Ivory Tower Denizen, Is There a Reason for a Warning Rather than an Explanation?

[Shodan]

@IvoryTowerDenizen

To clarify, the point of my comment was: If your intent wasn’t to troll you would have taken a different tack. Since you chose to drop an inflammatory one-liner with no context or explanation it was clear that your intent was to rile people up. That was to indicate that the topic of self identification is not de facto trolling, but they way you did it was.

So, to answer your question posed in the OP again- I did not think your post was incomplete, so awaiting an explanation was not warranted.

I don’t feel like my question is coming across clearly.

You assumed, because I didn’t flesh out my response, what my intention was. Why did you assume it that way?

Also, can you explain why mentioning the key role of self-identification in gender identification is inflammatory?

Regards,
Shodan

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

@octopus

How can you be so certain what intent one has?

@octopus

I just find it an interesting ability to unerringly discern intent.

I don’t think playing the excluded middle position has value. No one has claimed unerring certainty. Trolling requires one to discern intent, as that is the main definition of trolling- posting to inflame or get a rise out of people- has intent as an important. It’s a judgement call and I’m not one to accuse posters of trolling too often, so it’s certainly not a knee-jerk position for me to take, FWIW.

In this case- the combination of thread topic (a discussion of models driving gender identity) and the specific post (a one-liner invoking the LBGTQ criticism that people will just get to “choose whatever they want”. This argument is most often seen arguing that kids will just pretend to be trans to get access to the girls bathroom, but it’s a common minimization of the topic on its own). The dismissive tone included in the one-liner serves the purpose of pissing people off and/or yanking their chain, in a thread devoted to a serious conversation about what causes transgender feelings.It was clear enough to me, and as moderator, tat is my job- to read reports/threads, make judgments, and act in someway.

So, to answer your question: I never claimed inerrant insight and I don’t need it to make the claim of trolling. Hope that clarifies.

And with all due respect to BigT, apologies aren’t my litmus test for someone’s intent. An apology can be hollow and an explanation without apology can be meaningful.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

@Shodan

I don’t feel like my question is coming across clearly.

You assumed, because I didn’t flesh out my response, what my intention was. Why did you assume it that way?

Also, can you explain why mentioning the key role of self-identification in gender identification is inflammatory?

Regards,
Shodan

I explained why I assumed it in the warning I sent you. To recap, your specific words in that specific thread were designed to yank chains and/or inflame. I interpreted it that way because it seemed clear that it was a one-liner using a common trope to be dismissive of the serious topic of children identifying as transgender.

Self-identification could have been an interesting addition, as AHunter3 posted, but you didn’t choose to add it to the thread in that way. If you want to spark real discussion and debate, don’t use dismissive tropes, with no explanation or context.

And please do not use dismissive tropes and then ask “what, me?” when you get called on it.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

I’m out working most of today, so I’ll only have limited time to follow the boards. I think I’ve answered the OP’s questions, and hopefully followed up on the most pertinent others.

[UltraVires]

@Exapno_Mapcase

It’s impossible to see that post in any other way than as insulting the entire nature of the trans decision. Shodan is an experienced poster, well versed in the lines drawn on controversial topics. A nuanced post could have been framed in a million ways. This was a slur. A warning was well deserved. I know that every warning now has to have an ATMB thread, but c’mon.

Since when is taking one side of a controversial topic “insulting” to those who take the other side? When did transgender become a protected class?

I made a comment about seven years ago saying that if not for the politicization of the issues, biological men who thought they were women would be institutionalized. I wasn’t modded. I’m sure that is terribly insulting to someone. May a poster here still have that position? If so, must it be sufficiently articulate; if it is only a one line jab, then it is warnable?

What about the threads that insult Nazis? We can insult Nazis but not transgendered folks? I mean, I agree that we should insult Nazis, but is the rule of the board that we can insult some people, but not our favorites? No one line jabs against Nazis?

And the thing is, Shodan did not really insult anyone. He posted a drive by which illustrates his position on the issue which would be offensive to a person who was affected by the issue and opposite his position. Is a post on a political topic insulting only if it is not sufficiently fleshed out enough?

