Which post do you mean? I don’t think anyone is questioning that “he would have already been shot in the back” was inappropriate. But the warning wasn’t for that. It was for these two posts, and I disagree that they are obviously inappropriate for GQ. Are we talking about the same post?
They probably should have dropped it when told to by the mods, but the comment about race was no more subjective than the initial question.
The OP’s central inquiry was, basically: if I were to run, in a public place, as if I were being chased, but without having committed any crime, would the police arrest me?
That’s not really a question with a factual answer, because anyone who’s spent more than three minutes reading about law enforcement in the United States knows that different officers can react very differently, even when the situations they face are very similar. I read a lot of news stories about police, and also a lot of court opinions related to police actions. I’m especially interested in cases where lawsuits are brought against police officers, and in court opinions regarding things like qualified immunity. One thing that strikes me again and again when I read these stories and these legal cases is just how much variation there is in how different police officers react in any given situation, and those differences seem to result from a whole variety of factors.
If different cops react differently, even when faced with similar situations, then “Would I be arrested if I ran like I was being chased?” is inherently a non-GQ question. Some cops might arrest you; some might detain you until they found that there was no probable cause for arrest; and some cops might watch you go by as they eat their donuts. And if we accept, as any person with half a brain must do, that police don’t all act the same way, then it’s completely reasonable to ask what factors might lead them to change their behavior. Their training? Their age? Their sex? The surroundings? Their experience? The culture of their police department? And possibly even their perception of the person who is running. Including that person’s race.
If it’s GQ to ask “What would police do?” then it’s also GQ to answer in a way that takes into account possible differences in how different police might react. It’s like asking “What would a professor do if I brought my baby to class?” or “What would a feminist do if I told her I watch pornography?” In all those cases, there is no single answer, because the response depends, in large measure, on a variety of specifics and on the particular person who is involved in each case.
There are ways that the OP of the other thread could have asked a question more amenable to a GQ answer. For example, “If I’m running as if I’m being chased, but haven’t committed a crime, and the police arrest me, have they violated my constitutional rights?” Lawyers might disagree over this issue, but at its heart it’s a question with at least a possibility of a factual answer.
A question that asks, effectively, “What would some random member of a very large group of people do in this circumstance?” is not.
I don’t think the OP of the GQ thread seemed to be asking a question with a factual answer. It was not phrased as a question about what police could lawfully do, of if being arrested would be justifiable constitutionally. It was a question about what would happen. It asked for a prediction or an opinion. To which a number of things, including race, seem fair game to include, if not blindingly obviously relevant.
ecg said that further comments along those lines would get Warnings. garygnu and Saint Cad made further comments along those lines. If you think that ecg’s directions were unjust, I’ll let him defend that one. But they were clear.
They weren’t to me. Can you please define the “lines”? Is it flippant remarks, or any mention of race?
No, they were not.
I have put the posts in a quote hierarchy. My read is that engineer_comp_geek’s post was referring to disagreements with Chronos’s post. I would paraphrase it as ‘Chronos said DCnDC’s post is inappropriate. I agree. Do not continue to question our rulings in this forum. If people continue to question the moderators here we will be forced to issue warnings.’
After that garygnu and Saint Cad continued to question the moderator rulings in General Questions and received warnings.
If my interpretation is correct, it doesn’t matter what the original post or the topic was. The warnings were for disobeying moderator instructions.
~Max
I’ll try to remember that in the event that the board gets so desperate for mods that they turn to me. 
Let’s assume that the meaning of “these lines” was clear and could unambiguosly be interpreted as “no more discussion of race in this thread” (I disagree with this but let’s go with it for now).
Then the issue is why is the discussion of race NOT ALLOWED in a GQ thread on the probability of someone being arrested?
When creating a false dichotomy as refutation it is less likely to be seen as gratuitously bad logic if the dichotomy itself is not gratuitously irrelevant to the discussion. Not using a stupid one would help too.
