Year End Policy Updates and Community Affairs

Djkhaled

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
557
How about you actually do something when people troll in mental health threads? You guys couldn't give a shit and don't even give out warnings.
 

DoradoWinston

Member
Apr 9, 2019
2,133
How about you actually do something when people troll in mental health threads? You guys couldn't give a shit and don't even give out warnings.
mental health related threads 100% need work. What happens in those is just embarrassing.

I personally will never really believe they learn from it before they actually show they are better. The threads on Etika this year were disgusting and the mods did as much as the old lady down the street, thats to say nothing.
 

dreams

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,069
Then maybe we should have a thread for that, because there is no place for it currently. Make that a policy. There are like 20 people in that thread not understanding the ban, are you aware of that?
Then that's their problem. The closing post makes it abundantly clear why he was banned. It's a good ban. Just because you think something racist is funny doesn't mean it's not, in fact, racist. Do you not see in that closing post where they said it made members of Asian-era uncomfortable? Jesus, get a grip. You wanting to feel ok for finding a racist gag funny does not override their right to feel safe here.
 

mnz

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,480
Then that's their problem. The closing post makes it abundantly clear why he was banned. It's a good ban. Just because you think something racist is funny doesn't mean it's not, in fact, racist. Do you not see in that closing post where they said it made members of Asian-era uncomfortable? Jesus, get a grip. You wanting to feel ok for finding a racist gag funny does not override their right to feel safe here.
(I was done with it, I'm only answering because you quoted me, so don't hold that against me)

Of course it's racist, that's the point of that whole scene. Michael is racist. He sucks. That does not mean anyone watching it supports it. In fact, the scene only works when you understand how problematic it is. You're supposed to be against him.
We are talking about The Office here, a tame show compared to Always Sunny, every Netflix stand-up special or even some episodes of Seinfeld or Friends.
You need to understand that when you ban people for that, you are setting a bar for the future. A bar that is more strict than anything I've ever seen in a forum or social media. Liking the jokes of literally the most popular show on Netflix is too far for Resetera is now the new rule and I just can't with that.
 
OP
OP
Mist

Mist

Love & Respect
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
3,045
(I was done with it, I'm only answering because you quoted me, so don't hold that against me)

Of course it's racist, that's the point of that whole scene. Michael is racist. He sucks. That does not mean anyone watching it supports it. In fact, the scene only works when you understand how problematic it is. You're supposed to be against him.
We are talking about The Office here, a tame show compared to Always Sunny, every Netflix stand-up special or even some episodes of Seinfeld or Friends.
You need to understand that when you ban people for that, you are setting a bar for the future. A bar that is more strict than anything I've ever seen in a forum or social media. Liking the jokes of literally the most popular show on Netflix is too far for Resetera is now the new rule and I just can't with that.
Friends is also a popular show and yet it still has problematic scenes that would seem dated at best today if not actually bigoted. The popularity of a show should not prevent people from examining the issues it has. As dreams stated, the reason for the ban is clearly stated in the lock message. He was not banned for simply liking a show, but rather his response to a particular scene. We're fully aware of your argument, but that doesn't change the fact that sometimes jokes can perpetuate racist stereotypes. Would you find it too far for a black member to feel offended at white users laughing at a scene where Michael is in blackface, and they think it's hilarious that he's "unfiltered"? Not to mention that there is something to be said about how the show does not truly hold Michael accountable for his actions, and even sometimes depicts him as someone to sympathise with.

There is a history with these kinds of dehumanising racist depictions that often makes people of colour extremely uncomfortable. The post was reported and discussed by various Asian people in the community and team. We will continue to discuss it with Asian members of the team during the ban review process.

Even if you disagree with the ban, please understand that staging a protest about it in this thread of all places is highly inappropriate and insensitive. If you wish to continue discussing it, you're welcome to reach out to a Mod Captain.
 
OP
OP
Mist

Mist

Love & Respect
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
3,045
When I see staff members, both former and current, talk about how much time they spend moderating the forum and how much of a toll that is or was on them, it does make me wonder if maybe you should have more staff members than you do? Mist mentioned earlier in here that some staff spent their entire day yesterday going through reports, and I feel like if you had more people, then that load could be lightened and perhaps it wouldn't cause you all to spend hours and hours of your day going through reports.

