What's on your mind?

[Mr. Otaku]

22 minutes ago, Psalam said:

I'm no moderator (because I think they're overworked and underpaid, among other things) but I understand the absolute ban on religious and political speech on LL. I have had a number of threads I've started get hijacked and the result was anything but pleasant and/or enlightening.

I understand it too. While i think being able to speak freely is wonderful i can see that it might repel users who might feel overwhelmed by all this and like you said, political derailment often occurs. I'm willing to scrap political talks if it means an easier time for the site, i'm not here to make trouble with anyone. (There's hardly any point in doing that to begin with, especially on the internet)

 

22 minutes ago, Psalam said:

As far as a "let me just get this off my chest" thread is concerned, how the hell would you moderate such a thing. "Dewey is a New York scumbag, man I feel better." "Truman is a would-be tin pot dictator with illusions of godhood." Now, place your favorite current politicians names in those quotes and ask yourself, "how would I react?" My guess is badly and this sort of thing is best avoided here. I am certain that there are sites that would welcome this sort of thing. Maybe start a thread with links to places where this sort of speech is not just welcome but encouraged? That sounds like a workable compromise.

That's an understandable view. But i think as far as "moderating such a thing" goes, unless it reaches a personal targeted harassment level does it really need moderation? Suppose a group that gives a big trigger warning before you enter it, so that people would know beforehand what they're getting into and it's not exposed to everybody. I asked this question previously as well and have received no clarifications as of now. But i do believe that my suggestion is a solid one.

[landess]

36 minutes ago, Psalam said:

ask yourself, "how would I react?"

I use this whenever entering an environment with any group of people which would have many like-minded individuals - a majority - so I might be socially acceptable in my actions. If I don't agree with this I avoid it. Environments could be anything - A hospital, a gaming or other type of convention, a courthouse, someones home, etc. >I check myself at the door and act accordingly.

 

This is wise when traveling abroad and dealing with another culture as well - Is it considered rude to count your change, show the soles of your shoes, etc? Some effort must be made to blend in with any crowd instead of just being a thorn in every side one comes in contact with if one wants to get along. Like I said - if one doesn't like it - leave. Sympathy is given, not taken. Seeing those video's made in Japan by Logan Paul is a great example - the consummate ugly American.

 

Religious, political, AND medical discussions are generally frowned upon in the common workplace - this has been proven over time, as they DO create division and other strenuous engagement between people whom should be cooperating towards a goal instead of being distracted by their feelings about a non-work related opinion, belief, or situation (poor 'Joe' has cancer - I really don't want to hear about that depressing subject again today...there's nothing I can do about it!)

[Psalam]

7 minutes ago, Mr.Otaku said:

Suppose a group that gives a big trigger warning before you enter it, so that people would know beforehand what they're getting into and it's not exposed to everybody.

It's a sound suggestion in many ways. However, my experience tells me that such a thread would quickly become a sounding board for a single perspective where other viewpoints, and those who express them, would find themselves not just unwelcome but harassed. There are all sorts of examples to be had. Recently @Kendo 2 (I believe) posted a quote about a group that was so inclusive it had to exclude some people.

 

While you may suggest drawing a line at the personal I can attest that the line there is hard to draw. "Stupid idea!" - personal or not? "What kind of moron would think something like that?" - personal or not? "That's the sort of thinking that has ruined this great country." - personal or not? The list goes on and, whatever you may think, someone has been hurt and/or offended by those (and other similar) comments.

 

In short, it is my opinion (yes I know, opinions are like assholes: everyone has one but that doesn't mean that anyone else wants to know about yours) that there is little to be gained (for the site as a whole) and potentially a good deal to be lost (if there get to be hurt feelings and people leave the site and no longer recommend it to others) in going forward with it.

 

Edit: I found Kendo's quote:

 

We're so inclusive we're going to exclude anyone who doesn't adhere to our inclusivity.

[Kendo 2]

So what the fuck are we allowed to talk about?  Postmodernist Deconstructionism has inserted itself into everything (movies, games, comic books, television).

