Threads discussing racial issues

faceman

In light of some recent incidents and threads, i would like to offer my thoughts for those interested in listening, on the above topic. I realise that I put myself at risk of abuse, insults and the inevitable cat pictures (hence i took my anti-histamine ) so therefore I will just post my opinion and duck and hide!!

Boards is a great place and although the majority of users (however opinated we may be) are relatively (boards) law abiding folk. However every once in a while a thread will come up about foreigners, east europeans, the "brits" and extremist religons. In every case where a thread is not locked, the thread goes on a downward spiral of nonsense. Unfortunately, in my view, Boards isnt not really the best place to discuss these issues as its not a formal platform to do so or to allow healthy debate on sensitive issues. While I would love to see a healthy non violent debate on whether some issues concerning immigration or religon teachings in school etc, i dont ever believe it will be possible on boards. (Or any simliar website for that matter)

When someone does cross the line, they will on occassion spout they didnt intend to offend and they are the least racist person you could meet etc etc. As we all know, intention has no baring on whether remarks are racist or not, racist comments are racist comments full stop. But it doesnt stop there really, for example equal status act treats racism (and traveller-ism if there is such a word) equally for all nations and religons. Therefore its not more acceptable to knock one nation and get away it more so than another. I dont believe boards should be any different.

The mods dont have a pleasant job having to filter through have the shoite (especially in AH) on topics we know will eventually end up locked with users banned etc etc so i guess what im getting at is this. Why not adopt a tougher approach on these issues? For example, ban any discussions completely concerning race/religon from AH. (Its not really the place anyway)

Just my thoughts anyway. Maybe such rules exist anyway informally, im not sure. Now please be gentle!

seamus

Solution:
If you want a rational discussion on issues of racial sensitivity, don't use After Hours.

I don't bother getting involved in them any more because inevitably they turn into crap, as you say.

On Humanities though, controversial topics are often brought up and discussed at length in a rational and no-PC-bull**** way.

IMO, people know what to expect on AH. The reason I'd support your proposal is if the AH mods thought that removal of the topics was necessary to keep the forum usable.

The Corinthian

seamus wrote:

If you want a rational discussion on issues of racial sensitivity, don't use After Hours.

Any intellectual discussion in After Hours is a waste of time.

On Humanities though, controversial topics are often brought up and discussed at length in a rational and no-PC-bull**** way.

Threads/posts on racism, racialism or anything that can even be vaguely labeled as such are strictly forbidden in the Humanities forum.

Terry

I don't think banning them would work.
Look at AH right now. There were three threads moved already today and a couple locked. Peope will start threads on any subject there, no matter what.

Then you have the free speech advocates going on a rampage every time they call someone a ****** and are banned for it. It's just easier to monitor the threads in question and lock/ delete/ move them when deemed appropriate.

Of course, not all the AH mods are on the same page, so I don't expect the others to completely agree with me.
Boards would be less interesting if we all agreed.

meditraitor

Is it helpfull to completely subvert all racist comments? I am totally for the argument that racism should not be tolerated to any degree but how can we challenge peoples views if the ban stick is brought out automatically.
It is probably the most heated issue to argue from a moral standpoint and the fact some people dont really believe their opinions are racist when other can see the obvious undertones means ignorance is a major factor.
Challenge the ignorance and maybe some of these opinions can be changed.
On the other hand a very small percentage of people are inherantly racist and these sadly enough can not be swayed, but from my experience of boards that eliment doesnt last pissing time.
I really think that boards(users) and its mods are doing a sterling job with what is a near impossible issue to handle.

Mark

Hagar

I think there should be private forum where race related issues can be discussed openly in a frank and forthright non-pc manner. Nobody wants racist abuse but discussion of the topic can clear up issues and mis-conceptions. Many people have the idea that all <insert group here> are thieves, blackguards, spongers etc. the reasons why these (mis)conceptions have arisen can be examined in a reasonable manner. The unstructured posting that's going on now is not productive.

The Corinthian

Hagar wrote:

I think there should be private forum where race related issues can be discussed openly in a frank and forthright non-pc manner. Nobody wants racist abuse but discussion of the topic can clear up issues and mis-conceptions.Many people have the idea that all <insert group here> are thieves, blackguards, spongers etc. the reasons why these (mis)conceptions have arisen can be examined in a reasonable manner. The unstructured posting that's going on now is not productive.

That doesn't sound like a discussion, that sounds like indoctrination. If you are willing to have a "frank and forthright" debate about anything, you have to accept that it may not ultimately go your way and that you may be the one with the misconceptions.

Also, what's with this obsession with race anyway? A debate on the Travelling community would hardly be covered by that, for example.

Hagar

Did you actually read the post?
I did say discuss not indoctrinate, where do you get your notions from?
Race is an important issue in Ireland nowadays due to the profound changes taking place in Irish society. Burying our collective heads and not discussing the issues is not the way forward.

