Bad Moderation in "Hamas Attacks Israel" MPSIMS thread

[puzzlegal]

Yes, in moderating, i read it as extreme hyperbole, staggeringly offensive, and in poor taste.

[The_Other_Waldo_Pepper]

@puzzlegal

Yes, in moderating, i read it as extreme hyperbole,

Would you moderate differently if Crane were to confirm that, no, it’s not hyperbole?

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

I said in passing that the thread might be better suited for GD–but I want to reiterate that.

@puzzlegal

This is a topic on which people have extremely strong feelings.

This is all the more reason to hold things to a higher standard, in my opinion. Yes, people have strong feelings–but that cuts both ways. When feelings are this high, obnoxious posts like @Crane’s (and also some of the obnoxious posts that dehumanize Palestinians) are all the more harmful. Requiring people to express themselves without saying awful stuff–to control their emotional reactions to that degree–seems better than expecting people not to respond emotionally to the awful stuff that’s said.

[BigT]

@MrDibble

Like I said before, “antisemite” has lost all sting for me through its blatant abuse by our pro-Israel posters. I’d need actual ZOG-level posting from a long-term poster before I believe it. ⁢

And that’s what I find baffling. Why in the world would someone else’s misuse of a term change the criteria you would use for it yourself? I’m against any idea that you should raise the requirements of what counts as bigotry based on anything. That tactic is primarily used to defend lesser bigotry by raising the minimum requirements. It’s like the guy saying “Well, he doesn’t hate women, so he’s not misogynist.”

I also don’t get this:

@MrDibble

@BigT

I see it similar as when someone tries to portray slave owners as having been kind to their slaves. I’m pretty sure people wouldn’t balk at calling that racism. ⁢

No, it’s often mere cluelessness. It’s the result of systemic racism, but is just gauche ignorance in-and-of itself. Now, such defences often go hand-in-hand with racism, but you need more tells than just that one. ⁢

That seems like exactly the sort of thing that you would call racist. You don’t ever seem to think cluelessness is an excuse. Heck, I’ve disagreed with you because I think the person actually was just dumb, but you were sure they were not.

@MrDibble

@BigT

You can’t argue that the Nazis “really were more kind and considerate” ⁢

You present this as a quote, but that was Smapti’s sarcastic wording, not Crane’s. Crane did riff off the idea behind it in response, but again, only to say people might consider how much worse the IOF were being (which, it should not need repeating, they are clearly not)

I presented it as a quote because the OP did. I do now see Crane did not actually say that. But he did indeed make it clear that he meant “less kind,” and was not engaging in any sort of hyperbole. And he didn’t seem to object to Smapti’s characterization, but said people should consider it.

I guess I could say it’s not quite Holocaust denial, but it’s close. But then I take into account LHOD’s point. He was trolling Jewish people. I do not agree with you; you can’t tweak about the Holocaust and have it only affect Zionists and pro-Israel people. And you seem more concerned with content than I have seen you previously.

I do not reserve any terms for bigotry for intentional bigotry. Unintentional bigotry happens all the time. If you mean “intentional antisemitism,” then I agree that Crane doesn’t necessarily rise to that level.

But I stand by my other arguments.

---

But, regardless, I think puzzlegal’s moderation makes sense for the initial comment. It could just be an emotional expression. I disagree after he confirmed it was not hyperbole.

But I also do not think it is as big a deal as anyone else in this thread. At the end of the day, the purpose of modding is to stop a behavior. If it does stop, then there’s no longer a problem. If it doesn’t, then it can be dealt with.

I’ve lately been modding somewhere else, and I also err on the side of undermoderating. So far, the only time I’ve actually had issues is when I was cranky and overmoderated. Undermoderation can always be corrected the next time. But overmodding can make people leave who took me as being more harsh than intended.

[puzzlegal]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

Yes, people have strong feelings–but that cuts both ways. When feelings are this high, obnoxious posts like @Crane’s (and also some of the obnoxious posts that dehumanize Palestinians) are all the more harmful. Requiring people to express themselves without saying awful stuff–to control their emotional reactions to that degree–seems better than expecting people not to respond emotionally to the awful stuff that’s said.

Yes, and I DID moderate it. I agree that inflammatory posts need to be avoided. I thought i was pretty clear about saying it was not an appropriate post.

So I’m not sure what you are arguing for.

[crowmanyclouds]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

But the idea needs to keep its sharp edges.

Speaking of ideas that need to keep, very, sharp edges,

@Thing.Fish

blood libel

If that isn’t one I don’t know what does qualify.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@puzzlegal

So I’m not sure what you are arguing for.

I’m advocating for three things:

1. Move the thread to GD (or else moderate this one much more strictly to remove political comments and treat it as a purely “breaking news” thread–which will almost certainly result in a thread opening in GD).
2. Treat Crane’s commentary as at minimum a warning, as it’s pretty vicious trolling.
3. Also moderate with warnings the folks who persist in dehumanizing language toward Palestinians.

[puzzlegal]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

or else moderate this one much more strictly to remove political comments and treat it as a purely “breaking news” thread–which will almost certainly result in a thread opening in GD

We have a breaking news thread. As you observe, we need a place for comments that don’t belong in breaking news. We also have a pit thread. Maybe a great debates thread would be a good addition.

[MrDibble]

@BigT

Why in the world would someone else’s misuse of a term change the criteria you would use for it yourself?

