# How should the Pit be changed, if at all? **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [July 19, 2021, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859 "2021-07-19T23:19:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 34
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2021, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/667 "2021-08-18T11:44:03Z")
> [@TroutMan](#): > > Well, at least I’ve learned not to expect a productive discussion with you. I retain hope for others. I am happy to have a productive discussion with anyone who is willing to engage in one. If you are not, that is your decision. > [@thorny\_locust](#): > > An accusation of committing accidental and/or unthinking racism does not imply moral turpitude. One shouldn’t shrug it off in the sense of paying no attention to it – one should consider it, think about it, and probably (unless the accuser is entirely off the wall) stop doing it. But one should shrug off any sense of insult, yes. > > An accusation of being deliberately racist is an accusation of moral turpitude, yes. (Which is not a reason we should be unable to make it; at least in the Pit.) If accusers reliably made this distinction, it would probably help. @TroutMan didn’t. But still, if you accused someone of being an idiot, or even just of saying really dumb things, wouldn’t you expect them to be offended? Maybe if you did the latter nicely, to a friend, it would go okay, but to someone you are arguing with, accompanied by personal insults? It’s not going to lead to anything constructive. I think there is a bit of equivocation going on here. The claim is that calling someone a racist could start a productive discussion, and no one should be offended by it. Yet in practice, in the Pit we almost always see such accusations accompanied by personal insults, and it is certainly not made clear that the first meaning is the one intended. Productive discussions, if they are going to happen, almost always happen in the original thread. An accusation of being deliberately racist is not intended to spark such, it is merely intended as an insult. It is ridiculous to pretend there is some higher purpose. > [@thorny\_locust](#): > > If on considering the matter and investigating information and explanations one thinks the accusation is unfounded, reasonable discussions can be had. Not in my experience. This goes back to some people on the left using such accusations as a political tool. Instead of trying to persuade others that their opinion is the correct one, certain people simply claim that alternative views are racist/sexist/whatever and therefore it is unacceptable to argue for them. The point of the accusation is to end debate, not spark it. In the case of using a particular word or phrase, it’s a bit different, because sometimes there is a good reason to stop using it. But a. the changes demanded are often petty and not-universally-agreed-on by the group in question, b. they make life harder for those outside a particular well-educated left-wing subculture, c. they are sometimes used to push a particular ideological position, d. as @Sam_Stone said, the outrage is often selective and hypocritical (though I believe you are one of the few posters who actually does try to avoid hypocrisy on this issue). That could to lead to a reasonable discussion, but in general the people who bring it up are not prepared to engage in one. Their expectation is immediate acquiescence and possibly an apology, and any other response is considered more evidence of 'ism’s. ---
**Author:** ![thorny\_locust](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thorny_locust/32/431_2.png) [@thorny\_locust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thorny_locust)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2021, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/668 "2021-08-18T15:08:39Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > If accusers reliably made this distinction, it would probably help. @TroutMan didn’t. Reads to me that @TroutMan tried their best to. Do you mean in some specific post, and if so, which one? > [@DemonTree](#): > > if you accused someone of being an idiot, or even just of saying really dumb things, wouldn’t you expect them to be offended? Maybe if you did the latter nicely, to a friend, it would go okay, but to someone you are arguing with, accompanied by personal insults? It’s not going to lead to anything constructive. Pretty much everybody does stupid things occasionally. If they can’t be recognized as such, how are they going to be fixed? > [@DemonTree](#): > > Productive discussions, if they are going to happen, almost always happen in the original thread. An accusation of being deliberately racist is not intended to spark such, it is merely intended as an insult. It is ridiculous to pretend there is some higher purpose. Some of these discussions, as has been repeatedly pointed out, can’t happen at all on this board in the original thread. And while an accusation of being deliberately racist may be unlikely to convert the racist in the thread itself, pointing out the racism may make it clear to someone who was being otherwise gradually sucked in to it; and the accumulation of such experiences may gradually and eventually convince the racist that they’re wrong, or at least that racism isn’t socially acceptable outside certain limited circles. