Moderation show-and-tell, anyone?

[michchick98]

Only way to put this thread on ignore is to put the thread starter (me) on ignore. I wonder what happens if I do that?

I never thought of putting myself on ignore, but I just tried it, this is what it said:

"We can't help you ignore yourself."

So no matter how pissed off you get at yourself, you're stuck reading everything you have to say!

 

[sr71plt]

I disagree. This part of the site is non profit.

Excuse me? "Part" of a business being nonprofit? I take it you don't have an MBA. Another round of wishful thinking?

I, at least, haven't reported Stella. That would sort of be contrary to the supporting free speech issue, wouldn't it? (Which is what Stella is counting on--those supporting free speech not reporting her and a pretty much absentee site administration not seeing the thread). That said, I'm not in favor of full free speech here. I'd still just erase a lot of what gets put here--and could do so under the wording of the existing forum rules.

I'm objecting to Stella's insistence on being queen and her tactics in getting there.

And I laugh at her long-drawn-out farewell speech.

On the whole, it's pretty entertaining to watch her self-destruct.

 

[Stella_Omega]

Um...no. What on God's green earth made you think that I meant that? What it must include is the prevalent presumtion of non malice.
Not quite what I meant. There are those too, I'm not denying that. But you're on a crusade here it seems, deliberately jabbing at everything I said instead of trying to see if what I'm talking about might be a perspective worth considering too.
Um...no. Again with the attack attitude. Come on...

I have no magic solution. But I don' tthink a moderator is it either. Deleting hate speech as part of moderation is in a way just another way to pretend it didn't happen, IMO.

In a perfect world... ok strike that, in a perfect world there wouldn't BE any hate speech and bigotry. In a second best world, this place would have a broad alliance of members who would bring hateful behaviour to light in a non hostile way, maybe even be able to respectfully disagree that that's what it is, and maybe even give the poster a fair opportunity to have a say, before the "go to hell you repressed gaybashing fuckwad!". Not that I believe that that utopia is very likely, mind you. But a bloke can dream, can't he?

yeah, a bloke can dream. And when dreaming doesn't work, a bloke can look for something better to do about it.

I am all for a presumption of non malice, although some people are convinced otherwise.

But it can be pretty obvious when that's a bad presumption, wouldn't you say? And when it's obvious, it would be an adult kinda feeling to know we have something to bear on the problem.

Your premise of a broad alliance presumes that someone who brings a problem to light in a non-hostile way knows they will be listened to in a respectful way. It presumes that someone who has been offended can know for sure that they can share their offense and not be mocked for it. It presumes that someone who is offended would want to be "nice" and have the verbal tools to be so.

This means that the onus is on the offended to be inoffensive.

This ONLY works, as Bulwer-Lytton pointed out, in a country ruled by justice-- meaning in our case, in a place where the majority's decisions can include compassion for the minority. It means that some insults don't seem like such to majority, but must be treated with as much consideration as any other, even if the consensus is that your alliance won't take action about it.

Around here, the offended person gets told that they should not be offended, and should shut up or go elsewhere, unless the insult is against one's children which we more of us have in common. So why, someone might wonder, waste one's time on non-hostile bringing to light, when it seems so clear (as per slyc's refusal to 'help' me when I asked for backup) that the odds are that no one will step up the the mark for support or sympathy-- and one will make oneself a bigger target for having spoken up in vain (as per jbj's laughter at the interchange, and srplts telling me all about how i should grow up ™).

Another thing to think about; how does this alliance find out about these problems? New threads would quickly turn the place into a trash heap. In the thread it happened in? Anyone who has more than three people on ignore will never find out about half of these complaints and will be non-assets to the alliance.

So.. we hang seperate because we don't hang together. And we don't hang together because hanging together hasn't been of much use to so many of us in the past.

Matter of fact, on several occasions where we've hung together, srplt has shown up to accuse the hangers-together of being a clique and flaming the innocent and we should be ashamed of ourselves. Heh.

so.. how do we create this broad alliance? I know that TE99 is very much concerned with politeness and kindness. I also know that he is somewhat blind to some things that might be glaring to, for instance, a woman.