|
A big flaming stink posted:koos you realize how unsatisfying of a response this is, right? the guy was spewing open bigotry and you loving give him a single day probe? I'm not even talking about giving him an initial chance, the fact that he immediately doubled down into outright transphobia is reprehensible, and giving him a single day off is horseshit. A single day is the most a mod can give without queueing. I'm also giving him a longer probe with a note that he's threadbanned.
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 13:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:43 |
|
|
Koos Group posted:Yes. As a reminder, positions aren't moderated in D&D. Posters are allowed to assert wrong or odious arguments, because correcting them can be educational, and for other practical reasons. You're also not normally required to be rigorous when putting an idea forth initially, only if you refuse to concede it, because this allows for speculation, questions, and readers being able to see sophisticated replies to common talking points that they might not normally. This is obviously not true because a perfectly reasonable discussion thread was shut down in minutes. But when it comes to transphobic bullshit, suddenly it's all about arguments and reasoning and citations and blah blah blah. Sedisp posted:Look posters need to have a place where they can say "Yeah trans women are women but like you know.... not REALLLLY women." I'd also still like an explanation from How Are U about why, if they believe trans women are women, they'd have concerns if trans women get too successful in sports. Also it's disgusting that the rhetoric is quickly becomming "all lgbtq people are child molesters" (the next step is eliminationist violence) and apparently some people are much, much, more concerned about the loving muscle mass ratios of total strangers and poo poo. Given what's actually happening in the world it's completely loving unacceptable that bigoted garbage is even allowed a moment, a single post, to exist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 15:08
|
|
|
I think that we need to talk about how we talk about trans people here and a thread about that would be a lot more productive than a thread about trans athletes right now. Trans people deserve better than threads like this, where the people who hate them speak their ugly views loud and clear. It's great that those people are getting punished and I know that mods can't read threads 24/7 and simply aren't always on to take immediate action. But we can do better, and this website - specifically dnd - can be better at having these discussions than anywhere else on the internet if we can work it out. If any posters would like to discuss what an op for a thread like that would look like dm me and let's put some effort into that. I don't know if I would feel right being the only one making such a thing due to the nature of the topic but I really think it is a discussion worth having.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 15:08
|
|
|
Biological male and female is also a bit of a patriarchal idea. It's like, "Hey here's a trans lady doing the biological function of breastfeeding her child with the breasts that she developed through naturally occurring hormones." But if she doesn't have a vag that a dude can gently caress then it's like, "She's not biologically female!" PT6A posted:When I see women who see themselves as tomboys expressing concern about the implication that they might be trans, what that tells me is that they are not trans; they are happy with their gender identity the way it is even if they don’t follow the expected social norms. If gender identity were not real and important to one’s sense of self, then presumably they would not care about the possibility of someone suggesting they may be trans. Supervisor: Okay... so if I spoke to a lesbian who presents themselves as kind of manly... is it offensive for me to call them trans? Me: ...yes. Yes it is. You have to remember a lot of people are wrapped up in bottom surgery being what makes someone trans, so the idea that there are ladies with penises or men with vaginas is hard for some folks. And it's hard to not then see conversation spiral into the usual strawmen of some dude putting on a bow and going into the ladies room to... it's unclear what exactly these evil men posing as women in the bathroom are supposedly doing? Regardless, I do think it is overly dismissive to say these women have nothing to worry about. No, they're not being railroaded into being trans people, but Cis men and women are constantly being judged for their gender expression and how their bodies align with their asserted gender. Fat women and thin women with small breasts experience this. Black women's femininity and gender is often judged when they choose to wear a natural hairstyle. I'm sure you've seen some lovely movie or cartoon that laughs about men from other cultures wearing dresses or skirts. Lesbians and other queer women constantly have had their womanhood and femininity mocked. The strict gender binary is just like capitalism, white supremacy, or patriarchy. It's an insidious system that infects all aspects of society and hurts Cis people as well as trans people. That's kind of why those who try to police trans people are full of poo poo because they are for the most part the same sort of people who will also poo poo on a dude for acting feminine or for a woman for dating other women. They on one hand want to claim that gender is just your genitals while also wanting to police other nebulous norms related to gender.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 15:10
