WTF did I just see?! October 6, 2023 8:56 AM Subscribe
kanuck posted some straight-up blackpill content on the front page. It's still up. I've flagged the post with a note for the mods, but how can we as a community respond more assertively to blatant misogyny that's "well packaged"?
Link to the post in question.
By "well packaged" I mean both the polished quality of the content itself as well as the fact that it gets posted on MetaFilter by a longtime user surrounded by a bunch of positive spin.
Maybe it's just me, but I've gotten used to MeFi being less like reddit (where I will constantly brace for hateful posts to come my way from every direction) and more like a 90s/2000s blog run by people I trust. The mods here work hard to earn this trust. But that's why it's especially horrifying when content like this not only gets posted but stays up for long periods, clearly having been seen by a lot of people in the community yet getting only the weakest and most polite pushback ("eh, he said something iffy, I'm not watching that"). It was IMO utterly inadequate as a response to hate of this level and caliber.
I really wish more people had called kanuck out and reported his post. Can we talk about this? I know I may be responding from a place of having been triggered (yeah I'm getting flashbacks to GamerGate days when I got doxxed once, *shudder*) but I do think we can help each other to shut this sort of thing down more assertively. I think the very safety of MetaFilter has perhaps lulled us into not responding more strongly to overtly hateful content. This should not have been received so lackadaisically by our community.
Link to the post in question.
By "well packaged" I mean both the polished quality of the content itself as well as the fact that it gets posted on MetaFilter by a longtime user surrounded by a bunch of positive spin.
Maybe it's just me, but I've gotten used to MeFi being less like reddit (where I will constantly brace for hateful posts to come my way from every direction) and more like a 90s/2000s blog run by people I trust. The mods here work hard to earn this trust. But that's why it's especially horrifying when content like this not only gets posted but stays up for long periods, clearly having been seen by a lot of people in the community yet getting only the weakest and most polite pushback ("eh, he said something iffy, I'm not watching that"). It was IMO utterly inadequate as a response to hate of this level and caliber.
I really wish more people had called kanuck out and reported his post. Can we talk about this? I know I may be responding from a place of having been triggered (yeah I'm getting flashbacks to GamerGate days when I got doxxed once, *shudder*) but I do think we can help each other to shut this sort of thing down more assertively. I think the very safety of MetaFilter has perhaps lulled us into not responding more strongly to overtly hateful content. This should not have been received so lackadaisically by our community.
Fair enough, Blast Hardcheese, I submitted this post while my jaw was on the floor from having sampled a bit of the video on that post so, yes, maybe it sounds like I was calling for a pile-on. But when the mods reached out today to ask if I still wanted this posted many days later, I said yes because I think it's worth asking how we can respond to such outright hateful posts better than we did.
My comment in the post is not ideal, it was pure outrage. Other comments reacted by dismissing it nonchalantly, which is also off the mark. What might be a better community response that upholds the standards of MetaFilter??
- Maybe it should have been flagged more?
- I do think it should have been removed long before now
- Maybe more people needed to recognize that it was outright inappropriate content? As opposed to treating it as a normal wtf post which is 'merely' wrong/outdated/sexist, which is worth thinking about and starting a conversation about imo.
posted by MiraK at 10:20 AM on October 6, 2023 [4 favorites]
My comment in the post is not ideal, it was pure outrage. Other comments reacted by dismissing it nonchalantly, which is also off the mark. What might be a better community response that upholds the standards of MetaFilter??
- Maybe it should have been flagged more?
- I do think it should have been removed long before now
- Maybe more people needed to recognize that it was outright inappropriate content? As opposed to treating it as a normal wtf post which is 'merely' wrong/outdated/sexist, which is worth thinking about and starting a conversation about imo.
posted by MiraK at 10:20 AM on October 6, 2023 [4 favorites]
I had not engaged in the thread, due to the title/fpp not seeming interesting to me, so I had no idea...
posted by supermedusa at 10:22 AM on October 6, 2023 [13 favorites]
posted by supermedusa at 10:22 AM on October 6, 2023 [13 favorites]
A link to Friedman should have been enough for the mods to sandblast that thread into oblivion.
posted by Yowser at 10:26 AM on October 6, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by Yowser at 10:26 AM on October 6, 2023 [5 favorites]
Every once in a while I'll flag something that doesn't get removed, and it'll bother me. So instead of stewing I'll just add the offending poster as a contact. If/when I see them pop up on my side bar, I'll go into whatever they just posted and check it out. If it even hints of something personally annoying to me I'll flag it then shitpost a nasty little comment early in the thread. My shitpost will pick up lots of flags quickly (probably deleted), getting the thread even more mod attention, and there's a better chance that this post will get deleted, making up for the one that didn't before.
This doesn't make me a good person, but it does allow me to work within the system to eventually get closer to what I want.
posted by phunniemee at 10:41 AM on October 6, 2023 [67 favorites]
This doesn't make me a good person, but it does allow me to work within the system to eventually get closer to what I want.
posted by phunniemee at 10:41 AM on October 6, 2023 [67 favorites]
Frankly, I think you're still just asking for a thing that cannot be given, namely, for everyone to engage with the site at a specific level and respond in a specific way to all posts, such that 100% of garbage posts are always flagged into oblivion to prompt mod response following a thread of strong consensus condemnation. It simply will not always happen that way.
Of course the ideal is that idiots like the YouTube guy wouldn't exist. The second best is they'd scream into a vacuum and nobody would ever hear them. The third best, in my truest opinion, is that they and the people who share them get crickets/bored rejection in return. Because that's the kiss of death to Internet Garbage: lack of engagement.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 10:43 AM on October 6, 2023 [12 favorites]
Of course the ideal is that idiots like the YouTube guy wouldn't exist. The second best is they'd scream into a vacuum and nobody would ever hear them. The third best, in my truest opinion, is that they and the people who share them get crickets/bored rejection in return. Because that's the kiss of death to Internet Garbage: lack of engagement.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 10:43 AM on October 6, 2023 [12 favorites]
- Maybe it should have been flagged more?Yes, all of these things are true - but the fact that it was a link to a 62-minute YouTube video made all of those things less likely to happen. I'm not clicking links to 62-minute YouTube videos in the first place unless I have a reasonable amount of confidence that they're going to be relevant to my interests; if I had clicked on the link, then it would have taken me about 30 seconds to think "I don't want to watch this" but I would have had to watch five or ten minutes to think "This is garbage and the post should be deleted," and I would have never watched more than 30 seconds of the video unless it made my Spidey Senses of Righteous Fury tingle.
- I do think it should have been removed long before now
- Maybe more people needed to recognize that it was outright inappropriate content?
So I think it is likely that many, many people who would happily have flagged the post as sexist garbage did not even engage with it enough to see the sexist garbage. And I'm not really sure how you fight that problem for video content, which is much less skimmable than text content.
posted by Jeanne at 10:55 AM on October 6, 2023 [41 favorites]
Yeah, seems like a case of most people not wanting to spend 1-4 hours watching a video interview with Some Guy, Esq. on this particular topic. I saw the post a bit after it went up, skimmed the comments, figured by the unimpressed reaction it wasn't worth the time, and moved on. It took somebody posting an AI text summary later to really surface how questionable the content got (as opposed to the merely "off-putting" stuff noted early on).
