Discussion on sexism

Tokyo · 05-04-2021 9:38am

pwurple wrote: »

No comment is ever made by mods when people read that string of crap about “slapped tits” etc and object to it. If some terribly oversensitive difficult woman reports it, then reluctantly, it gets deleted, completely silently.

To reiterate, 61 reported posts, 37 actioned and two users banned. The remaining 21 reported posts were deemed unilaterally to be spurious.

anewme wrote: »

That's why I also said they could be snipped if they are bad enough, which removes most of the content, but not the fact that there is an issue.

pwurple wrote: »

I report posts with that kind of language when I see then. They typically get deleted. There is never a comment on it.

If I report a slew of them, I sometimes pm the mod and ask could they put up a comment so I don’t have to keep reporting. They usually don’t, and just say keep reporting.

Respectfully, neither of you are in any position to make that statement as fact - that posts are simply deleted with a 'move along, nothing to see here', laissez-faire attitude, and pwurple, the picture you seem intent on painting of a poster singlehandedly taking a stand, and the reluctant mod groaning and dragging their heels because they have been browbeaten to get to the computer to take action is at best disingenuous and does nothing to further discussion on the actual issue here. So I'd appreciate it if you'd stop it.

But what surprises me here more than anything else is that this thread is less about sexist comments on boards, and becoming far more about how posts are moderated, particularly if they aren't moderated within certain posters extremely narrow vision of how to do so.

As mentioned earlier, mods have the option of deleting posts, carding posts, or a combination of both, depending on the nature of the comment in question. Then of course there are bans, all the way to site bans. Not all mod actions are visible, nor do they need to be. My own approach in general (not just in this thread) is to delete posts that are, being blunt, too dumb to action. Others I card and leave as a visible deterrent for other posters. Other comments that I think will continue to cause the thread to spiral, I action AND delete, with a very clear note to the poster as to why they were actioned, and sometimes accompanied by a threadban. And there are plenty of posters in this thread who can attest to this because they have been on the receiving end of precisely that. Different mods may take slightly different approaches on a case-by-case basis, but that doesn't make one course of action inherently right and another inherently wrong.

anewme wrote: »

Deleting comments are deleting the history.

If boards are committed to improving quality, then the policy needs to change here.

I don't agree. While I strive to preserve threads as much as possible, certain comments serve no other purpose than to derail a thread, or inspire others to try to outdo the original with their witty repartee. Even those protesting said comments end up propagating the same comment multiple times within the thread - you personally have reposted that "gravel donkeys" post five times in this thread, no doubt to the delight of the original poster. Quite often the way to deal with trolls is to starve them of oxygen - as a poster by not being baited by them, and as a moderator by removing their content.

pwurple wrote: »

Look at it this way... One of your children is hitting an other child with a stick. The injured child comes running to you. You bandage up the cut , but don’t take the stick off the other child or tell them not to do it again. What do you think continues to happen?

You're speaking in terms of black and white and not looking at the third option - taking the kid aside and warning them not to do it again, and/or grounding them. What some people seem to be looking for is a public pillory though and are thoroughly unhappy with anything else.

To argue that sexism doesn't exist on Boards is absurd - it exists here in the same way that it exists in all strata of society. But it's almost become a secondary issue in this thread compared to how the moderators choose to moderate, which is a tack I wasn't expecting.

Baby01032012 · 05-04-2021 9:41am

anewme wrote: »

Mod has asked people to stick to feedback for mods/admins to improve quality.

Would be great if you could do that.

Thanks.

You too, rather than the agenda of your general dissatisfaction with the moderation of Boards.

If not happy why don’t you join a different discussion boards or set up your own.

So when someone asks you what did you do with your long Easter weekend. Your reply will be I was a keyboard warrior on boards for days on end from early morning to late at night arguing that men are sexist and shouldn’t be allowed freedom to voice their sexist comments.

05-04-2021 9:45am

pwurple wrote: »

My replied in this thread: 10
CtevenSrowder, LegEndReject,99nsr125,Omackeral: 26+10+17+7 = 60.

600% more posts is a pile-on from where I'm sitting.

You are saying that it is unfair if people disagree with you.

In fact the whole post this was taken from boiled down to a complaint that anyone was allowed to disagree with you.

Repetition from people you disagreed with wasnt fair- your own repetition was fine and right. The other poster agreeing with you posting the same actual post ten times was fine and right.

Ive noted a marked change in modding since the big thread a few weeks back. Maybe for the better, it's early to say yet- the site wasn't perfect, certainly.

