|
Shock value or not, I would have read the entire thing anyway, just as I would read any other post on this forum, and certainly would read it if presented in a newsletter from my local association. So, to say that the addition of this term "worked on me" isn't a valid assumption.
Of course I have absolutely no knowledge of the internal workings of your association, or any history they might have on racial issues. Perhaps this has come up before and been a point of contention. Maybe it really is something that needs to be addressed.
But my experience is that such issues are best dealt with by taking them up with the individual making the charge. By leading off your message with with a "shock value" term or phrase, you can tend to immediately polarize your audience, whether that is your intention or not.
Game assignments based on rule knowledge, mechanics, meeting attendance, attitude or availability are all valid points that cut across any racial or gender boundries and are at the core of your message. Why drag in a potentially distracting issue that, in reality, has absolutely nothing to do with getting your main points across?
Starting off your message by proclaiming (in effect), "We're not racists!", tends to put the focus on that one subject alone, which detracts from all of the other valid points throughout your message.
Political correctness and sensitivity aide, from a standpoint of effectively communicating a message you should cut any "static" that might get in the way of your core points.
|