40 staff for over 48,000 members seems like a really low number to me, less than 0.1%, and when I see people saying that they spend most of their days helping to moderate the forum, that makes me worry that you are all burning yourselves out really fast trying to keep up with everything you need to deal with here on a daily basis. This forum is big, tons of posts and threads are made each day, and you're all doing great work keeping up with it as is, but it still doesn't sound healthy to me in the long run, it just seems like a disproportionate amount of stress is being placed on you all to me, and that makes me worry about you.
There's definitely a balancing act involved. If the team is too large, it can be difficult to manage, and there are more chances of slip ups and mistakes as a result. But on the other hand, yes, not enough hands and things can get very taxing, especially over time.

We are actually looking for new members of the team at the moment. Both for perspective and also to help out with activity. We also take whether a new candidate could help with certain timezones into account at times. We've been actively discussing new candidates, so you should hopefully see some new faces on the team in the coming weeks. ^^

Sometimes, though, it isn't so much how many people we have, but certain periods of the year can get very busy, and people also have real life commitments or emergencies that pop up. We also advise everyone on the team to prioritise self care and take breaks when needed. That can be difficult at times when you can see the team and community really needs you, though. But we still try our best to strike a balance.

Also wanted to say, thank you for your concern for the team. I really appreciate it. Love and respect. <3
 
Oct 25, 2017
9,776
Yall probably gotta start banning people for derailing threads with side discussions about the harsher moderation because it's happening in multiple threads already. Shit is annoying.
 

FeistyBoots

Member
Oct 27, 2017
3,348
Southern California
It's pretty remarkable that they've made it 100% clear that they're trying to address site-wide minority treatment on the forum, and we still have people coming into the thread trying to make it about trivial personal bullshit and wanting to micromanage the site staff.

WHAT ABOUT MMMMMMMMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Privileged people can't help but center themselves in every conversation about issues affecting marginalized people. Which is, of course, another way to assert their privilege.

If the privilged could learn to listen instead of making it all about *their* needs, things would be different.
 

Grayson

Banned
Aug 21, 2019
1,248
Should we see a notification when a report we’ve made has had a resoluiron? I’ve see one where a ban has taken place but not if it has been decided that it’s fine.

I have one report in that I cannot see being ignored (poster quoted me and changed my post to a 🤡 in order to ridicule me, then said the mods would laugh at me too).
 

deepFlaw

Member
Oct 25, 2017
15,510
Should we see a notification when a report we’ve made has had a resoluiron? I’ve see one where a ban has taken place but not if it has been decided that it’s fine.

I have one report in that I cannot see being ignored (poster quoted me and changed my post to a 🤡 in order to ridicule me, then said the mods would laugh at me too).
It varies. I’ve had responses saying people would be banned, but also ones saying that they didn’t think it required action. Sometimes basically saying it was unclear, but the report would be noted so that if they did cross a line, it could be used to establish that they had a history of acting that way. And so on. But the majority of my reports don’t get replies; however, it should be said that I am also probably more willing to report things than the average user.

Though... I understand why not every report can get a response, but it can be frustrating to check back on a thread to see if anything was actually done after a day or so and see nothing, along with no reply to the report.
 

Djkhaled

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
557
Mods will happily ban for Port begging but don't give a fuck when someone is being trolled in mental health help threads.
 

Thorn

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
9,371
What is the procedure if you want to bring up a ban you had and wish to discuss it? I feel like I was given a week long ban for "drive by" in a thread whenI saw literally one word replies get ignored.

I didn't want to rock the boat at the time of my banning for fear of it getting extended.
 

Dmax3901

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,551
Privileged people can't help but center themselves in every conversation about issues affecting marginalized people. Which is, of course, another way to assert their privilege.

If the privilged could learn to listen instead of making it all about *their* needs, things would be different.
Yeah like the idea that there's people getting up in arms about that Office thread is so bizarre. Really? That OP is the one you wanna go bat for? Not like they wrote a nuanced, well thought-out response.
 

B-Dubs

Oh well, what the hell?
General Manager
Oct 25, 2017
18,160
First of all, thank you for the new updates and transparency. I know you guys work hard.

