Harassment in gaming

[S'mon]

I'm a little confused. Are you including people who are being harassed in "the crazies?"

People who claim - and in some sense believe - they've been harrassed when they haven't really, and people who grotesquely exaggerate minor incidents, could count as crazy in my book. I guess people who claim that all such claims should be believed, no matter how seemingly improbable, and race/gender groups condemned on that basis, could also be considered crazy. I tend to think they are mostly just bad, not mad, though the more radical ones may be somewhat disturbed.

 

[Springheel]

In a literal sense, yes. But, the fact remains that our culture still generally believes in taking matters into your own hands on occasion - our love of Batman, superheroes, and rogue cops who go outside the law when they have to are indicative - so you can expect that some folks will feel it is okay to do so.

Which says absolutely nothing about whether it actually IS okay to do so, as you implied when you first used it as an example.

Some folks apparently "feel it is okay" to grope cosplayers, but we don't condone that.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

I also think many of realize that we wouldn't be having this discussion if the language in the provoking article wasn't so inflammatory

Or, she could learn to write persuasively _without_ using such cheap and bigoted rhetoric.

I, for one, was turned off by her use of terms like "coward" and "white male terrorist." What I found persuasive were the incidents she mentioned. They raised my passion about this issue. They would have been even more persuasive if she had provided ways to fact check them. Her use of cheap and inflammatory rhetoric raises my suspicion that those incidents are made up. They make her text less persuasive.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Or, she could learn to write persuasively _without_ using such cheap and bigoted rhetoric.

I, for one, was turned off by her use of terms like "coward" and "white male terrorist." What I found persuasive were the incidents she mentioned. They raised my passion about this issue. They would have been even more persuasive if she had provided ways to fact check them. Her use of cheap and inflammatory rhetoric raises my suspicion that those incidents are made up.

You're still stuck there? Repeating myself:

The issue ISN'T about her ability to write well. Dismissing the validity of her claims or choosing not to engage in a discussion of them on the merits because of the relative skill with which she makes the claim is a logical fallacy.

If you saw a woman running down the street chased by a hockey-masked, machete wielding man, and she was just uttering an inarticulate, wordless scream, would you sit there and say, "Well, she could have phrased that better..."?

And the lack of verifiability in a great number of these incidents is part of the issue.. How does one prove a barely heard comment, a quick grope in a crowd or a verbal chant in public where the only one not chanting is the victim?

 

[cmad1977]

Or, she could learn to write persuasively _without_ using such cheap and bigoted rhetoric.

I, for one, was turned off by her use of terms like "coward" and "white male terrorist." What I found persuasive were the incidents she mentioned. They raised my passion about this issue. They would have been even more persuasive if she had provided ways to fact check them. Her use of cheap and inflammatory rhetoric raises my suspicion that those incidents are made up. They make her text less persuasive.

Because what's important isn't the message it's the tone!
Seriously though... If you aren't tough enough to see through some harsh words it's possible they apply.

 

[tomBitonti]

Because what's important isn't the message it's the tone!
Seriously though... If you aren't tough enough to see through some harsh words it's possible they apply.

This issue has been raised several times, with the response Being to look past the words used to the core issue.

We can do both: Looking at the words used and saying that the message could have been delivered better is possible while at the same time accepting that harassment is a problem and working to reduce it. One doesn't have to do only one and not do the other.

Also, the complaint isn't just about tone. The complaint is about accuracy. A person can reasonably look at a message and try to figure out how true it is. Given the vast quantity of misinformation which abounds on the net, having a strong filter seems necessary.

Another complaint (which I previously made) is that the message uses a number of techniques to play rough with emotions. Going for a strong emotional response while sidestepping reason. To go "hey wait a sec" doesn't seem unreasonable.

Edit: One response has been to say, "ok, so while not literally true, we can look aside and see that such events occur with enough frequency that we ought to look past the lack of literal truth". Sure, but this seems to be a very dangerous mode in which to operate. It is very easy to substitute what one believes to be true for actual truth. One has to ground reason in knowledge which is much more concrete.

Thx!
TomB

 

[Darkwing Duck]

The issue ISN'T about her ability to write well.

As long as people are excusing away her use of inflammatory and bigoted accusations on her ability to write persuasively, such as MechaPilot did here

I also think many of realize that we wouldn't be having this discussion if the language in the provoking article wasn't so inflammatory.

Then, her use of such offensive flames IS on topic, regardless of whether _you_ like it or not.

And the lack of verifiability in a great number of these incidents is part of the issue.

Why should i believe that someone is telling the truth when there is no evidence to support them?

 

[Darkwing Duck]

Because what's important isn't the message it's the tone!
Seriously though... If you aren't tough enough to see through some harsh words it's possible they apply.

But, it is likely that they don't.

Your argument "OMG, that guy got offended when I said he was guilty, that's _proof_ that he's guilty!" is not how things work in the real world. It is batshit crazy.

 

[Morrus]

Wowzer. Checked back in after a week or so. Still not talking about harassment, I see.

 

[Umbran]

Nope. Tried to bring it back around a couple of times, but to not much avail.