Relatedly, I have to wonder about how this MeTa was handled. I understand mods don't have time to pre-screen long video posts and how the delayed reaction here could have slipped under the radar. Heck, one time I linked to a video clip in a bigger post that some jerk had edited disturbing content into the middle of, and I didn't even notice it myself; it took a comment some hours later pointing it out.
MeTa posts *are* screened, though. If it's a justifiable deletion, why not take care of it when alerted by the queued MeTa (if not the flag w/ note) and skip needing to air this sort of "WTF?" post? If it's not, or if MiraK wants to make that post anyway (fair), why not follow up with a mod response, or hold it until the mod on duty can make one? That's the whole point of the queue. Having to answer for an oversight ain't fun, but the recent trend of vexed call-out MeTas getting approved but going without any staff response seems like the worst of all worlds and a recipe for bad feelings.
posted by Rhaomi at 10:57 AM on October 6, 2023 [14 favorites]
Relatedly, I have to wonder about how this MeTa was handled. I understand mods don't have time to pre-screen long video posts and how the delayed reaction here could have slipped under the radar. Heck, one time I linked to a video clip in a bigger post that some jerk had edited disturbing content into the middle of, and I didn't even notice it myself; it took a comment some hours later pointing it out.
MeTa posts *are* screened, though. If it's a justifiable deletion, why not take care of it when alerted by the queued MeTa (if not the flag w/ note) and skip needing to air this sort of "WTF?" post? If it's not, or if MiraK wants to make that post anyway (fair), why not follow up with a mod response, or hold it until the mod on duty can make one? That's the whole point of the queue. Having to answer for an oversight ain't fun, but the recent trend of vexed call-out MeTas getting approved but going without any staff response seems like the worst of all worlds and a recipe for bad feelings.
posted by Rhaomi at 10:57 AM on October 6, 2023 [14 favorites]
Friedman ends up reviled and scorned almost universally in the comments, and very deservedly, and I now know to be very suspicious of anything he might be associated with.
I thought that was the aim of the post in the first place, but maybe I jumped to that conclusion without making sure of my footing.
You could teach Machiavelli a thing or two, phunniemee.
posted by jamjam at 11:02 AM on October 6, 2023 [5 favorites]
I thought that was the aim of the post in the first place, but maybe I jumped to that conclusion without making sure of my footing.
You could teach Machiavelli a thing or two, phunniemee.
posted by jamjam at 11:02 AM on October 6, 2023 [5 favorites]
[insert GIF of the guy from Jurassic Park taking off his sunglasses in awe]
wow, phunniemee, I would love to also know your strategies for other areas of life, such as shopping at Costco and visiting family for holidays.
posted by kensington314 at 11:10 AM on October 6, 2023 [33 favorites]
wow, phunniemee, I would love to also know your strategies for other areas of life, such as shopping at Costco and visiting family for holidays.
posted by kensington314 at 11:10 AM on October 6, 2023 [33 favorites]
A link to Friedman should have been enough for the mods to sandblast that thread into oblivion.
I just want to say that this is what flagging or, uh, more creative approaches is for. I do not think it’s realistic or a good use of resources for mods themselves to be aware of every Bad Source in the world; that’s where the community can take responsibility for flagging.
posted by warriorqueen at 11:25 AM on October 6, 2023 [25 favorites]
I just want to say that this is what flagging or, uh, more creative approaches is for. I do not think it’s realistic or a good use of resources for mods themselves to be aware of every Bad Source in the world; that’s where the community can take responsibility for flagging.
posted by warriorqueen at 11:25 AM on October 6, 2023 [25 favorites]
I had not engaged in the thread, due to the title/fpp not seeming interesting to me, so I had no idea...
Ditto.
every Bad Source
On a meta-level, the youtube channel where the interview was posted, Soft White Underbelly, has a variety of interviews with social outsiders. I’m not surprised that someone with repugnant beliefs would be interviewed by them given that mode of operation, but ages ago I’d noted it as a channel to browse through for interesting videos that might be worth posting myself. I’m not coming out as pro-black pill content here, but I am, I suppose, wanting to note that interesting good and uninteresting bad things can come out of the same maw of content.
Anyhoo! I think that if the post violates the guidelines it should be deleted, especially since the many folks who get angry about spending lots of time flagging guideline-violating content end up in meta-talk and then rage quit the site. The guidelines are vague, but in general it seems like anti-woman content should fall under the category of “micro”-agressions and being unaware of privilege, so should be worth deleting unless some kind of additional context or warning can be added.
posted by Going To Maine at 11:52 AM on October 6, 2023 [2 favorites]
Ditto.
every Bad Source
On a meta-level, the youtube channel where the interview was posted, Soft White Underbelly, has a variety of interviews with social outsiders. I’m not surprised that someone with repugnant beliefs would be interviewed by them given that mode of operation, but ages ago I’d noted it as a channel to browse through for interesting videos that might be worth posting myself. I’m not coming out as pro-black pill content here, but I am, I suppose, wanting to note that interesting good and uninteresting bad things can come out of the same maw of content.
Anyhoo! I think that if the post violates the guidelines it should be deleted, especially since the many folks who get angry about spending lots of time flagging guideline-violating content end up in meta-talk and then rage quit the site. The guidelines are vague, but in general it seems like anti-woman content should fall under the category of “micro”-agressions and being unaware of privilege, so should be worth deleting unless some kind of additional context or warning can be added.
posted by Going To Maine at 11:52 AM on October 6, 2023 [2 favorites]
(Flag -> mod attention -> guideline violation? -> purge)
posted by Going To Maine at 11:53 AM on October 6, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by Going To Maine at 11:53 AM on October 6, 2023 [1 favorite]
That thread still sitting there reminds me of a demotivational poster I first saw decades ago. It was a lovely picture of a sinking ship, and here it is.
posted by heyho at 12:00 PM on October 6, 2023 [7 favorites]
posted by heyho at 12:00 PM on October 6, 2023 [7 favorites]
The real problem here isn't the thread still being there or not, or that it got posted or not, or that people did or didn't discuss it critically enough.
The problem with Metafilter is that not a single moderator has commented in this thread with even a simple "Yeah, we should have handled that better" or "Discussion is fine, and it certainly seemed like the commenters did a good job dunking on the video" or "Honestly, I didn't even watch the video. That shit is long, and the thread didn't get out of hand."
Any one of those answers would be ok! Any answer would be ok! But this site, which is spending thousands of dollars (ten thousand?) MONTHLY on moderation, doesn't have any moderators willing to moderate or speak out about the moderation of the site. And THAT is what will kill trust and engagement. This thread has been up for 3 hours, and was APPROVED BY A MODERATOR. This isn't a surprise thread. Someone was watching when this got posted. Where are you???
posted by bowbeacon at 12:04 PM on October 6, 2023 [17 favorites]
The problem with Metafilter is that not a single moderator has commented in this thread with even a simple "Yeah, we should have handled that better" or "Discussion is fine, and it certainly seemed like the commenters did a good job dunking on the video" or "Honestly, I didn't even watch the video. That shit is long, and the thread didn't get out of hand."