It should not be like this. We should not pick our favorite groups and deem that statements opposing them “insult” the group or is a “slur” against the group that we can get rid of. It stifles debate.

[IvoryTowerDenizen]

That is a misreading of what I posted.

Where did I say that taking the other side is insulting? I was precise and clear that it was specific to how is said it. In fact I’ve said multiple times that topic in and of itself was fine.

Your arguing against something I didn’t say.

[John_Mace]

Seems like Shodan was just posting the position that a lot of people take on the issue. You are what you self-identify as. The OP was certainly nuanced, but it looked to me like he wasn’t seeing the forest for the trees. More nuance isn’t always a good thing. Also, I’m not seeing the inflammatory nature of the post, other than an assumption that he was mocking one political side. But that happens dozens of times a day here.

But… let’s say Shodan was mocking the liberal position. Are we going to start seeing the liberal posters here moderated every time they mock conservative positions? If so, you guys have your work cut out for you.

[billfish678]

Bingo to Ultrvires and John Mace.

Even IF Shodan was outa line…IMO an official warning is BS…how about just a mod note?

Oh…but an official warning is no big deal…baloney…cause you can bet your last dollar when a suspension or banning comes along that “no big deal” warning will be used against you…

[octopus]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

That’s some college-level post-deconstructionism you’re dropping on us here, octopus–lemme drink some coffee first!

I was telling one of my students recently about a real-world magical tradition through which practitioners could use rare substances in combination with carefully-constructed wands to complete a ritual whereby they could place thoughts in the heads of other practitioners removed not only by thousands of miles, but also by years. That tradition, I told him, is called “writing.”

Presumably when Shodan “writes,” he’s operating within this tradition. Sure, he may be lying–the practice has a dark side to it–but normally we assume fellow practitioners aren’t using the Shadowed Arts. As such, we can be confident, if not certain, about his intent, because this magical tradition is a powerful one: he has used it to communicate his intent successfully.

It may come as no surprise that I have little patience with “how can you be certain about his intent?” arguments :). I similarly dislike snarky one-liners dropped in threads as a way for the poster to feel like they’ve won the debate, and am happy to see them moderated.

I hope none of that was sarcastic. :eek:

I think the real issue was holding a mirror to certain positions is actually dangerous on this board because a distilled reflection of an argument can highlight absurdity clearly.

@IvoryTowerDenizen

I don’t think playing the excluded middle position has value. No one has claimed unerring certainty. Trolling requires one to discern intent, as that is the main definition of trolling- posting to inflame or get a rise out of people- has intent as an important. It’s a judgement call and I’m not one to accuse posters of trolling too often, so it’s certainly not a knee-jerk position for me to take, FWIW.

In this case- the combination of thread topic (a discussion of models driving gender identity) and the specific post (a one-liner invoking the LBGTQ criticism that people will just get to “choose whatever they want”. This argument is most often seen arguing that kids will just pretend to be trans to get access to the girls bathroom, but it’s a common minimization of the topic on its own). The dismissive tone included in the one-liner serves the purpose of pissing people off and/or yanking their chain, in a thread devoted to a serious conversation about what causes transgender feelings.It was clear enough to me, and as moderator, tat is my job- to read reports/threads, make judgments, and act in someway.

So, to answer your question: I never claimed inerrant insight and I don’t need it to make the claim of trolling. Hope that clarifies.

And with all due respect to BigT, apologies aren’t my litmus test for someone’s intent. An apology can be hollow and an explanation without apology can be meaningful.

Thanks for the response. It would be nice, then, to see consistency with this new standard towards this form of trolling.

@UltraVires

Since when is taking one side of a controversial topic “insulting” to those who take the other side? When did transgender become a protected class?

I made a comment about seven years ago saying that if not for the politicization of the issues, biological men who thought they were women would be institutionalized. I wasn’t modded. I’m sure that is terribly insulting to someone. May a poster here still have that position? If so, must it be sufficiently articulate; if it is only a one line jab, then it is warnable?

What about the threads that insult Nazis? We can insult Nazis but not transgendered folks? I mean, I agree that we should insult Nazis, but is the rule of the board that we can insult some people, but not our favorites? No one line jabs against Nazis?