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:Regardless, I do think it is overly dismissive to say these women have nothing to worry about. No, they're not being railroaded into being trans people, but Cis men and women are constantly being judged for their gender expression and how their bodies align with their asserted gender. Fat women and thin women with small breasts experience this. Black women's femininity and gender is often judged when they choose to wear a natural hairstyle. I'm sure you've seen some lovely movie or cartoon that laughs about men from other cultures wearing dresses or skirts. Lesbians and other queer women constantly have had their womanhood and femininity mocked. Excellent point, and I do want to clarify: I think they don't have anything to worry about with regards into be coerced or convinced to "become" trans. They do still have reasonable concerns about the policing of gender roles and gender performance and sexuality, as I suppose all people do to some extent in our society. One thing that should be more frequently pointed out about the ridiculous "bathroom bills" is that... it's women as a whole who suffer from those. You're not not going to be suspected just because you are, in fact, a cis woman who presents masculine. Trans women will also be harassed (but not all of them, because you can't reliably tell who is trans by looking at them!), but it's not exclusively trans women who will be harassed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 15:33
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:A single day is the most a mod can give without queueing. I'm also giving him a longer probe with a note that he's threadbanned. The poster is grossly a bigot and should not be a part of this community. And I feel like they have more leeway because their bigotry is aimed at trans people.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 16:13
|
|
|
empty whippet box posted:I think that we need to talk about how we talk about trans people here and a thread about that would be a lot more productive than a thread about trans athletes right now. Trans people deserve better than threads like this, where the people who hate them speak their ugly views loud and clear. It's great that those people are getting punished and I know that mods can't read threads 24/7 and simply aren't always on to take immediate action. But we can do better, and this website - specifically dnd - can be better at having these discussions than anywhere else on the internet if we can work it out. I want to second this general opinion. I won't be sending anything for an OP because I don't feel qualified to take on responsibility for that. I don't know any trans people in real life. Almost everything I know about trans people has come from reading stuff on the internet. This includes testimonies of people who have transitioned and are happier because of it (there are a lot of these), and testimonies of people who transitioned and were *unhappy* with it, and subsequently chose to detransition. Testimonies of detransitioning after going on hormones or having surgery are very rare, as far as I can tell. Some of the posts in this thread that are the most educational and insightful have to do with the experience of being trans, and don't really have a lot to do with women's sports. EDIT: I would also suggest that a D&D thread dedicated to trans issues have a sizeable team of moderators. Moderating a thread like that is going to be a hard, time-consuming job, and probably more than one or a couple people can reasonably be expected to do in their spare time. Victar fucked around with this message at 16:27 on Apr 9, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 16:14
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Wanted to give him the opportunity This is the problem koos. Everyone knew this was coming, they could see it from their first post. Instead the OP was given the opportunity to repeat things that are both untrue and hateful. And in the interim, a completely separate transphobe was given the opportunity to do the same thing AND start harassing people. I get that you don't want to have to moderate positions, but there absolutely needs to be an exception for bigotry, no matter how politely and reasonably it's worded.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 16:21
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:This is the problem koos. Everyone knew this was coming, they could see it from their first post. Instead the OP was given the opportunity to repeat things that are both untrue and hateful. And in the interim, a completely separate transphobe was given the opportunity to do the same thing AND start harassing people. I get that you don't want to have to moderate positions, but there absolutely needs to be an exception for bigotry, no matter how politely and reasonably it's worded. Aginor wasn't given any particular opportunity. I probed him as soon as I saw what he was doing, and while he was on probation he was banned for harassment minutes after the admins knew that was occurring. How things happened wouldn't have been any different with stricter policies. As for making exceptions to the moderating positions rule, I understand why some might want that, but I have quite strong reasons why I think it should be adhered to absolutely. I'll post my rationale in the next feedback thread, or if you'd like it sooner than that I can PM it to you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 16:41
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:As for making exceptions to the moderating positions rule, I understand why some might want that, but I have quite strong reasons why I think it should be adhered to absolutely. This isn't true. Certain debates like "do trans people deserve human rights" are allowed to exist. Other debates are not.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 16:45
