Female, LGBTQI+ or People of Colour Mods

Danzy · 30-09-2020 10:07pm

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

That’s because you’re all cut from the same cloth and any diverse thought opinion is not welcome.

You have given no indication that you want diversity of thought.

0xzmro3n4y7lb5 · 30-09-2020 10:08pm

Beasty wrote: »

As has been already highlighted - everyone on this site (beyond organisations having verified representative status and full time staff) are entitled to their anonymity. It would be a breach of GDPR for us to "profile" mods based on what is Personally Identifiable Information.

Do you want to turn it into a full time business for moderators (a business that has very little income to pay us)? Such a change, even if viable, would in my view completely destroy the site. How many full time moderators do you think the site could afford? 1?, maybe 2? How much diversity would that bring? Is that what you want?

We currently have around 400 mods across the site. Based on posts (and indeed personally knowing some), I would surmise there are male mods, female mods, trans mods, gay mods, Irish mods, non-Irish mods, even "old" mods (The only ones I can properly vouch for are the last two....)

Who mentioned GDPR.

When I asked had you diverse mods it was rhetorical because of the bile on here it’s clear you don’t.

It’s not welcoming to the people I mentioned so why would there be any mods.

Beasty · 30-09-2020 10:12pm

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

Who mentioned GDPR.

When I asked had you diverse mods it was rhetorical because of the bike on here it’s clear you don’t.

It’s not welcoming to the people I mentioned so why would there be any mods.

I mentioned it as did another poster. What you are requesting cannot be achieved (in any verifiable manner) on the site under its current structure because of GDPR. The only viable way to circumvent that would be to employ paid staff to moderate and I'm saying that would almost certainly kill the site altogether. Is that what you want?

EmmetSpiceland · 30-09-2020 10:12pm

cdeb wrote: »

That's a bit of a leap of logic.

Have you anything to back that up, or is this like your previous posts where you think that things are true because you say them?

You've very ignorantly dismissed my comments for example - I'm not sure what that says about your real interest in diverse opinions? You do seem interested in hearing only what you want to hear

I think the problem is that the OP got on the wrong “side” in the ‘JK Rowling TERF’ thread. Any of the, more enduring, posters who went up against the anti-trans “lobby” have been thread banned. I can only assume that the mods are forced to take action once they receive numerous reported posts by a number of different users.

One of these users has since been unbanned but, considering how things are going, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were, unceremoniously, dumped back out due to (un)popular demand. Hell, I, personally, have been “called out” for daring to even thank posts I happen to agree with.

That thread does not welcome “dissenting opinions” and there is a consolidated effort to remove them from the thread. That’s where I see the OP’s “issue” stemming from. Maybe I’m wrong, just how I see it.

30-09-2020 10:12pm

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

Who mentioned GDPR.

When I asked had you diverse mods it was rhetorical because of the bile on here it’s clear you don’t.

It’s not welcoming to the people I mentioned so why would there be any mods.

Just to clarify

You, whose personal characteristics we are not privy to, can speak on behalf of all races, genders and creeds

Your complaint is that only members of specific classes are able to adequately do so

Which is it

30-09-2020 10:14pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I think the problem is that the OP got on the wrong “side” in the ‘JK Rowling TERF’ thread. Any of the, more enduring, posters who went up against the anti-trans “lobby” have been thread banned. I can only assume that the mods are forced to take action once they receive numerous reported posts by a number of different users.

One of these users has since been unbanned but, considering how things are going, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were, unceremoniously, dumped back out due to (un)popular demand. Hell, I, personally, have been “called out” for daring to even thank posts I happen to agree with.

That thread does not welcome “dissenting opinions” and there is a consolidated effort to remove them from the thread. That’s where I see the OP’s “issue” stemming from. Maybe I’m wrong, just how I see it.

It's that last line, yes

Scurrilous mischaracterisation of that thread tbh, quotation marks nonsense aside

0xzmro3n4y7lb5 · 30-09-2020 10:15pm

So to get banned . . .

using transphobic terms relentlessly won’t do it.

Using retard won’t do it.

How racist does one have to go? Black face memes won’t do it.

Anti-traveller sentiment free pass.

Transphobia has a free pass

I’ve got it, hurt the insecure men’s feelings.

You’re a group of Neanderthal misogynistic homophobic transphobic racist pricks.

Bye .

Sephiroth_dude · 30-09-2020 10:22pm

Well that escalated quickly......

30-09-2020 10:25pm

Sephiroth_dude wrote: »

Well that escalated quickly......

Rude!