The Corinthian

Hagar wrote:

Did you actually read the post?
I did say discuss not indoctrinate, where do you get your notions from?
Race is an important issue in Ireland nowadays due to the profound changes taking place in Irish society. Burying our collective heads and not discussing the issues is not the way forward.

I did read your post. You see such a debate as a means to educate people away from their racist misconceptions - that's not a debate.

So, what happens if the 'racist' side makes a better argument?

BuffyBot

I think there should be private forum where race related issues can be discussed openly

Contradicton?

PeakOutput

ye just because peoples views are not the same as you is not reason enough to stop them expressing them.


if i was to say "*insert particular minority here* are a bunch of ugly wasters who do not contribute anything to life in general and are ALL uneducated etc etc etc"..............you have the right to disagree with me BUT you do not have the right to stop me expressing my opinion.

solution is dont try and have a serious discussion in after hours and then any "trolling" will be caught by the relevant forums mods.

some of the forums here are over moderated as it is, a blanket ban on particular issues is ott

humbert

I'd hate to see boards censure particular topics. Sure some people have prejudices but I think it's healthier to let them be expressed and debated. It would be another thing if prevailing sentiment on boards or even in certain forums was racist or bigoted but I don't think that's the case.

If the same users are constantly starting threads condemning certain races then they can be warned, which I think is already the case. Wasn't some poor fellow banned for starting a bunch of threads on PJs or something*scratches head and wanders off...

Red Hand

Hagar wrote:

I think there should be private forum where race related issues can be discussed openly in a frank and forthright non-pc manner. Nobody wants racist abuse but discussion of the topic can clear up issues and mis-conceptions. Many people have the idea that all <insert group here> are thieves, blackguards, spongers etc. the reasons why these (mis)conceptions have arisen can be examined in a reasonable manner. The unstructured posting that's going on now is not productive.

Who gets access to this private forum, and on what basis?

meglome

There seems to be some intellectual snobbery going on too. Yes there are racist remarks but I think on whole it's been about ordinary people seeing stuff happening around them that they don't like and expressing that view. I personally have little time for the 'culture' of the Roma, I don't think that view is racist whatsoever. There's just a level of dishonesty there that I find hard to take. Yes there are plenty of Irish scumbags, I see that every day in Dublin City Centre - just like every society has its scum. But it's all about degrees at the end of the day.

Hobbes

BuffyBot wrote:

Contradicton?

QFT.

You can just use Humanities forum. The only rules there is you back up with facts not your gut.

You have to laugh though. The ATM thread for example pointing out how the ATM work went from anti-Roma to anti-Romanian and back again.

The Corinthian

Hobbes wrote:

You can just use Humanities forum. The only rules there is you back up with facts not your gut.

No you can't. The rules there are that if you say something politically correct you can back it up with anecdotal evidence and if politically incorrect you need to back it up with "solid irrefutable facts" - and even then you might just get banned.

Victor

Hagar wrote:

I think there should be private forum where race related issues can be discussed openly in a frank and forthright non-pc manner.

Won't that tie the hands of anyone who could be accused of being PC?

Hobbes

The Corinthian wrote:

No you can't. The rules there are that if you say something politically correct you can back it up with anecdotal evidence and if politically incorrect you need to back it up with "solid irrefutable facts" - and even then you might just get banned.

Any citations?

Victor wrote:

Won't that tie the hands of anyone who could be accused of being PC?

Then you should have a PC and anti-PC forum (for want of a better term). That way debate can always end in general consensus.

The Corinthian

Hobbes wrote:

Any citations?

As many as you, no doubt. Bottom line is the Humanities forum is not for certain topics.

Hagar

BuffyBot wrote:

Contradicton?

OK. Hands up, you got me there.:D I'm only proposing a private forum so that Boards.ie cannot be quoted in the gutter press and brought in to disrepute.

Jeremiah 1:16 wrote:

Who gets access to this private forum, and on what basis?

I'd imagine whoever mods the forum would decide that. Naturally people with no interest with the topic wouldn't apply for access and anyone who does would have a good idea what to expect so the scope for offence would be lessened considerably.

The Corinthian wrote:

You see such a debate as a means to educate people away from their racist misconceptions - that's not a debate.

I never said that, I would love to explore the basis for the so called "racism" and see if there are grounds for the feelings some people have against, say the Romas, or any other group. IF you think I'm "MR PC" visit Lolocaust sometime.

Victor wrote:

Won't that tie the hands of anyone who could be accused of being PC?

I don't think so. It never seems to work that way, it seems only the PC people want to tie hands.

David Michael

Hagar wrote:

i never said that, I would love to explore the basis for the so called "racism" and see if there are grounds for the feelings some people have against, say the Romas, or any other group. IF you think I'm "MR PC" visit Lolocaust sometime.