And the thing is, Shodan did not really insult anyone. He posted a drive by which illustrates his position on the issue which would be offensive to a person who was affected by the issue and opposite his position. Is a post on a political topic insulting only if it is not sufficiently fleshed out enough?

It should not be like this. We should not pick our favorite groups and deem that statements opposing them “insult” the group or is a “slur” against the group that we can get rid of. It stifles debate.

Well said.

@John_Mace

Seems like Shodan was just posting the position that a lot of people take on the issue. You are what you self-identify as. The OP was certainly nuanced, but it looked to me like he wasn’t seeing the forest for the trees. More nuance isn’t always a good thing. Also, I’m not seeing the inflammatory nature of the post, other than an assumption that he was mocking one political side. But that happens dozens of times a day here.

Exactly.

But… let’s say Shodan was mocking the liberal position. Are we going to start seeing the liberal posters here moderated every time they mock conservative positions? If so, you guys have your work cut out for you.

You know the answer to that.

[Exapno_Mapcase]

@UltraVires

Since when is taking one side of a controversial topic “insulting” to those who take the other side? When did transgender become a protected class?

For the ten millionth time, context is everything. We have history to go by. All those threads on gay marriage, just for one example. If people learned nothing else, they found out that issuing gay slurs was not considered taking one side of a controversial issue. Issues of identity are not the same as issues of religion or politics, where choices are consciously made and sides can be switched.

Amazingly, when you compare broccoli to broccoli rather than spinach to broccoli you get better comparisons. I say it’s spinach, and I say the hell with it. (Google it, you uncultured apes.)

[John_Mace]

@Exapno_Mapcase

For the ten millionth time, context is everything. We have history to go by. All those threads on gay marriage, just for one example. If people learned nothing else, they found out that issuing gay slurs was not considered taking one side of a controversial issue. Issues of identity are not the same as issues of religion or politics, where choices are consciously made and sides can be switched.

Which slur did Shodan issue?

[bobot]

@Left_Hand_of_Dorkness

…
I was telling one of my students recently about a real-world magical tradition through which practitioners could use rare substances in combination with carefully-constructed wands to complete a ritual whereby they could place thoughts in the heads of other practitioners removed not only by thousands of miles, but also by years. That tradition, I told him, is called “writing.”

…

I think this is really cool. Thanks for posting it!

[Beckdawrek]

I guess I don’t understand at all. The original OP was unintelligible to me any way, which made SHODAN’S question moot. Can someone elaborate ?

[billfish678]

@octopus

You know the answer to that.

Funny thing is…the mods and most of the posters here can’t even see it.

Not to say a way conservative leaning SDMB in bizarro world wouldn’t be just as biased in the other direction.

[Bricker]

@Exapno_Mapcase

Issues of identity are not the same as issues of religion or politics, where choices are consciously made and sides can be switched.

That claim is itself debated in the political arena. And while I agree it’s true that they differ in the way some are innate and others adopted, it’s not obvious that this alone mandates that one is sacrosanct and immune from criticism or mocking.

I intend to start reporting mocking comments directed at conservative politics and posting the report in this thread, along with any action taken. Let’s see how the mirror works.

[aldiboronti]

How would Shodan’s post rile or piss anyone off? I’m genuinely puzzled. Isn’t he just saying the the No 1 factor is that people themselves decide their own gender identity? Thar’s a slur?

[billfish678]

@Bricker

That claim is itself debated in the political arena. And while I agree it’s true that they differ in the way some are innate and others adopted, it’s not obvious that this alone mandates that one is sacrosanct and immune from criticism or mocking.

I intend to start reporting mocking comments directed at conservative politics and posting the report in this thread, along with any action taken. Let’s see how the mirror works.

I’ve thought about doing the same thing. Maybe we could start a movement.

Then again I got warned when I threatened to start posting just like Dio did…so the powers that be don’t like such innocent protests…

[Lamia]

@UltraVires

We can insult Nazis but not transgendered folks?

Uh, yes.

[Larry_Borgia]

I don’t understand why this even merited a mod note, let alone a warning. What did Shodan do wrong? Isn’t what he said–that a person’s gender is determined by what they say it is–pretty much the prevailing consensus on this board?

[billfish678]

But he is conservative… and he said it wrong…