Danzy · 30-09-2020 10:31pm

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

So to get banned . . .

using transphobic terms relentlessly won’t do it.

Using retard won’t do it.

How racist does one have to go? Black face memes won’t do it.

Anti-traveller sentiment free pass.

Transphobia has a free pass

I’ve got it, hurt the insecure men’s feelings.

You’re a group of Neanderthal misogynistic homophobic transphobic racist pricks.

Bye .

ðŸ€£

muffler · 30-09-2020 10:35pm

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

Bye .

Thank fuck for that.

gozunda · 30-09-2020 10:44pm

You’re a group of Neanderthal misogynistic homophobic transphobic racist pricks.

Bye.

That surely is worthy at least of a nomination for a best virtual door slaming and melodrama category Boards Award :pac:

Dravokivich · 30-09-2020 10:44pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I think the problem is that the OP got on the wrong “side” in the ‘JK Rowling TERF’ thread. Any of the, more enduring, posters who went up against the anti-trans “lobby” have been thread banned. I can only assume that the mods are forced to take action once they receive numerous reported posts by a number of different users.

One of these users has since been unbanned but, considering how things are going, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were, unceremoniously, dumped back out due to (un)popular demand. Hell, I, personally, have been “called out” for daring to even thank posts I happen to agree with.

That thread does not welcome “dissenting opinions” and there is a consolidated effort to remove them from the thread. That’s where I see the OP’s “issue” stemming from. Maybe I’m wrong, just how I see it.

The action a moderator may take on a reported post, does not always tend to be aligned to the comments of the report submitted, nor does it mean the mod agrees with everyone who has reported it.

I haven't read that thread much, mainly because it looks like something that can get messy quite easily and its a discussion that'll keep looping. People getting caught up that kind of thing can easily find themselves being reprimanded, regardless of their opinion, but mainly becuase of how they are either expressing it or how they are frustratingly interacting with others.

I find when you watch out for dog sh!t, you're less likely to step in it. I take that approach here for the most part too. If others did it, thered be much less bickering along the lines of the OP here and feedback would be more constructive.

robindch · 30-09-2020 10:49pm

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

Is there any Female, LGBTQI+ (Outside that forum) or People of Colour Mods?

Yes.

cdeb · 30-09-2020 10:56pm

Where were you earlier? You would have saved 8 pages of this

karlitob · 30-09-2020 10:59pm

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

Out of curiosity, Can you relate to being female, LGBTQTIA+ or being a person of colour?

Out of curiosity, Can you relate to *not* being female, LGBTQTIA+ or being a person of colour?

30-09-2020 11:02pm

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

Who mentioned GDPR.

When I asked had you diverse mods it was rhetorical because of the bile on here it’s clear you don’t.

It’s not welcoming to the people I mentioned so why would there be any mods.

I have a good idea that I actually worked with one of the mods in a previous job, just from general stuff they have posted in different forums on here.
I haven't broached the possibility of this with them by pm for a number of reasons, the main one being that it doesn't matter if I do or not in terms of their and my interaction with the site.

Your guessing incorrectly, that people on your list aren't mods because they don't immediately ban someone whose posts you don't like or shut down a thread that you don't like.
No good sites work like this, but outright dicks and trolls don't tend to last long before their threads are closed and they are banned, try to rereg and are banned again, and that includes those that consistently act the dick from what I've seen.

There are three ways of dealing with people disagreeing with your position on anything imo.

If you were wrong in anything admit it and move on.
Call out any bullsh1t they post with a good counter argument, which can in a few cases be just one word.
Put them on ignore.

I haven't put anyone on my ignore list for two reasons. First off it can be amusing to see them make a fool of themselves, and I don't mean with silly things like spelling or grammar. Secondly most people who put someone on their ignore list, at least from what I've seen reading different threads, are usually doing so when another poster can successfully counter their argument and call out any bullsh1t they post, but they can't do the same.

gozunda · 30-09-2020 11:55pm

DubInMeath wrote: »

I have a good idea that I actually worked with one of the mods in a previous job, just from general stuff they have posted in different forums on here matching up to stuff mentioned from conversions with them when we worked together.
I haven't broached the possibility of this with them by pm for a number of reasons, the main one being that it doesn't matter if I do or not in terms of their and my interaction with the site.

Your guessing incorrectly, that people on your list aren't mods because they don't immediately ban someone whose posts you don't like or shut down a thread that you don't like.
No good sites work like this, but outright dicks and trolls don't tend to last long before their threads are closed and they are banned, try to rereg and are banned again, and that includes those that consistently act the dick from what I've seen.

