Well, it’s in Chicago, that’s almost Canada if that counts.
The board has had moderators in other countries before. Coldfire was from Holland while Gukumatz was from Norway. And I believe Colibri is in Central America, although that is still usually seen as Northern America.
It’s just that, right now, we don’t have anyone from outside of here.
…and it shows.
Why does it matter?
Er… This particular line of questioning began by noting that a large number of conservative posters complained about the lack of conservative moderators and he merely made a joke about whether this was true also about having more ethnically diverse moderators.
That said, I’ll take your remarks as evidence you think people who whine about “liberal bias” amongst the mods are being idiots.
Panama. After living here for more than 25 years, and working extensively in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, I think I have some perspective on the developing world.
The vast majority of board members are North American, with a significant minority from Europe and Australasia. Only a tiny minority are from elsewhere. In fact, we do take into account input from other areas (as for example, disallowing a username that included “Hottentot” because it was considered offensive in Southern Africa). Why would you expect us to have a South African (or developing world) perspective?
This board doesn’t have a large number of conservative posters.
[Quote=Colibri]
Why would you expect us to have a South African (or developing world) perspective?
[/QUOTE]
Some perspective on exactly why “Africans are genetically retarded” is hate speech would be appreciated, that’s why.
And with respect, Colibri - you’re a great mod, and you do have lots of developing world experience, I know - but you’ll never actually be one of us. And I feel that that disconnect is why “polite” racists are allowed free rein here - nobody on the current Mod staff comes from the outside or seems to understand.
of course not, it would remove the opportunity to search for opportunities to complain about the perception of bias against your own political tendency and engage in the similar games
where did this occur?
disdain
One of our current moderators is African-American, and a former mod who is African-American still participates in the mod loop. My niece and nephew are biracial (their father is Guyanese). One of my sister-in-laws is South African (though white, she and her family were Mandela supporters). Another member of our extended family is Trinidadian (of mostly South Asian ancestry).
You see these ideas as being “allowed,” while we see it as allowing them to be refuted. These ideas don’t go away if we prohibit their discussion here. I think the discussions do more to provide ammunition to those who wish to refute the arguments than provide support to those who advance them. I don’t agree that the best way to combat pernicious ideas is to prohibit their discussion.
Have the mods considered the idea that such discussions be moved to the Pit, which would allow such assertions (in my view, at least) to be more accurately characterized?
I think that would have the effect of making each thread a train wreck instead of an actual discussion.
Threads may be started in the Pit, certainly. However, having a policy that means all threads on a subject get moved to the Pit is the moral equivalent of banning discussion. I don’t think it’s something I’d endorse.
They’re not already?
I think I disagree, but thanks for responding.
That doesn’t make them African or Muslim, does it? I was quite clear I meant a non-American minority experience.
I’m aware there used to be such mods, or at least one. I’m also aware the moderation has changed in the last while.
Again, with respect, none of that makes you an outsider. Any more than I expect my wife to have the outsider experience just because she’s my wife.
Yes, I get that. What you all don’t seem to get is that I’m not actually very interested in repeatedly combating those ideas in some Sisyphean labour. Not when it comes in the form of insult. Sure, you insiders don’t see “Your entire continent is retarded” as insulting. Well, I do.
Concur.
We get a constant stream of new members who may not have seen these ideas refuted before. And you’re not the only one who combats them. If you feel them insulting, there’s no obligation for you to participate in them.
As a scientist and environmentalist, I find the arguments of climate change deniers (who oddly enough seem to overlap with “race realists” to a remarkable extent) even more pernicious than those of racists, because I believe that such denialism will result in more deaths and suffering in the coming century than racism will (although the most serious affects will fall most heavily on the developing world). I would not, however, advocate banning such arguments. And despite my feelings about it, I rarely participate in such discussions because I know there are others here who are better able than me to combat these ideas (and have more stomach for the fight).
I’m well aware of that - in fact, I’ve cut back quite a bit.
There’s no obligation for me to post anything.
But that’s not the point of what I said - mods like Jonathan have said they strive for a civil tone in GD. And here we are, telling you that to us, the tone is decidedly not civil from the outset, from the very thread conception. And you say “just ignore it” as though that meant there wasn’t a double standard.
Climate change denialists aren’t insulting anyone’s ethnicity just by posting their arguments (just their intelligence). Race realists are.
Who is forcing you to do so?
The voices in my head, clearly :rolleyes:
So the solution, in your view, is what? Ban any discussion of race and intelligence? What exactly do you want to see happen here?
There are a lot of discussions here that people might find personally insulting. We’re not going to prohibit discussions just on the basis that some people find them offensive.