Welcome back to another edition of Knowledge Pool! This week we have a silver scenario, which I will remind us once again means that it's aimed at level 1 judges and L2+ judges please wait a few days before chiming in. Feel free to check us out at the blog below. Without further ado;

http://blogs.magicjudges.org/knowledgepool/?p=1112

During a match at a PTQ, Amy and Nolan are playing toward the end of the round. During game three, Amy has no cards in hand and her first draw for the turn is a Bonfire of the Damned that she is able to cast through its miracle cost for lethal damage. Nolan puts his hand down in disgust and says, “Well that's gay.” Amy gives Nolan a dirty look and says, “Yeah, well you're gay.” A spectator pauses the match and calls a judge. What's the most appropriate infraction, penalty, and any additional fix?

EDIT

I want to clarify the meaning of the word gay in this context.

Gay has 2 real definitions: 1) Happy/Joyful. 2) Homosexual. In America (and Australia, it seems), calling somebody ‘gay’ is used often as an insult, because for a long time being a gay person in the united states was worthy of ridicule.

Unfortunately many players will still use the word gay to be a descriptor of a situation they find unpleasant. This is both an inaccurate representation of the situation, and an incorrect use of the word. While this use is being removed from vocabulary it will still come up fairly often and may make others feel uncomfortable.

If you have any questions about the meaning of the word I would be more than happy to clarify off list. Thank you all again for so much participation!

Edited Benjamin McDole (July 24, 2014 09:34:57 AM)

Ok I'm going to stick my head above the parapet and explain my thought process on this rather than read other peoples thoughts 1st.

4.2.Unsporting Conduct —Major
A player takes action towards one or more individuals that could reasonably be expected to create a feeling of being harassed, threatened, bullied, or stalked.

This may include insults based on race, color, religion, national origin, age, gender, disability, or sexual orientation.

It is possible for an offender to commit this infraction without intending malice or harm to the subject of the harassment.

Use of the word “gay” as a negative is not ok, full stop. I understand that through ignorance, Amy and Nolan may not intend to cause offense to their opponent or spectators, and upon questioning, they may even feel that this is “just banter” but the fact is that a spectator felt strongly enough to ask them to stop playing and get a judge. This to me says that the atmosphere is not the safe environment that we want in magic tournaments. My take on this situation is that Nolan is venting frustration at the situation and Amy takes offense to what he has said, but rather than call a judge, retaliates, with the implied desire to hurt Nolan. To my mind therefore, both players have committed an offense that can be covered under Unsporting Conduct Major. I would take them away from the table separately and advise them that they will receive a match loss and the reasons why. I would also encourage them to apologize to each other, although if one or both players seem reluctant to do so, I would not push the issue

Further complication in this scenario is caused by the fact that Amy has cast a lethal Bonfire of the Damned. the situation as described is that she has cast this for lethal damage ending the game. I would therefore use the additional remedy to apply the penalty to their next matches.

This is very much behavior that we want to discourage at Magic events. The first step, when investigating, would be to bring the players away from the table, and away from each other, to prevent further escalation.

Nolan has committed USC - Minor. His language, and attitude towards his opponent, could create an uncomfortable environment for others. That said, the behavior wasn't specifically targeted at Amy, and is clearly an expression of general frustration, and not something that harasses or bullies a single person. Nolan receives a warning.

Edit:
on further thought, I don't think Amy has committed USC-Major.

Amy's case is a little trickier. She escalated the situation, insulting her opponent based on sexual orientation. This falls into the territory of USC - Major. This infraction carries the penalty of Match Loss. The current match is over (With Amy winning 2-1), so the Match Loss will be applied to the next round.

It is a bit feel-bad that Amy gets a more severe penalty than Nolan, for what seems like very similar behavior, which was done in response to inappropriate behavior. That said, she did escalate the situation, and made the situation more personal (“you're gay” vs “that's gay”), when she had the opportunity to call a judge, or call Nolan out on his statement appropriately.

Edited Talin Salway (July 29, 2014 01:13:00 AM)

I would say USC- Minor for both players. I would also suggest that it should be a Warning. I understand that we are currently on an anti-bullying campaign but i don't see so much harm that a Warning wouldn't fix the issue.

