4 ms·
This resignation notice from a moderator on the Christianity Stack Exchange appears to provide the most detail about what's going on: https://christianity.meta.
by csande17 7y ago
This resignation notice from a moderator on the Christianity Stack Exchange appears to provide the most detail about what's going on: https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/brothers-i-must-go https://christianity.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/6718/b...
- wendyshu 7y agoAha, the Jordan Peterson issue.
- doordonot 7y agoYes, it's exactly the same issue; FORCING specific speech which is quite different than BANNING some speech (hate speech for instance).
- 9HZZRfNlpR 7y agoThe whole pronoun drama that is inherently American is tearing down international communities left and right despite it not being even an issue.
- chipotle_coyote 7y agoIf it really wasn't even an issue, this wouldn't be coming up as often as it does, though, would it? To me, "if someone tells you they prefer singular 'they', use that" is non-controversial, just like "if someone tells you they go by 'Goldie,' use that" should be. Insisting "No, I am going to call you by the pronouns I believe are 'correct' for you" is akin to "No, your legal name is 'Marigold,' and I am going to call you 'Mary.'" Insisting that you will not, under any circumstances, call a person what they've requested you call them is -- to me -- pretty clearly being a discourteous jerk. There are a lot of valid complaints about the way Stack Overflow moderates in general, but I don't get the impression that this particular squabble is over moderation practices -- it seems to be about upcoming changes to SO's Code of Conduct. I don't know what those changes are, so I'll reserve judgement. I am certainly hoping that it doesn't boil down to "I cannot abide being required to refer to transgender women with 'her' and 'she'," though.
- lonelappde 7y agoIt's StackEexchange. Pronouns don't matter. I've never seen a reason for this person pronouns to be used. No one's generalist are topic of conversation, and it's not a a gossip forum, so there is no reason to use third person pronouns to refer to users at all! If this is true, it's damning: > Now if I avoid pronouns altogether by sticking to proper names or disengaging from the individual, that's being considered an insult too. The complaints seem to be about some proposed new rule requiring users to explicitly write other users' pronouns, for no other reason than as a performative display of respect. This is quite different from a rule that says "If a user states that they prefer pronoun X, don't use other pronouns."
- chipotle_coyote 7y agoI read that quote, too, but here's the thing -- I can't imagine a Code of Conduct actually demanding that staff go out of their way to explicitly write other user's pronouns just for the sake of demonstrating that they will, in fact, use the pronouns the users are requesting. If moderators are really, truly being directed the way that quote suggests, then yeah, that's a bad directive, whether or not the intentions are good. But some comments here suggested that this had to do with a trans moderator, not a trans user, which makes me suspect the pronouns in question may have been not on public-facing Stack Exchange but in moderator chats/forums. And if moderator X is pointedly avoiding ever "engaging" with moderator Y when the position requires it, then that's going to be a personnel problem.
- damnyou 7y agoModerators, as community leaders, need to go out of their way to signal inclusion for trans people. If they are unwilling to they should resign or be fired.
- charwalker 7y agoI think that connects with events like Princess Diana touching a patient with AIDS, Mr. Rogers inviting a black man to share the pool with him, etc. It's a top down change the role models (in this case moderators) can implement to improve equality and show humans as humans which in my experience goes a long way toward shutting down any *phobic type mentalities. It's never an easy or quick change but it's important.
- tomohawk 7y agoImposing speech codes is most definitely an issue. It goes to the core of deeply held values. It replaces tolerance with intolerance as the value to be upheld. Those imposing the CoC are getting exactly what they want - driving anyone who disagrees from the field.