Censorship on E.

[backlash84]

Yesterday a few comments on a thread about a possible boycott of the latest Mass Effect due to the racist tweets of one of the developers went a little off track into a discussion about racism in general. I personally thought that it was within the range of the topic, but the mods disagreed, which is fine. I was told they'd basically split off our subject, and once they were both separated. I was told, since we hadn't broken any of the sites rules in our discussion, and were still being civil with one another, that once the two threads were separated and people had time to cool off, the thread would be reopened. I figured that was fair, and said I was glad to hear it.

Today however, I have been told that the thread will not be unlocked, and that I was, apparently, "already told why"... which is a plainly false statement. To make sure everyone has all the details, I'll post what messages were exchanged. To keep identities hidden, I'll use the terms "Mod1" "Mod2" and "Me". Since I don't mind what I said being traced back to me.


Me: Why did you block the mass effect post? We are in a sub for political discussion, we were discussing something political. No one was being racist, no one was shouting at other people, just a civil debate.

Mod 1:

Hi Backlash,

The problem is with the development of the discussion. Yes, it was in the PROC, but the Staff are responsible for moderating that area of E as well.

The topic was locked as it had veered from the original topic, which was whether or not people should boycott Mass Effect Andromeda , and the conversation was indeed becoming volatile. We want to allow everyone the chance to cool down over the remarks made by Heir, and return to the topic of boycotting the game specifically. A thread lock is often used as a temporary measure under these circumstances; it often helps people cool off and prevents anyone escalating to a point where they would run afoul of Elliquiy's civility rule or other site rules.

Me: If that is the case, then I could start my own thread to continue the discussion we were having, as it is then on topic, and no one has violated any rules, correct?

Mod1: Staff is discussing splitting the thread off to remove any off-topic posts to their own locked area; if we do, that topic will be open, and you'll be able to return to it. :)

Me: Thanks, that would be great. :) I enjoy a good civil debate, and was really enjoying the conversation. If it does get split off, could you let me know?

Mod1: I won't be online soon (got to get some sleep), but if it's split, it should be readily apparent, so no worries about finding the topic again.


I figured that would be the end of it, and I looked forward to continuing the civilized debate we were having. However, I saw today that the thread was still locked, and inquired about it.


Me: I saw you managed to split up the two discussions, which is great. :) The other one still seems to be locked however, is that going to be changed?

Mod2: At present, there are no plans to reopen that thread.

Me: Why is that? It was a political discussion, in the politics section which lists "controversies" right in the title, and didn't break any rules... so I'm unclear as to why it's being censored.

Mod2: That information was already given to you in Mod1's responses, which indicated that the off-topic responses would be removed to their own locked area.

Me:

That's blatantly untrue.

"Staff is discussing splitting the thread off to remove any off-topic posts to their own locked area; if we do, that topic will be open, and you'll be able to return to it. :)"

Says right there, the topic WILL be open. So if it didn't break any rules, and has been separated, it seems the only reason to censor it would be the personal opinions of the mods on this particular subject.
----------------

I have yet to receive a reply.

So, what do you think? Should we be allowed to discuss things in a civilized manner as long as we do not break the rules of the site, or should it be up to the mods to decide what is and isn't acceptable to discuss? I'm interested in your thoughts.

[Vekseid]

You sent your message to "Mod2" an hour before you posted this, to which you 'have yet to receive a reply'.

News flash.

"Mod2" is a human being.

"Mod2" is a volunteer.

"Mod2" is a mother.

She has a responsibility to her family which, it may surprise you, supersedes her role as staff on this site.

It may take time to resolve some issues. You are not paying for a service, the least you can give the staff here is some basic respect for their time. All of us have other things to be doing.



As to the topic at hand - though kind of a moot point as the member deleted their split thread:

I leave it to staff to choose which threads get locked and unlocked, because they are the ones that deal with the fallout. It would be pretty asinine of me to demand that they keep all topics of discussion open and at the same time demand they also keep the resulting discussion under control. I do try to push for less locking and such - mistakes I've made myself in the past - but ultimately it is their call.