Tris
I don’t think it plays enough of a role that you can make a solid judgement about an individual encounter, I’m a white male I was speeding 113mph, 2 months ago, got pulled over by a white state trooper and was promptly arrested without more than a thirty second conversation. A month later I was pulled over going around the same speed by a black local policeman, he let me go with a warning! Why didn’t the white cop let me go, I thought we had a whole system going on, that let me get off the hook when police were involved! What happened to the good ol boy system?
I agree completely. I meant to report the thread for forum change because it’s clearly a IMHO topic. I am pretty sure I didn’t get around to it, and then after seeing a mod note I figured, “meh the mods see this and didn’t move so maybe I’m wrong”.
But it was a post asking for opinions and the replies were opinions, so it’s not a shock that the language drifted out of GQ territory.
I always remember how Harry T Stone became a judge; one of many reasons I never answer the phone.
Skin color most certainly affects interactions with police. It is a fact. Disallowing even the mention of that fact promotes ignorance instead of fighting it. This sequence of moderation decisions allows institutional racism to go on unchallenged.
Shame on you.
My interpretation was that in response to people asking about the relevancy of race, ECG answered the question. Then in response to another flippant remark, he gave instructions to not continue comments along these lines. He broke apart his responses, meaning they were specific to each of the preceding posts.
Now, your interpretation might be the correct one. I’m not arguing that I’m right and you’re wrong. My only argument is that the instructions weren’t clear, which is borne out by the number of people who didn’t understand it. Chronos might feel it was clear (and I’m sure it was to him), but this is demonstrably false.
Your citations do not support your contention that ““Running While Black” is absolutely a thing”.
1 is the way the man was dressed and acting.
2 is jogging at night, and while the officers were being dicks after they realized what was up, they act this way to Hispanics, Asians, whites; everyone. It doesn’t get reported nearly as often, though.
3 was not what OP describes, either; Mr. Gray started running when he saw police. This action shows consciousness of guilt to every police officer in the world, and color has nothing to do with it.
Perhaps that is the wrong question. I can’t speak for Chronos but personally I think DcDnC’s original comment was too flippant in asking such a sensitive question (“are you black?”), especially for the General Questions forum. Nevertheless, even if I am wrong or Chronos changes his mind, I don’t think that would save you from the warning.
Here is a quick rundown of where I think people in this thread stand:
Yes, it is appropriate to bring up race in that thread.
[INDENT]Saint Cad
Budget Player Cadet
garygnu
No. It is inappropriate to bring up race in that thread.
Chronos
engineer comp geek
Shodan
Velocity
TroutMan
cochrane
pool**
Other (e.g. inappropriate question for General Questions)
kopek
Left Hand of Dorkness
Really Not All That Bright
mhendo
eschrodinger
Atamasama
*not entirely sure[/INDENT]
You can add me to the list of people who think the question as written was too broad for a factual answer.
~Max
Like I said, I have no opinion either way. I see both sides.
BUT once the Note was made, the warnings were appropriate.
No one was warned for bringing up race. They were warned for not following Mod instructions.
As the apparent instigator here, I would like to add that my comment was not intended to be flippant; it was posted in complete seriousness. In light of recent and ongoing events, it’s clear to anyone that race was and remains relevant to any question regarding civilian interaction with police in this country.
OTOH, Chronos instructed me (and everyone else) to not pursue it, so I didn’t.
So, a question since I am still learning how things work here: After the mod instruction about not bringing up race, could someone in the thread have asked about moving it to another forum? It sounds like if there’s been no moderator attention, you would use the report post button to ask for that. Is that still the case once a mod has posted as a moderator in the thread?
And I understand that discussions of moderator actions take place in this forum, so if one has questions or disagrees those posts don’t belong in the original thread, right?
I am trying to learn to be aware of what forum a thread is in, and think about the effect that has on responses. Part of why I pointed out that the original OP called for non-GQ answers is because the responses seemed completely relevant and responsive to the question. I’ve seen other similar threads where the mod response was that the OP was not going to get factual answers, so the thread was moved. Also, flippant answers aside, I think it is a factual answer to say that race will factor into the prediction that the OP was asking for. Predicting the result: arrest, no arrest, getting shot, etc. are opinions. Saying race is a factor is factual. Even if you disagree that it is correct, it is a factual answer – i.e., it is falsifiable.