I don't think so. It never seems to work that way, it seems only the PC people want to tie hands.

I made it known I like cheese but I cant stand that smelly blue cheese stuff. It is like smelly socks+10?

I'm a racist.

Go figure.

nesf

faceman wrote:

For example, ban any discussions completely concerning race/religon from AH. (Its not really the place anyway)

That would be the equivalent to burying our heads in the sand and pretending that such feelings didn't exist. I know what you are saying but I'm not sure if it would be a good thing to sweep this kind of stuff under the carpet just because it's "unsightly" to the more politically correct minded readers. The forum shouldn't be just restricted to "politically correct viewpoint". Though that's only my personal opinion and the other mods or admins might disagree with me.

The Corinthian wrote:

No you can't. The rules there are that if you say something politically correct you can back it up with anecdotal evidence and if politically incorrect you need to back it up with "solid irrefutable facts" - and even then you might just get banned.

Groupthink ftw?

faceman

nesf wrote:

That would be the equivalent to burying our heads in the sand and pretending that such feelings didn't exist. I know what you are saying but I'm not sure if it would be a good thing to sweep this kind of stuff under the carpet just because it's "unsightly" to the more politically correct minded readers. The forum shouldn't be just restricted to "politically correct viewpoint". Though that's only my personal opinion and the other mods or admins might disagree with me.

i understand where you're comin from but i'm not suggestin buryin our heads here. Boards isnt goin to resolve racial issues unfortunately. Im not lookin for a PC view either. What I am sayin is that any time the discussion arises, especially in AH, it just becomes a pointless, pedantic insult thread that ends up being locked and/or users barred. Some end up being dragged up in Feedback.

However not each race related thread is treated the same even if the level of immaturity is present in the posts. Therein is a problem in itself.

Anyway, its just a discussion piece, after all its the mods and admins who call the shots on what works best so I will leave it up to you guys.

The Corinthian

faceman wrote:

i understand where you're comin from but i'm not suggestin buryin our heads here. Boards isnt goin to resolve racial issues unfortunately. Im not lookin for a PC view either. What I am sayin is that any time the discussion arises, especially in AH, it just becomes a pointless, pedantic insult thread that ends up being locked and/or users barred. Some end up being dragged up in Feedback.

The problem is that After Hours is not the place to have such debates as it has always been home to the LCD of discussion. This does not simply mean discussions on race, but pretty much any discussion will have a high probability of degenerating into farce.

Unfortunately there is no alternative however. Humanities would be the natural one, but the bias there is in favour of the politically correct view. I'm not saying whether this bias is as a result of partisan moderatorship or simply an overzealous approach to keeping extremists and/or the After Hours crowd at bay, but either way it's there.

WhiteWashMan

[QUOTE=faceman For example, ban any discussions completely concerning race/religon from AH. (Its not really the place anyway)![/QUOTE]


are you willing to put togeher a list of what is ok to discuss and what is not ok, and the limits to which any of these can be discussed?

or perhaps we can just use common sense?

Nevyn

Unfortunately common sense is not so common.

faceman

WhiteWashMan wrote:

are you willing to put togeher a list of what is ok to discuss and what is not ok, and the limits to which any of these can be discussed?

or perhaps we can just use common sense?

im not sure if you are asking the first question as rhetoric or as a geniune comment. You would think that common sense would prevail but alas it does not as there are no hard and fast rules regarding tolerance of intolerance.

Either way threads that start in AH that are racially motivated have no place there and i come back to my original point on what happens when threads kick off.

Whats your view?

nesf

faceman wrote:

Either way threads that start in AH that are racially motivated have no place there and i come back to my original point on what happens when threads kick off.

What counts as being racially motivated? If someone starts a thread saying that Roma that beg annoy them then sure that's racially motivated but it's not racist by any reasonable definition of the term.

nesf

faceman wrote:

What I am sayin is that any time the discussion arises, especially in AH, it just becomes a pointless, pedantic insult thread that ends up being locked and/or users barred. Some end up being dragged up in Feedback.

We tend to lock them before people get themselves banned usually.

As The Corinthian pointed out there isn't really an alternative for people to occasionally rant about things that annoy them on the street, be it beggars, chuggers or whatever when their rants don't conform to some "informed politically correct liberal outlook".

The actual question here is whether this site should only cater for informed posting where people can neatly back up their arguments with references and links. Or even more specifically whether this site should only cater for informed posting where the topic is controversial or contentious and where (generally) the liberal and "everyman" consensuses clash. Because at the moment AH provides an outlet for people who don't want to discuss topics in a "liberally informed" manner essentially.

Hobbes

The Corinthian wrote:

As many as you, no doubt. Bottom line is the Humanities forum is not for certain topics.