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:This isn't true. Certain debates like "do trans people deserve human rights" are allowed to exist. Other debates are not. I'm curious what you're referring to, in terms of which debates aren't allowed to exist.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 16:48
|
|
|
Hypothetically, could someone make a post arguing that the cranial capacity of black people made them suited for a life of servitude, as long as it was well reasoned and cited scholarly work? Would posters be expected to engage with them in good faith or choose to ignore them? Where is the line drawn if at all? The posts about trans people having HUGE SKELETONS that make them able to dominate sports aren't that much different.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 16:56
|
|
|
Yeah the poster was just repeating transphobe bigoted ideas. What was the debate? This is an awful look.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 16:58
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:I'm curious what you're referring to, in terms of which debates aren't allowed to exist. If someone were to, say, argue that Caster Semenya’s higher than average rate of testosterone production meant she should be excluded from women’s events, or even further that her medals should be taken back, would that be allowed to exist?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:02
|
|
|
Certain debates regarding the gustatory capacity of mods are verboten here in Debate and Discussion. But transphobic bigotry? Ah, no need to be hasty. That must be given a fair hearing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:03
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:Certain debates regarding the gustatory capacity of mods are verboten here in Debate and Discussion. But transphobic bigotry? Ah, no need to be hasty. That must be given a fair hearing. I mean, do we really want to cultivate an environment where bigots feel like they aren't allowed to pop off with random unsupported dehumanizing bullshit targeting specific people they consider to be inferior? Stifling, if you ask me, a serious person. To clarify so this isn't just a sarcastic jab, Koos, the reason you are getting the reaction you are itt is that there is no such thing as impartiality when it comes to bigotry. You're intentionally cultivating a safe space for people to make disgusting unfounded attacks. It's not an accident that this keeps happening. It's a direct foreseeable consequence of how you are choosing to run things. People are still being nice and extending to you quite a bit of benefit of the doubt, but I don't think that will last long unless you come to your senses. This is a very bad policy and has already had very bad results in terms of the space you're allowing and who you're allowing it for. It will get worse. Again, this is a direct foreseeable consequence of your choices. It won't be long before people turn from assuming this is a problem you're trying to solve, to assuming this is what you want, because trans people, at best, don't matter to you. ram dass in hell fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Apr 9, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:05
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:I'm curious what you're referring to, in terms of which debates aren't allowed to exist. Pretty sure we're not allowed to debate which mods are pedos. So obviously some topics are allowed and others arent. Maybe we should put "are trans people allowed to exist and have equal rights" into the forbidden debates category imo *edit Before Fluffy bans me, im just pointing out the hypocrisy, not trying to make a specific claim about any mods ScootsMcSkirt fucked around with this message at 17:13 on Apr 9, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:11
|
|
|
ram dass in hell posted:I mean, do we really want to cultivate an environment where bigots feel like they aren't allowed to pop off with random unsupported dehumanizing bullshit targeting specific people they consider to be inferior? Stifling, if you ask me, a serious person. Exactly. We need to set the boundary as firmly as we do for racism, anti-semitism, or homophobia. This community will not accept anyone voicing tired sibboleths meant to really stir up anger and resentment against minority people, no matter how it might jar against a platonic ideal of "debate". I've been around the internet long enough if you don't, things just snowball.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:16
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Hypothetically, could someone make a post arguing that the cranial capacity of black people made them suited for a life of servitude, as long as it was well reasoned and cited scholarly work? Would posters be expected to engage with them in good faith or choose to ignore them? Where is the line drawn if at all? The posts about trans people having HUGE SKELETONS that make them able to dominate sports aren't that much different. Someone could make a post like that, yes, and I think the debunking that would follow would be valuable, particularly as pseudoscientific racism has been on the rise in the last decade on the internet. Then if they repeated their claims without rigorously addressing the arguments made against them, which presumably they could not, they would be punished for bad faith. Nucleic Acids posted:If someone were to, say, argue that Caster Semenya’s higher than average rate of testosterone production meant she should be excluded from women’s events, or even further that her medals should be taken back, would that be allowed to exist? Yes. You could then rebut with what problems that