But my concern at the time was that "any complaint is legitimate and must be taken as an order" was the tenor of some of the feedback and that is very much the tenor of your posts and anewme's posts in this thread.

Im glad the mods retain discretion to disagree and not necessarily default to the sensitivity of the most easily offended or who can engineer -isms any time they read something they dislike

And that's not to claim the mods agree with me on that characterisation or that they delete stuff "reluctantly" which imo is a very unfair comment on them as mods and volunteers

They leave stuff up that isnt great and they allow leeway for offence and disagreement because the nature of contentious or current issues is often fluid, and has scope for views not necessarily sanitized to the standard of the parlour.

Nobody is defending the post in question. But you seem to be in a small minority in your opinion about how it was dealt with- thats not you being shouted down or bullied and the record showing you wanting this thread locked as soon as you lost control of opinion on it is, as already said, an indicator of the type of board you seem to want.

My feedback is for the mods to please resist any pressure to follow that direction.

anewme · 05-04-2021 10:13am

Baby01032012 wrote: »

I note you’ve spent over 6 hours posting on sexism on boards today. I completely disagree with the views taken against those two women. Which is based on their social class. And I think the criticism level is more a reflection of us Irish than of being sexist. I’m not here to tell anyone what to do but life is short every moment should be appreciated and give meaning. I hope you move on and find something joyful in the remainder of this long weekend. Posts will come and go and be lost in time.

Baby01032012 wrote: »

You too, rather than the agenda of your general dissatisfaction with the moderation of Boards.

If not happy why don’t you join a different discussion boards or set up your own.

So when someone asks you what did you do with your long Easter weekend. Your reply will be I was a keyboard warrior on boards for days on end from early morning to late at night arguing that men are sexist and shouldn’t be allowed freedom to voice their sexist comments.

I spotted this off topic yesterday and did not respond to it, but low and behold it's back again in a more blatant form.

I believe this is part of the pile on referred to.

Why is it your business what anyone does with their time and how is it relevant here in this feedback thread?

"I wont tell anyone what to do"....when bait not taken, followed by telling people not only what to do but what they say.

I could post a response to what you will say you attempted (and failed) to do here, but I wont as it does not need explaining , I'll leave it to the mods as its clearly not related to feedback.

knucklehead6 · 05-04-2021 10:18am

anewme wrote: »

I spotted this off topic yesterday and did not respond to it, but low and behold it's back again in a more blatant form.

I believe this is part of the pile on referred to.

Why is it your business what anyone does with their time and how is it relevant here in this feedback thread?

"I wont tell anyone what to do"....when bait not taken, followed by telling people not only what to do but what they say.

I could post a response to what you attempted (and failed) to do here, but I wont as it does not need explaining , I'll leave it to the mods as its clearly not related to feedback.

Are you not guilty of exactly the same thing?

Giving out because people didn’t think the post was sexist??

Baby01032012 · 05-04-2021 10:26am

anewme wrote: »

I spotted this off topic yesterday and did not respond to it, but low and behold it's back again in a more blatant form.

I believe this is part of the pile on referred to.

Why is it your business what anyone does with their time and how is it relevant here in this feedback thread?

"I wont tell anyone what to do"....when bait not taken, followed by telling people not only what to do but what they say.

I could post a response to what you will say you attempted (and failed) to do here, but I wont as it does not need explaining , I'll leave it to the mods as its clearly not related to feedback.

I never posted a single comment on the original thread which is now the subject of this feedback thread.

<admin: Nope. Don't personalize your posts like this again.>

Beasty · 05-04-2021 10:28am

I looked at some of the reported posts in the thread and acted against some of them as outlined by Tokyo above

Some were complaining about the terms used (eg "baps" or "diddies"), claiming they are sexist. Now the thread title included the term "boob". Is any reference to breasts using a term other than "breast" sexist? Does this apply to men as well? Is "Don't be a dick" sexist?

Just to add, I'm pretty sure some of the posters in question were female. Can women be sexist against other women?

I accept there is sexism on this site. I do not though accept that we must act against anything that could be construed as sexist. We are into shades of grey in many instances, and one person's definition of sexism does not always correlate to others.

anewme · 05-04-2021 10:35am

Tokyo wrote: »

Respectfully, neither of you are in any position to make that statement as fact - that posts are simply deleted with a 'move along, nothing to see here', laissez-faire attitude,

To argue that sexism doesn't exist on Boards is absurd - it exists here in the same way that it exists in all strata of society. But it's almost become a secondary issue in this thread compared to how the moderators choose to moderate, which is a tack I wasn't expecting.

