I’m not saying everybody should ignore them. Just people like the OP who lack the ability to understand that sometimes threads will exist that they don’t like.
Did I say right now? Look through his and a few other posters history. Rarely a thread goes by where they don’t somehow connect it to their theories on Black inferiority.
I am not aware of the situation you are referencing so I cannot comment on that, but I don’t think that (in general) what you are saying is true.
Actually they don’t. Free speech applies to the government, not a message board. This is obvious given the various things that are not allowed to be said or argued.
I would prefer two things happen. One, don’t warn people pointing out certain racist posters are racist. Two, don’t allow them to routinely open different threads about essentially the same damn thing. Chief Pedant and the others can create ONE thread to discuss whatever new theory on Black inferiority rather than spreading their shit all over hoping nobody will bother checking them in the umpteenth thread they start on the subject.
I was here for some of that stuff. My annoyance is that they act as if tone should be the most important factor. I would argue that the calm tone the newer guys take is more insidious because it appeals to a broader audience.
You know, I don’t know too much about you, but I personally cannot afford to be ambivalent about stuff like this. As a Black person, and a father, I don’t feel okay sitting idly by while someone convinces others that my skin color makes me stupid. I know you just view this as intellectual masturbation, but one of these fuck faces was supposedly doing admission at a medical school. They, and the people they convince with their drivel, don’t exist in some vacuum. They are real people who go out into the world guided by these prejudices. We collectively should not feel like we can be ambivalent about these things. I get that it make not affect your everyday life, but it certainly makes the world a far worse place, especially for the people they smear with their lies.
I don’t know if this would work, but how about it:
There should be one permanent thread about race, intelligence, criminality, and genetics, and this is the only place this topic can be discussed (except perhaps when mocking people in the Pit). This thread would probably be bookmarked/pushpinned or whatever in GD, and any other threads started on this topic would be merged into this ongoing thread.
Emphasis added.
No, racism is not illegal. Racism is an opinion, and hateful though they may be, opinions are not illegal. Some forms of racial discrimination are illegal, if that is what you meant.
I have to go along with what seems to be the majority opinion here. Any time I see any thread title, especially in GD, that mentions race, I automatically assume that the local racists will be swarming all over it, and that they will be both debunked and persistently oblivious to their errors. Rinse and repeat.
And why does this place have to serve any value to larger society? This place is by and for the people who post in it and the people who read it. This place is not superior, genetically or otherwise, to other places; it just happens to suit us better, and that’s why we’re here.
Roddy
Maybe that’s a reasonable compromise.
I’m pale as the moon, but my family consists of a bunch of unregenerate miscegenators. My step-father was black and all of my nieces and nephews are various flavors of mixed. So I get your angst ( well, hopefully enough it anyway ).
The ambivalence comes in from on the one hand my tendency towards pansy-ass ACLUish tolerance of non-violent assholes and on the other…well…your points*.
ETA: * That and selfishly they just sort of fucking annoy me. But that’s my own problem I guess.
The easiest example of this is “looming genetic crisis”. The SDMB is the 3rd result.
As for example of the numerous threads this group has started:
One
Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
Seven
Eight
Nine
I only stopped there because I was tired of waiting to search, and skimming through threads. This post gives you an idea of what I am talking about wrt to constant regurgitation of discredited cites and nonsensical drivel:
Here are a couple of pit threads discussing the same thing I am complaining about (see here, here, and here). Please don’t act as though I am imagining this.
Well, your Google Search indeed turns up “looming crisis in human genetics “ which indeed was the title of a Article in The Economist. So, how this is a “racist term” I dunno.
Google says there are 318 total hits for that phrase (barely three pages with duplicates taken out. It comes from this article in The Economist, and the SDMB appears in the search results because it was used several times in that thread - about half of them by people arguing against the proposition, including the OP. (orcenio started the thread and used the phrase three or four times including the thread title.)
I think you’re defining that group differently than I would - and anyway you just linked to nine threads spread out over five years.
I guess you have a reading comprehension problem, huh? I didn’t say I was the only one who bothered responding, nor did I imply that absent my response, the racist claims would go unanswered. My point was that I, and others, judging by the reduction in responses, are tired of refuting the same stuff over and over again.
I think it’s clear that I understand that threads I don’t like will exist. My point is this allowing the same group of posters to post redundant threads in GD when they don’t intend to engage in honest debate, when others are not allowed to accurately characterize their behavior, and when their conduct reflects poorly on the board itself does not serve the interests of anyone here.
