Very true. The entire thing — from the initial topic post to the moderation cleanup — was three hours. Not too long.
I suppose it’s only a few of us who see it, and can’t see the reasons it should be excused. If it really isn’t a big deal, great. I’m happy to deal with my own senso-meter in my own way.
Your and my memory of that thread are very different.
Sort of true and sort of not though rn. @orenwolf I understand the expanded leader powers give people greater weight. So really all it takes is a little power!
I want to say. I almost only SE flag with an explanation of why included, fwiw.
I’m going to return to lurk mode and walk away from this for a while though for my own wellbeing because I’m truly sad and upset at what I perceive to be happening and how people are engaging or presuming their roles as arbiters in it… and I want to enjoy my Sunday with my family instead of being sad.
And that’s the crux.
Anyway, I’m out for a bit. Family discussions are draining and there are a lot of rooms in the house.
I’m still trying to wrap my head around what it is that is supposed to be excused.
Questions about intent?
Disagreement?
Because @TornPaperNapkin had a very honest, vulnerable post on this thread flagged and hidden. So it seems like at least in some cases people are flagging because they are uncomfortable with that kind of perpective and perceive it as an attack. It’s not, and they frankly just need to get over themselves.
Going over and over the same old ground about this sort of thing with other posters is exhausting anywhere on the BBS, but especially here on this thread. Why have we had to repeat ourselves so much?
ETA
I saw absolutely nothing posted by TornPaperNapkin that I’d remotely consider flag-worthy. That is not only exhausting, it’s infuriating. Whoever flagged that post needs some consequences.
According to both @orenwolf and @codinghorror , malicious flaggers do lose their flagging “weight” and thus cannot actually have an effect on whether or not posts get flagged or hidden. And whether posts stay hidden is up to moderators.
If you are implying (or saying outright) that malicious flagging is not a thing, we have seen a very different BBS. I understand how it is supposed to work. What i am not seeing is consequences for those who weaponize flags against outspoken (and even not-so outspoken) women. It is there if there are eyes to see it.
I mean, it happened in this very thread for absolutely no good reason. Whoever flagged TornPaperNapkin should get a month off. It’s absurd and it’s cruel.
Thing is, unless it’s a spam flag, it should take more than one flag to hide. There are different weights for different users, i do understand, and i may be wrong about this. But @TornPaperNapkin should not have been hidden by a single flag. I understand her anger.
…and her post shouldn’t’ve got even a single flag. As Duke said,
Are you absolutely sure that in 100% of cases, they are reacting to a microagression and not just a point with which they disagree or a simple misundesrstanding? Does every single “free-for-all” involve 10 members of marginalized communities and their allies againts a single white cis male?
I realize upon review that your response skipped right by the point I was making and redirected the conversation. Again, it’s a very important point that it’s not the response to a microaggression that’s the problem, it’s the microaggression. Your wording put the onus on the responders, not the aggressor.
If you answer “Yes” to both of those questions, then that is enough for more me, because I respect your judgment on this matter. I just want to be clear on this. If pile-ons only ever happen in response to microagressions, then I do not see that as a problem. If there are outliers where that is not the case, then I think that it’s a little more complicated.
[/quote]
Part of the point we’ve been trying to make is that, no, it’s not more complicated. If there’s a post where a perceived microaggression is challenged and it’s not what’s intended, the correct the misunderstanding and move on. Don’t put the burden of fixing this on the marginalized folks.
Yup. That’s some mighty sneaky victim blaming.
I generally agree with this, and I’ve been someone who has stuck my foot in my mouth more than once and it ended up being a teaching moment, or had a comment that was misconstrued and required clarification. It’s an unavoidable side effect of the medium. Text is a poor method for dynamic expression because so much of the human element is lost. A sarcastic or pithy remark I made in jest could be considered deeply offensive to someone who doesn’t know me or isn’t “in on the joke” so to speak. And whose fault is that? (The correct answer is nobody. We are all participating in our own way as my shrink would say to me.)
The thing is, it’s on us as individuals to be clear and precise with our communication. It’s not on others to educate or “correct” us. I’ve long considered myself very leftist and accepting of others, but I’ve still learned a lot in my time here. It’s only through the graciousness and patience of other users here. What may be a teaching moment for me is probably something exhausting for the other person to have to talk about for the millionth time.
If you are called out on something, clarify your position (if you must) or apologize (if you were wrong) and then move on and try to do better. Don’t belabor the point. That’s a sure fire way to derail, make tempers get even more heated, and timeouts/bans start being gifted. I’ve found that if you spend too much time “explaining”, it just makes things worse. Sometimes it’s just not worth “being right on the Internet” especially when it means bringing down everybody else in the process.
I don’t know what the solution is. I appreciate the frank and difficult conversations we have here and I don’t want to diminish that, but people also need to feel safe here otherwise they go somewhere deeper underground, and the site withers because we lose a much needed element of diversity here. And to be clear I don’t mean “difficult conversations” where we “debate” how “Trump won” or the right of minorities or LGBTQ+ people to exist. “Difficult conversations” doesn’t mean “toxic conversations”. There’s things where there are no “both sides” that have no place here and those users can just fuck the hell off to somewhere else that revels in that kind of garbage.
