Depends on the group.
I think he should have been banned on the spot.
Draw a line and people will skirt it. A statement like “I hear that fully half of them are below average intelligence.” applied to a specific group sounds like bigotry, but is arguably defensible on mathematical grounds. But even statements that are arguably defensible or even flat out true can be presented in a manner intended to promulgate bigoted thought, which makes them hate speech to this listener.
At least the last two - I’m aware **tom ** just plain doesn’t mod hate speech.
If you’re going to threaten the guy’s posting privileges (rightly so), go head and make it a warning. I’ve seen people warned for far less.
If you’re looking for ways to improve the board, I think this would be a start.
No, it’s not just “an opinion” - especially to the people it’s about.
Here, give this a try - “Jews are venal and greedy” - *still *just an opinion? How about "Homosexuals are depraved and morally degenerate. " - just an opinion? How about “Women are just naturally inferior to men in every way that counts.” - just another opinion?
Well, for statements about black people, at any rate.
Some ___ are ___ is likely to be true and potentially offensive for many statements. The adjective “some” is powerful like that.
Being a member doesn’t mean you control the mods or write the rules.
Yeah, I trust some people to know obvious weasel words when they see them.
But *not *being a member gets one asked “Why don’t you pay up?” and accused of being “huffy” in threads about how to generate income for the board. I just like it always being out in the open that it’s not for lack of wanting to pay, or the means to do so.
If it is “an outright appeal to racism” as Tom labeled it( and I agree it is ), a formal warning would have been appropriate IMHO.
I think you’re barking up the wrong tree. The rules are constructed in a way that encourages the use of coded language. If there was a rule that said “You can’t call blacks dumb, lazy, or shiftless” or restrict the use of coded language in regards to people of color, there would be no threads (I’m overexaggerating here, but you know what I mean). As of this writing, I can count at least 5 on-going threads right now that’s nothing but white supremacist garbage; I even had a moderator on this forum categorized one my post as “anti-white”. You won’t get any traction here especially when this place - in my view - is a mix between NPR’s Fresh Air and Mississippi Burning. You even had a poster who skipped over your complaint and attacked you. In another thread, another poster posted your picture to mock you. Don’t let these people treat you like that. Can I give you some unsolicited advice? Just move to the Pit and/or reduce the amount you post. These people don’t deserve your perspective. Seriously. There’s very little refined debate going on in the other forums: in fact, it’s nothing but a dance between people who know of rules of this forum and the people who don’t know the rules; and when you don’t know the rules, you’ll be baited, warned, and banned. With all of that said, the offensive post would not get a warning because it affirms the dictums of white fragility. For white folks, there is nothing inherently racist, prejudicial, or morally wrong by questioning the intelligence of black people. You can do so long as you’re not too explicit (indeed, the moderator even said - emphasis mine - “. . . [Y]ou would be advised to avoid this sort of outright appeal to racism” suggesting that an appeal to racism is OK as long as it’s implicit and not outright) about it.
Cite? Linky?
Why restrict such a rule to so-called “people of color?” Why not a general rule prohibiting any negative or overly positive language that is used to describe any subset? The subject of the thread is in the same form as some men are bad and enjoy raping or most of Republicans are evil and do evil. Yes, the moderated post was ugly but in a thread about murder, which is a pretty ugly act, wouldn’t you expect some ugliness?
And such an indication should be a Warning, IMO. That is their purpose: to tell someone they are in danger of being banned (or suspended). Trolling usually is dealt with in that way–Warning for the first time, then instaban if they continue.
And I do not agree with your characterization. It is not merely an opinion or negative sentiment towards a group. It is a derogatory statement towards a class* of people. It is actually a racist attack on black people, not just a negative statement.
In my opinion, that means that it is hate speech. That said, I don’t really care what you call it. If it’s just generic “trolling” or even more generic “being a jerk,” that’s fine, too. But you asked if it should be considered hate speech, so I gave my opinion.
Whatever you call it, I think it deserves a Warning. Not only based on my own interpretation but also on tom’s.
*As in the legal term “suspect class.”
Devil’s advocate: Isn’t a poster like eg8576736 the reason why we’re all here? Would it help if we could reason with him to change his assumptions? Isn’t his ignorance exactly the thing we’re here to fight? If we just ban him, what does that accomplish?
No, that sort of racism is too set in their beliefs. You cant reason with them, especially not on a MB.
It tells him his message of racism is so repugnant to normal Americans that we dont want him around.
It’s an interesting proposition, panache. And I think where we land depends on where each of us starts. Yes, we argue and debate against these people, futile though it may appear. Very very infrequently we can change someone’s position.
However, the real audience is the one we never see. It’s the huge multiple of visitors to posters that see the replies and can be influenced, however slightly, by a cogent argument. It’s a marginal win, sure. But it’s still a win.
Yes, it can appear that most people are impervious to argument and debate. But each of us should remember that the ones grabbing the attention are theloudest and most obstinate.
So know that we can do some good in the world, even by just calmly rebutting such people. Yes, playing to the audience is a thing. But it’s important to know which audience you’re playing to.
So are you guys going to make that note into at least a Warning? Or why not a suspension or a banning.
You think all generalizations of a subset of a subgroup should be prohibited? Or different rules for different groups?
I see arguments which j=have convinced me that Ok, that post need not be deleted. That yes, we can respond to it, and Fight Ignorance.
But I fail to see any reason why that poster should not be banned.
And he wasn’t even warned. Hell, I was warned in that forum for making a stupid joke.
I think *outright open racism *should be banned. Which this post was, and no one is denying that.