It was only moving that fast because of his hardheaded behavior and intellectuality dishonest methods of interacting.
Note: I’ve interacted with the poster in question before, and trying to discuss/debate is futile. I’m not sure exactly how to get him to adapt his style. If any such method exists.
Sorry, I don’t follow. I see it is a Star Wars reference, but I don’t understand its use here.
If you’re asking if we approve of his outdated debate style, the answer is no. We already let him know that doesn’t work in GD or P&E any more.
He is contributing hatred. I hope we move faster on this issue than we did when it came to women’s issues, because that was just embarrassing.
Because it’s trolling?
My point is this: if it seems not quite right, maybe that’s because it really is not quite right (as was the case when rebels were allowed to infiltrate imperial defenses). It smacks of knowing exactly where the line is and going right up to it to play the “I’m not touching you!” game.
May I suggest a compromise? @What_Exit has said they’ve already been told that this tactic isn’t accepted in GD or P&E. I have no idea if it’s a mod note, warming or a PM, but a Mod Note in the Pit thread in question along the lines of the following could work.
Your posts have at this time the appearance of doing so entirely to provoke an emotional response. This is borderline for our definitions of trolling, which is unacceptable even in this forum. If you wish to continue, please include a modicum of support or plausible reasoning for your responses, otherwise further action will need to be taken.
No accusation of trolling, sets a clear expectation of proper behavior, and a record for any parties reading (members or not) that there are indeed limits. And if they improve, or choose not to participate, a clear win for the thread and board. If they continue, then that’s equally clear statement of intent and actionable.
I’ll take a different tack: is the thread in question even suitable as a debate thread? I mean, isn’t it very clearly off-topic to come in, sincerely or otherwise, with a bunch of “well, actually…” style posts? Don’t we have separate pro/anti-gun threads for a similar reason? That the “stupid gun news” (or whatever it’s called) thread is not the place to come in talking about all the supposedly great things guns do?
Other way around - people in the pro-gun thread complained about posts that dared to question whether somone mowing down three teenagers qualified as “positive” gun news. I still think that this was one of the worst moderating decisions I’ve seen on the Dope, and if anyone is considering using that decision as precedent I would strongly urge them to reconsider.
I work for the Multnomah Education Service District, and there is no way in hell I would ever bring up this message board in conversation because of the hate speech allowed. Even in The BBQ Pit, because it too represents the SDMB, there should be a minimum standard.
IDK. Maybe the pit should be different? Because if someone wants to have a debate, there’s a forum for that. Shouldn’t that count for something?
Because we currently have no subscription service, there is no way to treat The BBQ Pit as something different and/or separate from the rest of the SDMB. “One this board we try to have intelligent conversation and talk about current events in a semi-civilized manner…except for this one totally unrestricted section where you can piss on each other, and hate freely to your heart’s content.”
There is no way to separate the two parts.
It would be interesting to know if it is possible to make certain forums opt-in only. Another board I am on (not discourse, but phpbb) has several closed sub-forums, most of which require moderator approval to join, but one of which (the nearest we have to a pit) being freely available to anyone to join by just toggling a switch, but with opt-out as the default. This was a change (from its original status as an open forum) because, to your point, there was a concern potential new members might be turned off by seeing it in the feed for recent activity, not parsing the difference between the “anything goes”/pitesque-type forum and the rest of the board.
So, not that it’s the point of this thread, but… is there a way to make The Pit default to hidden or opt-in, and should this board maybe consider doing that?
At base, frankly, I don’t really care that much about projecting an air of civility to outsiders. Mostly, I just want transphobes to post… not on any board I am a member of (which changing the visibility of the pit does nothing to change). I guess I’m just rambling.
Bottom line(s): transphobes should be denied a platform. If calling their disingenuous/dishonest “debate” tactics trolling, even in the pit, is the way to do it, then let’s do it. Otherwise, I’d again like to put forward the argument that maybe a pit thread intended to catalogue instances of Republicans being transphobic bigots is not the place for someone to come in to “debate” on behalf of the pro-transphobe side. But maybe that’s just motivated reasoning on my part.
Other than the Pit I have not seen any recent hate speech. I mean, the thread on "karens’ maybe, but thats not really hate speech.
I am talking about The BBQ Pit. It is there on the list with all the other forums for all the world to see, equal with all the others.
In which case I heartily agree with you. Hate speech, bullying, all sorts of nastiness.
We have specific bright lines on what we can moderate for transphobia. They include misgendering, deadnaming, and calling trans people “crazy,” but they don’t include a blanket ban on debating every aspect of trans rights or the proper treatment for trans people. The only point being argued is the age at which its appropriate to begin medical interventions for someone who identifies as trans, and that’s well short of the line for moderating someone for transphobia. This came directly from Ed, so it’s not something you can change by arguing with the mod staff.
As for whether he’s posting to “elicit an emotional response,” yeah, probably. Its the Pit. That’s what its there for.
The point being argued is that only people who are adults should get any counseling whatsoever, unless that “counseling” is akin to conversion therapy, along with continuously complaining about underage children getting transitional surgery, which just isn’t happening. This is definitely transphobia.
This ain’t what the Pit is. Hate freely to your heart’s content. That’s how you see the Pit?
That sounds like “yeah, he’s trolling, but not to the level that warrants moderation in the Pit”.
And if that’s the case, fair enough.
That was my possibly excessively polite description of trolling, per the rules:
Trolling and uncivil behavior. You are free to express your views in a forceful manner provided you remain civil. Hate speech, insults, and purposely inflammatory remarks (i.e., trolling) will not be tolerated.
I see said user posting what to me are purposely inflammatory remarks, which is trolling, but admittedly, it’s a matter of interpretation so…
That’s for the board in general. Obviously, the Pit runs to different standards, as insults and purposely inflammatory remarks are explicitly allowed there.