Disputation and The Straight Dope Message Board

[MandaJo]

And is it the reasoned arguments from the objective, rational white dudes that change minds, or the chance to talk to members of these groups in an open, safe forum? Because when I look at my own evolution into a more insightful human, it started with Eve and Esprix talking about their experiences, not formal debates from neutral parties about whether they were even worth listening to.

And I’m not worried about letting it die off. I’ve realized that doesn’t work, because people seem to age into it. But I don’t think treating all propositions as theoretically plausible and insisting each can be argued in a safe, supportive environment is the way we stop that. For every one the good guys win over, the bad guys win over even more–not despite being wrong, but because of it. Because people like the message “You are superior. You are the ideal. The more different someone is from you, the less human they are”. Allowing open and free debate over those ideas lets bigots use us as a recruiting ground.

Look, five years ago, I agreed with you. I was a free speech absolutest. But The_Donald, RedPillers, 4chan and 8chan, Charlottesville. . . these things changed me. It’s naive to think that we can be content neutral and not take responsibility for the damage the speech we promote does in the world. And it’s hubris to believe what Mark Twain said was the most magnificent lie ever crafted, that “the truth is mighty and will prevail”.

[Ruken]

@MandaJo

And is it the reasoned arguments from the objective, rational white dudes that change minds, or the chance to talk to members of these groups in an open, safe forum?

I’m a scientist; bigotry doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. We weren’t scrutinizing this particular flavor of bigotry back then. Now we are, and that’s a good thing.

[MandaJo]

@Ruken

I’m a scientist; bigotry doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. We weren’t scrutinizing this particular flavor of bigotry back then. Now we are, and that’s a good thing.

But the bigots aren’t scientists. They don’t care about scrutiny. They rationalize, they don’t reason. And they reach others through that medium.

[Ruken]

@MandaJo

But the bigots aren’t scientists. They don’t care about scrutiny. They rationalize, they don’t reason. And they reach others through that medium.

Again, the one loon isn’t necessarily the one you’re convincing. While I do learn by arguing, I didn’t learn by arguing about this particular topic. Every thread has more readers than posters.

[Ruken]

And of course derailing a thread is always bad. Someone starts an “ask the” thread and a bigot wants to stir shit up? I think our current rules should shut that down. But I’m open to evidence that’s not the case.

[Amara_1]

I want to echo everything Manda Jo has said in this thread.

[DSeid]

@MandaJo

I feel like we lost the moderate conservative voices long ago. We used to have more, but they’ve either disappeared or, in some cases, radicalized. Some of that I think is based on the current political situation: it can’t be fun to be a reasonable conservative right now. But I would also propose that our “content neutral” moderation might has exacerbated things, as well. It’s allowed conversations to go to really nasty depths that make the whole board less civil. It’s lead to a not-entirely unjustified belief among conservative posters that they are targeted and unwelcome. …

Sometimes even moderate voices can feel driven out.

You are a big supporter of #metoo for example and the movement has indeed done many goods … and it also has those that operate under its hashtag that demonize anyone who expresses any hesitation from the line that a woman is ALWAYS telling the objective facts and that her version of what was in a man’s head is ALWAYS to be accepted as objective fact, who argue that there is ALSO still a need to balance due process for someone accused, who would lump those concerns as “misogyny” and would describe expressions of those concerns as making them unwelcome. And honestly? Making major progress on issues will require taking it on as a systems quality improvement issue - which generally accomplishes less by punishing individuals, and more by figuring the processes that lead to the unwanted events occurring and fixing them. That means that if you want more than showy items of celebrities getting taken down, if you want to prevent future abuse, you do need to understand how the men who assault came to behave in that way in order to change the systems that result in it.

As to the examples you’ve posted … there have also been similar ones with anti-Semitic tropes … and as a Jew I am very used to hearing them and know they exist as held beliefs said in rooms I am not present in much more commonly than that. Coming up every so often here and having their tropeness beat up on? I can handle that. Trans-people are dealing with real hate in the real world every day. I think posts on this board did more to normalize trans issues than many appreciate. I’ll speak for myself that my ignorance was reduced more by threads on this board, often in response to the vastly more ignorant, than by any journal articles I read.

I do not advocate for free speech absolutism here (or for the country). I completely accept that there are harms to some speech that offset the benefits. Constraining speech is completely reasonable but as much as I appreciate the harms of some speech I also have significant discomfort with absolute statements to be accepted as articles of faith.

