Misc - Several issues - Misc Posters Read!

[trampledamage]

So, honestly, and not being "cute," I don't really get your issue. Are you saying that you want people booted from TNZ to be banned from the board? Are you saying politics should be banned from Misc?

I think it's more like this: If people can't behave themselves in TNZ, of all places, how can we expect them to behave themselves elsewhere on the board?

Yeah - but that's a whole separate conversation - and not connected with this issue, since the people making these problem posts are not those who have been kicked out of TNZ and are also not in response to people who have been kicked out of TNZ.

It's nothing to do with TNZ.

Some people like to push the envelope of what is acceptable. Personally I think a response of "Oh dear lord, that wasn't pleasant" from all who don't like it accompanied with, if they deem it necessary, a notification so that the moderators can come in and, if warranted, agree and tell the original poster that they've crossed the line, warnings and comments to PM etc.

I hadn't realised that it was so prevalant in Misc that people consider Misc a no-go area. But maybe I read the wrong threads.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

So, honestly, and not being "cute," I don't really get your issue. Are you saying that you want people booted from TNZ to be banned from the board? Are you saying politics should be banned from Misc?

I think it's more like this: If people can't behave themselves in TNZ, of all places, how can we expect them to behave themselves elsewhere on the board?

I get that, but it goes back to my "cute" question. If we throw out people who are removed from TNZ, then we are giving the TNZ mods the ability to permaban people.

The only way to not have that be the case is to let the people who are booted from TNZ have their trial run on the rest of the board. And again, in that aspect, the only people booted from TNZ in 2009 have been TLS and Wombat.

 

[tharpdevenport]

Hell, I'm a guy and found some of that stuff offensive.

Seconded. I don't even know what thread that came from, and I don't want to see.

 

[Count Zero]

Indeed. That stuff is the reason I do not subscribe to TNZ. Seeing it here was very sickening indeed, especially with how many people piled on.

Actually, the Palin thread in TNZ was much more civil than the one in Misc, which I agree was a disaster. While I wasn't offended by what was posted (even though I'm a woman) I was surprised to read stuff like this in here. I was surprised this thread lasted as long as it did. Some people clearly got carried away.

 

[trekkiedane]

The problem we were dealing with was many women on the board and the staff saying that they feel uncomfortable in Misc and avoid it due to some of these remarks. So plenty of us thought we need to try to keep it in check.

I don't know about women, and I have seen the 'tone' of conversation in Misc. moving downwards for a while -well parts of it anyway.
I have even been forced to find another board altogether to converse with one of my favourite T-BBSers (about things not Trek related) because they didn't feel comfortable in Misc, any more.

So, all-in-all I am in favour of this new one-strike policy even if I personally find it a bit harsh - I'm here every day and still learning to moderate myself, which isn't always easy, but the samples supplied by the Romulan... OK, I understand how some of it is over 'the line', could have been dealt with on the basis of 'friendlies' -IMO of course.

 

[trampledamage]

On a slight tangent - Misc is a busy forum - and given that it is the place where you post pretty much everything that doesn't fit with the various Trek/Media themed other forums, it can be difficult to find threads of a specific subject.

Since politics is one area that people look for serious discussion on and therefore get annoyed with having to work through the rest of the miscellany, would it not be worthwhile making a sub-forum of misc for politics?

Worked very well in TNZ for the US Elections.

 

[Teelie]

The Palin thread went on far longer than I expected given some of the comments that were posted, and not warned about. Not even unofficially warned about until some time later. That thread had some of the worst comments and insults I've seen allowed to slip by here I can think of.

Coming from me, that says something. This place used to be a lot more lax back in the day and it rarely delved into that kind of remarking in Misc. TNZ it would but not in here. It's as much the mods letting it go by as it is the members who made the comments though. In the future stuff like that should be handled faster. Even after it was said to stop those comments a few people kept on and it wasn't until a few days later it was finally locked.