Any one of those answers would be ok! Any answer would be ok! But this site, which is spending thousands of dollars (ten thousand?) MONTHLY on moderation, doesn't have any moderators willing to moderate or speak out about the moderation of the site. And THAT is what will kill trust and engagement. This thread has been up for 3 hours, and was APPROVED BY A MODERATOR. This isn't a surprise thread. Someone was watching when this got posted. Where are you???
posted by bowbeacon at 12:04 PM on October 6, 2023 [17 favorites]
Can any mods clarify why the thread is still up? Does it not violate site guidelines?
posted by MiraK at 12:05 PM on October 6, 2023
posted by MiraK at 12:05 PM on October 6, 2023
I honestly don't see a problem with the thread. I've left a comment as to my thoughts around it (I had ignored it previously as I didn't have time to watch the entire video).
posted by lawrencium at 12:08 PM on October 6, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by lawrencium at 12:08 PM on October 6, 2023 [2 favorites]
I guess I don't think it really needs to be deleted. What does that accomplish? I think it's okay to see something bad, recognize it for what it is, and tell the poster it's offensive and why, which was done. As long as the thread isn't a shitshow, where is the harm in leaving a "bad" post up? (The real harm, not the potential harm.)
posted by heyho at 12:18 PM on October 6, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by heyho at 12:18 PM on October 6, 2023 [6 favorites]
I think any SLYT that's 1-4 hours with no transcript is a "bad post" in the sense that 1. that's not the best of the web and 2. it's likely to get poor engagement because nobody wants to watch that. The engagement it does get is going to be superficial because most people don't want to spend time watching and then discussing something that involved. There's a lot to pull out of one of those long multi-link posts that might take as much time, but most of the users who create those long posts include context that I didn't see here.
I didn't watch it or engage because it looked boring and unpleasant, which is not what I come to Metafilter for. Nothing in either conversation has changed that opinion, only reinforced it.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 12:33 PM on October 6, 2023 [23 favorites]
I didn't watch it or engage because it looked boring and unpleasant, which is not what I come to Metafilter for. Nothing in either conversation has changed that opinion, only reinforced it.
posted by gentlyepigrams at 12:33 PM on October 6, 2023 [23 favorites]
This thread has been up for 3 hours, and was APPROVED BY A MODERATOR. This isn't a surprise thread. Someone was watching when this got posted. Where are you???
Historically, the mods would usually let the users thrash it out before intervening. This was the remnant of the old "self policing since 1999" banner. It's quite different than when the mod makes a thread and says they will monitor it and then doesn't. I'm in favour of having the users discuss with as little mod direction as possible, at least at first, then if there is a decision to be made, it can be announced.
posted by Rumple at 12:54 PM on October 6, 2023 [1 favorite]
Historically, the mods would usually let the users thrash it out before intervening. This was the remnant of the old "self policing since 1999" banner. It's quite different than when the mod makes a thread and says they will monitor it and then doesn't. I'm in favour of having the users discuss with as little mod direction as possible, at least at first, then if there is a decision to be made, it can be announced.
posted by Rumple at 12:54 PM on October 6, 2023 [1 favorite]
On the other hand, without mod input we’re all left to make endlessly wild speculations about the mods’ reaction to the flagging and their assessment of the original thread/topic against site guidelines. I’d rather understand the background and then see if we need to revisit or revise site guidelines.
I’m all for the community model but we’re not there yet.
posted by mochapickle at 12:59 PM on October 6, 2023 [6 favorites]
I’m all for the community model but we’re not there yet.
posted by mochapickle at 12:59 PM on October 6, 2023 [6 favorites]
> I think any SLYT that's 1-4 hours with no transcript is a "bad post" in the sense that 1. that's not the best of the web and 2. it's likely to get poor engagement because nobody wants to watch that.
Counterpoint - isn't that what a significant part of the web has become? Take this metafilter post, universally approved in comments, of a video more than twice as long; that needed twice as many comments, than the one in question here, before a transcript was posted?
I see an increasing number of posts (not just here) that are video content that could just as easily been shorter blog posts, but alas those don't get the view these days.
But yes, I feel the the userbase here are less likely to spend X hours watching a video rather than reading an article. Maybe? I feel the video in question here is perhaps a good example of that?
posted by lawrencium at 1:00 PM on October 6, 2023
Counterpoint - isn't that what a significant part of the web has become? Take this metafilter post, universally approved in comments, of a video more than twice as long; that needed twice as many comments, than the one in question here, before a transcript was posted?
I see an increasing number of posts (not just here) that are video content that could just as easily been shorter blog posts, but alas those don't get the view these days.
But yes, I feel the the userbase here are less likely to spend X hours watching a video rather than reading an article. Maybe? I feel the video in question here is perhaps a good example of that?
posted by lawrencium at 1:00 PM on October 6, 2023
Mod note: Can any mods clarify why the thread is still up? Does it not violate site guidelines?
When the FPP was initially posted it picked a couple of flags and I added a private note for the rest of the Team: "This interview is picking flags for containing misogynistic statements. The video is 1 hour long so I can't confirm but let's monitor for comments in the thread." and then the thread didn't pick more flags or enough comments to be noticed by the rest of the Team. It has now picked more flags due to this thread and I have now watched most of it and I agree, there are lots of problematic statements. The thread has now been deleted. This is one of those cases where I think contacting us is the best way to have it removed.
posted by loup (staff) at 1:21 PM on October 6, 2023 [36 favorites]
When the FPP was initially posted it picked a couple of flags and I added a private note for the rest of the Team: "This interview is picking flags for containing misogynistic statements. The video is 1 hour long so I can't confirm but let's monitor for comments in the thread." and then the thread didn't pick more flags or enough comments to be noticed by the rest of the Team. It has now picked more flags due to this thread and I have now watched most of it and I agree, there are lots of problematic statements. The thread has now been deleted. This is one of those cases where I think contacting us is the best way to have it removed.
posted by loup (staff) at 1:21 PM on October 6, 2023 [36 favorites]
LOL what a crok of shite. If we're going to cherry pick things we don't like or disagree with from content posted with then we might as well delete 99% of the stuff linked on the front page. Honestly thinking meta has turned into an echo chamber at this point.
posted by lawrencium at 1:28 PM on October 6, 2023 [14 favorites]
posted by lawrencium at 1:28 PM on October 6, 2023 [14 favorites]
I don't mind talking about shitheads, but I don't want to amplify them. And like it or not, linking to shitheads from MeFi amplifies them.
posted by seanmpuckett at 1:45 PM on October 6, 2023 [19 favorites]
posted by seanmpuckett at 1:45 PM on October 6, 2023 [19 favorites]
Look, lawrencium, if an aspect of this guy's brand appears to be making sure to broadcast his misogyny before getting to whatever supposedly more nuanced discussion this supposedly contained, then I think it's okay for this site not to be a place that'll transmit it further. 99% of what's linked on the front page doesn't come close to doing that. Sorry for being part of the echo chamber.
posted by nobody at 1:48 PM on October 6, 2023 [20 favorites]
posted by nobody at 1:48 PM on October 6, 2023 [20 favorites]
[adds lawrencium to contacts]
posted by phunniemee at 1:50 PM on October 6, 2023 [95 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 1:50 PM on October 6, 2023 [95 favorites]
> [adds lawrencium to contacts]
Enjoy your echo chamber there @phunniemee
posted by lawrencium at 1:58 PM on October 6, 2023 [5 favorites]
Enjoy your echo chamber there @phunniemee
posted by lawrencium at 1:58 PM on October 6, 2023 [5 favorites]
OK so, what? We're just taunting other users with how we're going to game the flag system to actively deep-six their participation here going forward? This is cool with people?