I've not said posts are deleted with a laissez faire attitude, what I've said is when they are deleted, it leaves it looking as if people are giving out about nothing and no record.

There are people here arguing that sexism/ misogyny/ hatred does not exist in boards.

This thread is about the bigger picture and going back to the other thread raised in TLL and not just that one thread. I believe Pwurple has said this in the opening post.

It's not an attack on Mods and should not be seen as such. Its feedback.

Omackeral · 05-04-2021 10:38am

pwurple wrote: »

Reposting this as I see it wasn’t responded to with all the other noise.

I’ll wait.

The absolute arrogance of this. You dismiss other posts you disagree with as noise and pretty much demand a response... yet anyone who has responded has been wrote off as a bully and part of a pile on.

knucklehead6 · 05-04-2021 10:38am

anewme wrote: »

I've not said posts are deleted with a laissez faire attitude, what I've said is when they are deleted, it leaves it looking as if people are giving out about nothing and no record.

There are people here arguing that sexism/ misogyny/ hatred does not exist in boards.

This thread is about the bigger picture and going back to the other thread raised in TLL and not just that one thread. I believe Pwurple has said this in the opening post.

It's not an attack on Mods and should not be seen as such. Its feedback.

You have selected posts that you feel exemplify sexism, even though the posters in question were commenting on the two specific women. That’s not feedback.

Wanting to have your cake and eat it spring to mind.

pwurple · 05-04-2021 10:39am

Tokyo wrote: »

Respectfully, neither of you are in any position to make that statement as fact - that posts are simply deleted with a 'move along, nothing to see here', laissez-faire attitude, and pwurple, the picture you seem intent on painting of a poster singlehandedly taking a stand, and the reluctant mod groaning and dragging their heels because they have been browbeaten to get to the computer to take action is at best disingenuous and does nothing to further discussion on the actual issue here. So I'd appreciate it if you'd stop it.

Stop giving my perspective? Why is it not valid?

I am giving you a view of how it comes across, because what other insight do I have but my own? Is there a secret action behind the scenes I don’t see? Maybe there is, tell me more!

But what surprises me here more than anything else is that this thread is less about sexist comments on boards, and becoming far more about how posts are moderated, particularly if they aren't moderated within certain posters extremely narrow vision of how to do so.

only in response to the bleating about what could possibly be done differently In fairness.

You're speaking in terms of black and white and not looking at the third option - taking the kid aside and warning them not to do it again, and/or grounding them. What some people seem to be looking for is a public pillory though and are thoroughly unhappy with anything else.

Not so at all. I described fairly succinctly an example of how I have seen it done successfully elsewhere. No public pillorying needed. But a gentle reminder (even one single comment) can aid community standards. The difficulty remains there is no actual standard on sexism.

To argue that sexism doesn't exist on Boards is absurd - it exists here in the same way that it exists in all strata of society. But it's almost become a secondary issue in this thread compared to how the moderators choose to moderate, which is a tack I wasn't expecting.

It also isn’t where I wanted to go, so I will ask again...

Is there an intent to guide the moderator team on what sexism is, and how to deal with it?

anewme · 05-04-2021 10:41am

Beasty wrote: »

Just to add, I'm pretty sure some of the posters in question were female. Can women be sexist against other women?

I'm surprised you are asking this. It would be well recognised.

Of course women can be sexist and misogynistic towards other women and all genders

As men can be sexist and misandristic against other men and all genders.

Tokyo · 05-04-2021 10:45am

anewme wrote: »

I've not said posts are deleted with a laissez faire attitude, what I've said is when they are deleted, it leaves it looking as if people are giving out about nothing and no record.

Then they shouldn't be doing that. Age old rule of the internet is to not feed the trolls, and let the moderators deal with it. In many instances, a poster seems to want to attack the post AND report it for mod action at the same time, and those two don't work well together.

anewme wrote: »

There are people here arguing that sexism/ misogyny/ hatred does not exist in boards.

I don't believe anybody has said that to be fair. There is certainly opposing points of view as to what constitutes sexism, both in general and within the thread in question.

anewme wrote: »

It's not an attack on Mods and should not be seen as such. Its feedback.

Sure, but my point remains that the thread was opened under the guise of combating sexism but the subject matter has been predominantly about peoples displeasure at how the thread was moderated, which detracts from the supposed topic.

Genuine question then. How do you think the thread should have been modded?

knucklehead6 · 05-04-2021 10:45am

pwurple wrote: »

Stop giving my perspective? Why is it not valid?