[Mr. Otaku]

3 minutes ago, Psalam said:

It's a sound suggestion in many ways. However, my experience tells me that such a thread would quickly become a sounding board for a single perspective where other viewpoints, and those who express them, would find themselves not just unwelcome but harassed. There are all sorts of examples to be had. Recently @Kendo 2 (I believe) posted a quote about a group that was so inclusive it had to exclude some people.

I know what you're saying, but in a way is that not the price of having a truly free thought space? How does one exercise freedom without the exposure to potential bumps? There's no real way to make a system like that so it's either alienation of free dialogue and provocation of difficult open debates, or the alienation of those that cannot withstand their ideas, views and beliefs challenged and sometimes harshly criticized.

 

7 minutes ago, Psalam said:

While you may suggest drawing a line at the personal I can attest that the line there is hard to draw. "Stupid idea!" - personal or not? "What kind of moron would think something like that?" - personal or not? "That's the sort of thinking that has ruined this great country." - personal or not? The list goes on and, whatever you may think, someone has been hurt and/or offended by those (and other similar) comments.

In my opinion, calling somebody's idea stupid should not be treated as calling somebody stupid directly. Anybody who values open speech and understands it's nuances should be able to understand this. As for the second example you used, that's a valid one because that really is personal. So that can be used as a line, that you can call somebody's idea stupid but never them directly without incurring a report.

 

So "Your idea is fucking retarded man, here's why" should get a pass.

"You're fucking retarded for coming up with this trash" should not get a pass.

 

11 minutes ago, Psalam said:

In short, it is my opinion (yes I know, opinions are like assholes: everyone has one but that doesn't mean that anyone else wants to know about yours) that there is little to be gained (for the site as a whole) and potentially a good deal to be lost (if there get to be hurt feelings and people leave the site and no longer recommend it to others) in going forward with it.

Which is why i suggested the group method in the first place because i understand that this can damage LL's connection to the outside and make it appear as a rampant tilted political hunting ground. Let people make separate areas with sufficient warnings where they can talk away all that they want to talk about. Doesn't have to appear in random threads. Win-Win. Until i get a clarification on if it's okay or not i can't say for sure if this is a viable option but in my opinion (like an asshole lol) i don't see how it wouldn't be.

 

14 minutes ago, Psalam said:

Edit: I found Kendo's quote:

 

We're so inclusive we're going to exclude anyone who doesn't adhere to our inclusivity.

It's a great quote really, it demonstrates the point i'm making quite well.

[FauxFurry]

56 minutes ago, Psalam said:

I'm no moderator (because I think they're overworked and underpaid, among other things) but I understand the absolute ban on religious and political speech on LL. I have had a number of threads I've started get hijacked and the result was anything but pleasant and/or enlightening.

 

As far as a "let me just get this off my chest" thread is concerned, how the hell would you moderate such a thing. "Dewey is a New York scumbag, man I feel better." "Truman is a would-be tin pot dictator with illusions of godhood." Now, place your favorite current politicians names in those quotes and ask yourself, "how would I react?" My guess is badly and this sort of thing is best avoided here. I am certain that there are sites that would welcome this sort of thing. Maybe start a thread with links to places where this sort of speech is not just welcome but encouraged? That sounds like a workable compromise.

The Escapist has a section where hot button topics such as religion or politics can be discussed freely but I can not recall many discussions in that area turning out too well. Not only that, they have to end up culling overtly political bad actors from their payroll ever-so-often such it may not pay in the long run to encourage such things on their site at all.

Game Politics might be the best place for that kind of thing, at least in theory. In execution, I do not know if it is any better than OneAngryGamer or The Mary Sue for constructive debates or the airing of grievances.

[FauxFurry]

18 minutes ago, Kendo 2 said:

So what the fuck are we allowed to talk about?  Postmodernist Deconstructionism has inserted itself into everything (movies, games, comic books, television).

It might be helpful to at least be allowed to discuss such things as they pertain to the work in question such as, say, the political situation within Watch Dogs: Legion or ideal political strategies in a game such as Civilization or Tropico 5, keeping it all Watsonian rather than Doylist, so to type. 