There are three ways of dealing with people disagreeing with your position on anything imo.

If you were wrong in anything admit it and move on.
Call out any bullsh1t they post with a good counter argument, which can in a few cases be just one word.
Put them on ignore.

I haven't put anyone on my ignore list for two reasons. First off it can be amusing to see them make a fool of themselves, and I don't mean with silly things like spelling or grammar. Secondly most people who put someone on their ignore list, at least from what I've seen reading different threads, are usually doing so when another poster can successfully counter their argument and call out any bullsh1t they post, but they can't do the same.

I'd agree. But you're leaving out the thread muggers. Many of the same get away with repeated behaviour as they tend to hit and run. Funnily enough many such instances like the above use male / misogynist/ sexist / racist type rants These are simply thread wreckers and tend to inhabit the lower levels ...

Birneybau · 01-10-2020 12:46am

I can't help but think that the o.p. is in no way a retired female. A distinct whiff of troll.

01-10-2020 9:07am

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

I can't thank an All Lives Matter contribution. Asking for equality doesn't make me a racist.

You're not asking for equality, though. You're asking for preferential treatment based on a person's race/creed/religion/sexual orientation. That is, quite literally, the dictionary definition of discrimination and should be treated with disdain.

sydthebeat · 01-10-2020 9:13am

Who ever had the OP chained to a keyboard, and is forcing them to post on this site, please, please....

For the sake of the rest of us....

Release them to run off free.

Witcher · 01-10-2020 10:25am

Sterling Worried Mackerel wrote: »

You’re a group of Neanderthal misogynistic homophobic transphobic racist pricks.

Bye .

Thank you for your contribution.

01-10-2020 10:41am

How can you even tell someone's race or sex on here. Surely the beauty of anonymity is that we're all treated the same

Danzy · 01-10-2020 10:44am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Surely the beauty of anonymity is that we're all treated the same

That's the problem for carerhomeless.

dvdman1 · 01-10-2020 10:50am

Finding problems.. where problems dont exist.
Every blog, institution, business doesnt need to have 50/50 men women 3%lgbtq 5% another minorthy and so on..this is total madness to expect the world to reflect what a minorty wants.

Dial Hard · 01-10-2020 12:10pm

Birneybau wrote: »

I can't help but think that the o.p. is in no way a retired female. A distinct whiff of troll.

Who was only here for Aldi product recommendations.

And was too busy/old to understand how to use DRP properly.

Yet had the time and the wherewithal to essentially spam Feeedback, Helpdesk and DRP for the guts of a week.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Gruffalux · 01-10-2020 3:24pm

Witcher wrote: »

Thank you for your contribution.

Oh my god! I love the Witcher!!

Rothko · 01-10-2020 3:35pm

OP is a very, very obvious troll.

CtevenSrowder · 01-10-2020 4:14pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I think the problem is that the OP got on the wrong “side” in the ‘JK Rowling TERF’ thread. Any of the, more enduring, posters who went up against the anti-trans “lobby” have been thread banned. I can only assume that the mods are forced to take action once they receive numerous reported posts by a number of different users.

One of these users has since been unbanned but, considering how things are going, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were, unceremoniously, dumped back out due to (un)popular demand. Hell, I, personally, have been “called out” for daring to even thank posts I happen to agree with.

That thread does not welcome “dissenting opinions” and there is a consolidated effort to remove them from the thread. That’s where I see the OP’s “issue” stemming from. Maybe I’m wrong, just how I see it.

The poster who was unbanned was banned from that thread at the same time as me. So your implication of mod bias has no founding. We were then both unbanned after discussions with the mods.

Secondly, dissenting opinions are not unwelcome. What is unwelcome is the Continuous use of the slur of TERF, alongside consistently calling posters transphobic, anti-trans or some variation thereof.

Thirdly, ultimately, objective fact trumps opinion. It is the constant denial of these objective facts that causes so much consternation in the thread that you never contribute to.

EmmetSpiceland · 01-10-2020 4:55pm

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

The poster who was unbanned was banned from that thread at the same time as me. So your implication of mod bias has no founding. We were then both unbanned after discussions with the mods.

I never said their was any “mod bias”. I merely pointed out that there appears to be a “concerted effort” to have any pro-trans rights posters removed from the thread.

01-10-2020 5:13pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I never said their was any “mod bias”. I merely pointed out that there appears to be a “concerted effort” to have any pro-trans rights posters removed from the thread.