I am pretty proud of the fact that my forums were the only major roleplaying communities that could have a frank discussion of the GamerGate drama. Nearly every other major gaming community banned them, from 4chan on down, and most of those that didn't, well...

...but that was only possible here because we have a strong, open, female, feminist presence. Their voice isn't getting drowned out and they don't need to worry if they'll have backup.

That's not really true for the black members here, as a few have stated in PROC proper. And what you see is only the tip of the iceberg.

You don't see the reports that staff gets, or the messages we receive. And not everything gets to us. If something gets heated, staff needs to weigh the fallout versus continuing discussion.

And beyond that, we are all still human beings with our own schedules and priorities.

[backlash84]

You sent your message to "Mod2" an hour before you posted this, to which you 'have yet to receive a reply'.

News flash.

"Mod2" is a human being.

"Mod2" is a volunteer.

"Mod2" is a mother.

She has a responsibility to her family which, it may surprise you, supersedes her role as staff on this site.

It may take time to resolve some issues. You are not paying for a service, the least you can give the staff here is some basic respect for their time. All of us have other things to be doing.



As to the topic at hand - though kind of a moot point as the member deleted their split thread:

I leave it to staff to choose which threads get locked and unlocked, because they are the ones that deal with the fallout. It would be pretty asinine of me to demand that they keep all topics of discussion open and at the same time demand they also keep the resulting discussion under control. I do try to push for less locking and such - mistakes I've made myself in the past - but ultimately it is their call.

I am pretty proud of the fact that my forums were the only major roleplaying communities that could have a frank discussion of the GamerGate drama. Nearly every other major gaming community banned them, from 4chan on down, and most of those that didn't, well...

...but that was only possible here because we have a strong, open, female, feminist presence. Their voice isn't getting drowned out and they don't need to worry if they'll have backup.

That's not really true for the black members here, as a few have stated in PROC proper. And what you see is only the tip of the iceberg.

You don't see the reports that staff gets, or the messages we receive. And not everything gets to us. If something gets heated, staff needs to weigh the fallout versus continuing discussion.

And beyond that, we are all still human beings with our own schedules and priorities.

Umm, I only said I hadn't gotten a reply yet to show that, as of time of writing, that was the end of the conversation, and that I would probably update it as things progressed. You are making quite the assumption with what I said as far as interpreting tone. Also, I was very polite when I messaged you about this issue, it would have been nice if you could have extended the same courtesy to me. If anyone needs to be more respectful here, it's you.


------------------------

As for the thread that was deleted, that is hardly the point. A post was censored without having broken any of the rules, and it is perfectly reasonable for me to ask why that happened.

And personally, I don't need "backup" in a civilized debate. We weren't slinging hate speech, the tone was quite neutral, and I was being very polite with how I phrased my responses, as was everyone else. As for being drowned out, it was a conversation between three people at the time, not exactly an overwhelming about of adversity there for anyone who wanted to comment. If they did, they would have been treated with the same respect I've shown everyone else throughout this whole thing.

Oh, and in case it is forgotten, the posts DID get returned and unlocked, so I was right to contact you in the first place.

[backlash84]

Oh, and it took me three seconds to find a similar post, but with a more left wing slant to it. I guess if you are a moderate who might not agree with the bulk of E, you get censored?

https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=257316.0

[Vekseid]

Umm, I only said I hadn't gotten a reply yet to show that, as of time of writing, that was the end of the conversation, and that I would probably update it as things progressed. You are making quite the assumption with what I said as far as interpreting tone. Also, I was very polite when I messaged you about this issue, it would have been nice if you could have extended the same courtesy to me. If anyone needs to be more respectful here, it's you.

I have yet to receive a reply.

So, what do you think? Should we be allowed to discuss things in a civilized manner as long as we do not break the rules of the site, or should it be up to the mods to decide what is and isn't acceptable to discuss? I'm interested in your thoughts.

I give you the courtesy your choice of words deserve.

Oh, and it took me three seconds to find a similar post, but with a more left wing slant to it. I guess if you are a moderate who might not agree with the bulk of E, you get censored?

https://elliquiy.com/forums/index.php?topic=257316.0

What statement there, exactly, is the left-wing equivalent of claiming it should be okay for whites to use 'nigger' in a general context?