[Psalam]

35 minutes ago, Mr.Otaku said:

Win-Win

I have nothing new to add to the topic per se so I won't waste a lot of time. I would be curious about what a poll would say. Is there really sufficient interest on LL for this? Every time I have suggested something not lewd I have always been told that's not what people are here for - and maybe my critics were right. So, a poll?

[Mr. Otaku]

3 minutes ago, Psalam said:

I have nothing new to add to the topic per se so I won't waste a lot of time. I would be curious about what a poll would say. Is there really sufficient interest on LL for this? Every time I have suggested something not lewd I have always been told that's not what people are here for - and maybe my critics were right. So, a poll?

Perhaps. I'm predicting a mostly mild conclusion though. Like me for example, i don't have too much of a problem scraping politics if it means the site won't suffer. I'm assuming i'm not the only one thinking along the same lines. Or maybe i'm wrong. A poll could give some insight.

[Kendo 2]

Just jump to the top of the food chain and PM @Ashal about what's going on.

[DoctaSax]

11 hours ago, Mr.Otaku said:

Fair enough. Just to clarify, can there be a separate section for people that might discuss politics even sarcastically? Like a thread or a group that gives sufficient warnings for all those that might participate? I feel like completely cutting off any political talk at all is also a slight form of alienation to those that might feel the need to express few things, like in the form of rants and there are threads dedicated to that.

I fear that a separate thread/private club where people are forewarned about the tone will only really repeat, and exacerbate, the echo chamber dynamics we've witnessed so far.

 

It'd be a repeat of the separate politics section we used to have in order to quarantine such threads away from the general topics which they were taking over. That just ended up with nothing but flame wars, liberal helpings of bait, grudges being nursed and carried over from one thread to the next, and of course people criticizing staff for doing both nothing and anything about it. Too much hassle and negativity for us to have to deal with on a daily basis in a place that was meant to revolve around spending time on a hobby.

 

9 hours ago, Kendo 2 said:

Further Clarification: So no more discussions about COVID-19 on the site?

Any discussion about it would have to be free of political bias, scapegoating, the blame game. Discussing how it affects you personally only might work.

 

Eg: "my brother's a professional musician and hasn't been able to play gigs for most of the year. He's having a hard time making ends meet, what with a mortgage, two kids and a third on the way, a car that's decided to give up on him at the worst possible time, and only his teaching to fall back on. This means I've chosen to support him as needed, which isn't easy, considering I'm not made of money either. But he's my kid brother, so what the hell else am I gonna do. I just hope this thing ends before I'm bled dry or lose somebody I know. My uncle was diagnosed due to contact tracing, he's asymptomatic but has spots on his lungs now."

 

[Mr. Otaku]

5 minutes ago, DoctaSax said:

I fear that a separate thread/private club where people are forewarned about the tone will only really repeat, and exacerbate, the echo chamber dynamics we've witnessed so far.

 

It'd be a repeat of the separate politics section we used to have in order to quarantine such threads away from the general topics which they were taking over. That just ended up with nothing but flame wars, liberal helpings of bait, grudges being nursed and carried over from one thread to the next, and of course people criticizing staff for doing both nothing and anything about it. Too much hassle and negativity for us to have to deal with on a daily basis in a place that was meant to revolve around spending time on a hobby.

Understood, seems reasonable. I'm glad we've got this officially clarified so that no more misunderstandings and loophole digging can occur.

[GimmeBACON]

Honestly, I don't really want to discuss politics, it's just that things that have no business being a political discussion in the first place (like actor Mario Lopez being cancelled by the PC police for saying 3-year-olds can’t decide their own gender) have been absorbed by this culture war.

 

"politics is downstream from culture" -Andrew Breitbart

[RitualClarity]

13 hours ago, DoctaSax said:

OK, this is the final time I'm giving a general warning not to bring politics to this thread, or the other ones.

 

The only way to make certain that the site is equally welcoming to all, open, is if no one can just post blanket statements disparaging the people they don't like. Including, yes, people on the left, people who are ok with multiple genders & orientations, or people who believe covid's a serious enough problem to warrant wearing masks - to name just the targets in recent pages. That's probably half our userbase being regularly insulted and alienated in here this year, and it needs to end.