I am giving you a view of how it comes across, because what other insight do I have but my own? Is there a secret action behind the scenes I don’t see? Maybe there is, tell me more!

only in response to the bleating about what could possibly be done differently In fairness.

Not so at all. I described fairly succinctly an example of how I have seen it done successfully elsewhere. No public pillorying needed. But a gentle reminder (even one single comment) can aid community standards. The difficulty remains there is no actual standard on sexism.

It also isn’t where I wanted to go, so I will ask again...

Is there an intent to guide the moderator team on what sexism is, and how to deal with it?

As in “I want a set of cast iron rules that mods and admins have to follow and I have to approve of them too and not allow for any personal discretion and any comments that put ANY women in a bad light are inherently sexist if made by a male”

CtevenSrowder · 05-04-2021 10:46am

pwurple wrote: »

Not so at all. I described fairly succinctly an example of how I have seen it done successfully elsewhere. No public pillorying needed. But a gentle reminder (even one single comment) can aid community standards. The difficulty remains there is no actual standard on sexism.

There is a standard. Don't be a dick. It's worked fine up until now and has been boards policy from near the get go.

pwurple wrote: »

It also isn’t where I wanted to go, so I will ask again...

Is there an intent to guide the moderator team on what sexism is, and how to deal with it?

Why should there be. Again, most seem happy with the status quo. Who is going to do this guiding?

pwurple · 05-04-2021 10:49am

knucklehead6 wrote: »

As in “I want a set of cast iron rules that mods and admins have to follow and I have to approve of them too and not allow for any personal discretion and any comments that put ANY women in a bad light are inherently sexist if made by a male”

Nope. but this seems to be very tricky for you to understand. Keep trying, you might get there some day.

knucklehead6 · 05-04-2021 10:54am

pwurple wrote: »

Nope. but this seems to be very tricky for you to understand. Keep trying, you might get there some day.

No, I think I’m there. I think that’s EXACTLY what you’re after but now that two of the site admins have pretty much told you “nope, no chance, don’t be a dick covers it” you’re resorting to smart arse comments about keeping trying and maybe you’ll get there some day.

Deub · 05-04-2021 11:01am

pwurple wrote: »

Nope. but this seems to be very tricky for you to understand. Keep trying, you might get there some day.

In your OP you complain about the standard of posting and yet, you post this.
Or maybe does it apply only if it is toward women?

knucklehead6 · 05-04-2021 11:02am

Deub wrote: »

In your OP you complain about the standard of posting and yet, you post this.
Or maybe does it apply only if it is toward women?

Careful now. You’ll be accused of piling on and bullying next.

Signore Fancy Pants · 05-04-2021 11:04am

This is just Mods/Admins being harassed at this stage. Despite appropriate actions already being taken.

All with the intent of being forced to implement some policy that few posters can use as beating stick for their own agenda and hold Mods hostage.

Let's be honest, you could find some fault in a vast majority of posts on this site for various reasons if you wanted to. You can't have a policy for everything.

Most importantly, your own interpretation of a post...even when reaching...shouldn't trump another persons unless it is categorically obvious what is is to everyone.

anewme · 05-04-2021 11:14am

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Why should there be. Again, most seem happy with the status quo. Who is going to do this guiding?

This was raised previously in the thread in the Ladies Lounge.

It is one for admin/ senior managers of Boards.

anewme · 05-04-2021 11:16am

Tokyo wrote: »

Then they shouldn't be doing that. Age old rule of the internet is to not feed the trolls, and let the moderators deal with it. In many instances, a poster seems to want to attack the post AND report it for mod action at the same time, and those two don't work well together.

I don't believe anybody has said that to be fair. There is certainly opposing points of view as to what constitutes sexism, both in general and within the thread in question.

Sure, but my point remains that the thread was opened under the guise of combating sexism but the subject matter has been predominantly about peoples displeasure at how the thread was moderated, which detracts from the supposed topic.

Genuine question then. How do you think the thread should have been modded?

Sorry Tokyo, I had a comprehensive response typed, but I lost it. Will revisit again,

TheValeyard · 05-04-2021 11:18am

Someone posted something stupid. Moderator took appropriate action. Post removed. User dealt with.

Moderators are volunteers. I've met with a fair few of the Moderators here for drinks in the old pre Covid world. They are ordinary people with lives, families, jobs, unhealthy obsessions with finding wolves amongst villagers, but they cannot and should not be about policing what someone could post.