With my personal opinion out there, i would definitely talk to both players AND the spectator to get all the information. One i have a warm and fuzzy about the situation i would talk to the HJ.

To me, this seems like banter between players. Unless during talking to all the person's involved something else came out in the wash - i would stick with me first assessment.

I would also make it perfectly clear, that while they may have meant no offense - this sort of dialogue is not acceptable.

Edited Darren Horve (July 23, 2014 06:54:14 PM)

It's pretty obvious to me that this is a case to step in and separate the parties. There's two situations to deal with here that need to be dealt with individually.

First we have Noland's statement. While probably not appropriate, I have difficulty considering his statement “excessively vulgar or profane language”. I, personally, would give Noland a caution and warn him that such language isn't appropriate and can very quickly turn into a a very serious problem. I'm sure that some people would feel that USC-Minor is appropriate here, but I wouldn't hand that penalty out. Others may feel that USC major is appropriate here as it could be perceived as language that “bullies or harassed” based on “sexual orientation”.

Amy's situation is significantly more dangerous because her language is directed at her opponent. This makes it much more of a clear case of USC-Major. While Amy clearly took offense at Noland's statement, her turning it around onto Noland is a serious escalation. To me this is clearly a case of “harassment” based on “sexual orientation”.

Amy gets USC-Major, Match Loss. I'd apply this to her next match.

I originally thought that it would be a USC - Major for both players, but upon closer inspection of the IPG, USC - Major says "A player takes action towards one or more individuals“ and the statement ”that's gay“ isnt directed towards Amy. However Amy's statement of ”/you're/ gay“ IS directed at Noland, so I believe that Talin is correct in his ruling and I would make the same ruling.

EDIT:

One other thing that I would like to point out is that someone outside of the match called a judge over. That means that someone watching felt either uncomfortable enough to call a judge or knew that this language would make other people uncomfortable.
For all of the people arguing that saying ”you're gay" maybe isn't deserving enough for a USC - Major, not only is it laid out clearly in the IPG, but a non-player called you over to the table. To me, that would flag that this is a situation we need to deal with right now which is what USC - Major is reserved for.

Edited Elliot Garner (July 24, 2014 12:58:36 PM)

I feel pretty bad about this scenario.

Before reading comments:
I'd like to give them both a warning for USC minor, because, come on, we're at the ‘that’s stupid/no you're stupid' level.
I'd have a strong talk with both the players that this is not appropriate behavior.

After reading the comments:
- About the clear cut case for USC-Major: I'd ask if Nolan knew that he could bait his opponent like this.
If he did, then that would (for me) fall in the cheating field. Taking a warning yourself in hopes of getting your opponent a match loss at a time he could no longer win.
-IF i'd have to give a match loss, like some people suggested, then it could still be applied to this match as it has not yet finished (that she is able to cast through its miracle cost for lethal damage).

As an afterthought:
This behavior does show up at the my local FNM: I'll need to warn my players even more for the ‘yeah you are ____’ response if it's a USC-major offense at competitive.

USC - Minor for Nolan. His language was not directed at Amy or any other person, but is nonetheless language that should not be used at a Magic tournament. Give him a Warning.

USC - Major for Amy. Her comment was directed at Nolan and is an insult based on sexual orientation. Give Amy a Match Loss, and I would apply it to the match in progress, not to her next match, as there was no explicit confirmation that Bonfire resolved at the time the remarks were made or that Nolan had already conceded.

I would talk to each player separately and ask them if they were offended by this, or if they were both just joking around. I would let them know that this kind of behavior, while it may be common in their play groups, is not appropriate at a competitive event and won't be tolerated. I would give both a caution, assuming that they were not actually being aggressive and send them on their ways.

The obvious answer, USC Minor and Major would be more fitting if they were actually angry or confrontational with each other, but from the looks of it they are just exchanging playground banter.