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 2:29 PM on October 6, 2023 [29 favorites]
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 2:29 PM on October 6, 2023 [29 favorites]
[adds lawrencium to contacts]
I have no truck with this baby-man video, but I don't think it's cool to basically say that you are going stalk people around the site and "shitpost a nasty little comment" in posts they make in the hopes of getting them deleted. FIAMO, or post to MeTa, or contact a mod.
posted by Mid at 2:30 PM on October 6, 2023 [60 favorites]
I have no truck with this baby-man video, but I don't think it's cool to basically say that you are going stalk people around the site and "shitpost a nasty little comment" in posts they make in the hopes of getting them deleted. FIAMO, or post to MeTa, or contact a mod.
posted by Mid at 2:30 PM on October 6, 2023 [60 favorites]
The OP talks about not wanting to approach MeFi like it's reddit but that right there is some extremely Reddit shit, IMO way more so than **not enough** people yelling that a video sucks.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 2:31 PM on October 6, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 2:31 PM on October 6, 2023 [3 favorites]
I took that as a joke. I checked her profile, and she didn't really add the user as a contact. Gosh, I think we really need to take a step back and stop assuming the worst of each other. It's okay to react to things, but let's try to cut each other some slack, right?
posted by heyho at 2:36 PM on October 6, 2023 [31 favorites]
posted by heyho at 2:36 PM on October 6, 2023 [31 favorites]
What's FIAMO?
posted by MiraK at 2:38 PM on October 6, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by MiraK at 2:38 PM on October 6, 2023 [1 favorite]
Flag It And Move On
posted by seanmpuckett at 2:39 PM on October 6, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by seanmpuckett at 2:39 PM on October 6, 2023 [6 favorites]
I took that as a joke.
Even if it was a joke, it was a callback to the first comment, which was not a joke. I was bothered by the first comment, but didn't want to start the grar, but then a couple of people have praised the "shitpost comment" strategy (e.g., this), and now we have the callback "joke." It's not "assuming the worst of each other" to take the first comment at face value and say it's not cool.
posted by Mid at 2:55 PM on October 6, 2023 [15 favorites]
Even if it was a joke, it was a callback to the first comment, which was not a joke. I was bothered by the first comment, but didn't want to start the grar, but then a couple of people have praised the "shitpost comment" strategy (e.g., this), and now we have the callback "joke." It's not "assuming the worst of each other" to take the first comment at face value and say it's not cool.
posted by Mid at 2:55 PM on October 6, 2023 [15 favorites]
I have no truck with this baby-man video, but I don't think it's cool to basically say that you are going stalk people around the site and "shitpost a nasty little comment" in posts they make in the hopes of getting them deleted.
it seems quite creepy imo
posted by Sebmojo at 3:06 PM on October 6, 2023 [13 favorites]
it seems quite creepy imo
posted by Sebmojo at 3:06 PM on October 6, 2023 [13 favorites]
Just here to say that I think that our current Content Policy is good, and last I checked there is no actual shortage of websites that welcome misogyny, racism, antisemitism, transphobia, etc. for folks who feel like this site is really lacking.
posted by hydropsyche at 3:07 PM on October 6, 2023 [23 favorites]
posted by hydropsyche at 3:07 PM on October 6, 2023 [23 favorites]
Yeah, I'd just like to echo that the reason this stayed up is that nobody wanted to watch a hour long video about some dude's feelings about divorce. I saw it when it was posted, clicked over, noped out at the video. I think this would have gotten a lot more flags if anyone had actually watched it.
posted by corb at 3:11 PM on October 6, 2023 [23 favorites]
posted by corb at 3:11 PM on October 6, 2023 [23 favorites]
The thread has now been deleted. This is one of those cases where I think contacting us is the best way to have it removed.
MetaTalk has a queue. This thread was approved and then left open without mod comment for more than four hours. What’s the logic behind approving and ignoring a thread? If you’re looking to reach consensus via the comments in the thread you could post and say you are open to feedback. it’s a weird look, tbh, to decline to comment in MetaTalk more than twice a month. You’re a moderator. Moderate?
posted by kate blank at 3:13 PM on October 6, 2023 [9 favorites]
MetaTalk has a queue. This thread was approved and then left open without mod comment for more than four hours. What’s the logic behind approving and ignoring a thread? If you’re looking to reach consensus via the comments in the thread you could post and say you are open to feedback. it’s a weird look, tbh, to decline to comment in MetaTalk more than twice a month. You’re a moderator. Moderate?
posted by kate blank at 3:13 PM on October 6, 2023 [9 favorites]
The OP talks about not wanting to approach MeFi like it's reddit but that right there is some extremely Reddit shit, IMO way more so than **not enough** people yelling that a video sucks.
That's harsh on Reddit. Out of all the ways to deal with disagreement online--reporting, blocking, muting, downvoting, telling someone to go crush their balls under a wagon wheel--flagging someone's comment, then sabotaging whatever they have to say next if the mods don't rock up fast enough, seems like the pettiest. Especially on a 500-member anonymous forum, imagine treating "Sockmaster" like they're Elon Musk.
posted by kingdead at 3:14 PM on October 6, 2023 [6 favorites]
That's harsh on Reddit. Out of all the ways to deal with disagreement online--reporting, blocking, muting, downvoting, telling someone to go crush their balls under a wagon wheel--flagging someone's comment, then sabotaging whatever they have to say next if the mods don't rock up fast enough, seems like the pettiest. Especially on a 500-member anonymous forum, imagine treating "Sockmaster" like they're Elon Musk.
posted by kingdead at 3:14 PM on October 6, 2023 [6 favorites]
oh no flag me harder daddy
posted by phunniemee at 3:17 PM on October 6, 2023 [34 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 3:17 PM on October 6, 2023 [34 favorites]
This thread was approved and then left open without mod comment for more than four hours.
Four hours of community discussion?! God forbid! This was an emergency!
posted by kbanas at 3:23 PM on October 6, 2023 [25 favorites]
Four hours of community discussion?! God forbid! This was an emergency!
posted by kbanas at 3:23 PM on October 6, 2023 [25 favorites]
This is one of those cases where I think contacting us is the best way to have it removed.
Is flagging with a note materially different from contacting the mods directly? I didn't know that!
Wouldn't the problem of this being an hour+ long video have still been a barrier though? Or was it a matter of being given enough information for mods to act on?
I wish I could remember what was in my note when I flagged it! I bet the note was long, but perhaps it was ranty-long as opposed to informative-long. Next time this happens (though here's hoping it won't!) I'll include time stamps to relevant bits!
posted by MiraK at 3:38 PM on October 6, 2023 [7 favorites]
Is flagging with a note materially different from contacting the mods directly? I didn't know that!
Wouldn't the problem of this being an hour+ long video have still been a barrier though? Or was it a matter of being given enough information for mods to act on?
