No, detractors of the second will bring it up in response to the first.
Have we arrived at the ‘You’re the bigot because you know all the bigot dog-whistles!’ part of the thread?
What a poster says, how they say it, and any known, relevant posting history will always be factors.
At least two of those are 100% within a given poster’s control.
I think that is pertinent to your question.
How they say is is very difficult to show with just printed words. You cant see facial expressions or tone of words.
A great number of us manage just fine, pretty much daily, both here and In Real Life.
Experts say we really dont- this is on emails, but more or less that covers Message boards-
1. Lack of Emotional Cues
Emails lack tone, body language, and facial expressions, which account for 93% of how we interpret communication. A message intended as neutral, such as “Please address this by Friday,” may come across as curt or demanding, causing unnecessary friction.
2. Overconfidence in Clarity
According to Psychology Today, people believe their emails are understood 90% of the time, yet nearly 50% of messages are misinterpreted. This disconnect occurs because email readers project their own emotions and assumptions onto the text.
Please re-read my prior post.
Which I did and apparently did not understand.
I’m still not getting it. I think you could say, on this board for example, that Jewish people are overrepresented in Hollywood relative to the overall population. Are you saying that would get someone calling you a conspiracy theorist?
It’s possible, I guess, given the context of the thread? In a thread about Americans being over-incarcerated, I would feel comfortable stating that, “yes, the US incarcerates many more people that the rest of the developed world. This has an even stronger negative effect among the Black population, who are really overrepresented among the incarcerated population relative to other demographic groups. There are a variety of reasons why that is true, but the net effect is that more Black men are in jail and that has generational effects on that group. The US should try and understand why we jail so many more people than any other Western nation.”
I wouldn’t feel comfortable stating that “Blacks are overrepresented in the prison population, so it should be no surprise that the cop shot that Black kid.”
Yes. Or at a minimum someone would post a hostile “and you’re bringing that up why exactly?” response.
Okay, let’s try an experiment:
Jewish people are (statistically) over-represented in Hollywood relative to the overall population.
And you’re bringing that up why exactly?
I dont think we should go down that road.
Well, Jews tend to live on the coasts more than the middle of the country, and that’s where a lot of entertainment happens. And, there are probably some network effects – a lot of today’s entertainment industry has its roots in NYC, where Jewish people are really over-represented relative to their population in the rest of the US (or the world), and nepotism is certainly a big thing in the entertainment world.
That said, there are plenty of non-Jewish actors, directors, producers, etc.
I think it bears repeating: part of moderation on this message board involves a relatively careful and thorough look at a poster’s posting history where one exists.
History gives context, and context matters.
And that’s (still) only one of the three factors I raised: who you are, what you’re saying, and how you’re saying it.
I remember engaging a YouTuber once, quite a few years ago, who had a sexual harassment complaint lodged against him by a female co-worker. He felt he hadn’t crossed the line. Because I’m the child of an HR executive, I chatted with him, letting him know that, IMHO, who he was or wasn’t was probably the single biggest factor in how the situation played out.
In other words, while his action – whatever it was – wasn’t unambiguously over The Line, who he was caused the situation/action to cross over into unwanted attention.
I remember mentioning to the guy that … a hypothetical Brad Pitt might have garnered a materially different response to the exact same questionable action.
The three things that I named above all matter, and at least two are entirely within our control. If you’re “constantly being misinterpreted (or misunderstood) online,” it’s time to work on that.
And this (the SDMB) ain’t email. And this ain’t work. And the Psychology Today article referenced in some con$ultant’$ blog post (where he’s simply fishing for contract$) is a dozen years old (we’re getting better w/digital communications), and – if I found the right article – references a Quinnipiac study that intentionally dramatized the ‘incivility’ of the communication in the study to tease out signal.
Another thing I used to tell people constantly at work: you want to be relatively ‘protected’ against Harassment claims? Be the kind of person where – if you were accused – scores would line up as character witnesses to say “Not him. No way. Not possible.”
You want to raise a contentious subject on the SDMB – one that isn’t formally out of bounds? Be the kind of poster whose motivation won’t be questioned for doing so, or – worse – presumed to be less-than-honorable or hiding a malign agenda.
Sounds a little like ancient Roman law, where aiui a person facing legal action could have the entirety of their past and character brought up.
But it isn’t. In fact, it isn’t even close. This is a social media outlet and the potential worst case consequences are trivial.
Why do Jewish people have an oversized compared to their population ‘control’ of Hollywood?
Because they fucking built Hollywood,
Many of the men who created Hollywood were Jewish. Adolph Zuckor, one of the three founders of Paramount Pictures, was a Jew from Hungary. Another Jew from Hungary, William Fox, founded Fox Film Corporation. Louis B. Mayer, born in Russia, although he was never quite sure where, co-founded Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, with another Jew, this one with parents from Austria, Marcus Loew. And Warner Bros. was founded by the brothers Warner: Harry, Albert, Sam, and Jack, three of whom were born in Krasnosielc, Poland (Jack was born in Canada). With David Sarnoff, a Russian Jew who founded RKO, these were the five major studios of Hollywood’s Golden Age. In addition, two of the three minor studios of the time, Universal Pictures and Columbia Pictures, were founded and run by Jews. Carl Laemmle, one of the founders of Universal Pictures, was a German Jew from Laupheim in Germany; while Harry and Jack Cohn, along with Joe Brandt were Jews from New York City who founded Columbia.[5][6]
and, of course, anti-Semitism,
At the time that Hollywood was developing, antisemitism was widespread in the United States, and due to that, it played a major role in the development of the film industry.[7]
Jews were drawn to the film industry, partly because they were accepted in it. As first and second generation Jewish immigrants attempted to assimilate into American culture, they found many avenues barred to them. The power structures of the country were closed to them, occupied by the “New England-Wall Street-Middle West money”. The film industry was not one of them. Roadblocks found in other professions were not present in movies.[8]
There are an infinite number of facts out there. And an almost equally large infinite number of them are not relevant to keeping oneself alive and safe at any given moment. So, presenting a fact for others to consider is always contextual, and is always serving a purpose (to persuade, for example). We should ask- Who is presenting the fact? What conclusion is implicit in their presentation? Why is it relevant? How did they arrive at this fact? What is the scope of its truthiness?
These are all relevant things to consider. Who tells you something and why is always relevant, because most facts don’t share the same kind of absolute truth as “1 + 1 = 2” (ready for mathematicians to school me on that one 
).
One male rabbit plus one female rabbit probably equals a lot more than two rabbits.
One rabbit plus one hungry coyote probably equals one (temporarily) full coyote.
(I am not a mathemetician.)