This is getting ridiculous. You cannot police what people could post. If someone posts something silly, then it will get acted upon. The users of boards do not need an education on sexiest language.

knucklehead6 · 05-04-2021 11:18am

anewme wrote: »

This was raised previously in the thread in the Ladies Lounge.

It is one for admin/ senior managers of Boards.

So, same as I posted earlier, and SFP as well. You want a stick to beat people with and also do some rules lawyering.

anewme · 05-04-2021 11:28am

TheValeyard wrote: »

Someone posted something stupid. Moderator took appropriate action. Post removed. User dealt with.

Moderators are volunteers. I've met with a fair few of the Moderators here for drinks in the old pre Covid world. They are ordinary people with lives, families, jobs, unhealthy obsessions with finding wolves amongst villagers, but they cannot and should not be about policing what someone could post.

This is getting ridiculous. You cannot police what people could post. If someone posts something silly, then it will get acted upon. The users of boards do not need an education on sexiest language.

Why do you think then that so many women have expressed concerns about posting on boards or have left including a long standing and respectful moderator.

My point on the Ladies Lounge thread and here is that there is no calibration across forums.Point was made that different areas require different focus, ie, PI, but point remains there needs to be a basic standard for all. Given how the world has evolved, maybe it needs to be a bit more comprehensive than 'dont be a dick '.

Again, this is not a Mod issue, one for Boards management and how volunteers are supported and trained.

Leg End Reject · 05-04-2021 11:28am

pwurple wrote: »

Nope. but this seems to be very tricky for you to understand. Keep trying, you might get there some day.

Pwurple, how would you feel if a man posted this in response to you? Would you see it as mansplaining and sexist?

It's a dismissive comment suggesting that anyone who disagrees with you is intellectually inferior, and to be blunt, undermines your entire position.

sydthebeat · 05-04-2021 11:35am

Tokyo wrote: »

..... My own approach in general (not just in this thread) is to delete posts that are, being blunt, too dumb to action. Others I card and leave as a visible deterrent for other posters. Other comments that I think will continue to cause the thread to spiral, I action AND delete, with a very clear note to the poster as to why they were actioned, and sometimes accompanied by a threadban.......

Surely if a post deserves action it must have broken some rule of either the whole forum, or the particular sub forum. We all know each has different standards etc

Instead of a ninja deletion, which offers absolutely no incentive towards a behavioural change.... Why don't you simply add a warning to the post, and an instruction not to quote or reply??

In doing so the 'offensive' post remains as proof of the posters posting history trend. It can be used as future evidence should increased action be required against the poster.... In effect posters need to be accountable for what they post, even if borderline. Posting history is important for moderators in getting an idea of certain posters leanings.

To be honest, the deletion of a post without notification either on thread and / or to the poster is probably the worse course of action... Save for doing nothing.

knucklehead6 · 05-04-2021 11:39am

sydthebeat wrote: »

Surely if a post deserves action it must have broken some rule of either the whole forum, or the particular sub forum. We all know each has different standards etc

Instead of a ninja deletion, which offers absolutely no incentive towards a behavioural change.... Why don't you simply add a warning to the post, and an instruction not to quote or reply??

In doing so the 'offensive' post remains as proof of the posters posting history trend. It can be used as future evidence should increased action be required against the poster.... In effect posters need to be accountable for what they post, even if borderline. Posting history is important for moderators in getting an idea of certain posters leanings.

To be honest, the deletion of a post without notification either on thread and / or to the poster is probably the worse course of action... Save for doing nothing.

And if a mod leaves the comment there, along with their mod action note, then there is the very real probability that others will pile on, giving out about such a disgusting comment was allowed stay there.

It’s a no win situation. Putting rules in place to try to limit the options open to the mods/admins is the wrong way to go.

Trying to “calibrate” the behaviour and actions of the mods/admins is the same thing, and limiting their options

anewme · 05-04-2021 11:47am

knucklehead6 wrote: »

And if a mod leaves the comment there, along with their mod action note, then there is the very real probability that others will pile on, giving out about such a disgusting comment was allowed stay there.

It’s a no win situation. Putting rules in place to try to limit the options open to the mods/admins is the wrong way to go.

Trying to “calibrate” the behaviour and actions of the mods/admins is the same thing, and limiting their options

They wouldn't. I've also said it could be partly edited if it's that bad.

The point is there does need to be a more aligned approach of tracking behaviour.

Putting rules in place is there to support and train Volunteers as well as establish a qualitative standard . As Boards is a Commercial entity, it needs to have these regulations in place to support these customer facing staff, be they Volunteers or not.

