|
Just for a moment of perspective I’d like to remind everybody that we’re getting at each other’s throats about a guy who went by the name “Yeowch My Balls!!!” He’s probably laughing his rear end off right now.
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 17:40
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 13:13 |
|
|
Flying-PCP posted:Even if threads do have explicit biases, people shouldn't be assholes to anyone who isn't saying something genuinely vile as opposed to just 'wrong and dumb'. The term tone policing is really used inappropriately around here. Yeah, I feel like it's really easy to get hung up on the "left vs. liberal" dynamic when that's not really what the problem is. The problem is reflexive moral condemnation of any disagreement and sweeping generalizations of those that are disagreed with. (It's almost unbelievable how often people in D&D are told what they believe over their own protestations.) It just ends up framed as "left vs. liberal" because 1) political disagreement makes any conversation more heated and 2) the posters who are most strident about the utter immorality of their posting enemies' positions tend to end up on one side of that line. (From my perspective, anyway.) But I think the line itself is a red herring. There are also posters who are fairly assertive, if not aggressive about their views on both sides of that line who manage to not get probed very often, if at all, and people who are concerned about getting probated or ramped might look at those posters to see what they're doing "right" vs. what YMB did "wrong". (I think a large part of the answer is: pick your battles, and stick to threads where your viewpoint is more dominant/welcome, as A Buttery Pastry was alluding to a few posts up.)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 19:22
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:What does this actually entail? I don't think I've seen much if any of that, so it might be largely a USPOL issue? Because I can easily imagine the flip side to that, that being someone identifying as something that is completely at odds with their stated beliefs, and reacting negatively to people identifying those beliefs with another identity. Which would make sense as an issue in US threads in particular, given how far right people can be and still identify (or be identified) as leftists. Generally it'll go something along the lines of something like this. Apologies for the cartoonish nature of the hastily-concocted example, but I think it gets the point across: P1: "Although it's insufficient, I think the ACA has helped people and I think Biden's plans for expanding it would help people too." P2: "The ACA leaves people uninsured and it makes them pay a lot for insurance they might not even be able to use because of high deductibles, only M4A is good enough." P1: "Well, I support M4A, I voted for Bernie in the primary, I just think out of the options we have now, Biden's could have a positive effect." P3: "You don't support M4A if you're willing to vote for somebody who doesn't support M4A! You think poor people's lives are worth less! You're no better than a Republican!" And I mean, a lot of us had to deal with, during the primary, being told that it was simply inconceivable that we were actually Bernie supporters because we took issue with some statement like "Elizabeth Warren is a Reagan Republican" or "Joe Biden is a proven child molester". Stuff like that. (The GE thread right now is actually a paradise of civil discussion compared to the primary threads, which were pretty much the same level of hostility but with a half-dozen now-banned white noise shitposters roaming around as well.) It is probably mostly something that's been contained to primary/GE threads and the protest voting thread, which is why you haven't seen it much, although I'm pretty sure I've seen it a bit elsewhere. (And, of course, I take responsibility for my chronic inability to avoid the siren call of these slugfests. That's on me.) But even for stuff that's confined to the GE thread now, remember: when there's no more GE thread, that hostility going to spread out elsewhere, unless we start another containment thread, and I think most people in both feedback threads have been clear they don't want that.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 20:53
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:See, this is sort of what I mean. It is basically "The Democrats can be reformed no matter which candidates we vote for" vs. "Voting for the lesser evil props up the Democratic establishment that exists to be controlled opposition". Now there are two positions a member of either of those groups can take. If they approach it as "I believe I'm right but I understand others truly believe otherwise" then the discussion becomes about convincing you that their meta-position is correct. There's no need to claim the other person doesn't support M4A, in fact, their support for M4A might be key to convincing them to join your "lesser evil is for suckers" group. This is actually a very, very, very good point: most (not all) of what is framed as "ideological disagreement" in D&D is not actually about preferred policy outcomes, it's about how to achieve those outcomes in a political environment that is hostile to them. Some people just get really upset that people disagree with them on that question. And some people really don't react well to having a strategic disagreement framed as a moral one.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 21:45
|
|
|
UCS Hellmaker posted:Tbh Mellow seas does need threadbanned from the ge thread, mainly because he does make himself irrationally angry due to circumstances that do not pertain to the forums themselves. Posting like his is wrong and part of the problem of the forums as a whole right now, even if there are other circumstances for why he is lashing out the way he is I mean, I’m not going to lie, I’ve been going through poo poo, and I made a few posts in that thread that we’re intentionally bad rather than just regular-communication-failure bad. FOS suggested in my last probe that I “should not” post in the thread; given the posts I had made that wasn’t terrible advice. I took a few weeks off from posting in D&D at all, but I’ve been dealing with my mental health and life-circumstance issues and I would like to keep posting, if the forum will allow it. I’m sure I’ll still gently caress up sometimes, like most of us do, and the mods can take whatever action they think is appropriate. And any more bad times in the GE thread would absolutely justify a thread ban, given that I’ve received escalating warnings there. I don’t want to just yammer on about myself, but I got very directly called out, so, you know. Anyway, with the post that Lemming quoted above, I remember being honestly pretty surprised at how long it took to get probed for it. And I think it’s reasonable to question the IKs and mods who let it pass. But, like, poo poo, I did get probated for it, and my post being bad doesn’t mean those probed responses were any good. And whatever mod gave me the tag, it’s hilarious and I love it and it’s been a good reminder to take things here less seriously.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2020 03:18
|
|
|
Somfin posted:If you posted in the NoJoe toxx thread in CSPAM, you're automatically "in" and got the tag because of that. Never posted there! I don’t think I’ve ever made a single post in CSPAM, actually.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2020 03:29
|
|
|
rko posted:Is it just that people expect an unrealistic level of professionalism from the tiny group of volunteers who are tasked with overseeing a bunch of grown-rear end adults having forum posting battles? Hey, I may be having forum posting battles, and I may be grown-rear end, but... wait, what was the third thing you said? Seriously, it's not like I don't have complaints, but I have a hard time giving the mods too much poo poo for what they do, because it seems like an absolutely terrible job and they get no material benefit from it. And, like, I know that Helsing and MPF and fos used to post a lot, just participating in discussions, and they were all pretty good at it and seemed to enjoy it. Now their interaction with D&D is... this. It's gotta suck for them.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2020 16:45
|
|
|
There’s a difference between “somebody who’s in a clique” and “somebody that a particular clique is united in hating”.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2020 19:13
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I think more genuinely leftist representation among the IKs and mods who regularly participate in the most active threads here would go a long way to keeping clique wars from breaking out or ballooning, yeah. MPF and fos were absolutely leftist posters before they were mods. The only reason they're "not leftists" anymore is because leftist posters who break the rules constantly decided that they're biased against them. I'm sure the same thing will happen to the_steve eventually.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2020 20:11
|
|
|
People should consider the possibility that if you PM the mods and they are not giving you the response that you want, it’s because they disagree with you on how the forums should be run. PMing them doesn’t mean they have to give you satisfaction or whatever the hell. So PM an admin. If you don’t like what they say, either, maybe it’s just not the forum for you? It can’t be everything to everybody. Mellow Seas fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Oct 24, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2020 23:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 19, 2024 13:13 |
|
|
A lot of people give feedback. If the feedback of two posters is in conflict, one will invariably feel that they have been ignored. Nobody is entitled to have every one of their whims catered to by the moderators. If you're PMing them over and over and they're not doing what you want, they don't want to do what you want. How are people having a hard time understanding this?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2020 17:49
|
|