I was in game while this was going on, and honestly thought the vitriol Kimbo was spitting was much more offensive (though still not bannable by my estimation). Ryden referred to the avatar (and the fighter) as an inferior black being. There are a few ways of looking at this, I guess. The being is inferior, and is black as a descriptor; or, the being is inferior, with black being inferred as the reason for his inferiority. Why would someone assume the latter unless it was what they believed?
I can't in good conscience say what was intended by the statement, but feel that if someone were described as an "inferior white being" in game it would be taken as the former/not offensive.
I mean are we as a community so messed up that even mentioning race in any negative context- even if the negative aspect has nothing to do with the race but the person- is worthy of a ban? What if it's a positive context? What about a superior black being? A superior white being? Are people going to start being banned for those things as well? If they can be banned for one then why not the other? Is any of this making any sense?
Don't get me wrong, Ryden is annoying and it's pretty rad that he's banned; it just seems the borders for what's acceptable and what's not are ill-defined, sloppily drawn and enforced.