Should I be able to post a weekly threads intimating the holocaust never happened? Should I be able to start “debates” about products I am selling, or post transparent advertisements I am paid to post? Of course not. I think the reason are obvious.
Yes, the term itself isn’t racist, however, the thread is full of it. Fair distinction.
I should clarify. Not every thread I linked to was started by the people I am referencing, but they were all inspired by their comments elsewhere, or had them participating in the thread. Regardless, I know you pay a decent amount of attention to this stuff. Are you really saying that my characterization is that far off the mark? Again, read the pit threads. I am not the only one who has noticed it, nor am I the only one who has complained about it.
What any of you said about free speech is certainly true.
I guess I just meant that in any free society we all have the right to speak our minds. We don’t get arrested or jailed for speaking our minds. So, even if we don’t like when people talk about racism, I hope we would agree that we have to let them have the right to talk and talk and talk … for ever and ever … talk talk talk.
So these are all threads they posted in.
I said a couple of times that I agree with the general thrust of what you’re saying.
I believe so, unless I linked to a thread by accident. As I said, I really don’t intent to spend my whole day proving something that should be transparently obvious to most regulars around here. Even if you are not as bothered by this as I am, I don’t think the existence and frequency of these arguments is in question. I don’t want to start naming names, but I think you know the core group I am speaking of.
Fair enough.
Yes! Yes!
That is what I meant. Throw me a rope, won’t you please? Thank you.
So, several of us concede that certain posters are indeed getting more than a little tiresome over their choices of subjects for their new thread. OK, I can get behind TPtB asking “CP” to no longer open any threads about that subject. So asked. But I warn you, whenever TPtB do anything like that, there’s a shitstorm.
But your second position that “When you Google some of the racist terms used in these OPs, the Straight Dope is often on the first page of results.” has pretty well been proven false.
Nobody is suggesting these people be jailed for being shitty human beings. The point is that you don’t have a RIGHT to say whatever you want whenever you want while on this message board. Clear lines have been drawn to curtail and limit speech for a variety of reasons. There is no question the mods have and will continue to do this. For example, you cannot say someone is a liar. Regardless of how you feel about that rule, it seems fairly arbitrary to say that is out of bounds but virulent racist remarks are okay.
More directly, I don’t appreciate the hypocrisy of it all. Person X can start a thread saying Black people are inherently stupid on a regular basis, and say that not ONE Black person could get into an top-tier school based on scores alone. Yet, I cannot say that that person is a racist or that they are saying racist things without being warned by the mods. Apparently, dropping the R word stifles debate whereas implying the I, the person that you may be debating, is congenitally stupid/stupider because of my skin color is fair game. That’s the main thing that pisses me off. Even beyond having to step over each turd of a thread one of these assholes drops, I am annoyed that I get in trouble for making a defensible characterization based on their history and conduct.
I’m not going to argue about what’s being said. I do think it’s worth noting that nine threads started since 2007 (or if you exclude that old one, maybe eight from the last three years) demonstrates a big problem. The more relevant issue is that this small group of posters is more or less immune to debate - which is basically true but not unique - and that what they’re saying is offensive to most other people, which is also true but usually isn’t grounds for banning.
Sometimes, but not always. The board in general does not have patience for one-trick ponies.
Ok, I assume you have an umbrella. :p“partly cloudy, chance of shit storms” .:eek:
But I am really tired of CP’s “one trick”. Not even a good one. :mad:
No it hasn’t. The reason why the SDMB is often on the google search page is because the thread topics are quoting racist literature. So, when you search for, “race differences in average IQ are largely genetic” or “IQ differences: Nature v Nurture”, or “looming genetic crisis”, you get the “academic” paper making the claim, then one of our proselytizer’s threads about it. If you took my comment to mean that when you google a racial invective the SDMB comes up, then maybe I wasn’t clear. The issue is that these guys find well known racialist literature then link to it in threads named after the title of the paper or book. That’s problematic in my mind not because “looming genetic crisis” is an inherently racist term; it’s because the people searching for that phrase are likely looking for racist material. When they google things like that, then see the SDMB, they might feel like those kinds of opinions are welcome here when they shouldn’t feel that way.
The Economist is a purveyor of racist literature? :dubious::rolleyes: