• We are delighted to introduce GiftBot 2.0, the next generation of our popular gifting feature. To celebrate, we'll be giving away some incredible prizes over the coming weeks in one big Giveaway Extravaganza!

CNN: New evidence suggests Jussie Smollett orchestrated attack (Check Threadmarks / Staff Posts) (UPDATE: Now a suspect)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Burrman

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,253
Eh I can't get on with that Trevor Noah video.

A healthy degree of scepticism is not at all the same as just latching onto anything that confirms your biases.

I don't think it's particularly constructive to conflate people who would never take the side of someone presenting as a victim of homophobic and racist hate crimes as having the same mentality as people engaging in good faith rational critical thought. I'm sceptical of everything, I don't just believe everything I read and hear about any subject, and in this instance and in many other instances this is often the correct course of action.

I'm happy to believe victims, up until the point where their story is illogical, inconsistent or otherwise counter intuitive. My default position is to believe victims, but when things don't add up, I'm going to use my brain to analyse the facts, rather than just switch off critical thinking entirely just because they have presented as a victim.
Good post. I was very skeptical of the story but was scared to post how I felt, so I didnt engage in the discussion. I thought I would get banned. If plenty of people here felt the same way there is no discussion. And everything is a hive mind
 

Burrman

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,253
That doesn't excuse how willing people were to accept the story as the truth without some proper examination of what the details of the story actually was. There should be a separate thread just on that aspect alone, as a bunch of people got canned and shamed for even daring to not rationalize the story due to it not passing the sniff test. Discourse on this issue here was basically not allowed until the later reveal details of the story confirmed the initial inconsistencies and improbabilities of the story.
Ya I feel there should be a thread on this.
 

.Detective.

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,151
Good post. I was very skeptical of the story but was scared to post how I felt, so I didnt engage in the discussion. I thought I would get banned. If plenty of people here felt the same way there is no discussion. And everything is a hive mind
I have a question about this. Were there actually that many bans given out, since this whole topic of conversation began? I haven't read through the entire thread myself, but was kind of curious on whether we have had any similar scenarios on ERA where someone's initial thoughts were believed to be outright negative to the subject matter, but later looked at differently when further context was brought into the picture.

And from a Mod perspective, how do you manage that?
 

Burrman

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,253
I have a question about this. Were there actually that many bans given out, since this whole topic of conversation began? I haven't read through the entire thread myself, but was kind of curious on whether we have had any similar scenarios on ERA where someone's initial thoughts were believed to be outright negative to the subject matter, but later looked at differently when further context was brought into the picture.

And from a Mod perspective, how do you manage that?
I haven't read through through this whole thread or the previous but I'm I've seen a a few questionable bans when the attack first happened. Some posters were victim blaming but others were legit skeptical. As much as I wanted to post, I held off for fear of a ban. There's a couple other threads where I found myself in the same situation.
 

fatty

Member
Oct 27, 2017
123
Trevor Noah continues to be one of the smartest voices of reason on TV

I don’t watch Daily Show much but that was a well stated piece by Trevor Noah.

I have a question about this. Were there actually that many bans given out, since this whole topic of conversation began? I haven't read through the entire thread myself, but was kind of curious on whether we have had any similar scenarios on ERA where someone's initial thoughts were believed to be outright negative to the subject matter, but later looked at differently when further context was brought into the picture.

And from a Mod perspective, how do you manage that?
There were quite a few bans in the original thread. To answer your question, There have been other scenarios, the thread about Chipotle firing the manager for making customers pay first comes to mind.

Main thread

TLDR
 

NervousXtian

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,099
BTW, I think a lot of the issue is that people take the whole statement of "Believe (insert person/people/etc)" meaning you need to take what they say as truth - fullstop... when it really means you need to listen to people and not just wholly dismiss what they say because of who they are.
 

Watchtower

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,190
As much as we can criticize the original story as presented for being too cartoonish, the story as it has currently developed sounds equally cartoonish to me.