I’m sorry but I want to bring this up. I don’t know if this is the right place to state this, but I’ve also noticed a big issue on this forum with toxic cravings for controversial threadbackfires against OPs asking for advice. Why is this a problem? Because the last two times I’ve seen it happen, it’s involved mental health issues. This affects people’s safety. I think when a thread involves mental health issues it warrants some tact and careful moderation and ive been seeing a lack of that.

Last week someone posted that they have borderline personality disorder and their girlfriend left them and they were feeling suicidal. Some posters, instead of offering consolation and deeescalation of suicidal tendencies, decided to interrogate OP about why they broke up, which led to more personal details, which turned into a snowball of people attacking OP and summoning a thread backfire. OP had them admitted he started dating his girlfriend when she was 16 and he was 19. People then started implying he was a predator, even though he explained he lived in a part of Australia where age of consent was 16 and it was irrelevant anyway to the fact that OP was suicidal and this was years later. Now I’m NOT defending any inappropriate physical contact with a minor, it’s just seemed like he appropriately explained that he did nothing wrong and the main priority of the thread was that someone with BPD was suicidal and asking for help *now*. People showed gross ignorance and lack of tact for the OP’s borderline personality disorder. I tried to intervene and defend OP and they thanked me later via PM, but the thread ended up getting locked.



The second time was this week where a frustrated OP announced his friend tried to commit suicide and he was grieving with anger and frustration. Some posters proceeded to call the OP a shitty, selfish friend, and derailed the conversation when OP said from the get go that it was just his personal feelings. Those comments from backlashers were not helpful or relevant, just petty petitions for a thread backfire.


Is there something we can do regarding the toxic culture of people attacking OPs who are mentally ill or looking for help? It’s honestly getting dangerous IMO
While we aren't going to be protecting people from the results of their own actions, we do think that there is more to be done with threads like these. Quite frankly, locks and staff posts should have come sooner than they did and we will be trying to ensure that we act faster in the future.

As far as any bans go, those will depend entirely on the situation in the thread itself. We cannot read every post in every thread, so reporting posts in these, and all, threads, will help us spot potential trouble as it's getting started and hopefully take care of it before it escalates.

I will note, whenever a member mentions that they are suicidal, or we believe they might harm themselves, we always reach out to them in order to make sure they know they matter and will get the help they need. Unfortunately, not everyone will reply to such PMs.

All of this said, a vast majority of these kinds of threads go well and the community does come together to try and help those members who need help.
 

fireflame

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,028
mental health related threads 100% need work. What happens in those is just embarrassing.

I personally will never really believe they learn from it before they actually show they are better. The threads on Etika this year were disgusting and the mods did as much as the old lady down the street, thats to say nothing.
As someone who sometimes posts there but not often, what kind of posts happen? Most of the times I saw fine posts but I guess issues might happen Mental issues are still too frowned upon or seen as a way to get attention or get treated with the worst stereotypes, so I hope those problems don't happen too often...
 

jb1234

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,590
As someone who sometimes posts there but not often, what kind of posts happen? Most of the times I saw fine posts but I guess issues might happen Mental issues are still too frowned upon or seen as a way to get attention or get treated with the worst stereotypes, so I hope those problems don't happen too often...
Basically, this is not a safe forum to let yourself be vulnerable. A good chunk of posters aren't interested in helping you, they just want to be entertained and dissect each post the OP makes in an attempt to cause a thread backfire. It's deeply toxic, I've complained about it before, submitted several warnings and was deeply disappointed when the moderation team locked some of those threads without a word and also didn't do any bans. I am hoping (via B-Dubs post) that this will be addressed better in the future.
 

Dude Abides

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
2,214
What does it mean to “speak over” someone on a message board? In real life, one speaks over someone by interrupting them and talking louder than them. Since neither of those are possible on a message board, where one can make a post as long as one likes there is no such thing as loudness, how does one violate this rule?
 
Oct 25, 2017
9,776
What does it mean to “speak over” someone on a message board? In real life, one speaks over someone by interrupting them and talking louder than them. Since neither of those are possible on a message board, where one can make a post as long as one likes there is no such thing as loudness, how does one violate this rule?
Example
Transperson: Here's why comment xyz is transphobic and offensive.