It … wouldn’t? I wouldn’t use it before for someone merely anti-Zionist, and I wouldn’t now.

What I was saying that I don’t listen anymore when other posters call someone an antisemite. They’ve lost any credibility to do so.

@BigT

I’m against any idea that you should raise the requirements of what counts as bigotry based on anything.

I’m not raising the requirements for the bigotry. I’m raising the requirements of trust for reporters of bigotry.

@BigT

It’s like the guy saying “Well, he doesn’t hate women, so he’s not misogynist.”

It’s nothing like that. It’s like “Well, he hates this particular woman because she’s a murderer, so I don’t think he’s a misogynist based off him hating this particular woman.”

@BigT

That seems like exactly the sort of thing that you would call racist. You don’t ever seem to think cluelessness is an excuse.

Would I?
I don’t excuse cluelessness. That doesn’t mean I equate cluelessness with racism.

@BigT

Heck, I’ve disagreed with you because I think the person actually was just dumb, but you were sure they were not.

You’d have to refresh my memory as to who the hell you’re talking about.

@BigT

I presented it as a quote because the OP did.

And this is why quoteboxes are better than inline quotes for this kind of thing. When I “use” “them” , it’s either for what I just did, or to make it clear I’m paraphrasing.

@BigT

But he did indeed make it clear that he meant “less kind,”

I never said he didn’t. But that’s not the same as the quote.

@BigT

he didn’t seem to object to Smapti’s characterization

The very clearly marked with sarcasm characterization. I think he treated it as he found it.

@BigT

He was trolling Jewish people.

He was trolling a subset of Jewish people, and not for their Jewishness.

@BigT

I do not agree with you; you can’t tweak about the Holocaust and have it only affect Zionists and pro-Israel people.

I didn’t say it didn’t affect them. I said the effect on non-Zionists wasn’t the point, which speaks to whether it was anti-semitic in nature or not. Not caring about the feelings of nonZionist Jews when you’re attacking Zionists is not antisemitism… It’s definitely something I could only say in the Pit, but it’s not, itself, antisemitism.

@BigT

And you seem more concerned with content than I have seen you previously.

Maybe focus on this thread, and maybe, also, stop trying to personalize your argument about what I’ve said about other unrelated topics, yeah?

[puzzlegal]

I am not an ATMB mod, but i think the back-and-forth above may be verging into stuff that doesn’t belong in this thread.

[What_Exit]

With 4 different posts flagged, I’m putting this thread on pause until @engineer_comp_geek gets a chance to look it over.

[engineer_comp_geek]

Moderator Note

@msmith537

Yeah, fuck that dude!

This is ATMB, not the Pit. The point of ATMB is to resolve disputes related to the rules and moderation of this message board. The point of ATMB is not to fan flames. Take it to the Pit if you want to fan flames. That’s why they call it the BBQ Pit.

[engineer_comp_geek]

Moderator Note

This thread is re-opened.

Please focus on the rules and moderation in ATMB. Do not argue the actual thread topic here.

Also, as always, keep it civil and treat others with respect in ATMB, no matter how much you disagree with their opinion.

[ASL_v2.0]

@MrDibble

Calling the IOF “less kind” is not the same as saying the SS were kind. Just that the IOF are that much worse. Which I agree with everyone else is wrong, but is not the same thing as the words everyone else is putting in Crane’s mouth.

I agree. So much so that I almost—almost—created an ATMB thread going the other way yesterday. I actually had it all typed up and was just about hit the button to post the new topic arguing that the moderation was excessive. I only stopped myself as I read the post more closely—just one more time to be safe—and saw that Crane wasn’t just comparing Israel’s actions to the Waffen SS, Crane was saying that what is Israel is doing is worse. Which… I have to grudgingly admit it’s not. Yet.

But even so, I see it as a sin of exaggeration, not a completely baseless (or antisemtic) comparison on its face.

[engineer_comp_geek]

@MrDibble

like the IOF

I assume this is a dig at the IDF (Israeli Offensive Force, I guess?). Let’s keep the political jabs out of ATMB, please, as well as out of other forums where political pot-shots are not permitted.

If I am incorrect about this TLA, please let me know.

[Czarcasm]

Israeli Occupying Forces, a term used by Al-Haq (and others) for the IDF. Here is a link to determine whether it is offensive or not. IOF Targets Palestinian Civilians with Lethal Force, Killing 13 across the OPT

[engineer_comp_geek]

Wikipedia says this:

“Israel Occupation Forces or Israel Offensive Forces, pejorative terms for the Israel Defense Forces in Palestine” (bolding mine).

Poking around on google, I see a lot of uses that are similar to your link. Exactly how offensive the term is probably depends on whether you are pro or anti Israel. Either way it seems to be a political jab to me.

Just to be clear, everyone is free to argue either side of the political issue. We aren’t going to moderate based on whether anyone is pro or anti Israel. Just restrict political jabs to forums and topics that allow it.

ETA: In other words, it’s perfectly fine in the MPSIMS discussion thread or in most IMHO threads, but not acceptable in a breaking news thread. It should also be avoided in ATMB and FQ discussions.

[MrDibble]

Noted. I’ve basically been substituting it for IDF in other Gaza threads for a while now, so didn’t even think about it, but will keep it out of ATMB and Breaking News.

I assume referring to the “Israeli occupiers” or “the occupying force” would not meet the same moderation, being statements of fact as opposed to a pithy pejorative?