view has, of which there seem to be many. ram dass in hell posted:I mean, do we really want to cultivate an environment where bigots feel like they aren't allowed to pop off with random unsupported dehumanizing bullshit targeting specific people they consider to be inferior? Stifling, if you ask me, a serious person. Thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt. To begin, I would point out that personal attacks against posters are forbidden, and that goes doubly so for ones based on their race, sexuality, etc. If someone called you a slur in D&D, they would be getting more than the customary slap for rudeness to fellows. I don't believe my policy has had profoundly bad results yet, bearing in mind that what happened with Aginor would have played out almost exactly the same whether the policy were your preferred way or mine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:19
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Someone could make a post like that, yes, and I think the debunking that would follow would be valuable, particularly as pseudoscientific racism has been on the rise in the last decade on the internet. Then if they repeated their claims without rigorously addressing the arguments made against them, which presumably they could not, they would be punished for bad faith. Except we saw what this led to over the past couple of days, this is just insanely naive.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:21
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Someone could make a post like that, yes, and I think the debunking that would follow would be valuable, particularly as pseudoscientific racism has been on the rise in the last decade on the internet. Then if they repeated their claims without rigorously addressing the arguments made against them, which presumably they could not, they would be punished for bad faith. So you agree with me that the mods should reinstate the "How much poo poo could Mods eat" thread. Or do you think that's worse than arguing for literally enslaving black people. You're either too naive to be online or you're using the trans thread to do some epic trolling by...defending and supporting bigots. Either way it's pathetic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:24
|
|
|
More iks with a mandate to handle obvious problems, like the blatant ur-fash dance that aginor immediately began while maintaining a lighter touch regarding the more hotly contested issues on the American left. I get that you can't be everywhere all the time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:24
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:I don't believe my policy has had profoundly bad results yet, bearing in mind that what happened with Aginor would have played out almost exactly the same whether the policy were your preferred way or mine. It has, though, you just don't perceive them to be profoundly bad, for some reason. And the rest is a hypothetical, you're assuming that the issue of bigots piling in with personal attacks is a force of nature like the weather rather than taking responsibility for the environment that you have authority over. We don't know what happened with Aginor or Internaut! would have played out exactly the same, that's your assumption. I think more highly of you than you seem to think of yourself - I still believe you can do better, while you seem to think this is how things must always be.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:25
|
|
|
ram dass in hell posted:It has, though, you just don't perceive them to be profoundly bad, for some reason. And the rest is a hypothetical, you're assuming that the issue of bigots piling in with personal attacks is a force of nature like the weather rather than taking responsibility for the environment that you have authority over. We don't know what happened with Aginor or Internaut! would have played out exactly the same, that's your assumption. I think more highly of you than you seem to think of yourself - I still believe you can do better, while you seem to think this is how things must always be. I believe I see what you mean that a clearly indicated and forceful policy of the kind you're advocating may have deterred Aginor from even posting. That didn't occur to me. I just meant that once he had posted, it would have been handled the same under both.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:27
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Someone could make a post like that, yes, and I think the debunking that would follow would be valuable, particularly as pseudoscientific racism has been on the rise in the last decade on the internet. Then if they repeated their claims without rigorously addressing the arguments made against them, which presumably they could not, they would be punished for bad faith. I disagree with the idea that this hasn't produced profoundly bad results. The policies thus far have allowed people to repeatedly and openly make bigoted statements. If they had not come back to the thread they wouldn't have been punished for those statements at all. They were punished not for their bigotry but for breaking a decorum rule about posting sources. This is an important difference. A trans person seeing this will, correctly, notice that you avoided punishing them for being a bigot towards trans people. You chose to punish them not for that but for how rude they were as they did it, or for not supplying evidence of their claims as though there were evidence that could have justified those posts. There is not, and we all know it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:30