Is this a similar or different thing to your constant posting about cesspits/sewers in the current affairs feedback thread?

There's very little behaviour in the thread you cite that mods would be getting involved with. And strangely enough you might struggle to make a case that such intervention would be occurring on the side of the debate you seem to suggest.

Be interesting to see where you drew a line between things you disagree with and things people aren't allowed think or shouldn't be allowed post.

Well, interesting/informative,

CtevenSrowder · 01-10-2020 5:17pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I never said their was any “mod bias”. I merely pointed out that there appears to be a “concerted effort” to have any pro-trans rights posters removed from the thread.

Based on what? I think two posters have been banned from that thread on 'the other side' to me, one of whom has been allowed to post again.
I personally haven't reported any posts that I recall. So I think you are seeing something that doesn't exist.

Gatling · 01-10-2020 5:20pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Be interesting to see where you drew a line between things you disagree with and things people aren't allowed think or shouldn't be allowed post.

Well, interesting/informative,

Some people make a hobby of claiming what's going on in thread's with out every reading or contributing to said threads .

I'd be interested to see who emmet thinks people are trying to remove people from the thread ,

Only mods and higher up have that power

EmmetSpiceland · 01-10-2020 5:27pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Is this a similar or different thing to your constant posting about cesspits/sewers in the current affairs feedback thread?

I don’t think that I, personally, have called the “Current Affairs” forum a “cesspit” or a “sewer”.

A poster referred to it as ‘the sewer of boards’ in this thread but it wasn’t me.

I have always been a vocal “supporter” of the forum and have, on numerous occasions, praised the mod’s work in there.

Piehead · 01-10-2020 5:35pm

Can this nonsense now be locked as the wum op has slinked off?

Sir Oxman · 01-10-2020 6:04pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I think the problem is that the OP got on the wrong “side” in the ‘JK Rowling TERF’ thread. Any of the, more enduring, posters who went up against the anti-trans “lobby” have been thread banned. I can only assume that the mods are forced to take action once they receive numerous reported posts by a number of different users.

One of these users has since been unbanned but, considering how things are going, I wouldn’t be surprised if they were, unceremoniously, dumped back out due to (un)popular demand. Hell, I, personally, have been “called out” for daring to even thank posts I happen to agree with.

That thread does not welcome “dissenting opinions” and there is a consolidated effort to remove them from the thread. That’s where I see the OP’s “issue” stemming from. Maybe I’m wrong, just how I see it.

That thread does welcome all opinions, no-one owns it - what isn't welcome is throing out the utterly useless -phobes and -ists and anti-'s with not one actual intent to contribute to the discussion.
This utter rubbish debating tactic is seen on various threads and is rightly demolished and called out.

It may be the fact that most of the posters remaining are much in agreement that JKR was subject to a malicious, threatening violent campaign and/or that her actual words and opinion were not in any way 'transphobic' or 'anti-trans' or that they may hold closely aligned positions (not always agreeing 100%) on the ramifications of selfID and the consequences on women's rights, but no 'group' of posters control entry or stop anyone hitting the send button. At this stage, all people ask for is others with differing opinions to contribute something resembling a cogent argument and quit the lame, formulaic bad faith posting.

The intent to disrupt (with significantly low value posts) the opportunity that posters have an open conversation (which is moderated) is what is behind it.
I would hope (and I think I'm right) that mods take a look when posts are reported but do not base their decision on amount of reports - at least I'd hope so otherwise it'd be giving power to organised sets of posters.

I suggest Digital Spy's Politics Forum for any poster that wishes to discuss anything to do with selfID, transgender rights possibly impinging on women's rights or the mere possibility of unintended consequences etc - there you most definitely won't see any counterpoints to the OP's views allowed and definitely no inconvenient ones.
For sure, nirvana for a very few.

Danzy · 01-10-2020 6:09pm

Rothko wrote: »

OP is a very, very obvious troll.

Go to the Politics forum, the OP is mild among many long standing posters

Beasty · 01-10-2020 6:10pm

I was both active in the thread but had taken time out from moderation as a result of surgery I underwent yesterday

I did report the OP's final post and now I'm back in a modding capacity that will be dealt with

Other posters have also crossed the line with various "allegations" about the OP. My personal view is the OP was genuine in their concerns, but detached from reality in terms of what was being requested and how the site operates. I will not be acting against those other posters, but please note accusations of trolling and the like should be made via reported posts and not openly even in Feedback threads

I'm closing this up as I really cannot see how this thread can serve any constructive purpose

Female, LGBTQI+ or People of Colour Mods

Comments