Asshole: Here's why that doesn't matter as much as the way I feel.
 
What is the procedure if you want to bring up a ban you had and wish to discuss it?
It's in the OP:
There is a formal ban appeal process detailed in the General Guide, and we encourage you to utilise it. Every appeal is reviewed by multiple members of staff. We have already further streamlined and improved the process we use to review appeals in recent weeks. We must also advise that if you choose to publicly misrepresent the reason you were banned, we may need to respond with links to the actual post(s) for which you were banned.
 

DoradoWinston

Member
Apr 9, 2019
2,133
As someone who sometimes posts there but not often, what kind of posts happen? Most of the times I saw fine posts but I guess issues might happen Mental issues are still too frowned upon or seen as a way to get attention or get treated with the worst stereotypes, so I hope those problems don't happen too often...
mental issues are dismissed all the time or played down. Actions one person may take because of said mental issues (of which sometimes are clear af with anyone with any sort of experience) are held off as the person just being shitty or attention seeking when in reality they are even suicidal like Etika.
Overall ResetEra has a pretty shit track record when it comes to talking about mental illness.

As unfortunate as it is ResetEra is not a safe platform to talk about yourself having a mental illness or to talk about someone in the public eye who suffers from it. A lot of users do not wish to help you or see someone for whats actually going on (not everyone but easily the majority), Mods have never shown up at best they just lock the thread until a new one is made because the person kills themselves in which then you see them post "RIP".

Until something unfortunately happens where those threads pop up again and we see mods actually do something, the community actually shift away from blaming and instead understanding I personally wouldnt ever suggest this forum as your first means of being open.

for full transperancy i did make a thread saying i was going through a lot once and asked people for game suggestions, I actually really enjoyed it and the people in it were very kind to myself but also others in the thread. Like I said its not everyone by any means but actions speak louder than words and in that case its obvious those people are unfortunately the minority
 

fireflame

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,028
Would it not be convenient to resort to Sticky threads for suggestions and feedback? One for technical suggestions for example and another for feedback I guess they don't exist because they might become quicky heavy, but this way feedbacks would be visible and easily accessible.
 
Oct 25, 2017
2,923
Hey I just recently got a notification regarding that a post I reported has been taken care of and resolved. Is this a new feature as well? First time I got something like that about a post I reported. Just want to say that I like it as it further helps with open communication from the staff and that ensuring that reports aren’t sometimes just falling on deaf ears (not that I ever personally got that impression).
 

Chaz

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
3,160
Scotland, UK
Great, the one thing this forum needed was more authoritarianism and more ban-happy mods. This is coming from an LGBTQ+ individual, btw. You can create an inclusive environment without stifling any kind of diversity of opinion, civil debate or open-minded out-of-the-box thinking. At this point, I already view this website more as a news site than a proper discussion forum because of how it's being moderated.

That being said, if you're actually serious about unpacking the ban hammer at every instance of sexist and homophobic speech, I expect to see a ban every time someone says "Fuck [company XYZ]". I can't stand that expression. (I wouldn't actually ban people for using it if it were up to me but if that's your methodology of choice, I'd like to see it applied fairly and across the board.)
Is it a bannable offence to agree with this post? Cause holy fuck I couldn't have typed it better myself.

Also, users need to stop crucifying OP's because they don't like the topic of the thread. (Yes I am referring to a recently created topic of mine. Not going to even mention the title incase more people accuse me of 'platforming alt-rights' or something.) Mods are too ban-happy and users are too hostile. Y'all need to chill the fuck out please, god damn.
 

Kyuuji

Member
Nov 8, 2017
9,835
Is it a bannable offence to agree with this post? Cause holy fuck I couldn't have typed it better myself.

Also, users need to stop crucifying OP's because they don't like the topic of the thread. (Yes I am referring to a recently created topic of mine. Not going to even mention the title incase more people accuse me of 'platforming alt-rights' or something.) Mods are too ban-happy and users are too hostile. Y'all need to chill the fuck out please, god damn.
Not a bannable offense but an incredibly tactless post if you have knowledge of the context of the OP.
 