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2021, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/669 "2021-08-19T05:07:15Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#): > > And while an accusation of being deliberately racist may be unlikely to convert the racist in the thread itself, pointing out the racism may make it clear to someone who was being otherwise gradually sucked in to it There’s also the aspect that calling out racism (or any other bigotry) is being supportive to the targets of that bigotry. Of which there could be any number watching the discussion from the sidelines and wondering why the blatant bigotry doesn’t seem to be bothering any of the participants. In general, I don’t quite see the point of complaining about people being insulting in the Pit, because the Pit is specifically for the purpose of being insulting (and profane, and vindictive, and hot-tempered, and all the other stuff that people aren’t supposed to be in most of the other forums). Even if someone’s spewing insults in the Pit purely for recreational purposes, that’s in compliance with the designated function of the Pit. No “higher purpose” is required, even if there may actually be some higher purpose being served by the insult-spewing. As long as the insulter stays out of the red zones of actual hate speech and other bannable offenses, that’s all they need to do. I completely sympathize with, even if I don’t share, the distaste or distress of other posters who disapprove of recreational insult-spewing. But their remedy is easily obtained: just stay away from Pit threads. ---
**Author:** ![WalterBishop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/aeb1de/32.png) [@WalterBishop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WalterBishop)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2021, 12:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/670 "2021-08-19T12:08:14Z")
I’ve not read this entire (very long) thread, so I apologize in advance if this suggestion has already been made, but I’ve an idea which _may_ help improve the Pit. It’s an unrealistic suggestion. No doubt about that. And I don’t think it’ll be all that popular - at least, not at first. But it might be interesting to try it out, just to see what happens. For the record, I have mixed feelings about The Pit. I like the rants, and I agree that it’s good to have a place where posters can talk about controversial and/or widely disliked figures without having to watch their language. I can also see the sense in having a place where posters can air their grievances _sans_ gloves. On the other hand, there’s no denying that this board skews strongly to the left. I’m not saying that’s good or bad, just calling it how I see it. This means that when a conservative poster gets Pitted, the thread is more or less guaranteed to turn into a pile-on. There are, as I see it, two reasons for this. The first is that, obviously, this being a liberal board, it’s likely that more people will agree with the liberal doing the Pitting than with the conservative being Pitted, and will want to say as much. The second (and this is true of _all_ boards with _any_ strong political leaning, not just this one) is that political partisanship tends to encourage a schoolyard mentality. Posters use Pittings of conservatives to assert their place in the community by sniping from the sidelines. The end result is that Pittings of conservatives turn into 100 to 1 pile-ons. Also, while I don’t offhand recall seeing any conservatives opening pit threads about liberals, I’d imagine that such threads quickly become equally lop-sided, with posters rushing to defend the target of the thread and castigate the conservative who started it. Now, if you’re fine with all this then you probably won’t like my suggestion. However if, like me, you think this is all a little distasteful, then how about this? **If any poster is Pitted, the only people allowed to post in the thread are the OP and the poster being Pitted** For me, this has several benefits: 1. It ensures a fair fight. 2. Posters might be less likely to pit other posters if they can’t count on community support. 2a) If posters know in advance that they’re going into battle alone, they may work harder to ensure their criticisms are substantive. 3. If the poster being Pitted isn’t having their energy drained by incessant sniping from the sidelines, they’ll be more likely to continue talking to the OP. Eventually, this may lead to a _rapprochement_ between them. Unlikely, I know, but I’m an optimist. Of course, this suggestion is rather restrictive. If an unpopular poster is Pitted, other posters might think _“No fair! I was just about to Pit this guy. Now I have to sit it out? Ooh, I’m going to start one **hell** of a Pit thread about this!”_ But I think there _are_ ways this suggestion could be made to work. One idea could be to have a rule (perhaps an unwritten rule) which says that Pit threads should be between the OP and the target for the first 20/50/100 posts, or for the first 24/48/72 hours (or whatever). Then, after that, everyone can join in. The OP and the target would most likely have tuckered themselves out by then anyway, and the target would hopefully feel less honor-bound to defend themselves from other posters who join in later. Like I said at the beginning, probably not a great idea but I reckon it might be something worth trying. If nothing else, one-on-one flame-wars are just more fun to read than tedious pile-ons. I say give it a go. What’s the worst that can happen? ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2021, 12:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/671 "2021-08-19T12:13:03Z")
> [@WalterBishop](#): > > It ensures a fair fight. Who needs fair? ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2021, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/672 "2021-08-19T12:32:14Z")
Unintended side effect: Other posters would support the first poster by starting their own 1-on-1 threads. In other words, you’d get a distributed pile-on instead of a concentrated single-thread argument. You’d need to amend your rule to say “everybody out of the _entire_ pool” for as long as the original thread is extant. And _then_ you’d need some way to determine when the original thread had run its course, followed by a lottery for the supporters who didn’t previously get a chance to weigh in and now want to take their own 1-on-1 crack. ---
