Mods shutting down threads for threadcrapping

Mercurius

Legend
It doesn't seem that hard to me. Don't tell people they're not experiencing what they tell you they're experiencing. Don't tell people they're inventing reasons to feel offended. Discuss one's own thoughts and reactions without telling others, directly or passive-aggressively,that theirs are invalid.
Again, saying you disagree with someone's interpretation is not "telling people they're not experiencing what they say they're experiencing." It is saying, "I disagree with your interpretation." I do hear what you and others are saying, which boils down to "the medium is the message." But I think that only goes so far, and we can't invalidate a perspective simply by saying "But they said it in a bad way, therefore I can ignore what they're saying, because it wasn't served just right."
I can tell you that I don't see the reactions you've described on this forum. But I'm not going to tell you that you're seeing them only because you're looking to be offended.

If you express concerns that an RPG product is harmful or off-putting or insensitive or thoughtless, and if it's my sincere belief that your expressed concerns are coming from a place of misplaced outrage because you're trying to get yourself and others riled up about something that doesn't actually matter, then, yes, absolutely, I should just be quiet and not participate. Yes, I should assume I'm wrong and look for a better way to see things. Yes, I should examine myself thoroughly.
Examining oneself is a good rule of thumb for all of us, as is questioning one's assumptions. These are things that I do all the time. But just as you want others to examine themselves and come to a "better way to see things" (meaning, your way), so too should you do the same. I mean, we can all, always see things in a better way; the onus is on us to evolve our own perspective, rather than focus on whether or not other people are examining themselves and recognizing how wrong they are. All we can do is engage in dialogue, and hope that we get our own view across, while continuing to evolve our own. Or at least that's my approach!
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mercurius

Legend
From the official point of view of the boards, it is not the fact of disagreement that is the issue.

It is the manner of disagreement. Being a jerk about it makes it trolling or disruptive.
Thanks for the official word, and I hear you about manner vs. "the fact of disagreement" itself. My concern is that there seems to be a very fine line that is easy to cross, that sometimes "the fact of disagreement" is too quickly interpreted as trollish. But I recognize that it is an impossible task - not only moderation, but online communication in general.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
But I think that only goes so far, and we can't invalidate a perspective simply by saying "But they said it in a bad way, therefore I can ignore what they're saying, because it wasn't served just right."

So, if someone is speaking about the real harm they have taken, we should not be overly concerned about whether they are nice about it. We generally shouldn't police the tone of victims of racism or misogyny, or the like, when they are speaking on that subject.

But, if someone is asserting that they should not have to worry about harm they may be doing, they darned well ought to be nice about it!
 

Irlo

Hero
Again, saying you disagree with someone's interpretation is not "telling people they're not experiencing what they say they're experiencing." It is saying, "I disagree with your interpretation."
I agree! That's exactly what I'm saying. One can express disagreement without invalidating others' experience or impugning their motives.
It's not walking a tightrope. It's not complicated. And one won't be considered a troll or uninclusive. Win-win!
Examining oneself is a good rule of thumb for all of us, as is questioning one's assumptions. These are things that I do all the time. But just as you want others to examine themselves and come to a "better way to see things" (meaning, your way), so too should you do the same.
Let me clarify. Coming to a better way to see things does not mean coming to an agreement with me. It means coming to realize that people have experiences and opinions that are sincere and valid, that they're not "trying to be offended," etc. etc.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
I agree! That's exactly what I'm saying. One can express disagreement without invalidating others' experience or impugning their motives.
Which is fine until and unless what you want to question and maybe even specifically disagree with are the perceived motives underlying whatever is being said, regardless what that might be or what point of view is being upheld.

I've had far far too much real-life experience with people - including so-called friends at the time - saying the right things for what turned out then or later to be the wrong reasons, to the point now where all too often my first thought on hearing or reading anything remotely political or 'sensitive' is "what's the motive here?".

In an online forum setting there's no body language or anything to indicate whether somebody is dissembling, all we have to go by are the words posted; and while taking those words at face value might seem like the proper thing to do, having been burned by doing so in person in the past causes me to want to reserve the right to question motives whenever my little alarm bells start going off.

Cynical? Oh, yes. :)
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
In an online forum setting there's no body language or anything to indicate whether somebody is dissembling, all we have to go by are the words posted; and while taking those words at face value might seem like the proper thing to do, having been burned by doing so in person in the past causes me to want to reserve the right to question motives whenever my little alarm bells start going off.
And that lack of other information- such as body language- is why one must be especially cautious in being accusatory & confrontational in online discussions.

That doesn’t mean you need to set your cynicism and mistrust aside. But it DOES mean you may need to ask better questions before reaching conclusions about others’ hidden motives and positions just based on their postings on ENWorld, etc.
 

Jahydin

Adventurer
I would love to see "-" threads, where opinions on things could be shared in a non-safe space.

Let only people who sign up and opt in be able to see them? Maybe even block it form Google search engine bots?

Don't know, but would be cool to see everyone's unfiltered opinions on things.
 



MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
I would love to see "-" threads, where opinions on things could be shared in a non-safe space.