Because this is now the story of a well-to-do black celebrity who decided, seemingly at random, that he wanted the sympathy of a MAGA victim. And when his initial attempt at staging a fake anthrax scare failed, he paid two Nigerian dudes to pretend to be two white dudes as they beat him up, poured bleach on him, wrapped a noose around his for kicks, and topped off with "MAGA country". And his hope was that Chicago PD would just shrug, find two random innocent white dudes, arrest them for committing a hate crime, and call it a day. And the only reasons I can think of as to why he thought this was a good idea was because he wanted to be a martyr against Trump and maybe get an anti-lynching bill named after him or something.

At this point I'm half-expecting him to accuse the Nigerian brothers of sexually assaulting him. Y'know, just to make this every MAGA idiot's worse nightmare.
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,599
I don’t watch Daily Show much but that was a well stated piece by Trevor Noah.



There were quite a few bans in the original thread. To answer your question, There have been other scenarios, the thread about Chipotle firing the manager for making customers pay first comes to mind.

Main thread

TLDR
Jesus, some of the mod posts in there...

We’re all human and knee-jerk reactions are natural, but I guess I always assumed part of the duty of being a mod is to be above the fray.

Not being critical. Just surprised.
 

julian

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,402
He's like 36 years old. His youth was spent.
HOW DARE YOU!

I have a question about this. Were there actually that many bans given out, since this whole topic of conversation began? I haven't read through the entire thread myself, but was kind of curious on whether we have had any similar scenarios on ERA where someone's initial thoughts were believed to be outright negative to the subject matter, but later looked at differently when further context was brought into the picture.

And from a Mod perspective, how do you manage that?
Some of the permanent bans I saw were posters who were banned a few days and then who came back, bitched about the mods and wouldn’t drop the subject. At that point, you’re kind of asking for it.....insert victim blaming joke here.
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,599
As much as we can criticize the original story as presented for being too cartoonish, the story as it has currently developed sounds equally cartoonish to me.

Because this is now the story of a well-to-do black celebrity who decided, seemingly at random, that he wanted the sympathy of a MAGA victim. And when his initial attempt at staging a fake anthrax scare failed, he paid two Nigerian dudes to pretend to be two white dudes as they beat him up, poured bleach on him, wrapped a noose around his for kicks, and topped off with "MAGA country". And his hope was that Chicago PD would just shrug, find two random innocent white dudes, arrest them for committing a hate crime, and call it a day. And the only reasons I can think of as to why he thought this was a good idea was because he wanted to be a martyr against Trump and maybe get an anti-lynching bill named after him or something.

At this point I'm half-expecting him to accuse the Nigerian brothers of sexually assaulting him. Y'know, just to make this every MAGA idiot's worse nightmare.
That’s the weirdest thing about this, I think.

If you told me Smollett’s story when it first came out and pointed out all the inconsistencies, and then I somehow knew the actual story and told you everything we’ve found out so far, his made up story would sound far more believable.

Truth really is stranger than fiction.
 

BlueBomberX

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,471
I have to say that when they post things like this, as in after X point in thread X action will no longer be tolerated, it really should also be edited it into the OP. A post half way down page 11 is going to be missed by a lot of people in a 20 page thread. People read the OP, they skim, check the latest page to see how the discussion evolved, and I'm sure a few people will actually read 50 pages before making a post. But really, something like that is easily missed.
 
Last edited:

flkRaven

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,091
i laugh at all the people that at first sided with him without looking at all the facts. ridiculous times.
As stated earlier in the thread, in an effort to ensure victims aren't ignored some have gotten to the point of outright believe everything, immediately, at face value. Everyone should be listened to and heard, but everything should be thought of critically and (ideally) without bias.