Oct 25, 2017
9,776
Is it a bannable offence to agree with this post? Cause holy fuck I couldn't have typed it better myself.

Also, users need to stop crucifying OP's because they don't like the topic of the thread. (Yes I am referring to a recently created topic of mine. Not going to even mention the title incase more people accuse me of 'platforming alt-rights' or something.) Mods are too ban-happy and users are too hostile. Y'all need to chill the fuck out please, god damn.
You read the OP and thought this was an appropriate contribution to the thread.
 

muteKi

Member
Oct 22, 2018
12,449
a sunken pirate ship
Not a bannable offense but an incredibly tactless post if you have knowledge of the context of the OP.
Poster in question was also not, to my knowledge, banned for the thread in question so it's doubly confusing why it's being brought up here.
(I mean anybody who's followed the games press over the past decade has enough first-hand experience in how it works to not really need to read Chomsky, but you will never see that valid criticism coming from a Breitbarter, especially because they're the ones who have manufactured the consent for the US's current regime...)
 

Primus

Member
Oct 25, 2017
982
I'm not trying to steal focus here from the very legitimate concerns of Minority ERA and LGBTQ+ Era, but I would like to say that the increased focus on moderation going forward also definitely needs to apply to the Gaming side of the house. There are a number of gaming-related topics that bring out their own dedicated cadres of shitposters from post 1, and while staff posts do eventually show up actual warnings and bans are few and far between. Take a look at any thread regarding a Jim Sterling video, the Epic Game Store, or Star Citizen, and you'll find the same posters every time mucking up the threads with the same baseless arguments. It drives off actual discussion and turns threads into piles of flung dung.
 
Last edited:

Deleted member 60729

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 20, 2019
1,410
It’s fun seeing people with no self-awareness reacting negatively to these policy changes.

If you look at these policies and think “great, now I can’t post what I want anymore”, then guess what? You’re part of the problem, not an innocent caught in the crossfire.
 

silkysmooth

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,366
Modding bigots harshly is fine, but all this stuff happening lately magnifies every single decision. People are incredibly restless. Every single day there seems to be a thread featuring a ban that gets locked because half a dozen people are in disbelief that something has lead to a ban. Of course then the threads get locked because they are derailed. There still seems to be little accountability to us, the regular users, when threads are getting locked after a bunch of people are questioning a ban and getting zero actual reply as to why.
 
Oct 25, 2017
6,648
I have a very minor suggestion I would like to make, but as someone who actually reads the General Guide with some frequency (because I try to cite it when making reports) I think it would be handy to have it updated more frequently when changes in the community occur, and maybe some sort of notes on what was recently added or updated like "patch notes."
 

Chaz

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
3,160
Scotland, UK
Poster in question was also not, to my knowledge, banned for the thread in question so it's doubly confusing why it's being brought up here.
(I mean anybody who's followed the games press over the past decade has enough first-hand experience in how it works to not really need to read Chomsky, but you will never see that valid criticism coming from a Breitbarter, especially because they're the ones who have manufactured the consent for the US's current regime...)
I bring it up because I personally feel that: yes it is great that the mod team are reflecting on mistakes, accepting feedback, looking into issues and aiming to improve. I also think the users, the overall community, of Era need to do the same thing. There is so much hostility, snide remarks and overall negative energy going around lately and that thread was a prime example.
it is easy to chill out when you don’t have to worry about what we have to every single day
You're right. Permaban the bigot assholes swiftly. I have always held that position. I recognise that they are the reason that a lot of minority and LGBTQ+ members on Era can't enjoy their time here, I'm not denying that.
You read the OP and thought this was an appropriate contribution to the thread.
Yes. Its on-topic and I can see various members through this thread have had similar feelings to mine. Its nothing I need to be ashamed of.
 
OP
OP
Mist

Mist

Love & Respect
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
3,045
Hey I just recently got a notification regarding that a post I reported has been taken care of and resolved. Is this a new feature as well? First time I got something like that about a post I reported. Just want to say that I like it as it further helps with open communication from the staff and that ensuring that reports aren’t sometimes just falling on deaf ears (not that I ever personally got that impression).
This is not a new feature, but we've been trying to be more consistent with resolution alerts since we've received a fair bit of feedback regarding that. We're looking into technical solutions to streamline the process.

