You know what? Good catch. I was just glancing through the thread and I’m so used to the motif here of Republican = racist that I read bobot’s post as applying to all Republicans
OR
Maybe k9bfriender and I secretly teamed up to show everyone what a real challenge looks like.
Nope!
Not that one, but I do think that people on this Board make statement that intentionally or unintentionally apply to all Republicans. I talked to a mod once when someone posted how Republicans are racist and how that post is calling me as a Republican a racist and isn’t calling a member a racist a violation? The official stance was (and still is I guess) that calling a whole group X is not the same as calling a member of that group X. So if I were to say dog lovers are idiots, that’s not saying that you qua a dog lover are an idiot. But I’m sure you would still take that statement as talking about you.
I think that people are sloppy with their rhetoric, and sometimes let emotions get the better of them. I’m sure there are unkind things said about Republicans in general that not all Republicans deserve to be tarred with.
So, sure, I get it, you’ve probably received some insult somewhere that you didn’t deserve.
But, while this board may lean left, and in this space Republicans may get more of that then those on the left do, if you look at the world, that’s quite in reverse.
So, it’s not really fair but you probably do get some hostility that should be directed towards those who deliberately and intentionally demonize and dehumanize the left, and I apologize if I’ve ever misdirected ire your way for something you didn’t deserve.
But it’s hard out here for a Democrat. We watch as troll tactics work, as disinformation and out of context information work their way to create false narratives, and we are powerless to stop it. Some of us that live in red areas get this constantly. Now, I don’t get the hostility directed at me, as most of these people think I’m on their side, but they are being hostile to me and my opinions, as they talk about how they want to harm people I care about.
This is the only place that I talk politics freely. In my life, it’s very rare that it comes up, and when it does, I try to change the subject. So, sometimes, I have some stuff to vent, and I’m human, so I can hyperbole or exaggerate or broad-brush unfairly, and many posters here do as well. But, unlike in real life, I will point out disinformation, and also unlike real life, I will provide cites and ask for the same. This is the one place where I can refuse to let disinformation stand.
But any “hate” is towards the policies, policies that we truly believe to be harmful, and intentionally so. The people, while I disagree with them, I don’t have any ill will towards, even though many of them may have extreme ill will towards me.
I have not read the specific law. Most (but not all) of the drag shows I’ve gone to have quite a bit of sexual repartee in them and probably THAT would be inappropriate in public with children around. But just a gay guy tucked in a dress entertaining a crowd? Less pornographic than a lot of the stuff singers get away with. We all know what it is - how dare you be gay in public.
And I heartily disagree. Let’s say that this Board had decided to hate on dog lovers. Every thread about animals is a majority of negative comments on dog lovers. Generalized statements like dog lovers are unsanitary. Outrageous statements like dog lovers are bestialitists; statements that never get challenge or if you do you get shouted down by 10 others. A thread about zoos has posters taking potshots a dog lovers. Would you see anything constructive about a thread where you can air your greivances? Do you really think it would be an intellectual discussion or more of the same.
Like I said regarding the LSLguy quote, I made an error because I was quickly going through a thread I wasn’t familiar with, talking about Republicans, and I saw “racists” which on this Board (although not by bobot in that post) is a synonym for Republican. Because of that error, I might as well check out of this thread because now that example will be brought up forevermore and taint ALL of my issues as invalid.
In this hypothetical, are the dog lovers also trying to roll back civil rights, ban abortion, end same sex marriage, and force transgendered people to hide their identity? As well as advocate for a number of less odious but still disagreeable policies?
If so, then I may occasionally slip up and join in a round of anger against the latest outrage of the dog lovers, even as I cuddle with my dog. Even though we have something in common doesn’t mean that I have to take insult when I know it’s not intended for me. I don’t have to actually say, “#notalldoglovers”, I can append it for myself.