One would have to be horribly naive to believe that in the marketplace of ideas YOUR ideas or MY ideas (which for the sake of discussion we can assume are always the objectively correct “good guy” ones) will always win. But as I’ve argued in thread in which these issues are writ larger, our society as a whole, I think that “my side” is better equipped for fighting the fight with words than we are with fists and weapons. And here we have home field advantage as well. You are simply wrong if you think that “the bad guys” come into this forum promoting their shit and have successfully won any of “good guys” over to their beliefs. And I do believe that over time some of the “bad guys” have unavoidably reduced their ignorance some even as they continue some of their bad faith arguments.

But again, this place does not need be devoted to that fight and nothing else. That fight cannot squeeze out let alone hijack other discussions. I agree with significant constraints to prevent that.

[Saint_Cad]

@MandaJo

I feel like we lost the moderate conservative voices long ago. We used to have more, but they’ve either disappeared or, in some cases, radicalized. Some of that I think is based on the current political situation: it can’t be fun to be a reasonable conservative right now. But I would also propose that our “content neutral” moderation might has exacerbated things, as well. It’s allowed conversations to go to really nasty depths that make the whole board less civil. It’s lead to a not-entirely unjustified belief among conservative posters that they are targeted and unwelcome.

This board reflects the view of the majority of the posters viz. liberal. If a conservative dare post here expect to be

1. Insulted, but in general enough terms that the mods can equivocate and say that YOU were not personally attacked. But of course on this board being a conservative gets you labeled as stupid, a racist or a misogynist.
2. Gang-attacked in the thread that gets derailed by attacks against Trump.

There is no room for rational discourse anymore here. No conservative member can explain why they don’t like Obama or Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden or Elizabeth Warren
or AOC because it turns into thinly veiled ad hominum attacks against the poster. When I started here, people were allowed to have opposing viewpoints. Now they are not. And I agree with you about the moderation. It seems a lot of people are getting free passes from mods that before would have been warnings. That sets the tone for the board too.

[margin]

Somehow, nobody ever says of a woman, “she is falsely accused,” when the usual dogpile starts. Nor is anyone ever concerned that SHE is innocent till proven guilty.

[DrDeth]

@MandaJo

They don’t, not explicitly. This is less than 6 months old:

And it’s from a poster who has been starting threads supporting that point of view for years without reprimand. Being content neutral is not a virtue.

This is a couple years old, about transgendered people:
…

And the same thing goes for the racist shit. How do you defend yourself against someone who has said you are genetically inferior? Why can’t we have an official stance that this is horseshit?

I am not sure what Slackerinc meant by that post, honestly, but it was in the Pit. It is so baffling to me, i cant honestly make out what he was trying to say.

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=877275

But he was called out for it, by many posters. loudly, in no uncertain terms. This board seems to have a almost ‘anything goes’ in the Pit, but like I said, I dont delve there. Got anything outside the pit- because I have not seen any of what you are saying in the last couple of years. And I have called for the Pit to be closed down many, many times right here. Ok, I agree- lets close the pit, except for rants. No more open racism, bigotry, homo-hating, or especially internet stalking allowed.
*A couple years ago. * And so? I cant even find it. A lot has changed here in two years.
Got anything new? Outside the Pit?

Got any:
*
Gay kids need conversion therapy
Most girls who say they were raped are lying.

Genes for intelligence are much more commonly found in white and Asian populations.*

There are many wild accusations here being tossed around that the SDMB allows bigotry and racism and whatnot(which it does- in the Pit, apparently so lets shut the Pit down, easy-peasy)- yet, everyone seems low on actual examples. (outside of the Pit)

[DSeid]

@margin

Somehow, nobody ever says of a woman, “she is falsely accused,” when the usual dogpile starts. Nor is anyone ever concerned that SHE is innocent till proven guilty.

This is simply an untrue statement.

[FoieGrasIsEvil]

@DSeid

Sometimes even moderate voices can feel driven out.

You are a big supporter of #metoo for example and the movement has indeed done many goods … and it also has those that operate under its hashtag that demonize anyone who expresses any hesitation from the line that a woman is ALWAYS telling the objective facts and that her version of what was in a man’s head is ALWAYS to be accepted as objective fact, who argue that there is ALSO still a need to balance due process for someone accused, who would lump those concerns as “misogyny” and would describe expressions of those concerns as making them unwelcome. And honestly? Making major progress on issues will require taking it on as a systems quality improvement issue - which generally accomplishes less by punishing individuals, and more by figuring the processes that lead to the unwanted events occurring and fixing them. That means that if you want more than showy items of celebrities getting taken down, if you want to prevent future abuse, you do need to understand how the men who assault came to behave in that way in order to change the systems that result in it.