I'm not trying to steal focus here from the very legitimate concerns of Minority ERA and LGBTQ+ Era, but I would like to say that the increased focus on moderation going forward also definitely needs to apply to the Gaming side of the house. There are a number of gaming-related topics that bring out their own dedicated cadres of shitposters from post 1, and while staff posts do eventually show up actual warnings and bans are few and far between. Take a look at any thread regarding a Jim Sterling video, the Epic Game Store, or Star Citizen, and you'll find the same posters every time mucking up the threads with the same baseless arguments. It drives off actual discussion and turns threads into piles of flung dung.
I responded to a similar concern earlier in the thread:

Yes, we will be looking to crack down on toxicity as a whole. We realise that this is a concern in the gaming section, especially as the new generation approaches. It's something that has come up in recent meetings, and we want to keep an eye on this.

This thread is more focused on bigotry, because that is what the overwhelming amount of feedback we've recently received is about, and it's also an issue of great concern. The community relations team however will serve to identify concerns from all over the community. Our initial focus however will be to reach out to various marginalised communities.
So, yeah, while our initial focus is on bigotry as that is such a great concern, we are looking at reducing toxicity as a whole across the forum. I hope that answers your question. ^^

I have a very minor suggestion I would like to make, but as someone who actually reads the General Guide with some frequency (because I try to cite it when making reports) I think it would be handy to have it updated more frequently when changes in the community occur, and maybe some sort of notes on what was recently added or updated like "patch notes."
That's a good suggestion. We do update the General Guide with new policies / changes to policy, but have not had the opportunity to do so since making this thread. I'll pass on your feedback to the rest of the team. 👍
 

Kyuuji

Member
Nov 8, 2017
9,835
You're right. Permaban the bigot assholes swiftly. I have always held that position. I recognise that they are the reason that a lot of minority and LGBTQ+ members on Era can't enjoy their time here, I'm not denying that.
You came in to say a post was so good you 'couldn't have typed it better yourself' when they were equating saying "Fuck Blizzard" to someone posting something homophobic, taking moderators saying they will moderate bigotry more severely and suggesting we should be concerned about reducing 'diversity of thought' as a consequence.

Their post was around moderation, your point seems to be toward the community and less hostility from it. Which is fine, though it would be useful to clarify. More often than not talk of moderating tone has been directed to minorities throughout this, and ongoing. Situations where people should really be assessing what provoked the reaction than pearl-clutching around the reaction itself.
 

Servbot24

User Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
21,804
You're right. Permaban the bigot assholes swiftly. I have always held that position. I recognise that they are the reason that a lot of minority and LGBTQ+ members on Era can't enjoy their time here, I'm not denying that.
How would you personally define a bigot worthy of permabanning? Since there is quite a ranging of behavior, from as bad as using hate speech, to as minor as laughing at an insensitive Chapelle joke. I'm curious to see where people would place that permaban line.

I can say that I have laughed at an insensitive joke. To reference that Office thread again, like almost everyone I have laughed at Michael's behavior because of how wrong it is. I don't really think that makes me a bigot, but I know that there are some who would say I'm a bigot for that.
 

Llyrwenne

Hopes and Dreams SAVE the World
Member
Oct 26, 2017
988
You're right. Permaban the bigot assholes swiftly. I have always held that position. I recognise that they are the reason that a lot of minority and LGBTQ+ members on Era can't enjoy their time here, I'm not denying that.
This thread and the policy updates it details are a response to complaints from the LGBT+ community about a perceived lack of moderation in sensitive threads about issues that affect them.

You came into this thread to agree with a post specifically complaining about staff being too hard on things like sexism and homophobia, a post which equated sexism and homophobia to saying "Fuck [company]", a post made by a user who then doubled down on their previous infractions for defending sexualized depictions of minors and defending blackface costumes and got permanently banned for it.

Whatever point you are trying to make is lost, because you seem ignorant of the context and purpose of this thread and the content of the post you quoted.
 