[backlash84]

I can't help what you've read into my words. As for the statement, it stands. It was not insulting to anyone, I didn't name names, and was nothing but polite in all of my PM's, as can be seen from my first post on this thread. However, when I asked why it was locked I was informed I'd "already been told", like some sort of child.

Still, you admit to your discourtesy... seems farther childish to me.


EDITED: What exactly implied that using the N-word in public was alright? I'd love to see where you see that.

[Vekseid]

Your gaslighting is not going to wash off the manipulative veneer you laid over your first post.

Or spamming a bunch of people with "I'm about to be banned! Here's my e-mail!" ...right.

As for you being already told, you were:

Unfortunately, this particular thread is going nowhere good, and it's going there fast. The original topic was about a boycott against ME: Andromeda because of Manveer Heir's tweets (which no one disagreed about said tweets being offensive), but it's devolved into something rather wholly different.

Thread locked. Sorry, folks.

Did something make you think that thread was locked because of you?

I get the feeling you didn't read some of the posts, if you think that is remotely comparable to what was said.

[backlash84]

I've been banned from subreddits on reddit before, and all I did was send my email out to those I was currently roleplaying with, and accidentally one mod, for a total of 3 emails... really spamming it up there was I?

As for being told, I asked the mod who locked it, who told me that the that was just until they were separated into two different topics, as you can see in the quotes of the messages I've sent and received on the matter.

If you can show me one post in that thread that said saying the N-word was alright, I'd love to see it. If it had come up, I would have argued against it, and not just removed the topic entirely.

[backlash84]

You know, since this section is for controversial opinions.

[Vekseid]

Staff didn't delete the topic, the new owner of the thread did.

Staff merely split off the controversial topic to let the main thread get unlocked, as was directly mentioned.

It may be a debate that needs to happen somewhere, someday, but right now, if staff feels that sort of topic causes too much hurt, I am not going to overrule them on it. While this is 'PROC', at the end of the day members still need to feel comfortable around each other.

[backlash84]

And if the person who made the thread deleted it, that's fine. That said, it doesn't change the fact that I was told the thread was not going to be unlocked, and then when I posted about censorship on E to get people's opinions, that was deleted. You can see how this looks like anything that might be offensive to the far left demographic is censored, where as you get stuff on the same subject from the far left point of view, like I linked to earlier, which isn't locked at all. Whether or not the user themselves deleted it, it was not going to be unlocked until I contacted you directly.

I'm not even right winged, I'm a moderate. But just because this is a mostly left wing website doesn't mean censorship of right winged opinions is alright. If people don't want to feel uncomfortable, they shouldn't be in the sub labeled "controversial".

[Eikichi]

I'm not even right winged, I'm a moderate. But just because this is a mostly left wing website doesn't mean censorship of right winged opinions is alright. If people don't want to feel uncomfortable, they shouldn't be in the sub labeled "controversial".

I feel this a bit poorly worded. No one is purposely going to places that make them uncomfortable. This is a sub for topics of political, religious, and controversial nature. They come for some specific things they want to discuss, or see others discuss.

[backlash84]

But if you are made uncomfortable easily, then would it be wise of you to go to a section called "Controversial"? Aren't you then basically looking for something to be offended by?

It wasn't even like what we were talking about was that bad, we weren't being racist, we were discussing what constitutes Racism, mostly towards white people.

[Vekseid]

Is what you are comfortable with to be the gold standard against which all measures of comfort are to be judged?

[Silk]

Is what you are comfortable with to be the gold standard against which all measures of comfort are to be judged?

Not at all, but is it the butchers fault that the vegetarian walked into the meat grocers?

[Vekseid]

A more appropriate comparison would be asking when it's okay to take away people's knives when they start waving them.

[AmberStarfire]

A more appropriate comparison would be asking when it's okay to take away people's knives when they start waving them.

It may be an overly pragmatic way of seeing things but.. this is your site, so *shrugs*. If you or those you appoint to run it make a choice based on the interests of the site or its population as a whole, then that's your decision to make. For instance, opening, closing, locking threads, allowing discussions or not.