That is not really an answer. You made an assertion not me, I would be interested to see how you came to that conclusion. Hence the reason I asked for citations. Is that unreasonable?

Hobbes

nesf wrote:

when their rants don't conform to some "informed politically correct liberal outlook".

Someone going off about how a friend once heard of this woman who got free prams and cars and then left them at bus-stops because she had to get her free 5,000 euros from the government then mug someone at the ATM because they are [insert demographic]. Which is followed up how all [insert demographic] are alike.

That isn't debating. The only difference is in Humanities you would be asked to back some of the crap up and second-hand friend of a friend "I once heard" doesn't fly.

You seem to be equating liberal outlook as "wanting people to back up rants with facts".

Or to put it another way. I was mugged once. It was an Irish lad that did it. I know a friend of mine who also knew someone who got mugged by an Irish person. Clearly Irish people are scum that they have to go around mugging people. I even heard some Irish people get free handouts from the government and lie to get money. Why can't Irish people get a proper job like the rest of us normal humans? But I have Irish friends so I am not a racist and it is ok for me to say this.

nesf

Hobbes wrote:

Someone going off about how a friend once heard of this woman who got free prams and cars and then left them at bus-stops because she had to get her free 5,000 euros from the government then mug someone at the ATM because they are [insert demographic]. Which is followed up how all [insert demographic] are alike.[

That isn't debating. The only difference is in Humanities you would be asked to back some of the crap up and second-hand friend of a friend "I once heard" doesn't fly.

I never called it debating, I called it ranting. Not every discussion has to be a debate.

Hobbes wrote:

You seem to be equating liberal outlook as "wanting people to back up rants with facts".

I'm not. The scare marks/quotation marks were meant to imply that what I'm speaking of are positions that are taken to imply that they are informed and backed up by facts because they are popular or generally held to be true or backed by certain portions of the media. They are appeals to "sensibilities" rather than arguments premised on "facts".

nesf

Sorry I had quoted your post before you edited this part in.

Hobbes wrote:

Or to put it another way. I was mugged once. It was an Irish lad that did it. I know a friend of mine who also knew someone who got mugged by an Irish person. Clearly Irish people are scum that they have to go around mugging people. I even heard some Irish people get free handouts from the government and lie to get money. Why can't Irish people get a proper job like the rest of us normal humans? But I have Irish friends so I am not a racist and it is ok for me to say this.

That's just a poorly supported argument with plenty of fallacious reasoning in it that draws faulty inferences from small poorly selected samples. It's not necessarily racist, just very poorly reasoned and generally will get shot down for it.

Posts like the above aren't the problem when you get down to it. People suck at reasoning and draw inferences far far too quickly. The problem is when posts like the above when combined with other posts from the user show a racially motivated agenda or when someone takes the above and advocates violence etc from it as a premise. We watch for this and remove this but for vast majority of the time people are just ranting and their statements are literally able to taken at face value and aren't pushing some more sinister agenda behind them. In most cases the above would be benign, if not terribly well informed and reasoned out.

Hobbes

nesf wrote:

that are taken to imply that they are informed and backed up by facts because they are popular or generally held to be true or backed by certain portions of the media.

Which isn't the case in Humanities. Well until Corinthian can point out some instances.

Also remember backing up your sources (which you believe to be facts) is perfectly acceptable. You might not get people agreeing with you but it at least allows them to do a bit more reading to see if you are correct or not.

It also shows that people don't take BS at face value and bother to look into it.

nesf

Hobbes wrote:

Which isn't the case in Humanities. Well until Corinthian can point out some instances.

Well, consider it an opinion of mine that you can take or leave at face value. Again, you can do the same for some stuff I've seen on AH and newsprint.

Hobbes wrote:

It also shows that people don't take BS at face value and bother to look into it.

Ah, yes, but my question is why we should force everyone to back up their opinions with "facts" when the topic just happens to be something that is "not PC"? Why not force them to back up their opinions on something like the price of food thread atm in AH as well? Or is anecdotal evidence suddenly sufficient when it's not "controversial" to certain people? Is there some unwritten rule that you can't offer an opinion on anything until you've studied the subject? AH is closer to chatting in the pub, while humanities is closer to secondary school debating. Both are valid within their own contexts imho.

The Corinthian

Hobbes wrote:

Which isn't the case in Humanities. Well until Corinthian can point out some instances.

As you well know there was a discussion on Roma gypsies and their connection to crime over a year ago. Anecdotal evidence on this was rejected, however anecdotal evidence against was perfectly acceptable. Additionally, even though the discussion was about the Roma 'culture', this was taken as 'race' despite numerous explanations that the argument was looking at the environmental and not the genetic. Bans on the basis of racism there then handed out.

If you'd like to dig up the thread in question, feel free. I've better things to be doing than feeding your attempts at obfuscation.