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:I believe I see what you mean that a clearly indicated and forceful policy of the kind you're advocating may have deterred Aginor from even posting. That didn't occur to me. I just meant that once he had posted, it would have been handled the same under both. Precisely. Even setting aside the personal attacks via the PM system, this is currently a space where bigots feel that they can dehumanize and degrade people they think are inferior as long as they capitalize and use proper grammar. They don't even need to include citations, because they'll just be asked for citations and given free reign to poo poo on people for days at a time. This isn't good faith debate; people like that see a space where they can have some fun and stir up poo poo and hurt some feelings and get some dopamine. That doesn't have to be welcome here in order to have healthy debates over things that are actually reasonable to debate. There's a reason that people like Aginor and internaut see this space the way they do; and that's the explicit policies in place that allow and encourage them to do what they do. It's at very least, worth reconsidering if that's the type of environment you want.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:31
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Someone could make a post like that, yes, and I think the debunking that would follow would be valuable, particularly as pseudoscientific racism has been on the rise in the last decade on the internet. Then if they repeated their claims without rigorously addressing the arguments made against them, which presumably they could not, they would be punished for bad faith. Where have you been for the last two decades? You don't argue with phrenologists. You don't debate racists. You don't argue with bigots. This is straight out of another era. Moderation sets the tone of a forum. Allowing any of the above to post WILL eventually make things worse. Allowing any sort of safe space for these kind of people and these kinds of posts always leads to a worse, darker place to chat. e: I'm trying to bottle the actual amount of amazement and horror I'm having at the notion of arguing about the size of craniums, jesus christ.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:42
|
|
|
Let's play it out: "Black minds are feeble, and incapable of actual thought." "Well, actually, I don't agree with that, because there's no evidence of that. [Cites here]. This actually evidence of an attitude present in racism. [Cites here]. What's your evidence." "I never said that. Blacks are inferior though, lol." This is what happens when you argue with bigots. They are there to spew hatred. They don't care about "debate" other than a means to spew that hate. And that is what EXACTLY happened earlier with the transphobe post, to the loving letter. What are you doing Koos?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:47
|
|
|
To play devil's advocate to a certain point, I agree that there is some value in being allowed to debate certain topics that could perhaps be interpreted in some cases as bigotry, and I don't think this needs to devolve into Twitter 2.0 where any hint of something that could be interpreted out of context as bigotry is tantamount to a capital offense. With all due respect, I don't think that's what happened here. This was just bigots wandering in and spouting bigoted poo poo for no reason beyond doing it. I don't think there's a particularly good reason to allow that in any case ever. If we're concerned about where the line is between "questionable but worthy of debate" and "vile bigotry" I think sometimes it needs to land with the mods, and the "accused" can make their case personally to a mod, rather than making GBS threads up a thread with bigoted nonsense. We can judge a policy on its results. The results of the current policy have been Not Good in this thread, as people have mentioned. The policy needs to be suitably adjusted in that case, as it's pretty clear that it's not achieving its goals despite the policy having been designed and implemented in good faith by the mods.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:47
|
|
|
I just read (skimmed) 9 loving pages of posting about a niche group of people and whether or not they're so good at sports that they should be banned and do you know what no one, on either side of the issue has posted? Results. If these people aren't overwhelmingly amazing at sports, post the results. Link the losses. Conversely, if they're so amazing that they're making and breaking records, post the records. loving show evidence that Trans people are good/bad at sports so we can shut up about it. I like Korean eSports and those are intergender so trans people should start playing more StarCraft 2.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:49
|
|
|
Positions that are not moderated: - transgender people are a threat to sports - only trans people care about trans issues - black people are bred for athletics, all successful black athletes come from slave systems - black people have inferior intellect Positions that are moderated: - tone - moderator fecal intake Actions speak, odd how things that hurt people in already marginalized groups are more permitted Jaxyon fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Apr 9, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 17:53
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Hypothetically, could someone make a post arguing that the cranial capacity of black people made them suited for a life of servitude, as long as it was well reasoned and cited scholarly work? Koos Group posted:Someone could make a post like that, yes If there is anything that defines the state of the D&D community it is this right here.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 18:08
|
|
|
