5 ms·

> You make my case for me right here You were specifically talking about bans and "hard-censorship". Now you've shifted to talking about downvotes. I'm not g

> You make my case for me right here You were specifically talking about bans and "hard-censorship". Now you've shifted to talking about downvotes. I'm not going to try to hit a moving target. You asserted that "If your opinions are anywhere right of woke, you get banned straight up." I dispute this claim. Can you show me evidence supporting the claim? Once we've covered that idea, then I'd be open to talking about whether a system of downvotes and upvotes suppresses the outgroup. EDIT: If you're going to keep adding to your comment, you can't reasonably expect me to respond to it...

kodah 5y ago
With regards to being an IGC, I can say you won't always get banned. In fact, usually it's the folks on the extreme end of the homogenous group that end up doing the enforcement and driving people out. Is it censorship, bullying, harassment, or is this the system working as intended? I guess that's what people have to decide. One anecdotal example I have was from a Slack I was part of years ago. These two men who identified as "allies" went around trying to address what they called "micro-aggressions". At the time they were heavily focused on "gender neutral language". To them, this term was well-defined and solidified because in their group it undoubtedly was. The problem was, the wider community had not decided what "gender neutral language" meant to it. There were outstanding questions like, "Is dude okay?", "am I required to observe this massive list of alternative pronouns?" (at the time, pronouns were much more expansive than they are today). It fell short of low-hanging fruit like not assuming everyone is a man on the internet by default. These folks were pestering and ventured into their own system of micro and macro-aggressions. At one point I remember a Norwegian man was berated and micro-corrected for using the term "ladies". A full on lecture was dumped into a thread where he was trying to tell a story of his own. My chief observation in this specific incident was that not everyone agreed that "ladies" is dated language (including women). This caused people to join camps, the camps fought, and inevitably the primarily tech oriented (and progressive oriented) cultural homogeneity won out, driving out both the people they sought to defeat like actual misogynists but an overwhelming trove of normal people who just didn't agree with specific things. The thing I noted about cultural homogeneity at the time was that it inspires people to think in terms of camps, which makes good people odd bedfellows with bad people (and I mean that on both sides of this particular issue). To this day I do not view "ally" men as trustworthy by default. In other groups I had been a part of similar things happened, but the folks seeking homogeneity attached themselves to Codes of Conduct or Guidelines that became highly prescriptive, and at times, exclusive. They'd seek to moderate one side of this debate but not the other, and with a quickness that was hard to match. They developed a lot of abstract language about systems and power, and ironically enough, used it to boost themselves into power. I've since distanced myself from any group that has overly prescriptive COC's or has a history of them. What makes that interesting is that I'm not someone who opposes gender neutral language, but I disliked how they enforced it. They weren't positive change agents, and they made the assumption everyone who spoke up was an apologist or some more serious label. I hadn't seen these problems for a while, because I really only hang out on specific IRC networks or HN as a result, both of which have fairly reasonable guidelines that prevent a wide spectrum of abuse.
- falcrist 5y ago
  So are you saying "If your opinions are anywhere right of woke, you get banned straight up." is an incorrect statement? The last comment tried to shift the goalposts from being "banned straight up" to being suppressed through voting. Now you're trying to shift to a sometimes ban... there's also talk about not banning the people on the extreme right or not banning the "idiots" so they make the right look bad. Again, I'm not going to try to hit a moving target. The rest of your comment looks like it's trying to push the conversation off topic. I'm neither asking for anecdotes nor looking for a diatribe about your experience on Slack. A specific claim was made about censorship in a particular subreddit. I've heard that claim before, but never seen it substantiated in any way. Can you substantiate the claim? I'm asking because it sure looks like conservatives are just angry about being downvoted. That's a valid, but very different concern.
  - kodah 5y ago
    > So are you saying "If your opinions are anywhere right of woke, you get banned straight up." is an incorrect statement? Yeah, uniform rules are rarely reality. I do think people right of woke get ostracized with fairly regular tempo, sometimes that's bans, sometimes that's through other means. > The last comment tried to shift the goalposts from being "banned straight up" to being suppressed through voting. Now you're trying to shift to a sometimes ban... there's also talk about not banning the people on the extreme right or not banning the "idiots" so they make the right look bad. It seems like you're expecting me to have much more concrete thoughts and feelings around this subject. I don't. I have my experiences, if you're willing to value them then great, if you're the kind of person that thinks anecdotes are useless then our discussion is over. I didn't sit around writing down all the details around everything I ever saw that rubbed me the wrong way over years (nearly a decade now) of internet based discourse. That's to say, I can provide you a lens to look through, I can't make you see anything you don't believe exists. > I'm asking because it sure looks like conservatives are just angry about being downvoted. That's a valid, but very different concern. I am not a conservative. I also think the two are problems likely in the same domain based on what I've read of other replies.
    - 5y ago
screye 5y ago
I'm sorry about that. My keyboard glitched out, so I posted half my comment at that point. Then continued writing it. My bad. I appreciate you putting in effort to reply and find good sources to refute my claims.

