Post

Smolcasm wrote:

The outrage over the alleged hate speech, while quite valid and serious, strikes me as manufactured. Evidently someone who has - or even multiple people who have - taken great offense at content within our Discord server has reacted to it by taking screenshots of it and apparently using those screenshots to destabilize The LCRUA's foreign relations, rather than going through one of our many legal channels such as reporting it to one of our server's moderators, accusing the nation responsible of violating our law so that a trial may occur, or even informing the user in question that they consider this behavior intolerable and asking them to stop. This reaction, while not optimal or conducive to harmonious conflict resolution, would be perfectly understandable if not for the fact that this has led to multiple ambassadors making public denouncements of The LCRUA and its officials, only to either fall silent or offer vague descriptions or threats when I ask them precisely what they mean.

This scenario strikes a stark contrast to our internal affairs regarding the matter; I have made calls for anyone offended by the conduct of the nation in question to provide me with evidence or make a formal accusation of a violation of our laws for the Tribunal's consideration, and so far, none - be they visitors, members, or even ambassadors - have obliged this request. I take claims of hate speech very seriously, as in many cases this sort of speech hits me rather close to home; at the time of writing, however, it would seem that these claims have not come from within our community. I lament the possibility of a victim of hate speech feeling the need to go over our head and straight to the door of the interregional community to receive their rightful accommodation, but so far it appears that this is the best case scenario - the far more grim and likely possibility is that this controversy is the fulfilment of some manner of vendetta, heedless of my administration's resolve to learn from and improve as a result of what has transpired.

In light of this, our response, presently, is no response. We consider ourselves to be under no obligation to ensure your satisfaction, solicit an apology or explanation beyond any that have already been provided, or arrange for any of our officials to resign. Furthermore, while my administration maintains its commitment to opposing hate speech, it is with the understanding that no speech is innately hateful - the intent of a message, and how the message is perceived, is far more important than any of the individual words that comprise it. In light of this understanding, we will act in the best interests of our users; until and unless those users come forward with evidence of wrongdoing, these interests do not include acquiescence to these demands.

Thank you for your time, attention, and consideration.