If you don't grab a pitch fork and join the fight, it's presumed you have an agenda and can't be trusted (or are warned and banned)
 

flkRaven

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,091
I have to say that when you post things like this, as in after X point in thread X action will no longer be tolerated, you really should also edit it into the OP. A post half way down page 11 is going to be missed by a lot of people in a 20 page thread. People read the OP, they skim, check the lastest page to how the discussion evovled, and I'm sure a few people will actually read 50 pages before making a post. But really, something like that is easily missed.
I agree. There is this new thing where there are "staff posts" you can click but it never works for me on mobile. Likewise, I also find the "we can can't talk about X anymore" to be over used, especially on a web forum built to promote discussion.
 

spam musubi

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,733
As stated earlier in the thread, in an effort to ensure victims aren't ignored some have gotten to the point of outright believe everything, immediately, at face value. Everyone should be listened to and heard, but everything should be thought of critically and (ideally) without bias.

If you don't grab a pitch fork and join the fight, it's presumed you have an agenda and can't be trusted (or are warned and banned)
When fake incidents are so rare yet every real incident has tons of alt right trolls polluting the conversation, it's not that hard to understand why people err on the side of caution. The question is why does this seem to bother some people so much since it's such an insanely rare case.
 

flkRaven

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,091
When fake incidents are so rare yet every real incident has tons of alt right trolls polluting the conversation, it's not that hard to understand why people err on the side of caution. The question is why does this seem to bother some people so much since it's such an insanely rare case.
How many alt right people are on era, really?
 

BlueBomberX

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,471
I agree. There is this new thing where there are "staff posts" you can click but it never works for me on mobile. Likewise, I also find the "we can can't talk about X anymore" to be over used, especially on a web forum built to promote discussion.
See, I didn't even know that was a feature. I guess that's on me though.

But really, my position on this place and serious discussions is to, for the most part, stay out of them. Sometimes bans come from weird angles (Ever read a ban reason and been like, "huh, good to know?"). You really shouldn't feel you can't discuss things on a discussion forum.
 

Sarek

Member
Oct 27, 2017
153
Just because they don't last long doesn't mean they don't flood in droves with alt/burner accounts whenever something controversial happens

And we have a ton of centrists that like to walk a real thin line
What do centrist have to do with alt-right? Your post makes it sound like the political spectrum is left - centre - alt-right
 

Phonzo

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,335
Just because they don't last long doesn't mean they don't flood in droves with alt/burner accounts whenever something controversial happens

And we have a ton of centrists that like to walk a real thin line
Centrist that walk a real thin line? So if a centrist dont agree with your pov then they are walking a thin line huh? Probably then can claim they might as well be alt right
 
Oct 25, 2017
15,588
Too bad the original thread is locked because some of those that are oddly silent now really need to hear this.
They'd just ignore it or claim Trevor is "both sides-ing" it. That was a really good piece by him though.
i laugh at all the people that at first sided with him without looking at all the facts. ridiculous times.
I made the original thread. I had no reason to believe he was lying at the time. I'm not being "oddly silent." What can I say? These kind of stories aren't fabricated on a regular basis. And now the right gets to spike the football while the rest of us snipe at each other for reacting like a human being in, as the banned poster called them, ridiculous times.

So yes, hilarious.
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,599
See, I didn't even know that was a feature. I guess that's on me though.

But really, my position on this place and serious discussions is to, for the most part, stay out of them. Sometimes bans come from weird angles (Ever read a ban reason and been like, "huh, good to know?"). You really shouldn't feel you can't discuss things on a discussion forum.
This is where I honestly feel for the mods. On one hand, sensitive stories involving people belonging to historically disenfranchised groups require a watchful eye when people try to squirt their shitty little dog-whistles and winks into their posts without giving away their true intentions (the “I’m just sayin’” or “Just asking questions” shit).

On the other hand, stories that have major inconsistencies or problems should be open to discussion, IMO.

But when those two topics intersect, what can you do? If it’s too open, racists and homophobes (as rare as we may like to believe they are on this website) will post their thinly-disguised horseshit with aplomb because they know they can just fall back on saying they’re “playing airchair detective” like everyone else. But if it’s too closed down, it’s a circle-jerk where anybody who dares give an opinion that doesn’t line up exactly with the majority gets shouted down, insulted, or possibly banned.