I know some other sites and pages where it's just 'no politics or religion'. Anything divisive, but if you foresee this is going to cause more trouble than it's worth, then you have every right to do what you feel is best and right. It is afterall your backyard in a way. You're hosting the site and taking on the responsibility of running Elliquiy.

[Lustful Bride]

Lets all be honest with ourselves that thread was heavily doomed to degrade down into a screaming match and everyone being all pissy to everyone.

There was too much hot headedness, raging emotions and lack of calm thinking. I don't see it so much as censorship but as a case of the thread was going to start a youtube level screaming tantrum and its better to just prevent it before it happens?

Were there some valid arguments to be made there? Possibly.

Could a good discussion have come up on race relations, stereotypes and the possibility that racism against Caucasians gained a measure of acceptance or Vice Versa? Again, Possibly.

Was it going to be the main focus? No. It was just going to be finger pointings, misunderstandings, and everyone disliking everyone.

No one went into it to have an intellectual discussion, it was spawned from a thread about outrage over one racist guy on the bioware team and it was just going to be a thread of outrage and lack of calm thinking.

[backlash84]

As someone who was actually part of the discussion, the "Knife waving" comparison is just a major over reaction. We were all talking calmly and rationally with one another. And again, if you were that concerned about what COULD happen, why is it that so many left winged discussions on THE SAME THING are not being locked at all?

Deleting/locking threads because of what COULD happen makes this whole section pointless. Anything that is controversial could devolve into a shouting match, but the thread we were talking on DIDN'T. You can throw out horrible "could be" scenario's all you'd like, but it's just a fear tactic, nothing more.

And you've still been unable to quote anything that was said that you'd consider so offensive that was worth blocking off the whole conversation.

[Eikichi]

As someone who was actually part of the discussion, the "Knife waving" comparison is just a major over reaction. We were all talking calmly and rationally with one another. And again, if you were that concerned about what COULD happen, why is it that so many left winged discussions on THE SAME THING are not being locked at all?

Deleting/locking threads because of what COULD happen makes this whole section pointless. Anything that is controversial could devolve into a shouting match, but the thread we were talking on DIDN'T. You can throw out horrible "could be" scenario's all you'd like, but it's just a fear tactic, nothing more.

And you've still been unable to quote anything that was said that you'd consider so offensive that was worth blocking off the whole conversation.

Terrorist attacks could happen at any moment. That doesn't mean the entire world shuts down 24/7 to look out for them. They wait to see whether or not it's likely, then proceed with emergency procedures. I find the same concept applies neatly here. They assessed the situation, and the mods deemed it not worth continuing. That's their prerogative to decide, and if their opinion on the matter is trusted than they did it with some reason or insight. Not just to blindly shut off something that might happen.

[backlash84]

You are ignoring the facts that A: there are left wing conversations on the same subject that aren't being blocked, that are just as likely to go bad, and B: There has yet to be any direct quotes to show what was so dangerous, despite them being requested multiple times.

Right now, basically no one here has any context, allowing them to imagine the worst. The only reason not to give context is because it will hurt your case.

[Eikichi]

You are ignoring the facts that A: there are left wing conversations on the same subject that aren't being blocked, that are just as likely to go bad, and B: There has yet to be any direct quotes to show what was so dangerous, despite them being requested multiple times.

Right now, basically no one here has any context, allowing them to imagine the worst. The only reason not to give context is because it will hurt your case.

Again, the problem with that argument is that it's towards the mods prerogative. As far as the 'left-wing' conversation you linked. That conversation ended on October 15th. The mods decided it wouldn't go bad and.. it didn't. It ended. The left-wing conversation also doesn't have the same divisive language that was being used in the other thread, if not by you it was still being used by others.

[backlash84]

And now I'll ask you, and not add anything else so it can't be ignored, can you actually QUOTE any of this language?

[Eikichi]

And now I'll ask you, and not add anything else so it can't be ignored, can you actually QUOTE any of this language?

Considering the thread's now deleted that's impossible.

[backlash84]

So it was so offensive that it deserved to be locked, but not so much as to be at all memorable...