People are resistant to change, but given the world digitalisation, it is now time to review.

CtevenSrowder · 05-04-2021 11:50am

anewme wrote: »

Why do you think then that so many women have expressed concerns about posting on boards or have left including a long standing and respectful moderator.

My point on the Ladies Lounge thread and here is that there is no calibration across forums.Point was made that different areas require different focus, ie, PI, but point remains there needs to be a basic standard for all. Given how the world has evolved, maybe it needs to be a bit more comprehensive than 'dont be a dick '.

Again, this is not a Mod issue, one for Boards management and how volunteers are supported and trained.

There is a basic standard. Don't be a dick. That is the basic standard that has existed now for years.

A poster left, so what. They'll likely be back in some other form. Plenty have left and come back. Me included.

Many women have not expressed any concerns, some on this thread do not want a change of policy or of moderation. Those that have, should stick to the fora more to their liking. There are women who rarely post in TLL as they don't feel welcome, there are gay people who don't post their views on contentious topics in LGBT forum for the same reasons. Those forums are deemed safe spaces and so be it. But CA should not become another one.

EmmetSpiceland · 05-04-2021 11:50am

TheValeyard wrote: »

This is getting ridiculous. You cannot police what people could post. If someone posts something silly, then it will get acted upon. The users of boards do not need an education on sexiest language.

It’s an odd one, alright. People say there’s no sexism, racism, homophobia, anti-trans, bigotry etc on boards but we all know that’s not true. It’s just “contained”. And that’s a good thing.

What I, personally, found really strange was when one of the CA type user set up a thread in here complaining about how there was a thread in the “Ladies Lounge” forum discussing sexism on the site, particularly in the “Current Affairs” forum, and how these members weren’t entitled to a “safe space” to discuss these things.

Maybe a warning could be set up for users clicking into the “Current Affairs” forum explaining that anyone entering the forum will be subject to, excessive amounts, of blatant sexism, overt racism and other, general, distasteful opinion? It could be further explained that this is proving a “public service” by keeping these users distracted and away from the, more normal, areas from the site.

This would allow the forum moderators to take a “step back” from the, near, round the clock monitoring they are forced to take on now. Obviously, certain things like “personal abuse”, and the like, could still be reported, and actioned, as normal but at the current rate the mods are heading for burn out and without a forum “warning” that could be a disaster for any normal user who ventures into the forum without prior knowledge of what it’s like.

knucklehead6 · 05-04-2021 11:54am

anewme wrote: »

They wouldn't. I've also said it could be partly edited if it's that bad.

The point is there does need to be a more aligned approach of tracking behaviour.

Putting rules in place is there to support and train Volunteers as well as establish a qualitative standard . As Boards is a Commercial entity, it needs to have these regulations in place to support these customer facing staff, be they Volunteers or not.

People are resistant to change, but given the world digitalisation, it is now time to review.

Are you able to say, with 100% certainty that no member would post a comment giving out about a mod action where they left/edited a disgusting post?

Sorry anewme but that’s just not going to happen. You know it. I know it.

The volunteers that mod here do so out of an interest in their forum/subject matter. To suggest they need training, and need to give up more of their free time for said training just because of the comments of a few posters is unfair. I think, and a lot of others think that the mods/admins do enough to handle it.

banie01 · 05-04-2021 11:55am

anewme wrote: »

They wouldn't. I've also said it could be partly edited if it's that bad.

The point is there does need to be a more aligned approach of tracking behaviour.

Putting rules in place is there to support and train Volunteers as well as establish a qualitative standard . As Boards is a Commercial entity, it needs to have these regulations in place to support these customer facing staff, be they Volunteers or not.

People are resistant to change, but given the world digitalisation, it is now time to review.

Tracking behaviour?
By whom?

It's a big leap to assume that because you cannot see the moderator actions a user has been subject to?
That mods and admins can't.

It also lays clear an agenda tbh.

CtevenSrowder · 05-04-2021 11:57am

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

It’s an odd one, alright. People say there’s no sexism, racism, homophobia, anti-trans, bigotry etc on boards but we all know that’s not true.

Literally no one has said that. No one.

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

It’s just “contained”. And that’s a good thing.

What I, personally, found really strange was when one of the CA type user set up a thread in here complaining about how there was a thread in the “Ladies Lounge” forum discussing sexism on the site, particularly in the “Current Affairs” forum, and how these members weren’t entitled to a “safe space” to discuss these things.

