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 -
I'm not looking for a perma-ban for "single issue posting".
And you’re doing this by…joining other threads to talk about the ADL?
The OP hewed pretty close to bare links, so I can’t really blame you for taking your own spin.
Yes? Adding it as a comment to more of a roundup thread is less risky than a top-level thread, I received a 7-day ban for my last one.
The thread is "Time for some links about breaking and not so breaking culture war news" and my reply is contributing to that.
No, it's not. Do you think you're invisible if you don't post a top-level thread?
I'm not going to ban you for this comment, but it's borderline and adds to our stack of evidence that all you ever post about is Jews, and that even when you pretend you're posting about something else, it will always turn out to be about Jews, and when you respond to someone else in another thread, you will make it about Jews. So yes, if you continue to do this, you will eat another ban.
If there's relevant CW topics like the Indian Reservation excavations, or this controversy between Musk and the ADL, I'm going to post about it, sorry. If you're going to perma-ban me, then whatever.
We're not asking you to not post about it. We're asking you to also post about other stuff.
Is single-issue posting really such a problem? If a user has a limited knowledge or interest range, what else are they supposed to do? I could understand limiting top level posting frequency so that a single user can't swamp the forum, but allowing them to post and then giving other users free reign to strawman and attribute malicious motives to them seems to be the worst of both worlds. We have a mod, @Amadan, openly and repeatedly refusing to respond to this user's arguments because, (to paraphrase) 'you're only making these points because you hate "da joos" and think they're "lizard people"' (which is just as stupid inane as "muh freeze peach"). To me, that's a far bigger failure of this forum's ideals than a few users with their own hobby horses.
That's not correct and I have certainly responded with more than "stop whining about Da Joos" before. It's true I rarely give him much of a response anymore because he always posts the same things and when people do tackle his specific claims, he fades and comes back a short time later with the same arguments pretending the previous conversations never happened (something to pay attention to, if, as you imply, you care about the quality of someone's argumentation). This makes his threads a kind of Holocaust Denial Groundhog Day.
Note that this is not an invitation for you to argue with me about Jews or SS's posts. I don't care if you think my responses are inadequate or I don't engage to the degree you or SS would like.
But we clearly do not prohibit people from "Noticing"-posting, as many people do it. We don't prohibit people from talking about their problems with Jews or women or blacks or their personal dating life or sexual hangups or how much they hate liberals. We have told people who keep hammering one theme over and over again to stop trying to make this place their personal soapbox or therapy group. SS is not being threatened with banning because his arguments are bad or because they offend people. He's being threatened with banning because Joo-posting is all he's here for, and he's clearly not about "testing his ideas."
I'm not looking to argue with you at all, I think you're on the right side of this issue and I'm a lurker at heart. I'm complaining that otherwise articulate commenters are doing the written equivalent of repeating what their opponent is saying in a stupid voice.
You and other replies are pretty convincing that (this particular pattern of) single issue posting is no good, but there must be a better response than this. I don't remember you responding to his arguments in the past, (I'm sure you did and I didn't pay enough attention to usernames). But claiming your opponent is lying about their motives and presenting their argument as a miss-spelled jeer stands out here (it wouldn't stand out anywhere else I've come across).
That said, I appreciate that you don't care what I think of your responses, I enjoy that this place gives lurkers a chance to feel part of it. Occasionally that means we blurt out or frustrations before crawling back under our rocks.
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
More options
Context Copy link