Play it safe or leave it open.

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
 

SapientWolf

Member
Nov 6, 2017
2,988
I'd say any time any news comes down you should try to look at it from an unbiased perspective. When you just took a step back and read the supposed details of this story i'd argue that things just didn't make sense. It's too over the top. Just like during the 2008 election when that girl claimed that she was robbed by a big black dude, then then he held her down and carved a B into her cheek and then told her, 'You're going to be a Barack supporter now'. You didn't even need to see the fact that the B was backwards to know that was bullshit.
The thing that muddied the waters was how brutal other racial and homophobic attacks have been in the recent past. Typically far more violent than politically motivated attacks. I thought it seemed over the top until I started reading up on similar occurrences and then I had nothing to say.
 

RedMercury

Member
Dec 24, 2017
8,355
I have to say that when they post things like this, as in after X point in thread X action will no longer be tolerated, it really should also be edited it into the OP. A post half way down page 11 is going to be missed by a lot of people in a 20 page thread. People read the OP, they skim, check the latest page to see how the discussion evolved, and I'm sure a few people will actually read 50 pages before making a post. But really, something like that is easily missed.
It says to check the threadmarks in the title, you just click "staff posts" in the lower right side (I don't know if it's the same for mobile) and it takes you right to it. I agree though that red text in the OP in addition to the threadmark is helpful though, but then that assumes people read the OP which a lot of times they don't haha, regardless in this instance it's pretty impossible to miss it with it being part of the title.
 
Oct 28, 2017
7,307
This is where I honestly feel for the mods. On one hand, sensitive stories involving people belonging to historically disenfranchised groups require a watchful eye when people try to squirt their shitty little dog-whistles and winks into their posts without giving away their true intentions (the “I’m just sayin’” or “Just asking questions” shit).

On the other hand, stories that have major inconsistencies or problems should be open to discussion, IMO.

But when those two topics intersect, what can you do? If it’s too open, racists and homophobes (as rare as we may like to believe they are on this website) will post their thinly-disguised horseshit with aplomb because they know they can just fall back on saying they’re “playing airchair detective” like everyone else. But if it’s too closed down, it’s a circle-jerk where anybody who dares give an opinion that doesn’t line up exactly with the majority gets shouted down, insulted, or possibly banned.

Play it safe or leave it open.

Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

Leave the topic open and allow the weeds to show themselves so they can be pulled. One of the reasons I listen to the enemy's broadcast (for as long as I can stand it) is to hear how they think. It helps me in real life when I here people at work reciting the same rhetoric I hear on the radio, they dont expect me to know the keywords. I think the things that make ERA work is the underlying respect most of us have for each other and although I disagree often, its never without respect to the topic or the person(s). Those who move with that respect will get the hammer soon enough.



I do not envy the mods and having to decipher prejudices online from a few phrases, shit sounds impossible.
 

Kreed

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,654

A source tells CBS News that a last-minute phone call might have kept the case against "Empire" star Jussie Smollett from going to a grand jury. The actor claims he was the victim of a racist and homophobic attack last month, as he walked home in the middle of the night.
 

entremet

User requested ban
Banned
Oct 26, 2017
16,018

A source tells CBS News that a last-minute phone call might have kept the case against "Empire" star Jussie Smollett from going to a grand jury. The actor claims he was the victim of a racist and homophobic attack last month, as he walked home in the middle of the night.
Quickly becoming a boy who cried wolf situation now.
 