Apollo

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,240
Since there is quite a ranging of behavior, from as bad as using hate speech, to as minor as laughing at an insensitive Chapelle joke
The gap between these two things may not be as wide as you think. When people tell me laugh at Chapelle’s persistently transphobic jokes, or go out of their way to excuse them because the rest of his stuff appeals to them, that’s sending me the message that my having to deal with transphobia is less important than their being able to laugh at this specific comedian. When I encounter this, it doesn’t matter to me that it’s not hate speech, because it still really really sucks.

Is that worthy of a permaban? Not my place to say, but I do know that I wouldn’t be comfortable interacting in the future with any poster who feels like speaking over the people affected by that kind of humor when they share why it hurts them.
 

Servbot24

User Requested Ban
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
21,804
The gap between these two things may not be as wide as you think. When people tell me laugh at Chapelle’s persistently transphobic jokes, or go out of their way to excuse them because the rest of his stuff appeals to them, that’s sending me the message that my having to deal with transphobia is less important than their being able to laugh at this specific comedian. When I encounter this, it doesn’t matter to me that it’s not hate speech, because it still really really sucks.

Is that worthy of a permaban? Not my place to say, but I do know that I wouldn’t be comfortable interacting in the future with any poster who feels like speaking over the people affected by that kind of humor when they share why it hurts them.
Chapelle is probably not the best example because it often seems like he actually believes the things he's saying which makes him very hard to stomach. So for instance I'll use a lighter example - if I laugh at the wrongness of Dwight Schrute saying that women are bad drivers, I would obviously never defend Dwight on that. But am I a bigot because I laughed (note I am not laughing at women being bad drivers, but at Dwight being an idiot)? If there is an argument where the sides are "They should not have included that joke in the show" vs "It's okay to have that joke in the show, with the understanding Dwight is a sexist", are those who hold the latter view judged to be bigots and worthy of permabans? It's probably clear from my language that I don't think so but I'm curious what people think. (please don't accuse me of just asking questions. i know there are probably phrases that people see as indicative of that but i honestly am not that in tune with internet talk)

To go a step further, we are so far talking about having an emotional response of laughter to misbehavior. I'm curious what range of emotional response to misbehavior should be bannable. A serial killer show depicts horrible violence, murder, and depravity, but often times viewers are intrigued and thrilled in a twisted way. I don't think people should be banned for having that reaction, but maybe someone who has been more affected by violence than I have would disagree.

PS: I keep framing this as about me which is not my intent, the "I" phrasing is just easiest to use in examples of judgement scenarios.
 

Apollo

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
3,240
Chapelle is probably not the best example because it often seems like he actually believes the things he's saying which makes him very hard to stomach. So for instance I'll use a lighter example - if I laugh at the wrongness of Dwight Schrute saying that women are bad drivers, I would obviously never defend Dwight on that. But am I a bigot because I laughed (note I am not laughing at women being bad drivers, but at Dwight being an idiot)? If there is an argument where the sides are "They should not have included that joke in the show" vs "It's okay to have that joke in the show, with the understanding Dwight is a sexist", are those who hold the latter view judged to be bigots and worthy of permabans? It's probably clear from my language that I don't think so but I'm curious what people think. (please don't accuse me of just asking questions. i know there are probably phrases that people see as indicative of that but i honestly am not that in tune with internet talk)

To go a step further, we are so far talking about having an emotional response of laughter to misbehavior. I'm curious what range of emotional response to misbehavior should be bannable. A serial killer show depicts horrible violence, murder, and depravity, but often times viewers are intrigued and thrilled in a twisted way. I don't think people should be banned for having that reaction, but maybe someone who has been more affected by violence than I have would disagree.

PS: I keep framing this as about me which is not my intent, the "I" phrasing is just easiest to use in examples of judgement scenarios.
I don’t think it has to make you a bigot, but we should also recognize that A) not everybody who watches it will come to the same conclusion, so some will walk away emboldened by the supposed “humor” expressed by the characters we’re supposed to be laughing at and B) even if it’s mean to be ironic, it does not change the fact that at the source of the humor is an idea birthed from real life issues that cause real life hurt. These are extremely valid reasons for people to be upset about this sort of thing, and it only gets worse when people on the internet get on your case for being “too sensitive”. We’re allowed to have opinions on this stuff, and unless you’re apart of a group who’s directly affected by the media in question, it’s not your place to talk over us and/or tell us how to feel. Doing so is usually going to be worth a ban in my book.

