2024-AT-09: Staff and Mandemon - Upheld

Status
Not open for further replies.
RadiantPhoenix said:
Under the circumstances, I can sorta see why mandemon felt the need to be so defensive.

Perhaps SV should have a recommended reading list for learning de-escalatory posting skills.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Frankly Mandemon's post is what it is but I will not let people completely weaponize thoughtful comments about the nature of societal biases in order to try and score points against two members of staff, including one in my department. That post was a completely out of context snipe with readdily apparent context in both cases, and if they cared they would have actually tried to explore this alleged double standard not used it to dunk on people. Think what you will of my post this will not turn into a free fire zone on staff.
 
SerGregness said:
To clarify, I'm not trying to excuse transphobia, more referring to the linguistic masking. "Holy shit what if he had been as blunt as calling someone a smug cunt is". The tribunals regularly hit people for less than that. Not trying to excuse Mandemon, but do two wrongs make a right here?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Honestly calling someone a smug cunt would have been far preferable, imo.
 
SerGregness said:
To clarify, I'm not trying to excuse transphobia, more referring to the linguistic masking. "Holy shit what if he had been as blunt as calling someone a smug cunt is". The tribunals regularly hit people for less than that. Not trying to excuse Mandemon, but do two wrongs make a right here?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I should hope the difference in severity between hate speech and crass language is not something that needs explaining.
 
Hologram Killer said:
SV rules don't work that way. You don't get a free pass to say what you want just because you believe other people are also being unreasonable. The best de-escalatory technique is called taking a break instead of continuing to argue. No amount of recommended reading will change the fact that sometimes the best thing to do is log-off.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Understandable does not mean good or acceptable.

It means that it is understandable, which means we can consider how things got that way, and whether we can create systems that will make it less likely to reoccur in the future.

Such as by having a resource list that SV's posters, including mandemon, can take advantage of to learn more skills that will allow them to contribute to creating a less-hostile environment on SV.
 
I believe the best way to proceed would be to create a Private Message group that they can take advantage of in order to understand how best to contribute to SV's rules and be infracted less often.
 
RadiantPhoenix said:
Such as by having a resource list that SV's posters, including mandemon, can take advantage of to learn more skills that will allow them to contribute to creating a less-hostile environment on SV.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It would especially useful to have full list of "dog whistles", because it feels like everything is a dog whistle, no matter how careful you try to be. Especially if you use wording that apparently is a dog whistle, people instantly jump to "This was all planned by you from the several pages ago, this was all part of the plan!"

The Laurent said:
I believe the best way to proceed would be to create a Private Message group that they can take advantage of in order to understand how best to contribute to SV's rules and be infracted less often.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Considering how well that went for SB, I kinda doubt it. Personally would much more prefer open source that can be checked at anytime.
 
RadiantPhoenix said:
Such as by having a resource list that SV's posters, including mandemon, can take advantage of to learn more skills that will allow them to contribute to creating a less-hostile environment on SV.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I think that this is an interesting proposal, the problem is that while some posters genuinely might benefit from it, bad faith actors would skew the experience and use it as a tool to toe the line or even farther. I am not saying mandemon is one of that group I do not know his heart of hearts, but it would be too valid a concern to touch imo
 
our main resources for showing people what we consider to be unacceptable dog whistles are staff notices and infractions, both of which are extremely minor penalties that take a long time to amount to anything of notable consequence besides being corrected. my experience in dealing with users encountering these suggests that creating a single vocab list would just invite abstract arguments about the list, which does not reach anyone's goals.
 
Mandemon said:
It would especially useful to have full list of "dog whistles", because it feels like everything is a dog whistle, no matter how careful you try to be.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Those don't work for the same reason why the rules don't lay out specific examples for a lot of things. Its far too easy to abuse that to toe the line in practice, even if some people could genuinely have a usecase for it.
 
Also I don't think a list of every dogwhistle is really a feasible resource to produce and maintain. Probably not fun to have to write out, either.
 
RadiantPhoenix said:
Understandable does not mean good or acceptable.

It means that it is understandable, which means we can consider how things got that way, and whether we can create systems that will make it less likely to reoccur in the future.

Such as by having a resource list that SV's posters, including mandemon, can take advantage of to learn more skills that will allow them to contribute to creating a less-hostile environment on SV.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

SV has no obligation to save people from their own stupidity. If they can't understand the staff plainly and simply laying out how their language was offensive and/or disruptive and how to avoid further penalties, it's on them.

And like, Google exists. Why is the onus on the staff to create some kind of educational program for people who can't even do the literal bare minimum of self-examination?

*EDIT* Also like again the stakes here are embarrassingly low here, like oh no they can't post in one thread for three days

heaven forfend
 
Last edited:
khan2012 said:
Especially since part of the problem is dogwhistles change and update over time. Such a list would have to be regularly maintained.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The ok emoji was a white supremacist dogwhistle until it wasn't to list one example not to mention the terms that can be problematic or not entirely depending on context the fact that this can look innocuous without knowing specific context is the entire point which inherently complicates the exercise
 
Last edited:
Arthur Frayn said:
SV has no obligation to save people from their own stupidity. If they can't understand the staff plainly and simply laying out how their language was offensive and/or disruptive and how to avoid further penalties, it's on them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

And when people refuse to explain the issue? Such as my supposed "spirited defense" of misogyny?

Arthur Frayn said:
And like, Google exists. Why is the onus on the staff to create some kind of educational program for people who can't even do the literal bare minimum of self-examination?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I used Google. Look where it has landed us. Apparently, when Finland adopted self-identification it was actually dog whistle to deny transpeople exists.

Arthur Frayn said:
*EDIT* Also like again the stakes here are embarrassingly low here, like oh no they can't post in one thread for three days
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's... not the issue here. Like at all. Especially when the thread was shut down completly.
 
"Full list of well-known euphemisms used to avoid responsibility for one's words by relying on the euphemism's obscurity" is an oxymoron, anyway.
 
Mandemon said:
I did not edit it in, it was originally there. Care to actually provide evidence that I had edited in my post in some grand conspiracy move? This is a second post that claims I am some sort of grand mastermind who setup all this in advance.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I am going to add that this is correct. I suspect this is fuzzy memories, not conspiracy, but the phrase was present in mandemon's posts from the beginning; this is something staff can and does regularly check when looking at infractions and appeals.
 
Mandemon said:
I used Google. Look where it has landed us. Apparently, when Finland adopted self-identification it was actually dog whistle to deny transpeople exists..
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Going to be like the eighth person to say this: the problem is not gender self-identification. The problem is when you specify 'self-identified woman' you are (intentionally or not!) implying that 'woman' without this clarification does not include trans women. Ditto for men. That's the issue.

The fact you yourself said you would have just used "women" and "men" were trans people not involved in the discussion plays into that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top