I wish I could remember what was in my note when I flagged it! I bet the note was long, but perhaps it was ranty-long as opposed to informative-long. Next time this happens (though here's hoping it won't!) I'll include time stamps to relevant bits!
posted by MiraK at 3:38 PM on October 6, 2023 [7 favorites]
I enjoy the thought that our last line of defense against ideological infiltration is our collective short attention span.
posted by AdamCSnider at 3:48 PM on October 6, 2023 [39 favorites]
posted by AdamCSnider at 3:48 PM on October 6, 2023 [39 favorites]
It’s not an emergency, but the mods are being paid thousands of dollars a month to moderate the site. We’re talking about adding a single comment to a thread about content decisions over half a work day. What is the job, if not that?
posted by bowbeacon at 3:48 PM on October 6, 2023 [9 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 3:48 PM on October 6, 2023 [9 favorites]
MetaTalk: flag me harder daddy
posted by Going To Maine at 3:55 PM on October 6, 2023 [17 favorites]
posted by Going To Maine at 3:55 PM on October 6, 2023 [17 favorites]
I thought loup did a good response in this thread and am happy that’s it has been resolved! There are after-action questions people are having about response time and how if the meta hadn’t gone up it would have stuck around being mostly unnoticed but with a bunch of comments pointing out that the video was nasty. (Good job commenters.) That would have been non-optimal but not the worst thing, IMO. But we got a better outcome and I’m happy about that.
posted by Going To Maine at 4:00 PM on October 6, 2023 [12 favorites]
posted by Going To Maine at 4:00 PM on October 6, 2023 [12 favorites]
Every once in a while I'll flag something that doesn't get removed, and it'll bother me. So instead of stewing I'll just add the offending poster as a contact. If/when I see them pop up on my side bar, I'll go into whatever they just posted and check it out. If it even hints of something personally annoying to me I'll flag it then shitpost a nasty little comment early in the thread. My shitpost will pick up lots of flags quickly (probably deleted), getting the thread even more mod attention, and there's a better chance that this post will get deleted, making up for the one that didn't before.
Why doesn't MetaFilter attract new users? Why is the community dying? Such a mystery.
posted by betweenthebars at 4:31 PM on October 6, 2023 [62 favorites]
Why doesn't MetaFilter attract new users? Why is the community dying? Such a mystery.
posted by betweenthebars at 4:31 PM on October 6, 2023 [62 favorites]
let's monitor for comments in the thread
Is there a way to monitor a thread after it has gathered flags? From this comment, it sounds like monitor means, let's just see if it gets more flags. That seems odd and I hope I misinterpreted. If not, can mods add threads like this to their recent activity page so that they can keep an eye on it? It is continuously baffling to me how moderation works/doesn't work here.
posted by twelve cent archie at 5:04 PM on October 6, 2023 [3 favorites]
Is there a way to monitor a thread after it has gathered flags? From this comment, it sounds like monitor means, let's just see if it gets more flags. That seems odd and I hope I misinterpreted. If not, can mods add threads like this to their recent activity page so that they can keep an eye on it? It is continuously baffling to me how moderation works/doesn't work here.
posted by twelve cent archie at 5:04 PM on October 6, 2023 [3 favorites]
If it even hints of something personally annoying to me I'll flag it then shitpost a nasty little comment early in the thread.
Please do not do this.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:09 PM on October 6, 2023 [96 favorites]
Please do not do this.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:09 PM on October 6, 2023 [96 favorites]
Honestly thinking meta has turned into an echo chamber at this point.
Bless your hear phunniemee for dealing with 103.
I was going to seriously unhinge at that comment but....Please do not do this. like a portent.
I asked travelingthyme to delete a post of mine last night and they handled it well, my first time with the contact form, so thanks. interesting when one flags a post.... time really speeds up I mean it speeds up. it did for me and it was my own damn post. two reasons I wasn't quite sure of the link at the point. I did say I didn't like the way the comments were going. however if one makes a post and asks for it to be deleted cuz you don't like how it's going, that's wrong and that's not what I was doing in this case. my whole point is that it was done in a professional manner within due course time and I appreciate that that makes a big difference. The few times that I do interact with a mod, I may not use my best grammar but I use my best behavior.
yeah, in the old days when I/others just knew a post was going to be deleted, peanut gallery, pile on, like sport, like theatre. one time a post didn't get taken down and one can look like a damn fool and one time a poster said: "this is the kind of s*** that makes metafilter bad"
if I had to put a metric on the site for the last month maybe two to the last couple of weeks I'd say there's a lot of stiffled GRAR.
I think the very safety of MetaFilter has perhaps lulled us into not responding more strongly to overtly hateful content
if you substitute Metafilter for France, you have a great historical analogy.
posted by clavdivs at 6:51 PM on October 6, 2023 [2 favorites]
Bless your hear phunniemee for dealing with 103.
I was going to seriously unhinge at that comment but....Please do not do this. like a portent.
I asked travelingthyme to delete a post of mine last night and they handled it well, my first time with the contact form, so thanks. interesting when one flags a post.... time really speeds up I mean it speeds up. it did for me and it was my own damn post. two reasons I wasn't quite sure of the link at the point. I did say I didn't like the way the comments were going. however if one makes a post and asks for it to be deleted cuz you don't like how it's going, that's wrong and that's not what I was doing in this case. my whole point is that it was done in a professional manner within due course time and I appreciate that that makes a big difference. The few times that I do interact with a mod, I may not use my best grammar but I use my best behavior.
yeah, in the old days when I/others just knew a post was going to be deleted, peanut gallery, pile on, like sport, like theatre. one time a post didn't get taken down and one can look like a damn fool and one time a poster said: "this is the kind of s*** that makes metafilter bad"
if I had to put a metric on the site for the last month maybe two to the last couple of weeks I'd say there's a lot of stiffled GRAR.
I think the very safety of MetaFilter has perhaps lulled us into not responding more strongly to overtly hateful content
if you substitute Metafilter for France, you have a great historical analogy.
posted by clavdivs at 6:51 PM on October 6, 2023 [2 favorites]
It’s not an emergency, but the mods are being paid thousands of dollars a month to moderate the site. We’re talking about adding a single comment to a thread about content decisions over half a work day. What is the job, if not that?
this is unhelpful and not adding to the conversation.
posted by feckless at 6:54 PM on October 6, 2023 [21 favorites]
this is unhelpful and not adding to the conversation.
posted by feckless at 6:54 PM on October 6, 2023 [21 favorites]
Is flagging with a note materially different from contacting the mods directly? I didn't know that!
Wouldn't the problem of this being an hour+ long video have still been a barrier though? Or was it a matter of being given enough information for mods to act on?
I wish I could remember what was in my note when I flagged it! I bet the note was long, but perhaps it was ranty-long as opposed to informative-long. Next time this happens (though here's hoping it won't!) I'll include time stamps to relevant bits!
The post was flagged 2 times that day. The first time was flagged as offensive and then it was flagged by you saying it contained misogynistic statements. That's when I left the note. I didn't realize how bad the video was until now, so yes, the length of the video played a part in my decision. Maybe through email I could have asked for more info? Maybe I could have reached asking for more information? Maybe it should have been flagged more? I really think your feedback can help us decide how we should proceed in these cases.
If you’re looking to reach consensus via the comments in the thread you could post and say you are open to feedback.
