I got to the thread late and seeing the tone decided it wasn’t worth the drama of engaging. But I wholeheartedly agreed with your assessment. I think the point another poster made about this being a weird time politically for such a exaggerated message is also apt. @What_Exit shut that down which I found a bit weird considering he allowed the villainizing of whites.
Now we’re in thread two where @BeagleJesus treats anyone offering a critical view a bigot. Any wonder I chose not to engage?
I applaud your constant apologizing and attempts to reach out, but there’s folks in that thread who came in loaded for bear and ready to do battle on the topic of race.
Sensitive subjects have people who have good reasons to be sensitive. I may be being overly sensitive myself and mistaken about intent.
I do recognize that it may be easier for me to advocate for not assuming bad intent. Priors. Odds are that a large amount of time that @BeagleJesus perceives racism implied they are right. I even grant that I can say things out of implicit bias without recognizing it even though it may be obvious to the other person.
I don’t think so this time and do think a CS thread on a show about race benefits from moderation encouraging behaviors all around that stay within extra respectful and on show related bounds.
FWIW @BeagleJesus has a point. They had been and are a significant contributor to the thread. Your chiming in just to snidely soft Jr mod their post does read as a bit off. I’m not a moderator but my understanding is that one believes a post is crossing into off the rails or too personal territory then the better choice is to flag it for a moderator to judge.
It’s certainly true that if a work of entertainment includes race as an issue,* then feelings about that work will run high, and misunderstandings may well result. To me the only possible solution is to keep talking (and part of that process, sometimes, is moderation that serves to let people take a step back and cool down).
*There are plenty of works that include race, but not as an issue; a famous early example was the movie An Officer and a Gentleman, which included a major character who was black without being a Symbol or a Life Lesson or a Magic character. He was just a guy doing his job.
.
.
.
I agree with all of this, too.
.
.
.
For all who participate in such threads, it’s worth being extra alert to phrasing choices that may be taken as insulting. I believe What_Exit was correct in seeing a point about one particular phrasing being questionable:
The ellipsis is a poster’s name, which I removed not to change the meaning of What_Exit’s post, but instead to keep the principle general.
Unless we’re in the Pit, there are phrases that are always going to get people’s backs up:
I suggest that you do a little root cause analysis
I suggest that you examine your assumptions
I suggest that you look at the mindset you’re displaying and may not be aware of
I suggest that you perform an attitude adjustment
All such comments carry an implicit message of ‘I am your moral superior and I am in a position to shame you.’ No such comment is ever neutral. It’s always a power play.
And no one is ever going to receive such a comment gratefully.
Using power plays is not arguing in good faith. Whether the topic is race or anything else, here at the Dope we strive to argue in good faith.
I read this thread because I’m also new to moderating Cafe Society, and want to understand the issues as best as I can. But I feel like this thread has run its course, and is veering into personal attacks in various directions. I’m going to close it. If a more experienced mod (or the “about this message board” mods) think I overstepped my experience and/or authority, I trust they will re-open it.