Maybe a warning could be set up for users clicking into the “Current Affairs” forum explaining that anyone entering the forum will be subject to, excessive amounts, of blatant sexism, overt racism and other, general, distasteful opinion? It could be further explained that this is proving a “public service” by keeping these users distracted and away from the, more normal, areas from the site.

This would allow the forum moderators to take a “step back” from the, near, round the clock monitoring they are forced to take on now. Obviously, certain things like “personal abuse”, and the like, could still be reported, and actioned, as normal but at the current rate the mods are heading for burn out and without a forum “warning” that could be a disaster for any normal user who ventures into the forum without prior knowledge of what it’s like.

Fine, have what 'amounts' to a 'trigger warning', and the let the big boys and girls 'debate'. Maybe have a 'CA/IMHO - Not for the weak minded' banner at the top of the page. The 'rest' can go back to their safe space and mutually console eachother about how racist and sexist boards is. Boo hoo.

05-04-2021 12:08pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

It’s an odd one, alright. People say there’s no sexism, racism, homophobia, anti-trans, bigotry etc on boards but we all know that’s not true. It’s just “contained”. And that’s a good thing.

What I, personally, found really strange was when one of the CA type user set up a thread in here complaining about how there was a thread in the “Ladies Lounge” forum discussing sexism on the site, particularly in the “Current Affairs” forum, and how these members weren’t entitled to a “safe space” to discuss these things.

Maybe a warning could be set up for users clicking into the “Current Affairs” forum explaining that anyone entering the forum will be subject to, excessive amounts, of blatant sexism, overt racism and other, general, distasteful opinion? It could be further explained that this is proving a “public service” by keeping these users distracted and away from the, more normal, areas from the site.

This would allow the forum moderators to take a “step back” from the, near, round the clock monitoring they are forced to take on now. Obviously, certain things like “personal abuse”, and the like, could still be reported, and actioned, as normal but at the current rate the mods are heading for burn out and without a forum “warning” that could be a disaster for any normal user who ventures into the forum without prior knowledge of what it’s like.

Or maybe there could be a notice upon entering the forum that explains to the poster that just because they might believe that what they’re reading is blatant this that and the other, it doesn’t necessarily make it so.

anewme · 05-04-2021 12:24pm

banie01 wrote: »

Tracking behaviour?
By whom?

It's a big leap to assume that because you cannot see the moderator actions a user has been subject to?
That mods and admins can't.

It also lays clear an agenda tbh.

Syd suggested it and I fully agree.

Tracking by mods.

We dont know if they have actioned it or or not, that's the whole issue.

Syd has said that you are often not told when your post is deleted So the behaviour continues.. So thsts not adding any value.

I get that one off sign up trolls should be deleted and banned, unfortunately they keep coming back like Boomerangs.

The only people who want posts deleted would be the ones with the Agenda, ie something to hide.

05-04-2021 12:26pm

There's no greater measure of someone than to note their approach if given a little power

anewme · 05-04-2021 12:31pm

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Literally no one has said that. No one.

Fine, have what 'amounts' to a 'trigger warning', and the let the big boys and girls 'debate'. Maybe have a 'CA/IMHO - Not for the weak minded' banner at the top of the page. The 'rest' can go back to their safe space and mutually console eachother about how racist and sexist boards is. Boo hoo.

I'd argue that the weak minded are those who want to big themselves up by bringing others down.

Recent case in point, thread about who lives here. Someone posted a link to a persons RIP page.

Yet, the big boys and girls (as you call them) went on to trash the mans home , who couldn't speak back, as hes dead. No debate either.

I know who I'd say were the weak minded ones in this instance.

This is my point about basic levels of respect.

Edited to add: the above example was actioned and deleted by Mods as far as they could. Example used to refute definition of weak minded.

knucklehead6 · 05-04-2021 12:51pm

anewme wrote: »

I'd argue that the weak minded are those who want to big themselves up by bringing others down.

Recent case in point, thread about who lives here. Someone posted a link to a persons RIP page.

Yet, the big boys and girls (as you call them) went on to trash the mans home , who couldn't speak back, as hes dead. No debate either.

I know who I'd say were the weak minded ones in this instance.

This is my point about basic levels of respect.

And yet there was mod action taken. The RIP post was deleted. Whether or not users were sanctioned behind the scenes is unknown.

Is that what you’re after? To know what mod actions (if any) were taken against posters who post something you decide is insulting/degrading?

anewme · 05-04-2021 1:07pm

knucklehead6 wrote: »

And yet there was mod action taken. The RIP post was deleted. Whether or not users were sanctioned behind the scenes is unknown.

