Misc - Several issues - Misc Posters Read!

[SPOCKED]

Hermiod wrote:

---

So where are Garak and Squiggy's warnings then ?

I don't know if moderators are allowed to put people on ignore, but if you can do so then please do. On a board where the above poster's actions aren't warnable there's no way I've said a damned thing that's actionable so you have no further reason to read what I've said.

Moderators do not have an "ignore" function.

Hermiod, a moderator has asked you to stop and so your ranting in this thread ends now. Nothing (including any warnings) is as yet final, but we need to move this discussion forward and, frankly, you are not helping.

[Squiggy]

Alidar Jarok wrote:

---

Squiggy, if you have an opinion on how Miscellaneous should be handled as far as moderation goes, maybe you could try discussing this in a serious manner. Jokes have their place, but there are also other times when constructive discussion might be better.

I wasn't aware that jokes were allowed there and this are serious thread. I explain my stance by using humor.

Deal with it or warn me for being funny.

[Alidar Jarok]

An Officer wrote:

---

I think finding a board consensus is unlikely, there are too many differing opinions, among staff and among posters. It was necessary for T'Bonz to step in and make a ruling one way or the other. Either we go on as before, or we make changes. Is there a middle ground? If there is, I would be curious to hear it.

On the sexism issue? I can't think of much of a compromise. The current compromise we instituted was to encourage moderators to yell at posters who posted creepy, seemingly sexist comments. Since most of them seem to be doing this unintentionally and it's just part of their personality, the idea was that we couldn't warn for it (it isn't trolling), but they might take the hint and stop. That clearly isn't working so, in that regard, a rule seems best. Maybe exactly what that rule is could still be open for discussion. "Don't say sexist things" is vague enough that figuring out what is sexist is a problem. Of course, moderators could use their judgment and probably will, but a discussion is still helpful. Then again, maybe there is a compromise and both of us are missing it.

For trying to keep TNZ out of Misc and keeping debate civil, I think there's a big difference between allowing all political discussion and banning of calling public figures rude names. So the discussion of politics in Misc has been going on for a long time, but it's still helpful to discuss it.

[Alidar Jarok]

Squiggyfm wrote:

---

I wasn't aware that jokes were allowed there and this are serious thread. I explain my stance by using humor.

Deal with it or warn me for being funny.

Squiggy, I like your posts. I'm just saying comments like:

Well done. I'll inform the Chariman.

Counting down until this is locked...

Aren't helping the case (there are many who agree with you, but if people see your post first, they might decide that your arguments aren't valid because of how belligerently you've expressed them).

And your fun with selective quoting post is kinda just spamming. It doesn't address the topic at all.

Time and place is my point. 90% of threads they'd be fine. This probably just isn't one of them.

[An Officer]

Alidar Jarok wrote:

---

The current compromise we instituted was to encourage moderators to yell at posters who posted creepy, seemingly sexist comments. Since most of them seem to be doing this unintentionally and it's just part of their personality, the idea was that we couldn't warn for it (it isn't trolling), but they might take the hint and stop. That clearly isn't working so, in that regard, a rule seems best.

I did notice that happening (but not from all of the Misc mods, maybe one or two only), and I did also notice it was having little effect, unfortunately. I agree the new rule will be very helpful in making things more clear to those who are still unsure of what is and is not acceptable in each forum.

[sidious618]

This is how I see the problem, and this goes for any message board with a larger male percentage than female one (the other two boards I frequented were the same way).

Any group that is a minority (be it women or people who hate TOS or something) is going to feel threatened in some way as it is so simple for the majority to gang up on them. Therefore they will take what amy be an unintended slight as something worse. This is understandable, I'm often the same way in such situations.

So how should this be addressed? Should the minority be protected more and point out anything that might be against them or should they instead be on the lookout for outright hostility? I'd say the latter but it appears that many think it's the former.

Let's first take a look at outright hostility. Honestly, I've not seen any sexism from men to women in Misc. I haven't seen anyone say, "You're a woman and we don't want your opinion." In a male environment here women are actually treated like goddesses half the time, especially when they post a picture or make any sort of sexual reference. All of a sudden a number of male posters are telling them how awesome they are and how they want to be their best friend.

So outright hostility? I just don't see it.

Now, let's take a look at subtle sexism. Does it exist? Absolutely. We have a number of male posters post sexist comments about women and female posters make sexist comments about men and posters of both genders make homophobic comments about homosexuals. Thus the question is, where do we draw the line?

I think we already have. The remark about creepy comments in the picture thread (although, if you're worried about comments like that I wouldn't post your picture anywhere on the internet) was interesting to me because IIRC a mod did knock those comments down. The Palin thread, which seems to be the crux of this thread due to the quotes, was shut down. At the time I'm guessing that there weren't any mods around and that that is why things went on for so long.

Now here's my take on the reaction. I think it was an overreaction. I think some people were bothered by it and that's fine but I think others are using it as a soapbox (and it's pretty obvious who) which helps no one.

What we need to do is to step back and discuss the future and how we should deal with it instead of harping on the past where we can throw around accusations about men being sexist and women being sexist.