It's hardly limited to sexism either but so far the fat vs thin argument in the "Jolie" thread has not been given this treatment yet. It has some genuinely sexist remarks in addition to the usual remarks any time someone is accused of being too thin or too fat.

The same can be said of the Michael Jackson threads. I stopped reading or just avoided reading some of those making some claims that weren't discussed in an appropriate tone. True or not what he did, there are better ways to address it than some members have done.

I'm sure there are other, more crass threads I could point out but I don't read everything in here for that very reason. And I'm no thin-skinned newbie either.

 

[sidious618]

Context matters.

The "watch me as I rape your face" was a reference to a film, and when it was said it was referring to destroying someone's post not to raping someone. I know the poster who posted this and he is in no way a sexist nor okay with rape. Now it's not a nice phrase, I'll grant you that.

But you know what I find sexist? The fact that this is somehow especially offensive towards women. Men get raped and sexually abused as well. So that's some sexist thinking in the OP right there.

Secondly, one of the posts quoted is mine, but not in completion which is totally unfair and intellectually dishonest. My post was, in response to this quote:

You should see the 'enhanced interrogation techniques' I have lined up for her.

I stated:

"Just bend right over this board..."

Okay, we need to stop.

As in, is this where we're going to end up, saying "Just bend right over this board..."? Hence the laughing face of we need to stop now but doing it lightly. If you didn't get that, fine, but it in no way had a sexist intention.

I ask that you remove it since you minsinterpreted its meaning. I had no problem with posts joking around about her attractiveness (both men and women on the board joke aobut wanting to have sex with someone) but the enhanced interrogation techniques was too far hence my post of trying to lightly point out the ridiculousness of where that would end up.

Edit: And you'll also notice that afterwards I skirted away from any such discussion on her looks because I knew it was going too far.

 

[Orac Zen]

Honestly, if you're such a massive troll that you can't abide by the extremely limited rules of TNZ, despite the 15 chances to shape up that you get, and get booted, I'm not sure I understand the logic that you'll be a model poster in the open areas of the board.

Did you actually read Spiff's post(s) where he said that two people have been removed from TNZ thus far this year, and neither of them participated in the thread in question? Why are you harping on this point when it has no relevance whatsoever to this issue?

Would love some honest opinions on that part. Seems like a logical disconnect to me. To use a bad analogy, if the prisioner in the Max Security wing can't behave himself and keep from rioting, moving him into GenPop and assuming that will fix things makes the Warden look kinda foolish, doesn't it?

So you're saying the board's staff look foolish over something that isn't even part of this issue?

Only part that is blending these two problems is when the TNZ exiles take up the same schtick in Misc, since they are banned from TNZ.

One more time: Two people have been banned from TNZ. Two. One has effectively left the board as a result and the other took no part in the thread in question. The other participants were indeed mostly TNZ regulars. Are you saying they're "massive trolls" who can't post normally elsewhere?

Again: Why are you harping on something that has no relevance to this issue?

Anyone who knows any of those posters knew it wasn't intended the way Bonz portrayed it, but out of context, doesn't look great.

So there's a context for saying that a woman should be serving drinks and performing analingus while wearing as little as possible? Perhaps, but Miscellaneous isn't that place.

 

[Count Zero]

So there's a context for saying that a woman should be serving drinks and performing analingus while wearing as little as possible? Perhaps, but Miscellaneous isn't that place.

Well, men tend to say things like that in real life, even if women are present. That doesn't necessarily make them evil sexists. I might be insensitive, though, since one of my favourite tv shows is a guy commenting and parodying bad tv, using artfully created insults and vulgarities.
I agree, though, that something like the Palin thread shouldn't happen in Misc. But I also think the people who did say those things shouldn't be vilified.

 

[sidious618]

Well, men tend to say things like that in real life, even if women are present.

And vice versa. Anyone remember the girlie thread?

