Or, challenging commentators to have discussions without engaging in victim blaming raises the level of discourse, since most any position on such a matter can be held without doing that.
See the many posts in the Ferguson discussion that hold the shooting as justified without claiming Brown deserved it for XX.
Are you actually serious?
If you think that those are the ârightâ questions, does that mean you seriously believe that resisting arrest deserves death?
What a fucked-up mentality some people have.
Dogs, in particular, adore theirs.
The person earning a ban isnât a âvictimâ â theyâre just someone breaking the rules they agree to in participating in our forums.
âif you drag your (slutty dress) into the forum and start (shaking it) jumping up and downâŠâ That all sounds rather familiar, eh?
It seems really odd to me that youâd put these words into my mouth, when I didnât gender the guy. Itâs pretty trollish to edit what I said to include a sexist slur like that.
I am not trolling you. Being aware of the phrases we use, particularly as we discuss victim-blaming, is a worthwhile exercise. Each phrase I took (even if a bit parodied) is from this discussion thread on victim-blaming. This irony is not trolling.
Edit: Personally, I find the willingness to dub anything contrary âtrollingâ a bit facile, donât you? Dishonest even.
To be clear, no. This is, of course, apparently your second comment!
The deal is simple, and always worth reiterating: follow the rules agreed to when you sign up, donât get banned!
Sometimes I feel that the fundamental entitlement is unworkable: few bother to check a communityâs local policy, let alone adhere to it. They just think, hey, Iâm a decent guy, Iâm cool. So if and when a ban comes, for whatever reason, it is always doomed to be interpreted as a judgment on the posterâs own implicit community standards, even their personality.
This is why people always feel like itâs about disagreement â even when it is manifestly not.
So, StrawBoss, youâre entirely welcome to agree with him! But if you post that you think Michael Brown deserved to die or anything like that, it will be deleted because it contravenes our rule on victim-blaming. And if you do so in a way that is obviously just to be an asshole, you may be banned for it.
People who are disappointed with Boing Boing
This is often done, actually! Itâs probably more often than not exactly what happens to a crummy post. For every ban, there are a pile of deleted posts. Discourseâs flagging system is excellent and provides all sorts of moderating options short of bans.
Ahh, youâve figured out the troglodytes like to make fun of well intentioned people. Itâs a step towards the light.
The first moment such mocking distracted us from the troglodyte hand in our pocket.
What did he do? Flag the post, itâs a long thread.
Edit: I found it. Yes, hostile and foul language is generally unacceptable, and that commentâs been deleted. I donât think weâve ever banned anyone for a âfuck off,â though.
Sometimes, foul language is an expression of hostility, but sometimes itâs merely tone. In general we remove cussy comments when they apply heat to discussion, but it might live when there is an obvious element of humor or cameraderie thatâs appropriate to the context.
Same goes for other things in the policy, too, though Iâll readily admit that there are things for which the bar is so high you will certainly be sliced trying to leap it.
Flag comments you donât like. The bottom line is if a comment contains foul-language, itâs got a big dragon-shaped target on it.
So, when did you stop beating your wife? It was like that.
Got cross and sweary, I think. IIRC, he got told not to be a dick (his words) by the mods, and stopped being a dick.
Public shaming involves actually pointing someone out. If the person who wrote that sees it here, I have no idea what they might feel, but if they feel shame (which I donât think they will) it will be at the realization of their own actions. No one knows who they are.
(emphasis mine) Hence if someone says that Michael Brown deserved to be shot because he stole some cigars then that person is definitely victim blaming. If someone says they have looked at the evidence and they believe officer Wilsonâs account, then that is not victim blaming. Iâve seen plenty of posts that did not get banned espousing views I find ridiculous about what might or might not have happened that day.
And really, who cares anyway? There are no trials and thereâs no appeals process. Mods can delete your comments and ban you at their discretion. Very shortly after #8 is #10 which says not to bother rules lawyering. So honestly, the rules are there to give you an idea of what is acceptable, BB is not actually held to them.
Come on. If you think that something is left to address, then say what it is. You seem to think itâs bad that they ban anyone or delete any comment for any reason. If you want to go read completely unmoderated forums, Iâm sure there are plenty of them. Hope you like acsii art.
First of all, the original comment was something they didnât want on their site, so they still donât want it. Secondly, this isnât about the original comment at all. The original comment could have been anything. This is about the âIâm disappointed in you for banning meâ letter, which is a genre unto itself, and is frankly ridiculous whether the original comment was in some sort of banning grey zone or not. Third, someone else above mentioned the issue of public shaming. In an effort to not make this about public shaming, it is best to not leave any breadcrumbs to the original commenter.
Yeah, but the problem is that those phrases make sense. If Michael Brown had been stopped by Darren Wilson and arrested for stealing cigars, then brought to court on those charges and been given a reasonable punishment that fit the crime then âWell, he made his bed.â would be a perfectly reasonable thing to say. Itâs also a reasonable thing to say about a person who gets banned for posting banable things. For the most part, people who get banned are treated entirely fairly. Iâm sure at some point someone got banned and it was awful and wrong, but even then they only got banned from an internet forum. You canât just point out similar construction of language and say that the two things are equivalent.
To add my own thoughts, this letter really is a fantastic exemplar of the genre. There was a forum I used to go on that was moderated zealously and mercilessly (it was about a video game so it had to be) that had a giant thread of comments that got people banned for people to peruse and privately mock (you couldnât actually post in that thread).
One day they had something quite a bit like this and they made a thread for people to comment on it. Further, they explicitly said that thread had no rules at all, and people could do/say whatever they wanted in it. Wow did the unicorn pictures come out fast. It was a good day.
Brutal, relentless moderation is the only thing that makes forums usable. This also isnât the legal system - your past crimes can be used against you. Make a habit of doing offensive things and moderators are probably going to get less and less patient with each subsequent thing.
And seriously, if you get banned from any internet discussion - chat, forum or otherwise - do your time. If you feel you were terribly wronged or they banned you forever, then move on.
Is it disruptive to throw people out of your own house party?
No? Then send me your address, Iâll be over with the burroâs soon.
Apologies! Shoulda flagged the post⊠noted.
Anyway - Iâve had an answer to my question - he got his hand slapped by a passing mod.
IN
did you miss the last âinâ in that song? Lyrics as written vs lyrics as sung. You canât avoid the revolution butâŠ
Donât you know itâs gonna be⊠allright?
Certainly most letters to the editor are private. Thatâs certainly been the American tradition. /s
The difference is between blaming a living breathing Mike Brown, and blaming a corpse that cannot defend itself AGAIN.
Itâs also defending the powerful officer, who clearly could, and has, and ought to defend himself without your help. Unless you identify with the officer for some reason, and thats something you should work out in private, becyase all the internal turmoil makes people incredibly defensive, and then offensive⊠and then someone gets banned. Or shot.
These clique-y attitudes youâre ascribing to BB⊠remind you of any police departments youâve read about lately?
Okay, now that is funny. Iâd say too soon, but I think weâre all trying to deal with this horror show. Sometimes, humor helps that.