Yes, we are open to feedback! Let's keep using this thread for this.
posted by loup (staff) at 7:10 PM on October 6, 2023 [14 favorites]
Wouldn't the problem of this being an hour+ long video have still been a barrier though? Or was it a matter of being given enough information for mods to act on?
I wish I could remember what was in my note when I flagged it! I bet the note was long, but perhaps it was ranty-long as opposed to informative-long. Next time this happens (though here's hoping it won't!) I'll include time stamps to relevant bits!
The post was flagged 2 times that day. The first time was flagged as offensive and then it was flagged by you saying it contained misogynistic statements. That's when I left the note. I didn't realize how bad the video was until now, so yes, the length of the video played a part in my decision. Maybe through email I could have asked for more info? Maybe I could have reached asking for more information? Maybe it should have been flagged more? I really think your feedback can help us decide how we should proceed in these cases.
If you’re looking to reach consensus via the comments in the thread you could post and say you are open to feedback.
Yes, we are open to feedback! Let's keep using this thread for this.
posted by loup (staff) at 7:10 PM on October 6, 2023 [14 favorites]
Phunniemee should be banned immediately for their really troubling confession. What they describe is deeply uncivil and uncharitable behavior that destroys community goodwill and discourages good conversation (the purpose of this site, I would think).
posted by crazy with stars at 7:40 PM on October 6, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by crazy with stars at 7:40 PM on October 6, 2023 [5 favorites]
If you can show me where I actually have a pattern of doing this I will leave the site forever.
And now I've outed myself as someone who will occasionally exaggerate on metatalk for fun.
And profit? Please don't ban me mefi favorites are the only way I can feed my family 🥺 🙏
posted by phunniemee at 8:00 PM on October 6, 2023 [68 favorites]
And now I've outed myself as someone who will occasionally exaggerate on metatalk for fun.
And profit? Please don't ban me mefi favorites are the only way I can feed my family 🥺 🙏
posted by phunniemee at 8:00 PM on October 6, 2023 [68 favorites]
phunniemee has been an immense asset to Metafilter from Day One, and if she were to be banned, this would rank as perhaps the most destructive Meta of all time, which is an exceedingly high bar.
posted by jamjam at 8:02 PM on October 6, 2023 [58 favorites]
posted by jamjam at 8:02 PM on October 6, 2023 [58 favorites]
not sure that value has been in evidence in this thread
posted by sagc at 8:03 PM on October 6, 2023 [10 favorites]
posted by sagc at 8:03 PM on October 6, 2023 [10 favorites]
Look, everybody with a history on Metafilter has some good days and some bad days. If we all caught a ban for our bad days there would be no one left. The world is bleak and terrible but we don't have to make it worse.
posted by corb at 8:38 PM on October 6, 2023 [39 favorites]
posted by corb at 8:38 PM on October 6, 2023 [39 favorites]
Phunniemee is just being phunnie, folks
posted by kensington314 at 9:27 PM on October 6, 2023 [21 favorites]
posted by kensington314 at 9:27 PM on October 6, 2023 [21 favorites]
If those comments posted in this thread were meant to be funny, that’s one helluva way to read a room.
posted by armoir from antproof case at 10:20 PM on October 6, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by armoir from antproof case at 10:20 PM on October 6, 2023 [8 favorites]
MetaTalk has a queue. This thread was approved and then left open without mod comment for more than four hours. What’s the logic behind approving and ignoring a thread? If you’re looking to reach consensus via the comments in the thread you could post and say you are open to feedback.
There was a time when a MeTa post like this -- pointing out a problematic post or comment that may require mod intervention -- would be approved out of the queue by a moderator who would then add a comment at the top of the thread to say something like, we've reviewed the post/comment and decided to leave it in place but would like to use this thread to get community feedback, or we've reviewed and removed the objectionable content but let's use this space to consider whether the guidelines need review, &c. Point being, a moderator took action to approve the MeTa but also acknowledged in the thread what mod review or action had already taken place regarding the content in question.
I appreciated this whenever I saw it, because it demonstrated that the mods were actually reading the MeTas they approved, because it offered some insight into what mod actions were being taken and why, and because it set appropriate framing for the rest of the (meta)discussion.
Do we not do this any longer? If not, was it a considered choice to discontinue it, or just a casualty of insufficient mod coverage? If so, why was it not done in this case?
Does it just come down to an hour-long SLYT with minimal context being difficult to moderate effectively? If that's the case, do we need to rethink site guidelines re long video posts with minimal context? If a video like this didn't collect enough flags to draw mod attention because hardly anyone watched it, because hardly anyone engages with videos like this, that would seem to make them a bad fit for the site for multiple reasons.
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 12:04 AM on October 7, 2023 [14 favorites]
There was a time when a MeTa post like this -- pointing out a problematic post or comment that may require mod intervention -- would be approved out of the queue by a moderator who would then add a comment at the top of the thread to say something like, we've reviewed the post/comment and decided to leave it in place but would like to use this thread to get community feedback, or we've reviewed and removed the objectionable content but let's use this space to consider whether the guidelines need review, &c. Point being, a moderator took action to approve the MeTa but also acknowledged in the thread what mod review or action had already taken place regarding the content in question.
I appreciated this whenever I saw it, because it demonstrated that the mods were actually reading the MeTas they approved, because it offered some insight into what mod actions were being taken and why, and because it set appropriate framing for the rest of the (meta)discussion.
Do we not do this any longer? If not, was it a considered choice to discontinue it, or just a casualty of insufficient mod coverage? If so, why was it not done in this case?
Does it just come down to an hour-long SLYT with minimal context being difficult to moderate effectively? If that's the case, do we need to rethink site guidelines re long video posts with minimal context? If a video like this didn't collect enough flags to draw mod attention because hardly anyone watched it, because hardly anyone engages with videos like this, that would seem to make them a bad fit for the site for multiple reasons.
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 12:04 AM on October 7, 2023 [14 favorites]
The post was flagged 2 times that day. The first time was flagged as offensive and then it was flagged by you saying it contained misogynistic statements. That's when I left the note. I didn't realize how bad the video was until now, so yes, the length of the video played a part in my decision.
Maybe the length of the video should also factor into the threshold of flags needed to take something seriously? Like, I get that one flag or two is usually noise, but on something as long form as this, with far less eyes on it as a result, maybe it should count for more?
posted by Dysk at 12:24 AM on October 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
Maybe the length of the video should also factor into the threshold of flags needed to take something seriously? Like, I get that one flag or two is usually noise, but on something as long form as this, with far less eyes on it as a result, maybe it should count for more?
posted by Dysk at 12:24 AM on October 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
Or maybe we should have a queue for anything posted to the front page, similar to how it works in MetaTalk, so that nothing gets through unless it’s been fully vetted and approved by a moderator. And we can nominate certain members as Super Users who are given special veto powers that enable them to delete any posts that they find objectionable—let’s say a maximum of ten posts per week.
posted by Atom Eyes at 12:43 AM on October 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by Atom Eyes at 12:43 AM on October 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
The post was flagged 2 times that day. The first time was flagged as offensive and then it was flagged by you saying it contained misogynistic statements. That's when I left the note. I didn't realize how bad the video was until now, so yes, the length of the video played a part in my decision. Maybe through email I could have asked for more info? Maybe I could have reached asking for more information? Maybe it should have been flagged more? I really think your feedback can help us decide how we should proceed in this cases.