A lot of the issues over the past few months that led to this situation are notable for not being what one might call outright bigotry- as it turns out, there are a lot of ways people can cause hurt and make a space totally uncomfortable for people, even without resorting to hate speech.
 

ibrahima

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
1,563
I had a question about the verified member program as it doesn’t seem clear at times how it works. I hope this can be considered as part of the policy updates that are being undertaken at the moment.


The original post advised that verified members would have a title like ‘developer at X’ or ‘community manager at Y’ but I’ve noticed there are a number of verified members who either have no tag or one that doesn’t give a good indication of who they work for.

Can I ask what the expectations are for this? I’m aware that at times this has created confusion amongst members as they’ve taken a verified member’s title to indicate that they work for ResetEra rather than work for a specific company or organisation in the video game industry. It would really help avoid this kind of confusion if the format of the tags was more in line with the suggested format from the original announcement.

There is a wider question as to why a member would want to have a verified tag but not disclose who they work for, is there a better way of managing that than what is currently being done?
 

Aomame

Member
Oct 27, 2017
350
I do have a question about issues that were raised in some of the threads started by TransEra, specifically transparency. I feel folks have requested moderators signing off on their infractions and bans, but I think the explanation that these disciplinary actions are decided by a team is sufficient. I also understand not wanting to open the deciding mods to harassment. However, I did see folks asking for a public record of a user's past infractions, akin to what you see here. I understand not wanting to shame people for their past behavior (perhaps you could hide actions older than a year old or something?), but it's also helpful to know if you're interacting with someone who has a history of bad faith posting or bigoted behavior.
Can I get a response from the staff on this? I'm not looking for "yes we will definitely implement this system immediately," I just want to know whether it has been discussed (and to what end) or if it was tabled (and why). It was a very popular suggestion in the original threads on the issue.
 

The Woods

The way out is through
Administrator
Oct 25, 2017
4,450
I had a question about the verified member program as it doesn’t seem clear at times how it works. I hope this can be considered as part of the policy updates that are being undertaken at the moment.


The original post advised that verified members would have a title like ‘developer at X’ or ‘community manager at Y’ but I’ve noticed there are a number of verified members who either have no tag or one that doesn’t give a good indication of who they work for.

Can I ask what the expectations are for this? I’m aware that at times this has created confusion amongst members as they’ve taken a verified member’s title to indicate that they work for ResetEra rather than work for a specific company or organisation in the video game industry. It would really help avoid this kind of confusion if the format of the tags was more in line with the suggested format from the original announcement.

There is a wider question as to why a member would want to have a verified tag but not disclose who they work for, is there a better way of managing that than what is currently being done?
Hello ibrahima, thanks for raising this question.

The point of the Verified member program is so that users can more easily know who industry professionals are, and identify those who may have information relevant to the conversation. However, privacy is also a concern, so we allow these folk to choose how specific their custom tag is. So, while we want people to know that these members can be trusted to have an informed perspective on certain topics, we do have to think about their own privacy and comfort.
 

B-Dubs

Oh well, what the hell?
General Manager
Oct 25, 2017
18,160
Can I get a response from the staff on this? I'm not looking for "yes we will definitely implement this system immediately," I just want to know whether it has been discussed (and to what end) or if it was tabled (and why). It was a very popular suggestion in the original threads on the issue.
This has been something we've discussed at length when the community raises these concerns and suggestions, but every time we come to the same conclusion. As you note, the reason we do not make infraction histories public is so that users don't abuse the information. Part of what we're looking to do is cut into toxicity on the site. A gigantic part of that is harsher bans on those engaging in bigotry, but part of that is also individuals who would weaponize prior bans in order to attack people they simply do not like. This is something we have seen occur from time to time already, people taking unrelated bans into threads in order to dismiss someone's argument or position (for example someone gets warned for trolling on gaming side and it's used to attack them in other threads), and it's something that isn't really healthy for the site. We would essentially be making it easier for users to bully each other. We don't want to propagate things like this, so while it might be good for some users, we believe it will be a net negative for the site as a whole.