OMG, this 
.
Please, if you take nothing else from this topic let it be this. When others say they are feeling/being harassed, please don’t argue with them as why they are wrong for feeling that way. I’ve seen this happen here way too often and it never ends well. Listen to them.
Just to everyone… so sorry… this turned into a long-ass post with lots of responses… but I’m gonna put it up anyways… My apologies for the length…
And my question extended beyond that point, which I understood, to the larger point being made…
That is true, however, that it’s not about you specifically, but about the general topic at hand of miscommunication and perceptions of bullying, yeah?
That was not what was meant at all.
No, but that is again, part of some of the claims in the whole thread - that a clique of bullies are getting people banned. That’s not how moderation works, as you know.
And many of us has asked for general examples of that, and one of the first examples given WAS the animated gif eyeroll being used AS a form of bullying. You said you don’t agree that that is bullying, okay! Great! What IS an example of that kind of behavior. You are now saying that THIS thread is an example, that there are twisting of words happening.
Okay. Be specific here - because, let’s be crystal clear on this - when we say “twisting words” that’s an intentional act, yes? But if there is a misunderstanding or miscommuication born out of a lack of clarity that is very different, right?
And last, sometimes people DO understand exactly what is being said and find it problematic and try to point out HOW is problematic and/or hurtful. Is that a form of bullying or not? And if that post or thread ends up removed, is that a form of bullying, as it indicates to me that @orenwolf agrees that something crossed a line, yes? Do you feel he is being unfair in his judgements in that regard? If so, why?
Yet some people instinctively react with hostility if blindspots are pointed out. There seems to be at least some indication that pointing out blindspots is not welcomed.
Which is?
Again this language… we’re not allowed to disagree, or it’s a pile on? I was again accused of using loaded language by asking a question for clarities sake (you did not like how I framed it), but you keep using this language (and others are using terms like bullying, etc). That is also loaded language…
Then I’d argue it’s NOT a pile on, and I’m unsure why anyone would be upset about those, as it’s good for all of us to point out bad faith posters, yeah?
Okay. Shit does happen, and none of us are perfect, but I sort of feel like you’re expecting some of us to never make a mistake (which, BTW, we get modded, too, when we step over the line, right?). How is that fair?
Explain how we get perfect understanding at all times, in a text-based forum? We depend on the moderators and leaders to help make those judgement calls, If you don’t trust them (yourself, I guess) to do that job, then…
I thought no one was owed any kind of communication? Does that not hold true for these cases?
come on… that’s hyperbole in service of what would be the outcome of not letting people call out problematic posts. Of course that’s not what anyone would say, because people here don’t see it that starkly, but it would very much be the outcome. If that’s acceptable to you, you should justify it.
Quite often these “pile ons” as you keep characterizing them happen, because a blind spot gets pointed out, and the only thing that happens is a form of denial… or a non-pology, “I’m sorry if you’re offended” not any kind of admission that what the person said was hurtful or problematic. But again, if we’re meant to extend good faith to the point where no one ever gets told that their language is hurtful, in fear of it becoming a “pile on” then, people really can’t say how they feel about something that they found hurtful, ever again.
That is very much the case of what would happen. I’m sorry, but that’s just true. The politics of respectability are never about making sure everyone is okay and can feel comfortable, it’s about the illusion of civility, not the reality of it.
That too.
I’m just gonna highlight this point here, since we have no control over moderation decisions at all, although there are some women in the leaders club. But the reality is that moderation decisions are up primarily to Orenwolf and no one else. So, if people think that there is a problem with removal of certain posters, I’m unsure why we’re having this conversation rather than leaders having a conversation about it with him?
I’d like to know that specifically too… Again, the language being used (pile on, bullying, clique, etc) is not really helping with any sort of clarity. And YES, that language was repeatedly used in this discussion.
What does that mean? How are we meant to know sincerity, if the apology is “I’m sorry you were offended”? Yes, some people will definitely apologize and be sincere and you can tell - because they don’t frame it as the problem being the offended person, not their comment. I’m always happy to see those, because it shows that someone is actually listening rather than just trying to stop the interaction.
Of course not, but people can show a pattern of behavior over time that shows that they maybe have not learned anything about how hurtful their language can be…
No one is asking that! We’re asking for some sensitivity in these fucked up times. We’re asking for real allyship, not performative niceness.
It really hasn’t. It’s very much still about miscommunication and the belief that a clique rules the roost around here, when that’s not the case at all.
Maybe so, but we all do, and we’re expected to NOT make that mistake ever? If it’s mostly good, then why are we expected to be perfect and never make a mistake on this kind of thing?
Even if the poster doubles down and continues to be a problem? You’re asking marginalized people to be better, and not misunderstand people ever. Is it better to make mistakes and sometimes things get out of hand (which is always cleaned up by moderation), or is it more effective that we shut up and never point out problematic posts in order to keep things fun, despite our hurt?
Right!