 

The only way to end it without staff getting an earful about how biased we are when we judge these things on a case-by-case basis is to completely disallow politics altogether, no exceptions. Apolitical is as politically neutral as it gets. 'Politics' includes posting opinions about politicians, parties, current affairs proven to be divisive, and whatever else is clearly meant to express or confirm a political bias. It includes linking to outside sources that do the same.

 

 

 

Note, the following isn't intended to be argumentative. Only a statement of what I am seeing. The comment came out of left field and I was confused for some time as to why this was posted. This coming from someone that has taken considerable efforts to be as polite and considerate as possible here.  Take it as you will.

 

You are being so broad about the "politics' that someone cannot post comments and have discussions as many won't even realize the conversation is moving in that direction until a moderator comes and slings his hammer around telling us we are bad people. This is so broad that I doubt any active member posting outside of game mod and tutorials threads will not eventually trip up on this no matter how hard they may try to avoid it.  Like the saying "you can't make everybody happy" you can't prevent somebody from getting upset during conversations. This is a downhill battle that will be lost time and time again. It is impossible to sustain where the site is open to non gaming discussion and even then, you will run into some form of politics related to the current trend of "social justice" concepts entering main stream gaming.

Years ago it was direct attacks on fellow members that was the general  line. Now it is the general population regardless of even if they are members of the site that seems to be the line. I can't see how a moderator can keep their minds with such a low bar to hold, line in the sand to keep etc.

 

Just like it is impossible to keep everybody happy it is impossible to not hurt someone, sometimes. It is the nature of free open speech which this site has with their open thread for discussions such as "What is on your Mind" and "What pisses you off ..." threads among others There are three choices that I can see. 1. raise the bar (perhaps to where someone is specifically attacked. 2. these open discussion threads are closed and members go elsewhere to have these discussions or 3. moderators continue to loose their minds and swing band hammers (which is the current choice as I see it)

 

 

 

[landess]

6 hours ago, DoctaSax said:

It'd be a repeat of the separate politics section we used to have

I never knew - experience is a great teacher - thanks for bringing up this simple fact.

[Kendo 2]

6 hours ago, RitualClarity said:

This is so broad that I doubt any active member posting outside of game mod and tutorials threads will not eventually trip up on this no matter how hard they may try to avoid it. 

That's the point; make LL the gamer version of Twitter and Facebook.

[Visio Diaboli]

Actually, if I had a nickel for every time I accidentally voiced a political opinion, I would have zero nickels. This isn't a difficult line to avoid crossing if you use any amount of discretion.

[GimmeBACON]

13 minutes ago, Visio Diaboli said:

Actually, if I had a nickel for every time I accidentally voiced a political opinion, I would have zero nickels. This isn't a difficult line to avoid crossing if you use any amount of discretion.

agree to disagree.

 

Saying something like 3 year olds shouldn't be transitioning... political.

Saying random people shouldn't be tearing down statues of black abolitionists... political.

The violence and riots in the streets needs to stop... political.

"(any variation of) lives matter"... political.

Saying people shouldn't make movies sexualizing children, you guessed it... political.

 

When common sense becomes labelled "right-wing talking points" EVERYTHING becomes political, it's the games being played.

[Visio Diaboli]

4 minutes ago, GimmeBACON said:

Saying something like 3 year olds shouldn't be transitioning... political.

Saying random people shouldn't be tearing down statues of black abolitionists... political.

The violence and riots in the streets needs to stop... political.

"(any variation of) lives matter"... political.

Saying people shouldn't make movies sexualizing children, you guessed it... political.

I have never once encountered these in a day-to-day conversation, nor had the urge to discuss one of them. 95% of people are not bringing shit like this up frequently.

 

Arguing for these is a political action, but so too is arguing against them in absence of anyone trying to impose those opinions upon you. So the question becomes, who is trying to force those points on you?

 

It certainly isn't the LL staff, and if it's other users then they need to be shown the door. But that comes with the double-edge that when you engage in debate against someone's political stance, your own point is now political. If you want to fight your fight for justice go ahead and do so by the proper channels, but the battle isn't here, because points like that shouldn't even be considered here.