Let only people who sign up and opt in be able to see them? Maybe even block it form Google search engine bots?

Don't know, but would be cool to see everyone's unfiltered opinions on things.
Eh, there are other forums for this.

I would worry that the attitudes engendered, and communication habits developed, in such threads would inevitably bleed into other threads.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
having been burned by doing so in person in the past causes me to want to reserve the right to question motives whenever my little alarm bells start going off.

Do you recognize a difference between "reserve the right to question motives" and "reserve the right to publicly impugn motives"?

If you want to keep in the back of your mind the idea that people and internet conversation are both complicated, so it may be that what we can see isn't the entirety of it, that's fine. But just blurting out dismissing people because you assume/believe their motives are suspect isn't fine.

And that lack of other information- such as body language- is why one must be especially cautious in being accusatory & confrontational in online discussions.

That doesn’t mean you need to set your cynicism and mistrust aside. But it DOES mean you may need to ask better questions before reaching conclusions about others’ hidden motives and positions just based on their postings on ENWorld, etc.

And, we can expand on that a little - frequently, what someone might call a "motive" or "bias" might be better seen as a perspective that deeply moves them.

It is very easy to see a person and decide, "Well, they had this bad experience, so their judgement on the matter is biased, and should be ignored." When, really, the fact that they had this experience is the bloody point, and the resulting perspective should not be discarded, but accepted as a true thing that must be contended with.

Motive does not, in and of itself, make a statement true or false.

I would love to see "-" threads, where opinions on things could be shared in a non-safe space.

Non-safe spaces generally wind up dominated by those who are willing to behave the worst.

Maybe I need to stick in my speech on psychological safety, and why it is important.

Let only people who sign up and opt in be able to see them?

Conflicts and emnity that develop in that non-safe space will not stay there.
 

Mercurius

Legend
So, if someone is speaking about the real harm they have taken, we should not be overly concerned about whether they are nice about it. We generally shouldn't police the tone of victims of racism or misogyny, or the like, when they are speaking on that subject.

But, if someone is asserting that they should not have to worry about harm they may be doing, they darned well ought to be nice about it!
That's a false duality, Umbran, and I think you know that. Those aren't the only groups of people involved in such conversations, or the only voices presented. Let's not confuse outrage with real harm.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
I would love to see "-" threads, where opinions on things could be shared in a non-safe space.

Let only people who sign up and opt in be able to see them? Maybe even block it form Google search engine bots?

Don't know, but would be cool to see everyone's unfiltered opinions on things.
There's still, I think, circvsmaximvs.boards.net for that - it's a forum started (I think!) by either Morrus or one of his predecessors as pretty much just this - an outlet valve for completely off-topic and-or off-colour posts and "discussions" that have no real place here.

It's fallen into considerable disuse of late, I suspect largely because very few remain who know of or remember it and it's not really promoted on this site any more.
 

beancounter

(I/Me/Mine)
There's still, I think, circvsmaximvs.boards.net for that - it's a forum started (I think!) by either Morrus or one of his predecessors as pretty much just this - an outlet valve for completely off-topic and-or off-colour posts and "discussions" that have no real place here.

It's fallen into considerable disuse of late, I suspect largely because very few remain who know of or remember it and it's not really promoted on this site any more.
I would like to see a thread for such off- topic topics here.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Do you recognize a difference between "reserve the right to question motives" and "reserve the right to publicly impugn motives"?
Yes, but any post attempting the one is almost certain to be interpreted as the other; and that's where it gets sticky.
And, we can expand on that a little - frequently, what someone might call a "motive" or "bias" might be better seen as a perspective that deeply moves them.
Indeed; and that is of course completely fine.

I've just run across too many real-life instances where the "perspective that deeply moves" someone turns out to be a false front hiding some other, less savoury motive(s).
Motive does not, in and of itself, make a statement true or false.
IME it both can and - sometimes - does.
 


Jahydin

Adventurer
Non-safe spaces generally wind up dominated by those who are willing to behave the worst.
That's true.

I had nothing but good intentions with my thought. ""Real talk" with a group of trusted friends" was the atmosphere I had in mind. The more I thought it through though, the more I realized how unrealistic that would be on the internet. Bad people ruin everything...
Maybe I need to stick in my speech on psychological safety, and why it is important.
If you have a link I'd like to read it.
 

Jahydin

Adventurer
There's still, I think, circvsmaximvs.boards.net for that - it's a forum started (I think!) by either Morrus or one of his predecessors as pretty much just this - an outlet valve for completely off-topic and-or off-colour posts and "discussions" that have no real place here.
Oh, never heard of it. Thanks.

Instead of threads being locked down, maybe they could just "punted" over there, haha?
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
I would love to see "-" threads, where opinions on things could be shared in a non-safe space.

Let only people who sign up and opt in be able to see them? Maybe even block it form Google search engine bots?

Don't know, but would be cool to see everyone's unfiltered opinions on things.
That is not a community I have any interest in running. There are plenty of such communities out there. But I’m not interested in hosting (or visiting) such a thing.
 


An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top