 

[Count Zero]

There is a difference though between threads about hot women/men where such remarks can be expected (although the graphic language should probably toned down a little for this forum) and such remarks springing up in unrelated threads.

 

[sidious618]

There is a difference though between threads about hot women/men where such remarks can be expected (although the graphic language should probably toned down a little for this forum) and such remarks springing up in unrelated threads.

This is true, yes.

 

[trampledamage]

Well, men tend to say things like that in real life, even if women are present.

And vice versa. Anyone remember the girlie thread?

Exactly, it depends on if the comment is meant seriously.

 

[sidious618]

Exactly, it depends on if the comment is meant seriously.

Well, that's one person who doesn't think I'm a raging sexist.

 

[trampledamage]

Exactly, it depends on if the comment is meant seriously.

Well, that's one person who doesn't think I'm a raging sexist.

However, I can understand that if there's a prevailing culture of this level of humour it can be discouraging and upsetting for women - or for men, if that's the way the humour is directed, and let's face it, there are far more dubious comments from men to other men in the photo threads than there ever are from men to women!

So, if the moderators are receiving enough complaints that they think there is a prevailing culture of sexism (humourous or otherwise) and not just isolated train-wrecks of threads or posts, then we all need to look to how we respond and joke and maybe dial it back a bit.

 

[sidious618]

So, if the moderators are receiving enough complaints that they think there is a prevailing culture of sexism (humourous or otherwise) and not just isolated train-wrecks of threads or posts, then we all need to look to how we respond and joke and maybe dial it back a bit.

I absolutely agree, I'm just pissed that my post (well, half of it) is quoted in the OP when it was meant to have the opposite effect.

 

[trampledamage]

So, if the moderators are receiving enough complaints that they think there is a prevailing culture of sexism (humourous or otherwise) and not just isolated train-wrecks of threads or posts, then we all need to look to how we respond and joke and maybe dial it back a bit.

I absolutely agree, I'm just pissed that my post (well, half of it) is quoted in the OP when it was meant to have the opposite effect.

I hear you.

That happened to me once, in nothing like as serious circumstances and I just wanted to interrupt everyone's post with "I DID NOT MEAN THAT!"

 

[sidious618]

That happened to me once, in nothing like as serious circumstances and I just wanted to interrupt everyone's post with "I DID NOT MEAN THAT!"

Story of my life, sadly. "No, mom, that's not what I meant! Your voice isn't irritating all the time!"

 

[trampledamage]

okay, I'm having a bad day and don't have going to see Trek to look forward to, so I'm thinking about this more than I should. Normal silent service will resume tomorrow....



Right then.

The humour in Misc has always leant towards the juvenile and sophmoric - boys making smutty jokes about women and that level of talking - from both male and female posters.

An attempt to make Misc a better place for serious discussions on wide-ranging topics was undertaken when the lounges were created (I think that's where the lounges came from anyway). But I think this was less successful than it could have been because the lounges were made rank specific, so they don't get used much and most of the humour/chit-chat "fun" threads stay in Misc, and it's just as hard to keep a serious conversation going as it ever was.

Recently we went through a phase of "anything political/hot-button goes in TNZ" - because people were getting too unpleasant. This is unfair to those people who don't want to wade though several posts of people sniping at each other to find posts on the topic of the thread. Although there are some great, serious, detailed threads within TNZ - they can be as difficult to find as in Misc.

So, here's my idea.

Split Misc in two.

One for serious discussion, one for fun stuff. The person who starts the thread can decide whether they want serious discussion or not. Make one a sub-forum of the other if you want - or at least keep the same mods, so moving threads is easier if there is something completely misplaced.

I'm not suggesting tighter rules, just a separation - for one thing, it'll make threads easier to follow and it'll be easier to understand people's expectations. If someone posts a thread about Sarah Palin in the "fun stuff" forum, don't expect serious political discourse.


Okay, I'm done