It’s really easy to find ways to ignore the most toxic parts if you’re part of a more privileged group, but it’s not easy to do that if you’re not…
And we should not have to be either…
Yes! the POINT of a microagression is not that someone is purposefully being a dick, it’s that they have a blind spot and say something that is hurtful carelessly. And then often it gets pointed out, and they are unhappy with that.
No!
You really should think about why you need another man to tell you that, though.
But the point is that it’s often about reading something and feeling attacked or hurt, and then being told that you’re feelings are not real or valid, or you’re too sensitive, or that “they didn’t mean that” so why are they being attacked?
Excellent point. I feel like we’re being asked to never make mistakes, as if we’re not really fully human and allowed to make mistakes…
Being told that we’re not allowed to make mistakes is impacting how people interact here! Do we matter less or are our interactions of less value to you?
Again, one can be posting entirely in good faith AND still have a post that is indeed a microaggression. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Long-standing users have repeatedly expressed exhaustion and frustration with ongoing microaggressions, too. Do we not matter as much?
Indeed. This happens a lot, and we ignore it a lot more than people realize. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve posted something in a discussion, a long post, that gets completely ignored, and the response is only to a male presenting figure who makes a similar point to mine… or the times I’ve posted something, and have (sometimes the VERY NEXT POST) be the same fucking thing… I do not call that shit out quite a lot, because it’s not worth it to be accused of being a “mean girl” bully…
But of course, they can still happen. No communication is immune to misunderstandings, and to act like it needs to be is a problem. How are we supposed to look inside the hearts of another poster and just KNOW their intent… and even if there intent is good, are we not meant to call out problematic language that is hurtful in order to preserve civility?
YES!
rarely does Ken just ban people for a first time offense. If someone gets the permanent boot, it’s because they are a repeat offender, not because they had a one time offense. again, I think you’re assigning too much power to what you call a group of 10 posters…
That’s what I’m getting, too.
And again… they can come from a place if ill-intent, sure but more often they’re out of ignorance.
Right!
Again, you’re kind of mischaracterizing these and their relationship to marginalized communities… it’s not like we sit around and get training to spot them, it’s that we live with them from the time we’re born until we die. It’s the result of often unintended dismissal of our experiences and how we’re shaped by the world… It’s not like we get pulled aside in HS and explained what it means. We LIVE this shit. When someone talks down to me, or dismisses my point and yet treats a male presenting poster with respect for making the SAME Point, that is a microaggression, and the person might not be acting with ill intent.
Yes, exactly so…
Yep. That’s exactly the point we’re trying to make. People WILL react differently to you doing the same thing a man would do if you are a woman.
What did Malcolm X say?
That’s great! Thank you!
What the fuck? Where?
It really is a thing, and the way the flagging system is set up doesn’t change that. Someone with good flag weight can still sometimes use their flags for bad intent…
Again, I just know what @orenwolf and @codinghorror have told us. That it’s never just one flag that causes a hiding. And that Leaders/moderators can unhide.
I have been watching this thread and debating if I should comment as this is obviously a very complex topic which disproportionately affects some members.
Going way back to the original post from @cannibalpeas I have personally had the same experience and I am glad the topic was mentioned. In the end of my situation direct apologies were made (by me) and the mods agrees to nuke the thread which contained a couple hurtful personal attacks. The mods did a great job and I beleive the end result was good. But the process was exhausting, and I dramatically disengaged from the community for a while.
Far more commonly though I have seen the opposite where people are obviously bad faith piling onto someone. Like a few very recent interactions where a frequent poster I respect was being forced to defend their expertice multiple times (across threads), and defend a claim that a discriminatory policy was in fact discriminatory.
I do not envy the task of moderators. As others above have noted accurate text communication is very hard. I believe this thread has several excellent examples of the challenges in this.
So I guess my main point is that I see everything everyone is saying happening, but the question is how do we minimize accidental runaway threads and shut down bad commentators?
Perhaps in addition to flags there are methods to allow an earlier graceful exit from a unintended derail? Currently even if you delete your offending comment the replies and quotes can stick around. The permanence of a mistake feels very different from a verbal conversation and just invites a potential downwards reply spiral. Are there perhaps methods to more easily voluntarily nuke a thread and responses, potentially with a replacement apology? (I don’t want to imply that someone has to accept an apology btw)
I will say that this is a regular occurrence for me. It’s part of existing online for me. That is daily life for me.
But more often than not, it’s not being in an argument about a historical point, it’s just being ignored.
As far as I know, Leaders can’t unhide posts. That’s a moderator-only function.
Having to defend my expertice is a rare experience for me (White guy with a PhD).
But the few times it does happen, it is painful and cuts to the core of your self worth. Isolated commments from years ago can still hurt today.
And yet I see my wife (an MD) and subspecialist have to defend her expertice daily. And I see you have to do the same in.basically every thread…
I can’t even imagine having to go through that as a normal part of your existence. It doubt I would have the strength to be polite in response. And I am afforded the privledge to be a dick about things because I’m a man…
Edit - mansplainin tone. I recognize the same point was being made and should have acknowledged that at front of post.
