s8ken was kicked by Tuomey (you know what? official warning)
This example is demonstrative of numerous things.
First, the site as a whole, at least at this time (2017), seems to be overly-sensitive to criticism of newer articles when compared to older ones. This is natural, as the site is mostly known for the older ones, and the newer authors inevitably still feel as though they are in the shadow of the early ones despite their contributions.
Second, an individual is punished for a valid and thinly-supported opinion on the site’s content, albeit one voiced in an inflammatory manner. Contrast that with staff demonstrating that they don’t seem to regard an inflammatory and diffuse statement about a group of users as particularly discipline-worthy, at least when the user is staff. (See here and here.)
Thirdly, the inclusion of a popular and politically influential member in the reaction seems to have contributed to the insult’s perceived severity; it is evident in this log (and the second one, upcoming) that the staffer would not have registered the offense were it not for this member’s reaction.
Fourthly, the users and staff do not register that they are being unwelcoming to the user, who is not an antagonist to the site itself — only a part of it — as they enjoy the earlier articles.
Fifthly, it demonstrates the extent to which staff will hold an active vendetta against individuals who disrupt chat or express controversial opinions, because this is not what the user was permabanned for.
Now let’s continue with our story:
“This happened and then in a sidechat it was pointed out that this guy was the one from this here nazi channel so I’m just gonnna go ahead and perma on the grounds of ‘fuck nazis’” — Toumey
The subtext of this is that staff and/or site members extra-judicially investigated the user and their activity. They mined data on someone on the basis of them disagreeing with the prevailing attitude of the site and inciting a rhetorically charged discussion about it. The user then attempts to get an explanation for the permaban:
22:01 someoneelse: so why exactly did you kick me? I asked about the recent change in writing styles, and then got kicked almost an hour later?
22:01 someoneelse: Tuomey
22:01 Tuomey: that was going to be an official warning because I didn’t notice you being a dick about writing at the time
22:02 Tuomey: then it was pointed out you were the guy who was in the nazi channel yesterday
22:02 Tuomey: which is why you got banned
22:02 someoneelse: you’re a fucking moron, faggot
22:02 someoneelse: kill yourself
[source]
The takeaway most relevant to this is that the user was permabanned for being in the swastika chat. There is no other information to contextualize this; staff is technically unaware of the individual’s reasons for being in the chat, or (it would seem) any dialogue that took place therein. They ban the individual for the surface optics of the chat room’s name. Again, staff do not seem interested in the particulars of the case that might cast light on the actions in a more positive, good-faith way.
Next, let’s look at an example of Nazism that ARD himself moderates the disciplinary response to:
“The user started a discussion by claiming that nazi Germany was better than anarchism. I don’t know if they were being facetious or not, so I’m logging to be safe.” — ARD [provided chat log]
To thicken the plot, another staffer asks if this was truly necessary to cite. A careful reader might wonder if the statement was an ideological stance that attempted to say more about anarchism than an endorsement of Nazi Germany’s actions. However, no extension of apologietics are given, and there is no potential present to interpret the statement in its most favorable light. Additionally, other staff reinforce the concern and justification for a citation:
“Yes, it was, because discounting the systematic extermination of millions of people is never a good look. Relevant: https://slate.com/technology/2018/07/the-askhistorians-subreddit-banned-holocaust-deniers-and-facebook-should-too.html — not that I’m calling jacrel a Holocaust denier, but calling Nazi Germany a preferable option has the same end result.” — Quikngruvn
Again, details that might contextualize the offensive action are truncated here. The crux is the effect; the optics of it. Would staff apply the same to ARD, or Roget, or ProcyonLotor? Does the use of a sauwastika “have the same end result” as using a swastika? Is the use of the sauwastika based on a technicality that no one will appreciate “not a good look”?
ARD concludes:
“In any event, they also used the r-slur. These together are deserving of a warning. With the consensus of Bouncl and Quikngruvn, warning sent.”
ARD would post his soft n-word pictures approximately 1 year later. He would create and participate in the sauwastika chat room approximately 2 years later.
[source]
These examples demonstrate something important; not one of these users was acting in good faith. Staff was correct to not fall for technicalities and obtuse claims that would rationalize the behavior. Staff was right to deal with them in accordance with their ethos. The users choices were tasteless, in bad-faith, and appeared degenerate. The particulars were irrelevant. No remote excuses were mined for them, and shouldn’t have been. To do so would have been to fall into a troll’s trap; ceding irretrievable ground. The premise of any of these being a joke, even a bad one, was not factored in. Coming down hard on anything that could be vaguely innuendo of an offensive and insensitive nature is the correct thing to do according to staff’s practices, their history of behaviors, and their standards for the users.