Maybe an AI summarizer like the one that Kristi used in the thread would also be a good tool to help with moderation decisions on long videos.
posted by Eyelash at 3:02 AM on October 7, 2023 [6 favorites]
Maybe an AI summarizer like the one that Kristi used in the thread would also be a good tool to help with moderation decisions on long videos.
posted by Eyelash at 3:02 AM on October 7, 2023 [6 favorites]
I'm not sad that post got deleted. But I also don't think it's a huge problem it stayed up. It got very little engagement, most of it negative, and was probably already off the front page by the time this was posted.
I missed it entirely until this post, because the FPP description didn't sound interesting enough to click through to. I have now listened to about half of it, and it was not worth my time. Family law is an important specialty and I suspect lots of practitioners could give valuable relationship advice based on their experience - some of what was said in that video was practical advice even. But that Bill Maher wannabe's musings about how marriage is an outdated technology (?) from when women died in childbirth (when did that stop?) obscured any valid points he was making.
I understand that watching/reading everything linked is an untenable expectation for the mods. And I appreciate the advice to send a longer note through the contact form in cases where I feel strongly that a given link needs to be deleted. But, am I correct that this Metatalk post was read, there was correspondence with the person who submitted it, and then it was posted to Metatalk, and no mod watched the video in question until after all that occured? That seems weird to me! Why would a contact form note get the mods to investigate the appropriateness of a link when seeing this in the queue did not?
Most importantly, no one has done anything worth banning over here, c'mon.
posted by the primroses were over at 6:02 AM on October 7, 2023 [11 favorites]
I missed it entirely until this post, because the FPP description didn't sound interesting enough to click through to. I have now listened to about half of it, and it was not worth my time. Family law is an important specialty and I suspect lots of practitioners could give valuable relationship advice based on their experience - some of what was said in that video was practical advice even. But that Bill Maher wannabe's musings about how marriage is an outdated technology (?) from when women died in childbirth (when did that stop?) obscured any valid points he was making.
I understand that watching/reading everything linked is an untenable expectation for the mods. And I appreciate the advice to send a longer note through the contact form in cases where I feel strongly that a given link needs to be deleted. But, am I correct that this Metatalk post was read, there was correspondence with the person who submitted it, and then it was posted to Metatalk, and no mod watched the video in question until after all that occured? That seems weird to me! Why would a contact form note get the mods to investigate the appropriateness of a link when seeing this in the queue did not?
Most importantly, no one has done anything worth banning over here, c'mon.
posted by the primroses were over at 6:02 AM on October 7, 2023 [11 favorites]
I would like people who post blatantly misogynistic or racist things to be banned, actually. These types of posts are clearly against the rules. If that's too extreme for some, tough.
posted by tiny frying pan at 6:22 AM on October 7, 2023 [21 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 6:22 AM on October 7, 2023 [21 favorites]
but in general it seems like anti-woman content should fall under the category of “micro”-agressions and being unaware of privilege, s
Ummmm no. Anti-woman content is violent and disturbing. Misogyny is not a micro aggression.
posted by tiny frying pan at 6:25 AM on October 7, 2023 [36 favorites]
Ummmm no. Anti-woman content is violent and disturbing. Misogyny is not a micro aggression.
posted by tiny frying pan at 6:25 AM on October 7, 2023 [36 favorites]
I must have missed something, because the only actual request for banning I saw in this thread was directed at phunniemee.
I still disagree that one dumb link to a misanthropic divorce lawyer is cause to ban a user, but I may be missing context there as well.
posted by the primroses were over at 6:32 AM on October 7, 2023
I still disagree that one dumb link to a misanthropic divorce lawyer is cause to ban a user, but I may be missing context there as well.
posted by the primroses were over at 6:32 AM on October 7, 2023
Yes; I believe that instabans for rules violations is too extreme! Honestly, the level of anger and intolerance here lately is utterly disturbing. We don't all see through the same lens (thankfully). Banning everyone who doesn't present the same as you is a bit of a slippery slope, don't we think?
There've been two references to banning users in this MeTa! (phunniemee and the OP of the post on the blue, just a few comments up) What the hell? This is tiresome and toxic for the site. Yes. More than some edgy guy who uses the p-word. Chill.
posted by heyho at 6:40 AM on October 7, 2023 [22 favorites]
There've been two references to banning users in this MeTa! (phunniemee and the OP of the post on the blue, just a few comments up) What the hell? This is tiresome and toxic for the site. Yes. More than some edgy guy who uses the p-word. Chill.
posted by heyho at 6:40 AM on October 7, 2023 [22 favorites]
No, I won't "chill." I have a right to state my opinion on it.
posted by tiny frying pan at 6:41 AM on October 7, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 6:41 AM on October 7, 2023 [5 favorites]
A link to Friedman should have been enough for the mods to sandblast that thread into oblivion.
Just dropping in for a second to suggest that if a person is this problematic, it would be good to flag the comment or post and leave a note about why said person is problematic. There's a lot of stuff on the internet, so it's totally possible for a mod to not know about a particular person or situation.
Thanks!
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:56 AM on October 7, 2023 [37 favorites]
Just dropping in for a second to suggest that if a person is this problematic, it would be good to flag the comment or post and leave a note about why said person is problematic. There's a lot of stuff on the internet, so it's totally possible for a mod to not know about a particular person or situation.
Thanks!
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:56 AM on October 7, 2023 [37 favorites]
Ummmm no. Anti-woman content is violent and disturbing. Misogyny is not a micro aggression.
It's also not merely "things we don't like or disagree with" as that FPP was apparently described upthread.
posted by polytope subirb enby-of-piano-dice at 7:11 AM on October 7, 2023 [18 favorites]
It's also not merely "things we don't like or disagree with" as that FPP was apparently described upthread.
posted by polytope subirb enby-of-piano-dice at 7:11 AM on October 7, 2023 [18 favorites]
That advice goes against what loup suggests above.
posted by bowbeacon at 7:13 AM on October 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 7:13 AM on October 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
A few points.
That video does have an (auto-generated) transcript, like most of YouTube. If you click the "..." in the grey circle and press "Show Transcript" you can get to it.
I think the mod (in)action was reasonable. I wouldn't want them to delete everything that gets a couple of flags.
There might be a bit of an oddity in the system. A controversial thing that gets some defenders probably generates a lot of comment-flags, but because there wasn't really any defence of the post in the thread, probably not a lot of flagging happened. So perversely, a link that almost everyone hates might generate fewer comment-flags than a link that some hate and some don't.
I think banning phunniemee would be a wild overreaction.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 7:23 AM on October 7, 2023 [5 favorites]
That video does have an (auto-generated) transcript, like most of YouTube. If you click the "..." in the grey circle and press "Show Transcript" you can get to it.
I think the mod (in)action was reasonable. I wouldn't want them to delete everything that gets a couple of flags.
There might be a bit of an oddity in the system. A controversial thing that gets some defenders probably generates a lot of comment-flags, but because there wasn't really any defence of the post in the thread, probably not a lot of flagging happened. So perversely, a link that almost everyone hates might generate fewer comment-flags than a link that some hate and some don't.