 

We let the rules handle this so that toxic debate never pollutes these forums - the very rules that say politics are not to be discussed.

[landess]

3 minutes ago, Visio Diaboli said:

We let the rules handle this so that toxic debate never pollutes these forums

Toxic debates won't go away, but removing the strongest bait seems to be the goal.

[Guest]

*downloads the next rape mod*

[GimmeBACON]

1 hour ago, Visio Diaboli said:

I have never once encountered these in a day-to-day conversation, nor had the urge to discuss one of them. 95% of people are not bringing shit like this up frequently.

 

Arguing for these is a political action, but so too is arguing against them in absence of anyone trying to impose those opinions upon you. So the question becomes, who is trying to force those points on you?

 

It certainly isn't the LL staff, and if it's other users then they need to be shown the door. But that comes with the double-edge that when you engage in debate against someone's political stance, your own point is now political. If you want to fight your fight for justice go ahead and do so by the proper channels, but the battle isn't here, because points like that shouldn't even be considered here.

 

We let the rules handle this so that toxic debate never pollutes these forums - the very rules that say politics are not to be discussed.

Then count your blessings, but while people turn a blind eye to it... the people whom perpetuate it take advantage of that.

 

Once upon a time these were fringe topics and not particularly political. Then a political tribe embraced it. Once upon a time defund the police and dismantle the system wasn't a political movement... it was sedition or the ravings of lunacy.

 

I get it, but the topic is "What's on your mind?" current events are on some peoples minds... and again, I don't necessarily think what's being deemed as political to actually be so; or at least shouldn't be politicized. 

[Mr. Otaku]

1 hour ago, Alkpaz said:

*downloads the next rape mod*

That's the spiwit!

[landess]

I'm a bit surprised at the pettiness surrounding what members want vs disrespecting the house Ashal built.....

 

If I have a rule saying I don't want guests wearing pink socks and they come into my house wearing pink socks - they can take them off, or get the fuck out. My house - my rules.

[Visio Diaboli]

2 hours ago, GimmeBACON said:

Once upon a time these were fringe topics and not particularly political. Then a political tribe embraced it. Once upon a time defund the police and dismantle the system wasn't a political movement... it was sedition or the ravings of lunacy.

It's not a lot of people, and it's not here. The case can be made all day that this is either a tangible threat or not, but insofar as LL off-topic discussions go, the notion that it's a viable talking point isn't really true. Again, anyone advocating for the things you mentioned is breaking the rules. That shouldn't be permitted, but it isn't even what we're seeing right now. Right now we have people (we all know exactly which ones, too) bringing up (external to LL) incidents of these things being suggested, and then using intentionally divisive language to incite conflict with an enemy that hasn't set foot here (as far back as I can remember) and, per Rule 9, isn't permitted to express their doctrine in the first place.

 

But let's even put aside that specific example, in favor of a more general view. I think saying that the term politics encompasses any views people hold about the legislature, and its enforcement, should be managed is a fair assessment of its meaning - and people take these things very seriously. Under that definition, every example you gave is technically a matter of politics - even if only one out of a hundred people believe something about how the law should be carried out, and even if they, or the 99 others, don't consider it 'political,' it still is, because it pertains to governance. Because of how seriously people take it (i.e. believing, sometimes correctly, that their way of life is imperiled by the current state of politics), it brings a host of seriousness, anger and desperation with it. This site isn't really made for discussion containing those things, as I see it - the way I see it it's primary purpose is for people to connect over morally contemptible mods (I'm not calling us out on that, the contemptibility is why I for one am here) - it works best as an easy-going community.

 

I don't think political discussion should be silenced everywhere - trying not to break any rules, I will state that I enjoy political discourse from time to time, for example debating @gregathit on mask use the other day. It probably wasn't an 'allowed' conversation on this site but I actually left the conversation better informed about why people with his opinion may hold that one, even though I don't agree with it any more than I did before. So it's a vital topic of discussion for the success of the population, but even so I can't see it being anything but detrimental on this site, where it detracts from Loverslab's purpose on whole.