Everyone here agrees that such statements fall under USC, and that seems so obvious that nobody explained why. However I just don't understand that, because this looks like innocuous language to me, so I would be grateful if anyone could elaborate about it please. I am not a native English-speaker and I am not familiar with slang, so the only meanings I know for the word 'gay' are either 'joyful' or a positive word for 'homosexual man' (positive, due to the first definition). 'Gay' is not a pejorative term, it is a nice word in and of itself, as far as I know.
As a consequence, I fail to see the insult or inappropriate language here. It seems to me that Nolan was simply ironic to say the situation was joyful for him and Amy… well, honestly I have no idea of what she meant: even if she used 'gay' as a synonym for 'homosexual', that makes no sense for me in this context (is this a weird linguistic joke?), but still this word is not an insult, contrary to 'faggot' for instance. Otherwise I don't know how I can talk about sex with a gay Magic player or judge if the word ‘gay’ itself is banned from Magic tournaments.

My initial thought before reading other responses:
Amy committed USC-Major here, because she explicit insulted Nolan by using the word “gay” in a way that (might) makes him feel harassed. Even if they are both friends and its normal for them to talk like that with each other, this is not ok at a Magic tournament. Language like that makes other people feel uncomfortable (at least the spectator that brings the situation to the attention of a judge), or worse, insulted. I would separate the players and talk to Amy, explaining to her that this sort of behavior is unacceptable, even if it’s just a bad joke from her.
The penalty for this infraction is a match loss, which will be applied to the next match.

After reading other responses:
I was so focused on Amy that I initially didn’t think about what Nolan did. A general action that might discomfort other players should be treated as USC-Minor, so I would give Nolan a Warning and explain to him that he should stop saying such things.
From the actions that has been taken from Amy and Nolan (showing a lethal Bonfire of the Dammed, putting the hand down) the next question would be is the match still running. My first thought was apply it to the next match, and my understanding of the situation is that the match is over because of the Bonfire shown by Amy. But I’m looking forward for more opinions for that part of the scenario.

> I am not a native English-speaker and I am not familiar with slang, so the only meanings I know for the word ‘gay’ are >either ‘joyful’ or a positive word for ‘homosexual man’ (positive, due to the first definition). ‘Gay’ is not a pejorative term, it
> is a nice word in and of itself, as far as I know.

See, here's where English is complicated. While “Gay” is the term
used by male homosexuals to refer to themselves individually or in a
group, it's also a pejorative (i.e. negative word) when used by people
outside that group. Something (as opposed to someone) being referred
to as ‘gay’ is almost always doing so in a negative sense: “Being gay
is bad and this this is gay, therefore bad”.

Similarly, calling someone gay is a typical insult in many groups of
English speakers: this is true even if one or both of the people
involved are gay. It turns out that the tone of voice is different
between “I'm gay” and “You're gay”. (This is more true in some places
than others, but is very true in much of the US and Australia, in my
experience.)

If you read the rejoinder by Amy as using the word “faggot”, you
wouldn't be far wrong in your response.

Loïc Hervier: In Australia, and to my knowledge America as well, saying “that's gay” or “you're gay” can be very much used as an attack on someone. It can have negative connotations when used in an aggressive manner, and is very prevalent in middle school over here.

As for the scenario, I think it is pretty clear cut USC - Minor for Nolan, as he use a word describing a sexual orientation in a negative way about the general gamestate.

Amy is quite clearly attacking Nolan personally with negative slang for a sexual orientation, which is covered by USC - Major.

Slang is almost always weird to explain…

The term ‘gay’ can be used exactly how you are thinking about it and isn't banned from general speech. But this particular usage of it, in context, is more of a synonym for “stupid” (as little sense as that makes).

There's a huge amount that can be written about how people separate word usage by context, and generally people using that phrase in this context don't actually mean it homophobically, the concept of sexual orientation is not involved at all.

But, given that we're trying to create safe spaces of play, I don't think we need to get too caught up in the linguistic history or alternate usages of the word. Someone who has been bullied for something they are doesn't really need to be exposed to that in a safe environment.

This is the reason I don't like where we're heading with USC - Major. In my mind as a person, a player and a judge there is no difference between these two comments, they are exactly the same in how the players meant it (of this I'm certain) but under the current IPG if Nolan feels hurt by this comment at all (and it's a situation where it's entirely impossible to make a case for cheating if Nolan just lies about being hurt) I'm forced to give Amy a match loss and Nolan gets only a warning which I feel is very unfair considering the situation.
This is behavior we want to discourage but in this situation the IPG just fails and I would issue a warning for both.