This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
No one is rehabilitating South Africa. But the people there don't deserve what is happening to them.
I suppose you probably think that Red Army soldiers gang raping German woman was a good thing too.
Supposing this is an example of being uncharitable.
If any poster here believes that Red Army soldiers gang raping German women was a good thing, they are more than capable of expressing that thought plainly themselves; your assistance is not required.
You've been getting better at acquiring AAQCs rather than warnings lately, but this sort of post is flatly and egregiously against the rules. I'm giving you a one-day ban. Please do not post this way in the future; ban length will escalate if you do.
Gonna do anything about the goading, post-deleting obvious troll he's replying to? Or does the affirmative action policy cover that behavior
He's been warned to stop deleting posts or he'll be banned.
And you've been warned to stop goading mods and making things up. The last few times we've let pass, but the ankle-biting will stop. Now.
Clamping down on blunt feedback to the mods is a pretty serious change in norms around here, and a very negative development -- you should stop.
Here are the last couple directed at me. I even think he was directionally correct on the latter! Do you think it was helpful?
Amadan might be thinking of non-mod examples.
Probably not helpful per se, but I'm thinking of the oldish days in which mods were expected to put up with blunt-to-the-point-of-against-the-rules commentary on their decisions as part and parcel of the awesome power they wield. I'd probably need to go pretty far back on the reddit sub to find examples, and don't really know where the norm came from (LessWrong?) but it struck me as a pretty good norm. As with the "free-speech vs hate-speech" issue, "criticizing the mods is only allowed if you aren't a PITA about it" is not really a stable equilibrium.
This is kind of true. In the oldish days, we had an unofficial policy that the rules were not enforced as strictly when people were sounding off against mods. We understood and expected that people would often get pissed off about being modded, and so we'd let people bitch and whine about moderation and even take shots at us and not mod them the way we would if they spoke to another poster the same way.
It got very tiresome, though. People abused the privilege and thought it was open season to dump on us every time they didn't like how a mod ruled. Eventually we said "That's it, you don't get to abuse us just because we're mods."
(I say "us" but I can't actually remember if I was a mod while this policy was still in effect. I think it changed either just before or just after I became a mod.)
I'll tell you frankly: I'd be okay with loosening up and letting people like Steve take his shots at us, but only if y'all would be fine with us not being expected to be impartial and modly in our responses. I am not sure the people who want to give us "blunt feedback" would enjoy our blunt feedback about their conduct and posting history. Every time someone complains about how converged or biased we are, I remember how that complainer wrote a tirade at us which they then deleted, just because they know we can see deleted comments, or dropped hostile DMs on us while they were banned, or wrote an antagonistic report, or keeps making the same claim that we've addressed and refuted multiple times until you are a liar would be an accurate characterization.
I'm not saying I want mod feedback to become petty flamewars, but we are held to a higher standard. You want people to be able to bite our ankles with impunity, but when I (in an admitted deficiency of patience) said bluntly "Stop the ankle-biting. Now" - Oh, that was too hostile?
I get that some people think that letting people blast us is part of a mod's job, and to a large degree it is, but I don't think it's our job to let someone say the same dishonest thing over and over again, as belligerently as possible, and never tell them to knock it off.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link