Is that what you’re after? To know what mod actions (if any) were taken against posters who post something you decide is insulting/degrading?

My post challenges the definition of weak minded and is a response to the poster who bandied about the term weak minded, but that's very clear.

I'd say that people who feel better for laughing at a dead mans home and possessions are way more weak minded than people speaking out about sexism/racism.

EmmetSpiceland · 05-04-2021 1:08pm

knucklehead6 wrote: »

And yet there was mod action taken. The RIP post was deleted. Whether or not users were sanctioned behind the scenes is unknown.

Is that what you’re after? To know what mod actions (if any) were taken against posters who post something you decide is insulting/degrading?

I’m not a mod so I don’t know which is easier, deleting a post entirely or just editing out the “offending” post with a mod note.

The latter would leave a record of the action and might “discourage” those users from trying the same thing again.

The ‘Woke-ism” thread in AH gets a lot of posts deleted for not being in the “spirit” of the thread but it doesn’t seem to deter this type of posting. Which is a shame.

05-04-2021 1:09pm

Anewme- Seems this feedback thread is just whatever you want it to be

Seems the whole site should be

YellowFeather · 05-04-2021 1:17pm

Dr Turk Turkelton wrote: »

So basically have a forum with people who only post what you approve of?

I hate this kind of argument. Whilst I wouldn't feel as strongly as pwuple at all (I like to take insults as insults if they are meant, and not disseminate them into gender in particular), that's not what was said.

anewme · 05-04-2021 1:18pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Anewme- Seems this feedback thread is just whatever you want it to be

Seems the whole site should be

The poster mentioned weak minded people should stay out, I gave an example showing that week minded are already in.

If you have an issue with the term weak minded, take it up with the poster who used that term and wanted it as used as a warning to people not to enter the CA forum, not me for refuting his skewed definition.

*I asked Tokyo yesterday if it was ok to continue the discussion raised in TLL thread here or start a new thread. He said fine, so if you've an issue with that, speak with Tokyo.

pjohnson · 05-04-2021 1:20pm

pwurple wrote: »

Nope. but this seems to be very tricky for you to understand. Keep trying, you might get there some day.

The weak minded big themselves up by bringing others down. Would you agree anewme?

Wibbs · 05-04-2021 1:21pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

People say there’s no sexism, racism, homophobia, anti-trans, bigotry etc on boards but we all know that’s not true.

I've not heard of a single person on this site saying that. That "we all know that’s not true" suggests you agree. It's where people draw lines regarding isms and phobias is the issue.

What I have learned down the years and it applies to this site and the practicalities of moderating is that you will always have a minority of people who are never going to be satisfied with the ethos of a forum and community. I've seen it in all but one forum I modded down the years. The "trick" is to keep that number a minority. I work the adage that if one person says you smell, check of course, but if you don't notice then plough on, if ten people say you smell, buy soap.

anewme · 05-04-2021 1:27pm

Wibbs wrote: »

I'he "trick" is to keep that number a minority. I work the adage that if one person says you smell, check of course, but if you don't notice then plough on, if ten people say you smell, buy soap.

That's why people expected clear feedback in respect of The Ladies Lounge thread and its again being requested here.

A lot of people noticed something was rotten there and spoke out about it. Too many to plough on regardless.

Beasty · 05-04-2021 1:46pm

anewme wrote: »

I'm surprised you are asking this. It would be well recognised.

Of course women can be sexist and misogynistic towards other women.

As men can be biased against other men.

Why do you use the term "sexist" when against women and "biased" when against men?

Is the implication that sexism only works in one direction?

Pawwed Rig · 05-04-2021 1:57pm

Where the line is is an important issue. For example I have had people report any posts critical of feminism as sexist and posts raising concerns with immigration as racist. Questioning either is not sexist/racist by default. It is the manner in the way they are addressed that determines what the response from a mod perspective should be.

For example I would argue that feminism as an ideology no longer has any interest in equality. This might elicit a response from someone who identifies as a feminist but doesn't buy into the more extreme elements of the movement. So one persons sexism is another person's common sense.

anewme · 05-04-2021 1:59pm

Beasty wrote: »

Why do you use the term "sexist" when against women and "biased" when against men?

Is the implication that sexism only works in one direction?

No, the exact same applies to both men and women both ways and gay/lesbian/trans. Not unique to any gender.

The word misandry would not come to me at the time so I used bias, that's all.

I'm surprised you asked that question in the first place.

Discussion on sexism

Comments