I don’t think you covered yourself with glory in that thread. And no-one is suggesting that only they/them pronouns should be used, they are suggesting that it should be okay to use those pronouns for any singular person, unless that person has specifically requested not to be referred to that way. Simple.
Word.
Well the Mods just got the last word in. At least for a few hours until it reopens. If it reopens.
We may also have lost a poster by the time it’s over.
I think the question on everyone’s mind is… will that be “Posters we Lost” 2023, or “Posters we Lost” 2024?
I agree. Not a good moment or two for me. But that one poster was seriously wanting it all one way. I didn’t like that.
I’m sorry. Did not mean to cause any trouble.
I’d say this is the wrong thread for that poster. Not only are they violating every rule we have on trans stuff, but they’re very obviously trolling.
I’m honestly surprised they weren’t immediately banned.
Let ECG enjoy his New Year’s weekend 
the poster will still be there to ban when ECG returns.
Nobody else was on board with that either.
I don’t even think it’s possible to police such a thing on this board.
As far as I know there’s no method by which any established poster can be “immediately banned,” except perhaps for those who threaten legal action against the board. It’s always a deliberate and deliberative process, which is how it should be.
A ban is for sure in order, though, and I definitely won’t miss any poster who spews garbage like that.
Regarding the long term, but rarely active poster who has been cited. They broke the same rules at least thrice, possibly four times depending on POV about Transgender issues as insanity in short order. Is that three/four broken rules since there was not mod to stop them?
I dunno, not knowing their history, I’d guess a STERN warning, and possibly a topic ban and suspension. If they have prior notes/warnings, then I’d absolutely expect a ban.
Considering what they said, I’m all for hitting them ( 
) with the banhammer ASAP.
Ah, he was the guy who (nearly?) got topic banned for being a covid conspiracy/misinformation sort.
That was my point. I wasn’t sure why ECG is needed. But I since went and checked and found out the troll is a longterm poster. I had assumed they were new. So maybe they actually need all hands on deck to vote on this one.
Well then, I hope that when the well-earned ban is applied, it doesn’t cost us Seanette who hasn’t to my knowledge, ever been a noticeable jerk.
I just looked that up.
There were some really fucked up and ignorant arguments being made in that QZ thread by Bob. 
Well, I have to say. I have learned my lesson, this day.
This place never ceases to amaze me.
IIRC, one formerly well-respected poster found that threatening to hack the board led to the same result.
I just want to interject that those pronouns weren’t invented by that poster. They are known as the Spivak pronouns, and i believe they were the first set of gender-neutral pronouns introduced into English in modern times. They have been independently invented several times. The first recorded use was 1890. Spivak got his name on them in the early 1980s by using them in a popular manual on TeX, a powerful typesetting program that is still widely used. They had a run in several geeky corners of society.
It’s possible they were invented yet again by our poster, but odds are e chose them from the various novel pronouns that all got a little bit of traction.
Because he’s the ATMB mod. And that thread is in ATMB.
Don’t worry, I don’t think anybody’s doing that.
They had already had a mod note, in that same thread.
Well, except “ers.” That is, as far as I can tell, completely made up. At best, it’s like a poster refusing to use “an” as the indefinite article before a word starting with a vowel, at worst it is like someone saying “I want to use my own made up language and impose it upon the rest of you” (because it’s unclear to me whether their end-goal was for the board to mandate those particular gender-neutral pronouns for everyone on the board).
Agree that it was an oddly global but vague set of demands. Which several of us tried politely to have them explicate. Which they sorta did just by repeating the same sentences we couldn’t parse.
Upon rereading the relevant posts I believe I understand what he meant although it was never stated as concisely as I’m about to. Ths is my interpretation and may be incorrect. But it’s the best I can come up with:
-
Even if some 3rd party explicitly states a desire to be referred to by gendered pronouns, it must be acceptable for posters to instead use non-gendered pronouns to refer to them. Doing so is by (the demander’s) definition not an example of misgendering and must not be considered such under the rules here. IOW, the absence of gendering is not and cannot be mis-gendering.
-
Which specific non-gendered pronouns to use would be chosen by the person using them, not the person(s) being referred to. As @puzzlegal said, our revolutionary has chosen the Spivak pronouns.
Seems a silly hill to die on. English is far less grammatically gendered than most languages. This last vestige will probably fade in the next century. Insisting it fade today is a bit much.