Jimmyfenix

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,134
Seriously just edit staff posts in the OP since this magical threadmark system is borderline broken on mobile or when it actually works you need to scroll down a page to find the staff post

It isn't rocket science more people will see it on the first page in the op
 

FaceHugger

Member
Oct 27, 2017
7,510
Trevor Noah continues to be one of the smartest voices of reason on TV


Also side note, but if you're all not following the "Between The Scenes" segments from the Daily Show, you're really missing out. They're impomptu conversations he has with the audience between taping, and it's frequently smarter, more insightful, and funnier than most commentary on TV

And I actually don't watch the actual Daily Show that much. But i've pretty much watched the majority of his Between the Scenes stuff

Here's the playlist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3vm7xmQ37s&list=PLeskMkEaHJYfIUSU8jfEQ45x7qP4_pzl9

If I could I'd post a separate thread about them with some of my favorites, as they're so good
Man, why was Noah never this insightful during the actual show when I still watched? That was just as good as Stewart there. I'll have to check out these Between the Scenes deals.
 

Wackamole

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,583
Trevor Noah continues to be one of the smartest voices of reason on TV

Yeah he's a smart guy. He's right.

Edit: wait, nobody watches Trevor? Weird to see all these disclaimers: "well i don't watch him but.." Is he considered unfunny or something or unsmart? Or is the pain of Stewart leaving still too big (he was amazing, i agree)? Cause Trevor Noah is good.
 

Deleted member 888

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,361
Putting "READ OP" on like every single topic that diverges from arguing about game reviews is just such an archaic way to handle a conversation. I'm not saying you can't do it, or the thread bookmarks, but this place really comes across like a class school room at times.

If the forum is going to ask about 30 mods to steer the ship, then if you want a more natural way of handling things mods should (most of the time) simply be quoting posters and engaging. Either telling someone to stop something/explain further and so on.

Just banning everything is incredibly "lazy" at times. Outside of clear alt-accounts/burner accounts. And yes, I understand not being happy with victim blaming or the just asking questions the second this was reported, but on the other hand, will there be any self-reflection at all from what gets coined as "ban honeypots" like this event? It is okay at times for mods to hit the post reply button, rather than the moderate button.

Even I thought this sounded comically evil from the start, but I kept my mouth shut and just looked on hoping your cops would either find who done it or find out what happened. Only then did I comment. But in hindsight, I ain't going to sit here and lie and say on initial reporting my brain didn't think "Jesus, that sounds both horrific and comically evil". From the start, there were one or two details that seemed over the top given the time, weather, surroundings (heavy Democrat area) and reporting. None of that meant you had to 100% believe it was lies, but it was natural to think/articulate your thoughts stating some of the reporting was intense/strange.

Of course, some of that was down to the terrible gossip like reporting telling the public something different every 2 seconds.
 
Last edited:

Ferulci

Member
Oct 31, 2017
187
Trevor Noah continues to be one of the smartest voices of reason on TV


Also side note, but if you're all not following the "Between The Scenes" segments from the Daily Show, you're really missing out. They're impomptu conversations he has with the audience between taping, and it's frequently smarter, more insightful, and funnier than most commentary on TV

And I actually don't watch the actual Daily Show that much. But i've pretty much watched the majority of his Between the Scenes stuff

Here's the playlist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3vm7xmQ37s&list=PLeskMkEaHJYfIUSU8jfEQ45x7qP4_pzl9

If I could I'd post a separate thread about them with some of my favorites, as they're so good
I don't always agree with Trevor but this is a brillant statement. Putting aside the Jussie Smollett thing (we'll see what new evidence reveals), we have to be careful to not become like the one we are fighting.
 

blinky

Attempted to circumvent ban with an alt account
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
1,329
Just because they don't last long doesn't mean they don't flood in droves with alt/burner accounts whenever something controversial happens

And we have a ton of centrists that like to walk a real thin line
It says something about this forum that being a centrist is seen as living dangerously.
 

Boxxy

Member
Oct 30, 2017
601
BTW, I think a lot of the issue is that people take the whole statement of "Believe (insert person/people/etc)" meaning you need to take what they say as truth - fullstop... when it really means you need to listen to people and not just wholly dismiss what they say because of who they are.
Believe =/= Active Listening, so it's understandable if people are confused.

Sigh I hate hashtags for serious topics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.