Acting like a racist jerk is against the rules, even in the Pit, right?
I have the impression that my reports of rule violations tend to be disregarded.
Nope.
I suspect the actual answer is a wee bit more nuanced than that.
No reports are ignored due to the reporter. Some just have a better batting average. The last post I reported in a forum I don’t mod was not acted on. It happens.
As the person who started the thread in question, i would like to note that i acknowledged, in the very first post, that this could become a problem. I also made very clear that i did not consider my thread to preclude other, individual threads on important subjects. In fact, i explicitly said that it might be a good idea to start separate threads for particularly compelling or controversial cases. If you want to do that, i completely encourage it.
I think that having the thread is useful, though, for a few reasons. Firstly, anyone willing to look through it will see that there have been dozens and dozens of specific cases discussed in that thread. At the time i made the thread, there were at least four separate threads dealing with issues of controversial law enforcement procedures.
Do people really want each of these incidents, large or small, to generate their own thread? And if not, re you happy to have some such incidents go without any mention at all? Because that’s what would happen. While there is, at times, a certain repetitiveness to the debate in the omnibus thread, we have actually had broad-ranging discussions of a whole variety of incidents, many of which might have received no attention at all if they required a separate thread.
And this goes to the heart of the issue, nicely identified upthread by Enginerd: the thread was not designed only to be a laundry list, but to engage with an “overarching societal problem,” and to provide a forum for discussing that problem while also using specific incidents as examples or evidence. I thought i made that pretty clear in the OP. Even if that “overarching societal problem” sometimes appears to get lost in the bickering and minutiae, i would argue that it is still evident in the thread as a whole, and that the ongoing accumulation of evidence and incidents actually serves to help make the point.
Anyway, i would argue against it being closed, not because it is “my” thread, but because my default position on this message board has always been that any thread that is still receiving contributions, especially if they come from a reasonable variety of posters, should always be allowed to remain open.
Maybe.
Touche!
I don’t know. That thread doesn’t look very nice. I didn’t see a single kitten or puppy.
Okay, the nuanced answer:
“Being a racist” is not against board rules. And “being a jerk” isn’t really against the Pit rules: the purpose of the Pit is, basically, the place where people can be jerks to each other. So, being a “racist jerk” isn’t against the Pit’s rules. Now, there is a rule against hate speech in the Pit. Personally, I do not consider any expression of prejudice to automatically be hate speech. “I hate gay people,” is not, in my opinion, “hate speech”. “Faggot,” on the other hand, is. “Let’s kill the faggots,” definitely is.
So, being a racist jerk is allowed in the Pit, so long as you’re not A) using slurs to express your opinions, and B) advocating violence against members of the group you dislike.
How about advocating Ahmed “Clock Boy” Mohammed be the target of a drone strike? I did report that one.
No, I don’t usually consider statements made about a specific, named individual to fall under the “hate speech” rule.
That being said, a conversation in the mod loop has just come to a satisfying conclusion, which largely moots this issue.
Who do you think you are, Shakespeare?
Nay.
So, you’re going to share the sheep now? Or they still off limits to members and guests?
I ain’t sharin’ no sheep with nobody!
Share the sheep? There’s bound to be pushback on that.
Sheep are for shearing.