**Author:** ![thorny\_locust](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thorny_locust/32/431_2.png) [@thorny\_locust](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thorny_locust)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2021, 12:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/673 "2021-08-19T12:40:37Z")
@WalterBishop: Your suggestion wouldn’t allow any way, for instance, for other liberals to come in and say they never heard of “Democrat” as being an insult before they read about it here. Sorting out whether others on these boards agree or disagree that a pitting’s deserved seems to me to be a useful and proper function of the Pit. Of course, I’m among the ones not seeing anything near as simple as liberals piling on conservatives just for being conservative; or ‘to assert their place in the community’. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2021, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/674 "2021-08-19T12:42:07Z")
> [@WalterBishop](#): > > If any poster is Pitted, the only people allowed to post in the thread are the OP and the poster being Pitted This is only going to lead to a proliferation of threads about some posters, because they piss off multiple people. > [@Cervaise](#): > > You’d need to amend your rule to say “everybody out of the _entire_ pool” for as long as the original thread is extant. So if someone says something racist, only the first responder gets to Pit them? And especially screw over those of us in non-US timezones? No thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2021, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/675 "2021-08-19T12:52:35Z")
Yeah, my point was this “simple” change would actually be too complex in application to be workable. Personally, I think the best argument for open Pittings is the frequency with which they backfire. Somebody consciously tries to provoke a pile-on, the community says “mmm, no, weak beer,” and the Pitter rapidly becomes the Pittee. That alone argues against the proposal. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2021, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/676 "2021-08-19T13:48:10Z")
Totally agree ---
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2021, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/677 "2021-08-19T16:03:25Z")
> [@thorny\_locust](#): > > Sorting out whether others on these boards agree or disagree that a pitting’s deserved seems to me to be a useful and proper function of the Pit. Given how skewed the numbers are, this is almost inevitably going to go against a conservative poster unless the original Pitter is being extremely and obviously unreasonable. ---
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2021, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/678 "2021-08-19T16:32:13Z")
> [@WalterBishop](#): > > If any poster is Pitted, the only people allowed to post in the thread are the OP and the poster being Pitted It’s an interesting idea that probably would have a better chance of engendering a positive result. But the Pit aficionados do enjoy their pile-ons, so I can’t see it being adopted. ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2021, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/679 "2021-08-19T17:30:22Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > > [@TroutMan](#): > > > > And we’re off the rails here. Why on earth do we need to stop calling out racism in cases where the other person doesn’t think they are being racist? Isn’t it _most_ important to call out in those cases, so the accused has the opportunity to reconsider what they say and learn from it? > > Do you want an accusation of racism to be a serious thing, implying moral turpitude, or a minor matter that people should basically shrug off? Both those things cannot be true. Others have addressed this, but I wanted to take a shot at it, too. I think there’s a difference in how conservative and liberals see accusations of racism/sexism/etc. I am on the liberal side of this, but I get the impression that many conservatives see these accusations as being fundamentally a criticism of the person’s character and innermost being, whereas liberals see them as being ordinarily a criticism of the person’s behavior – typically actions and words. Liberals believe that we all have racist tendencies, and it is our duty as good citizens to examine ourselves and be aware of when our behavior is improperly influenced by those tendencies, and correcting our behavior. So yes, if I say that your argument is racist, I absolutely want you to take that seriously. No, I don’t want you to shrug it off. But my a priori assumption is not that you have more moral turpitude than the rest of us, but that you have examined it less. Of course, my a priori might change, based on your reaction. But the whole point of defining and discussing “micro aggressions” is to draw attention to the fact that well-intentioned people commit small racist (etc.) acts, and need to think about (and sometimes be told about) the impact of their choices, so they can improve going forward. > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > An example from a less contentious issue: I was taken to task some time ago for using the word ‘Democrat’ instead of ‘Democratic’ (as in, ‘The Democrat Party’) I totally didn’t get it, and neither did lots of people. We split down the middle between people who said, "oh yeah, that’s an obvious slur’, and half who responded essentually ‘huh?’ Apparently, ‘Democrat’ is used by some to mean ‘DemocRAT’ or something. But only a portion of the members even knew that was a thing, while others were bewildered. But it was assumed that since I am on the ‘right’ I intended it as a malicious slur. This is an excellent example. I am in the camp that is offended by referring to the “Democrat Party”. And it’s not even because I knew the origins (which is “they aren’t Democratic”) but because all of a sudden, people started purposefully mispronouncing my name. It got less offensive to me over time, as it became less obvious that it was intentional, honestly. But I still don’t like it. So thank you, Sam\_Stone, for changing this speech pattern. I appreciate the consideration. > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > we endured the Tea Party being called ‘Tea Baggers’ for years on this board even after many people said it was offensive to them, on a thin-reed justification that some clueless tea party group somewhere used the term for a few days before being informed of its sexual connotation, and therefore no one had a right to complain about it. That was certainly a case where people on this board _didn’t_ change their behaviour when they were infprmed that it was offensive fwiw, I used “Tea Baggers” for about a week, and then realized I was being childish and rude, so I stopped. I realize I was wrong. It was just SUCH a funny mistake on the part of those initial clueless people that it was hard not to pick it up. Mea Culpa. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2021, 10:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/680 "2021-08-20T10:23:34Z")
> [@WalterBishop](#): > > If any poster is Pitted, the only people allowed to post in the thread are the OP and the poster being Pitted A corollary and slightly less drastic version of this is to put all Pit threads of individuals on slow mode for 10+ hours. Slow mode is a configuration in Discourse that forces every poster in the thread to only post every X number of hours since their last post. The number of hours is set by the mod. I suggest a number higher than 10 for the number of hours between posts. It would require the thread starter to coordinate with a mod to set the slow mode, but I’ve seen people coordinate with the mods for their threads before. This should not be a problem. If a poster can only take a bit of the apple twice a day, they may be more thoughtful about what to say in the Pit thread. Of course, this will just push some of the grumbling underground. But each person would still have their say. The person being Pit would be able to respond more thoughtfully, knowing that there are a limited amount of responses possible in a given amount of time. That might elevate the level of discussion in the thread to a more rational level and be more reflective of the kind of discussion outsiders (lurkers) might want to join in. ---
**Author:** ![filmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@filmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filmore)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2021, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/681 "2021-08-20T16:48:34Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > A corollary and slightly less drastic version of this is to put all Pit threads of individuals on slow mode for 10+ hours. That’s a really interesting idea. I think it should be explored. It would likely take a lot of heat out of the pittings and encourage more thoughtful interactions. And it would likely mean pitting threads would peter out relatively quickly. Seems like a good compromise between those who like pitting threads and those that don’t. ---
**Author:** ![kayaker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kayaker/32/441_2.png) [@kayaker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kayaker)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2021, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/682 "2021-08-20T16:51:14Z")
> [@filmore](#): > > It would likely take a lot of heat out of the pittings and encourage more thoughtful interactions. You say that like it’s assumed to be a good thing. ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2021, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/683 "2021-08-20T17:10:11Z")
I thought about slow mode, but I’m afraid it would compound the “piling on” effect. Someone pits a poster with an unpopular take. The pittee replies. And is then locked out for some time while twelve other posters complain about them… ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2021, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/684 "2021-08-20T17:38:50Z")
Agreed, **puzzlegal**. I don’t see how that does anything to address the (nonexistent) problem. ---
**Author:** ![GreysonCarlisle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a87d85/32.png) [@GreysonCarlisle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreysonCarlisle)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2021, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/685 "2021-08-20T19:46:05Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > Slow mode is a configuration in Discourse that forces every poster in the thread to only post every X number of hours since their last post. The number of hours is set by the mod. I suggest a number higher than 10 for the number of hours between posts. I usually see slow mode measured in minutes, not hours. It’s good for some threads, not so great for others. It’s especially useful for when there’s not going to be adequate mod coverage for some period of time and a thread is likely to go off the rails. You set the timeout for whatever it takes to let the mods keep up (or catch up) in a timely manner. Hours might sometimes be necessary, but I usually see something like 15 minutes. ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2021, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859/686 "2021-08-20T20:13:48Z")
I’ve actually seen it work much better than I would have imagined on threads where both sides are heated. It forces everyone to think a little before they post. (or prevents them from posting much, one or the other.) It’s possible it WOULD help some heated pit threads, or P&E threads, too. But I don’t think it addresses the “pile on” issue. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859.md?page=33) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-should-the-pit-be-changed-if-at-all/946859.md?page=35)