As to the examples you’ve posted … there have also been similar ones with anti-Semitic tropes … and as a Jew I am very used to hearing them and know they exist as held beliefs said in rooms I am not present in much more commonly than that. Coming up every so often here and having their tropeness beat up on? I can handle that. Trans-people are dealing with real hate in the real world every day. I think posts on this board did more to normalize trans issues than many appreciate. I’ll speak for myself that my ignorance was reduced more by threads on this board, often in response to the vastly more ignorant, than by any journal articles I read.

I do not advocate for free speech absolutism here (or for the country). I completely accept that there are harms to some speech that offset the benefits. Constraining speech is completely reasonable but as much as I appreciate the harms of some speech I also have significant discomfort with absolute statements to be accepted as articles of faith.

One would have to be horribly naive to believe that in the marketplace of ideas YOUR ideas or MY ideas (which for the sake of discussion we can assume are always the objectively correct “good guy” ones) will always win. But as I’ve argued in thread in which these issues are writ larger, our society as a whole, I think that “my side” is better equipped for fighting the fight with words than we are with fists and weapons. And here we have home field advantage as well. You are simply wrong if you think that “the bad guys” come into this forum promoting their shit and have successfully won any of “good guys” over to their beliefs. And I do believe that over time some of the “bad guys” have unavoidably reduced their ignorance some even as they continue some of their bad faith arguments.

But again, this place does not need be devoted to that fight and nothing else. That fight cannot squeeze out let alone hijack other discussions. I agree with significant constraints to prevent that.

There’s a LOT of Bill Burr to unpack here!

[MrDibble]

@DrDeth

I am not sure what Slackerinc meant by that post, honestly, but it was in the Pit. It is so baffling to me, i cant honestly make out what he was trying to say.

https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=877275

But he was called out for it, by many posters. loudly, in no uncertain terms.

You realize that means jack-shit compared to the official sanction it enjoys, right?

[DrDeth]

@MrDibble

You realize that means jack-shit compared to the official sanction it enjoys, right?

what “official sanction” are you talking about? No one gave that post any “official sanction” in any way shape or form.
Did you report it and Pm a Mod and get a answer?

[Kobal2]

@DSeid

One would have to be horribly naive to believe that in the marketplace of ideas YOUR ideas or MY ideas (which for the sake of discussion we can assume are always the objectively correct “good guy” ones) will always win. But as I’ve argued in thread in which these issues are writ larger, our society as a whole, I think that “my side” is better equipped for fighting the fight with words than we are with fists and weapons. And here we have home field advantage as well. You are simply wrong if you think that “the bad guys” come into this forum promoting their shit and have successfully won any of “good guys” over to their beliefs.

Kind of a difficult argument to be making in the age of Donald Trump, Boris Johnson and Emmanuel Macron isn’t it ?

I would also be remiss if I didn’t seize the opportunity to trot out that one MLK quote everybody likes to forget now that every white guy was obviously cool with MLK what with his being so moderate and peacelike :

@Dr. King

I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.

I think what he was saying was, incrementalism can go felch a goat, in so many words.

[MrDibble]

@DrDeth

what “official sanction” are you talking about? No one gave that post any “official sanction” in any way shape or form.

Was it modded? No? Then it’s sanctioned.

[Jragon]

Man, The West Wing really just profoundly fucked up a generation of Liberals huh.

[Kobal2]

How do you mean ?

ETA : Hmm, that maybe came off aggro or something, which it is absolutely not - I’m honestly interested & curious and would like to hear more

[Jragon]

@Kobal2

How do you mean ?

Knowing you, I’m pretty sure you’re familiar with Innuendo Studios and The Alt-Right playbook in particular, right? Remember that Never Play Defense video where he shows a clip of The West Wing and talks about how Liberals eat up someone by laboriously explaining why their short, quippy, and wrong statement is wrong at length?

Basically that. I don’t think The West Wing literally caused this, but man do the values of “man just watch me wreck this dude who clearly has no strong position with my reasoned argume-wait why did half of you become fascists?” is strong. There are far more victory conditions for a debate beyond actually being factually correct, and in some cases like naked bigotry playing that game is not a great idea. You want to explain something to someone? Bypass the bigots and explain it directly, don’t argue with them

[Kobal2]

@Jragon

Knowing you, I’m pretty sure you’re familiar with Innuendo Studios and The Alt-Right playbook in particular, right? Remember that Never Play Defense video where he shows a clip of The West Wing and talks about how Liberals eat up someone by laboriously explaining why their short, quippy, and wrong is wrong at length?

Basically that. I don’t think The West Wing literally caused this, but man do the values of “man just watch me wreck this dude who clearly has no strong position with my reasoned argume-wait why did half of you become fascists?” is strong.

Oh, yeah, that :). Yeah I wouldn’t say TWW was a cause, so much as an expression of, but yup.