If not, what is it about dog lovers that has caused such ire? Or are you saying that it’s just a random arbitrary thing that has no rational basis? If so, are you saying that there is no rational basis to dislike what the Republicans are doing?
Anyway, if that were really the case, then I would hope that I would have the convictions of my beliefs to start a thread on why I love dogs. I would try to convince people that their beliefs about dog lovers are misfounded, and I would try to at least differentiate myself from other dog lovers that they had bad interactions with.
Now, that said, we have had a few threads that are actually a pretty good analogy of both your and my points. I’m not up for digging them up right now, but there’s been a few pitbull threads that got a little… heated. Now, in those threads, there was a whole lot of hate thrown towards pitbulls and their owners, and as someone who has no problem with pitbulls, I felt personally attacked by this. However, it was really just like two people, and mostly just one, who were driving the insults, and everyone else was just trying to have a conversation around the invective, even if they disagreed with eachother. It made everything a bit more hostile, but more importantly, it made everything feel a whole lot more hostile.
But, that was also in the pit. I’d hope things would be more civil outside of it.
I think that if the OP isn’t a poisoned well, and it is looking for intellectual discussion, and the OP is willing to simply ignore anyone who seems more in it to get a swipe in than to exchange understanding, there’s a good chance it would.
Remember, we can be our own mods, we can issue our own personal bans on people, and not have to see their posts.
And like I said, I’m sure that there are things said in anger or laziness that are unfair, and it shouldn’t be too hard to find an example. But, roll back a little hyperbole, and often, the observation is fair.
“Republicans want to kill transgendered people” is unfair hyperbole. But it is based on the fact that Republicans are electing people for the purpose of removing the rights of transgendered people, so it’s not like it’s just out of thin air.
And at the same time, I think that it’s not that infrequent that one may misinterpret something, and assume it means something that it doesn’t, and feel aggrieved for that, as in the LSLGuy quote.
I mean, I don’t know how a thread like that would end up going, but the more I see here, the more I think that something like that is needed, not even just here, but nationally, globally. We need to level with eachother, find out what it is that we actually disagree on, and if it’s really as big a deal as we make it out to be.
Anyway, just for the record, I am registered as a Republican.
Unless I’ve missed something (quite possible, it’s a long thread), nobody’s needed to be modded in this thread so far. And the thread Love in the Age of Trump, or, I fell in love with a Republican appears to have quietly fizzled out, with no sign of any need for moderation action, either.
Maybe the assumption that the proposed thread would be unworkable because too many people couldn’t even be civil in it is flawed. I’d really like to see it tried. If it does rapidly get entirely out of hand, then ditch it.
Again, this is factually wrong. The mods have explicitly said that questioning the facts of a claimed “positive” news story and offering opinions about whether it is actually good news is allowed.
That leaves out the context that “good” in this case is what is good from a gun rights advocate’s position. A story of a successful gun control bill will be moderated, as well as any questioning of how a story that leaves all participants traumatized, injured, and/or dead is positive.
Anyway, I think the reason that it’s become dead is because it’s boring when there isn’t any pushback. At least in SGNOTD, we can get some recreational outrage in.
So, I guess the point is that a thread, if given special protection, not only makes more work for the mods, but also ends up petering out when it is found that they didn’t actually want what they asked for.
A thread of testimonials of Republicans with no question or contest would be as boring for them as it would be frustrating to those silenced.
It’s not how long it lasted, it’s how it ended that defines “petering out”.
After the new rules were laid out, posting became less and less frequent, with lots of “21 days later” “2 months later” “6 months later” between posts. For a while one poster was using it as a blog, just posting news stories with no commentary or discussion.
I assume people still use guns in self defense, but I wouldn’t know if from that thread.
OTOH, SGNOTD actually just passed its 10th year anniversary and is going strong. (Sadly)
Yes, we did that with the Positive Gun Story thread. After a while, it just withered away. As it turns out, issue threads without debate or controversy aren’t very interesting. No one could have predicted that.