[Hermiod]

SPOCKED wrote:

---

Moderators do not have an "ignore" function.

Hermiod, a moderator has asked you to stop and so your ranting in this thread ends now. Nothing (including any warnings) is as yet final, but we need to move this discussion forward and, frankly, you are not helping.

The moderator did not ask me to do anything. He expressed his personal opinion of me and told me what he thought of my views. I do not agree with his view and I don't totally agree with T'Bonz either. I have not 'ranted', and for the most part I agree with the reasoning behind T'Bonz's decision.

Nothing in Locutus' comments couldn't have been sent in a PM and saved me from having to use this thread to answer him. It's his views that had nothing to do with the subject of this thread.

There's not much that could not have been put in a PM in yours either.

My view that this board is oversensitive when it comes to gender stands.

[sidious618]

Hermiod- I often agree with you but you take it to the EXTREME. Just state a good case and move on. You have to drop the righteous indignation if you want to be taken seriously. Righteous indignation is good sometimes but not everytime you post.

[Locutus of Bored]

Well said, Sidious (about the previous post).

I think we already have. The remark about creepy comments in the picture thread (although, if you're worried about comments like that I wouldn't post your picture anywhere on the internet) was interesting to me because IIRC a mod did knock those comments down. The Palin thread, which seems to be the crux of this thread due to the quotes, was shut down. At the time I'm guessing that there weren't any mods around and that that is why things went on for so long.

Exactly right, on both counts. Within the preexisting rules of the forum, the people who made the creepy comments in the picture thread were asked to stop, and the Palin thread was friendlied (after which the sexual comments stopped) and later shut down. Things worked as they should. However we can't protect people from ever seeing things that make them uncomfortable, all we can do is react to it after it's been said.

There's also going to be times where none of us are online. It doesn't mean we're ignoring the issue, we're just not seeing it yet. The same goes for when people get upset by something and don't hit notify. We don't see everything, even in topics we sometimes post in. I skim through topics to see if there's any major blow-ups, which means if a comment is just sitting there unresponded to I might miss it. Hit notify if you want to bring it to our attention, don't just assume that we'll come across it eventually.

I think part of the reason the overly sexual/sexist remarks have continued is that we haven't had a public thread like this to discuss the issue. We wanted to have one, but for reasons already expressed earlier it was considered a potential problem. Hopefully now that more people have seen this thread they will become aware of the problem and be more aware of how what they say effects others.


Hermiod, I think you'll find that I agree with you on occasion if you didn't make it your mission in life to see everything I say as coming from your personal nemesis or something. We've agreed on issues in topics before relating to sexist attitudes toward men. We agreed in the very topic you cited even IIRC.

And yes, I did quite explicitly ask you to stop. As did Alidar, as did SPOCKED. How many more is is going to take? Or do they all have a personal vendetta against you, and therefore you can just ignore what they say as well?

[Hermiod]

sidious618 wrote:

---

Hermiod- I often agree with you but you take it to the EXTREME. Just state a good case and move on. You have to drop the righteous indignation if you want to be taken seriously. Righteous indignation is good sometimes but not everytime you post.

I made one post on the subject. Others asked me questions to which I replied. Wouldn't it be rude for me to just ignore people?

I have said my piece but if someone makes specific comments directed towards me then I reserve the right to reply.

And I totally agree - I do get angry about this stuff but that reflects the board here. We are oversensitive about this stuff but unlike others I haven't left the board because of it or e-mailed T'Bonz.

[Misfit Toy]

I miss this rule:

The best general guideline can be summed up in one phrase: use common sense when you post.

[Hermiod]

Locutus - I am in Starbucks right now posting from my phone so I didn't see your last comment until I had already replied to others. As I said, I have said my piece.

I do take you all seriously whether you think so or not. Take a note out of RJ's book though, it's not necessary to post in a manner that you know is going to get someone angry in order to moderate.

[Spot's Meow]

I don't really think anything can be done about the "sexism" issue because such a large proportion of the population here is male. It gives things a certain atmosphere and until the population evens out (which isn't likely) between male and female, it will stay that way. I don't think there is outright hostility, there is just a lot of drooling and fawning over women (which in my opinion may be worse than outright hostility) and a lot of turning normal discussions into a bunch of sexual innuendos about banging women. It's very much a locker room discussion or boy's club type feel sometimes. But like I said I doubt it will change and I doubt anything can really be done about it, it's a reflection of who posts here. It makes me a little sad that I can't feel more "at home" here, but I've mostly stopped caring about this place so much anyway.

[Neroon]

Hermiod wrote:

---

I do take you all seriously whether you think so or not. Take a note out of RJ's book though, it's not necessary to post in a manner that you know is going to get someone angry in order to moderate.

Which is also a good approach to use even when you're not a moderator.

[An Officer]

Hermiod is getting exactly what he wants from this thread - it is the same thing he wants from any thread, given the chance. It has to be about him, all the mods, and general posters must somehow be addressing him, or he is not happy. Every time you give him this attention, which he craves, it guarantees he will continue to act in exactly the same manner the next time, in order to get exactly the same results. It is a self-feeding cycle. Since he shows no sign of changing himself, this behaviour won't go away until the rest of us change.