Not ARD though.
Finally, let’s look at an analgous case: a user is found to have a Confederate flag as an icon on their Wikidot profile. The user is cited in a disciplinary fashion for this:
“Recently, it was brought to staff attention that their site icon was a confederate flag. They were asked 10 days ago to change the image, and responded that to them it represented their modern culture and southern pride. Full text of the PM here:
‘If y’all had read my profile y’all would know that it does not express my views of it. To me it represents my modern culture. For the record it does not represent treason, racism, or discrimination to any minority group, but southern pride. It represents traditional southern values.
The “The Stainless Banner”, as the “confederate flag” is called, was officially the battle flag of the Confederate States of America. It is part of my culture. It is part of who I am. To me its no more offensive than say the gay pride flag or the communist hammer and sickle (I heavily dislike communism and socialism, the their flag is still a very good one). Now if it was the Swastika I might see your point. But even then that symbol was originally a religious symbol that the Nazi’s turned backwards and called their own. Personally I don’t find any flag offensive.
However if you would still rather me use the national flag of the actual Confederate States of America, the so called “The Stars and Bars”, not the Stainless Banner I will happily do so. Simply PM me on this. Have a nice day.’
They then changed their icon to the first national flag of the Confederate States of America with 13 stars.
Per admin consensus, their site membership has been revoked. We have one recommendation for a ban. How should we proceed?” — Zyn
The user was banned from the site for a year for this. They asked why they were banned:
“Why was I kick[ed] from the SCP wiki? I complied with the communities request to change my avatar.”
Staff replies:
“The image is of the first national flag of the Confederate States of America with 13 stars, which has the same issue as your previous avatar. Coupled with your previous history of vehemence on the site, staff consensus was for a one-year ban.
[…]
This flag was the official flag of the CSA from 1861-1863. Here's an image from wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America_(1861–1863).svgIt's not the one we commonly think of as a "Confederate flag", so they might be trying to sneak under the radar.
Their username is also problematic, implying they are a follower of the Qanon conspiracy theory.
I'm not sure if this violates site rules, but I saw on the admin site that a user got banned a while ago for having a racist caricature as their profile pic. Since the CSA was an explicitly white supremacist organization, I assume a similar response would be appropriate.”
The user was then permabanned. I hope the reader can ask the relevant rhetorical questions for themselves.
Other disiciplinary cases re: suggested/explicit Nazism, antisemitism, and swastika use can be researched here:
SCP staff bent over backwards to protect ARD from the connotations that clearly they would bend forwards over to have any other user nuked from the site unanimously, and without pause for possible technicalities. It seems the difference between a swastika and a sauwastika is truly an “.au”.
The typical response to something like this would have sunk ARD’s political career at SCP, and reflected poorly on the brand, especially given that he is a very active and talented writer. So it’s safe to say that instead of acting honestly, SCP staff simply closed rank here. That is a small scandal. When asked about it, their leader — head of anti-harassment and involved in disciplinary actions — is an apologist about it. That’s another small scandal. When you consider just how many slights of hypocrisy and “rules for thee, but not for me” like this have gone unsung to the greater SCP userbase, you might have a French Revolution on your hands.
But now for the greatest scandal here; deep down, SCP staff are not offended by the soft N word. They reveal as much with ARD. These are people who have grown up with the Internet. They are completely desensitized to it. The offense is feigned for social points and visibility’s sake. Their moral reactivity to it is a factor of how visible the case is, and how useful it would be to make a theater out of decrying it.
They pretend to cover themselves in virtue but instead contribute to the glaring double standard that now even their own user base identifies as endemic to their persons.
Staff’s ethos is an optics of sensitivity projection.
A final note; the users of SCP are equally implicated in this as morally deficient, despite their newfound vehemence against the staff’s hypocrisy. This information has been available and known by a sufficient number of them for months now. ARD has gone unrecognized for these actions (ProcyonLotor as well… the artist formerly known as Roget is already an enemy to SCP and ostracized). This is comprehensively hypocritical. The users will not distinguish themselves from staff’s failure in this until they make noise about it. They’ll pick off lesser public figures on staff and those who maybe have more of a meekness about them… the slow, easy, limping of them at the edge of the herd…
But not ARD though.
(This post was sent to ARD via private WikiDot messages. Any reply will be posted as an update.)
© Lack of Lepers, 2021