I think this is a backlash to a backlash and the dialectical will restabilize shortly. We spent many years moderating away lovely bigoted positions. But this often came in the form of people being banned as they lost the argument. Eventually we started getting very low on lovely bigots and it became efforts to get posters banned instead based on whether they were American Left or International Left and things got very terrible for a while. So things got loosened up and the bigots returned.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 18:16
|
|
|
I was assigned male at birth and am dealing with the trauma or living a false life as a boy and man for so long. I also have a son. He was assigned male just like I was because of sexual characteristics he was born with. This is something that I'm sort of troubled with and debate in my head. I've debated hypothetically if I had an intersex child if I should assign them as non-binary. A lot of posters in this thread probably agree with the premise that someone can superficially look male and be female. Yet a lot of folks including trans people are fine with the compromise that playing professional level sports should require certain hormonal requirements. Some people disagree. Many people agree that trans youth deserve affirming services, but the common sense on what those services were are based on debated and peer reviewed guidance from health professionals. But some might argue for broader access to affirming services. There are people who generally have more comfort with being someone of the same gender. Is it appropriate for a woman in a burka to request a female security or safety agent to see her face to check against her ID? There are cis women and men who have been poo poo on because of their gender expression and used their biology to affirm their asserted gender against the same people who now fight trans people. Does that biology that once affirmed them no longer matter? The point being, there are tons of debates that can be scary and emotional to have about gender. There are discussions about gender that can be heated. There are opinions I have on gender that my fellow trans folks and cis allies might disagree with. But here is the thing, those debates are debates that require nuance and adults talking like adults. Someone going, "Girls have hoo-has and boys have pee-pees" is not a meaningful debate topic. It is an easily disproved point, and one that reduces discourse to such a base level. While I appreciate the OP's definitiveness, there really are some debates about how we can reimagine sports and their relationship to gender. But when people are posting thoughtless and loving basic takes, it reduces discourse to allies and trans folks having to repeat the same basic points. And I appreciate the allies. But as someone who professionally had to advocate and change people's minds on trans rights, it would be nice to come to a space where more grown up conversations can be had about the topic. One thing I have seen before is boring repeated topics being banned, and I don't necessarily mind that. But I think I already made a post explaining gender theory in basic terms, and I think it's easy to say "Look at this post and don't make the same boring debate about what a woman is." Sorry if I'm talking too much about posting, but I don't think the free market of ideas approach to debate is actually allowing meaningful debate. It's stifling it with basic bitch horseshit. And I think it's fine to treat it like some stupid meme about AOC or whatever. EDIT: There are also genuinely posters who have been very gracious and humble in inquiring and discussing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 18:43
|
|
|
If the forum is going to allow bigotry as if providing a platform for reasoned discourse doesn't lend legitimacy at least let people respond with the indecorous ridicule that any bigotry rightly deserves.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 18:46
|
|
|
Trash forum, trash mods. Many people are saying this! edit: Koos Group posted:I believe I see what you mean that a clearly indicated and forceful policy of the kind you're advocating may have deterred Aginor from even posting. That didn't occur to me. I just meant that once he had posted, it would have been handled the same under both. cat botherer fucked around with this message at 18:54 on Apr 9, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 18:52
|
|
|
Koos Poop
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 19:02
|
|
|
Shageletic posted:Let's play it out: Under my policy, the racist poster would be punished harshly for the third post, as it's a blatant demonstration of bad faith. The exchange would also affect his forums reputation and probably lead to him being shunned from the community as a whole. In addition, the second post would demonstrate to readers how they might argue against similar racist ideas in the wild, or at least bolster them against being susceptible to those ideas. That's a general overview of the policy's intent. I've meant to point out that this policy has been in effect the entire time I've been moderating D&D, was advertised from the beginning, and has generally worked quite well. The forum has not been overrun by those with odious views or trolls, with Internaut being a single exception that should have more highly scrutinized because of the sensitivity of the subject. The Wicked ZOGA posted:Koos Poop Permaban queued.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 19:04
