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 -
Well, that's an inference you're drawing. There could be any number of reasons he doesn't post as often as he once did.
Ctrl-F "distinguished". You can also filter using the dropdown in the top right of the modlog.
This thread does not contain any mod warnings, so far as I can see.
I mean, sure, I don't know the mans mind. But also, not really. I was there reading the posts. He stopped making top level posts at the same rate after he was told to stop single issue posting.
It's an example of how biased moddings operate. In one instance it's part of the mod post that SS is dipping out of arguments for some ulterior reason. When the mod is later challenged on this point in an unofficial capacity there's no reply. Same with the singular ChatGPT comment made by SS. Assertions or implications that a user is constantly doing bad things have a lot of rhetorical weight coming from a mod, hat on or not, but sometimes there's very little behind them. They're just building a case of justifications, which does put pressure on people.
I can see distinguished comments, but not who is being replied to.
Well, as obnoxious as the mods (and me, though it's not like my opinion carries any weight here) find his single-issue posting, he hasn't actually been banned for it, unlike the Hock guy. I really do think what the mods object to is repetitive one-note single-issue posting, as opposed to your apparent belief that they are censoring criticism of da Joos.
What you claim I am claiming and what I have claimed are two different things. For instance, I never said he got banned for it. I said he got modded for it. And there are plenty of logical implications to be made from your characterization of my belief that do not follow from my actual belief.
To give an example from my own mind, if you don't like someone, you are more likely to notice if he does something you further do not like. It's just simple confirmation bias and the horns effect.
Another example would be that this is an end result of cognitive dissonance. A person who thinks of themselves as open and fair minded with regards to all opinions will feel emotional confusion if they feel a dislike for someone based on their views alone, since that's exactly what they fashion themselves not being. So they seek justification for their dislike. Which manifests itself in all sort of curious ways. It's not that they dislike them for their views, no, It's everything else about them that's the problem!
A simple cycle of this behavior would be something like:
Someone voices an opinion you dislike or look down upon.
Your cognitive dissonance cope cycle begins, and you notice their negative behaviors more. Fueling the cycle to protect the ego
You confront them
Sensing your ire, or through their own lack of social skill, they act defensive, awkward, or unpleasant back toward you.
You take their reaction as further proof that they are awful, reinforcing your initial dislike.
Now, is it terribly unreasonable to suppose that there are people with visceral negative reactions to critique levied against groups our societies have lionized as sacred? Or maybe the psychological causal chain of events is completely different, but I do not believe that someone on this forum could post the things I noted here, only swapped out for jews, and not get a mod asking them what's up. Even if just to ask them to cool down.
It's not that complicated. Your theory of mind is entirely wrong.
I can't speak for other mods, but I absolutely dislike some people, and won't deny it for a second. I don't need to find reasons to justify my dislike of people. My reasons are usually pretty straightforward.
It's not just the Joo-posters, I assure you. There are definitely people who, when they show up in the mod queue, I think "This fucking guy again." If anything, this makes me more likely to go easy on modding them. I'm quite aware that mods can easily fall into the temptation of looking for excuses to ban someone they really want to ban. I suffer no cognitive dissonance; I know when I am itching to ban someone, and I audit myself very carefully at such times, and when necessary, defer to other mods.
Apparently I am really bad at finding excuses to ban people since there are so many people I have not banned.
Mostly, you are wrong. In some cases, I read those posts and tried to do a mental substitution of "Israel/Jews" for "Hamas/Palestinians" and thought, "Yeah, maybe." I know I have at least a couple of times modded people who outright called Palestinians subhuman. So, did you ever actually report any of those posts? If so, why that person didn't get modded could vary for a lot of reasons, none of which I am going to relitigate on a case-by-case basis because we're already covered all the many reasons why the mods might not act precisely according to your desired calibration, but the one reason it is not is because we have a "visceral negative reactions to critique levied against groups our societies have lionized as sacred" (i.e., we all twitch when Jews are criticized).
You think, and care, about Jews far, far more than any of us do.
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