kodah 5y ago

With regards to being an IGC, I can say you won't always get banned. In fact, usually it's the folks on the extreme end of the homogenous group that end up doing the enforcement and driving people out. Is it censorship, bullying, harassment, or is this the system working as intended? I guess that's what people have to decide. One anecdotal example I have was from a Slack I was part of years ago. These two men who identified as "allies" went around trying to address what they called "micro-aggressions". At the time they were heavily focused on "gender neutral language". To them, this term was well-defined and solidified because in their group it undoubtedly was. The problem was, the wider community had not decided what "gender neutral language" meant to it. There were outstanding questions like, "Is dude okay?", "am I required to observe this massive list of alternative pronouns?" (at the time, pronouns were much more expansive than they are today). It fell short of low-hanging fruit like not assuming everyone is a man on the internet by default. These folks were pestering and ventured into their own system of micro and macro-aggressions. At one point I remember a Norwegian man was berated and micro-corrected for using the term "ladies". A full on lecture was dumped into a thread where he was trying to tell a story of his own. My chief observation in this specific incident was that not everyone agreed that "ladies" is dated language (including women). This caused people to join camps, the camps fought, and inevitably the primarily tech oriented (and progressive oriented) cultural homogeneity won out, driving out both the people they sought to defeat like actual misogynists but an overwhelming trove of normal people who just didn't agree with specific things. The thing I noted about cultural homogeneity at the time was that it inspires people to think in terms of camps, which makes good people odd bedfellows with bad people (and I mean that on both sides of this particular issue). To this day I do not view "ally" men as trustworthy by default. In other groups I had been a part of similar things happened, but the folks seeking homogeneity attached themselves to Codes of Conduct or Guidelines that became highly prescriptive, and at times, exclusive. They'd seek to moderate one side of this debate but not the other, and with a quickness that was hard to match. They developed a lot of abstract language about systems and power, and ironically enough, used it to boost themselves into power. I've since distanced myself from any group that has overly prescriptive COC's or has a history of them. What makes that interesting is that I'm not someone who opposes gender neutral language, but I disliked how they enforced it. They weren't positive change agents, and they made the assumption everyone who spoke up was an apologist or some more serious label. I hadn't seen these problems for a while, because I really only hang out on specific IRC networks or HN as a result, both of which have fairly reasonable guidelines that prevent a wide spectrum of abuse.

falcrist 5y ago
So are you saying "If your opinions are anywhere right of woke, you get banned straight up." is an incorrect statement? The last comment tried to shift the goalposts from being "banned straight up" to being suppressed through voting. Now you're trying to shift to a sometimes ban... there's also talk about not banning the people on the extreme right or not banning the "idiots" so they make the right look bad. Again, I'm not going to try to hit a moving target. The rest of your comment looks like it's trying to push the conversation off topic. I'm neither asking for anecdotes nor looking for a diatribe about your experience on Slack. A specific claim was made about censorship in a particular subreddit. I've heard that claim before, but never seen it substantiated in any way. Can you substantiate the claim? I'm asking because it sure looks like conservatives are just angry about being downvoted. That's a valid, but very different concern.
- kodah 5y ago
  > So are you saying "If your opinions are anywhere right of woke, you get banned straight up." is an incorrect statement? Yeah, uniform rules are rarely reality. I do think people right of woke get ostracized with fairly regular tempo, sometimes that's bans, sometimes that's through other means. > The last comment tried to shift the goalposts from being "banned straight up" to being suppressed through voting. Now you're trying to shift to a sometimes ban... there's also talk about not banning the people on the extreme right or not banning the "idiots" so they make the right look bad. It seems like you're expecting me to have much more concrete thoughts and feelings around this subject. I don't. I have my experiences, if you're willing to value them then great, if you're the kind of person that thinks anecdotes are useless then our discussion is over. I didn't sit around writing down all the details around everything I ever saw that rubbed me the wrong way over years (nearly a decade now) of internet based discourse. That's to say, I can provide you a lens to look through, I can't make you see anything you don't believe exists. > I'm asking because it sure looks like conservatives are just angry about being downvoted. That's a valid, but very different concern. I am not a conservative. I also think the two are problems likely in the same domain based on what I've read of other replies.
  - 5y ago

screye 5y ago

I'm sorry about that. My keyboard glitched out, so I posted half my comment at that point. Then continued writing it. My bad. I appreciate you putting in effort to reply and find good sources to refute my claims.