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Under my policy, the racist poster would be punished harshly for the third post, as it's a blatant demonstration of bad faith. The exchange would also affect his forums reputation and probably lead to him being shunned from the community as a whole. In addition, the second post would demonstrate to readers how they might argue against similar racist ideas in the wild, or at least bolster them against being susceptible to those ideas. That's a general overview of the policy's intent. Under this policy you are saying that someone can do a Glenn Beck "I'm just asking questions!" routine and not be banned even though it's painfully obvious that they're just looking to justify victimizing people. This is effectively dog whistling by way of questions. At the very least, the person should be forced to expound on why they think ____ thing to ascertain if they're just an rear end in a top hat or are simply misinformed or something like that, with a ban coming if it turns out that they're just a bigoted piece of poo poo. As someone who is a minority this policy is incredibly distressing, since I can't think of a single person I know that hasn't had to deal with that "polite bigotry" bullshit and people like yourself writing it off as just being acceptable in public while the stress of the situation mounts up. Indeed, the entire reason why bigots can speak out in public is because of the by far and large society wide acceptance of letting people bring up nonsense topics that are fundamentally bigoted in nature as if things like whether someone deserves equality and fundamental human rights are topics that should be allowed to be debated. Just look at the actual science behind why trans athletes who are on hormones have by far and large no advantage alongside their win/loss rate as the latest example of how this tactic does harm upon minorities. I have to say though that at the very least this makes me seriously question the integrity of the mod team for this subforum, since remark number 1 in the previous post in that example interplay between people should at least let people respond with a gently caress off and demand an explanation on their beliefs. Failing that, they should be forced to explain themselves, with a ban forthcoming if it turns out that they're just plain old bigoted and hiding it or are unwilling to explain themselves, as dodging explaining themselves is an old tactic of bigots (Something i've seen years ago on this very forum.) as well. That at least allows for people to be wrong/uneducated and be educated on a topic without giving cover to bigots. Anything less than that gives cover to bigots by way of imposing a demand for decorum on the people who are there to argue in good faith. Or to put it another way, I would not want you moderating a forum for trans people as it would slowly be overtaken by people just like Aginor or Internaut, complete with the usual doxing, harassment, and other threats to a trans person's livelihood once they were dug in heavily enough. That SA is forgotten enough to not be brigaded by transphobes unlike more popular forums and social media is not a validation of the way things are currently done but instead an example of a loophole in the rules that is just waiting to be exploited by people who seek to do harm upon others in whatever ways they have available. Politely being a bigoted rear end in a top hat does not mean you should be allowed to be a bigoted rear end in a top hat at all. That way lies a forum slowly being colonized by politely bigoted assholes who, once they have the majority (or reins of power) will very quickly stop being polite towards those they wish to do harm upon. What's worse, course correction is near impossible after that point since everyone paying attention will simply know the locale as that place where bigots, supremacists, neo-nazis, etc, etc hang out. Meaning no one who is part of the victimized minority (or just decent people in general) will come within five miles of the place. As a side note, this is true for any organization or area of real life as well. TL;DR: I seriously suggest you rethink the content of this policy. Edit: Having been able to go back and read it without having to rely on my memory I should also point out that by any standard of bigotry remark 1 in the quote quote:"Black minds are feeble, and incapable of actual thought." Should also have earned a ban, since saying "black brains are feeble and weak" or some nonsense like that is explicitly anti-science rhetoric of white supremacists that was at one point and time also widely accepted in the US because of it's decorous and polite nature of being presented. So, to stress the point further, I don't even know how the hell anyone could think that this policy of yours is a good idea. I'm honestly surprised we've gone on as long as we have without the forum getting hit with bigots doing their usual lovely thing.  Archonex fucked around with this message at 20:13 on Apr 9, 2022 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 18:43 |
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Actions speak, odd how things that hurt people in already marginalized groups are more permitted The stance that trans people's right to exist and live normal lives is a matter of debate is decidedly not a neutral stance. Same hateful rhetoric that's been kicking around for decades, just as commonly aimed at other queer people when transgender folks didn't have as much visibility. Decorum, or bad faith attempts to present a veneer of academic curiosity, does not change the content of their posting. Bigotry formatted as a question to dodge moderation policy remains bigotry. We have all lived through the last five years of being very online while people with particular social agendas use the 'Just Asking Questions' routine to float bigotry and seize on their opposition calling it out as a failure of decorum, thus validating their beliefs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2022 19:47
|
|