I think banning phunniemee would be a wild overreaction.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 7:23 AM on October 7, 2023 [5 favorites]
maybe we should have a queue for anything posted to the front page, similar to how it works in MetaTalk, so that nothing gets through unless it’s been fully vetted and approved by a moderator. And we can nominate certain members as Super Users who are given special veto powers that enable them to delete any posts that they find objectionable—let’s say a maximum of ten posts per week.
No. Not ever. Never ever ever. This is a community weblog. Not a committee weblog. That would be my last day on the site.
posted by chasles at 8:16 AM on October 7, 2023 [23 favorites]
No. Not ever. Never ever ever. This is a community weblog. Not a committee weblog. That would be my last day on the site.
posted by chasles at 8:16 AM on October 7, 2023 [23 favorites]
I too have a hard time telling apart what's supposed to be satire and what not here lately but I have a feeling the "queue for anything" and "super user" suggestions were not in earnest. At least I hope so.
posted by bitteschoen at 8:25 AM on October 7, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by bitteschoen at 8:25 AM on October 7, 2023 [8 favorites]
yeah this truly is one of those MeTas that tests one's ability to feel confident that any given reply is meant as a joke vs. being so unhinged as to feel like deliberate sabotage, which then routes right back round to thinking it's a joke, but more in the "I have become the Joker" sense
anyway: I really appreciate Two unicycles and some duct tape's comment. since MetaTalk posts already go through a vetting process, it'd be nice for ones like these to come up with much earlier mod statements/prefaces, which in these sorts of cases is way more important (I think) than super-consistent engagement beyond that point. doesn't need to be elaborate; loup's post ending with "Yes, we are open to feedback! Let's keep using this thread for this." is more than enough context and thoughtfulness to probably (???) keep this conversation from devolving into demands that posters be banned and other wild shit
posted by Kybard at 8:27 AM on October 7, 2023
anyway: I really appreciate Two unicycles and some duct tape's comment. since MetaTalk posts already go through a vetting process, it'd be nice for ones like these to come up with much earlier mod statements/prefaces, which in these sorts of cases is way more important (I think) than super-consistent engagement beyond that point. doesn't need to be elaborate; loup's post ending with "Yes, we are open to feedback! Let's keep using this thread for this." is more than enough context and thoughtfulness to probably (???) keep this conversation from devolving into demands that posters be banned and other wild shit
posted by Kybard at 8:27 AM on October 7, 2023
I would like people who post blatantly misogynistic or racist things to be banned, actually.
This requires some effort though, because of the gulf between dislike and harm. Right? Like, I've now grudgingly watched a little of this video (a prenup could save you millions in legal fees? clearly i am not the target audience for this thing) and some additional parts of the transcript, and I still am not sure what's wrong with it. Not my thing--very much not my thing--but nobody's yet said, "oh but wait if you look at 24 minutes 30 seconds in he says this horrible thing that makes it unforgivable."
But you've got to do that if you want to say something's blatantly misogynist. You've got to show the harm. Otherwise it becomes really dangerous to post or comment here. Just as a quick example, take that gay gene FPP the other day--that conversation went really well, and I enjoyed hearing viewpoints that I don't necessarily agree with. But what if someone had been all, "sorry guys, any implication that gayness is a choice is blatant homophobia and has to be banned"? Or even "sorry times two, but making a light-hearted joke about something turning you gay, in a thread like this, is blatant homophobia and has to be banned"?
But if you look at the sad lawyer video FPP, it seemed like the community's natural immune system was working pretty well. Pushback was happening. And on a community discussion board, that's what needs to happen. A little back and forth. "This is bad, and I will now tell you why." Right? Not, "oh you mentioned Lex Fridman in your FPP so you need to be called out" b/c unless you spend a thousand hours a day online maybe you don't know who Lex Fridman is.
I mean, don't get me wrong, there's nothing I love better than big dramatic moral judgments. I would've been a GREAT puritan! But I think we do the site a disservice when we talk too freely about banning people forever, erasing posts, etc., without really thinking through what we owe to the discussion before that happens.
posted by mittens at 8:38 AM on October 7, 2023 [41 favorites]
This requires some effort though, because of the gulf between dislike and harm. Right? Like, I've now grudgingly watched a little of this video (a prenup could save you millions in legal fees? clearly i am not the target audience for this thing) and some additional parts of the transcript, and I still am not sure what's wrong with it. Not my thing--very much not my thing--but nobody's yet said, "oh but wait if you look at 24 minutes 30 seconds in he says this horrible thing that makes it unforgivable."
But you've got to do that if you want to say something's blatantly misogynist. You've got to show the harm. Otherwise it becomes really dangerous to post or comment here. Just as a quick example, take that gay gene FPP the other day--that conversation went really well, and I enjoyed hearing viewpoints that I don't necessarily agree with. But what if someone had been all, "sorry guys, any implication that gayness is a choice is blatant homophobia and has to be banned"? Or even "sorry times two, but making a light-hearted joke about something turning you gay, in a thread like this, is blatant homophobia and has to be banned"?
But if you look at the sad lawyer video FPP, it seemed like the community's natural immune system was working pretty well. Pushback was happening. And on a community discussion board, that's what needs to happen. A little back and forth. "This is bad, and I will now tell you why." Right? Not, "oh you mentioned Lex Fridman in your FPP so you need to be called out" b/c unless you spend a thousand hours a day online maybe you don't know who Lex Fridman is.
I mean, don't get me wrong, there's nothing I love better than big dramatic moral judgments. I would've been a GREAT puritan! But I think we do the site a disservice when we talk too freely about banning people forever, erasing posts, etc., without really thinking through what we owe to the discussion before that happens.
posted by mittens at 8:38 AM on October 7, 2023 [41 favorites]
And ... that's MetaFilter of late 2023 distilled into one short MetaTalk thread!
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 8:55 AM on October 7, 2023 [14 favorites]
posted by Ivan Fyodorovich at 8:55 AM on October 7, 2023 [14 favorites]
I for one would not have a problem autobanning people who post blackpill and/or redpill content on MetaFilter. Not saying the mods should ban kanuck or anyone else who posts this shit, but good grief, how could banning blackpill/redpill assholes possibly be a bad thing?!
Imagine being so inured to hate speech against women that the original post seemed like no big deal to you? just a regular eyerolly meh kind of bad post? that you feel like splitting hairs about whether or not misogyny this violent and this blatant is truly causing harm or whether it is merely "disliked" by over-sensitive women who tend to overreact to "micro"-aggressions. SMH several of the comments here are making me question the assumptions I made while posting this thread.
posted by MiraK at 9:30 AM on October 7, 2023 [17 favorites]
Imagine being so inured to hate speech against women that the original post seemed like no big deal to you? just a regular eyerolly meh kind of bad post? that you feel like splitting hairs about whether or not misogyny this violent and this blatant is truly causing harm or whether it is merely "disliked" by over-sensitive women who tend to overreact to "micro"-aggressions. SMH several of the comments here are making me question the assumptions I made while posting this thread.
posted by MiraK at 9:30 AM on October 7, 2023 [17 favorites]
I’m glad for this thread because it’s helping me articulate a concern I’ve had lately.
I do think pushing back on misogynistic content is great. And if someone is extremely consistently posting that kind of thing then I think a chat is good. I also don’t really want to have actively harmful content posted.
But I do think that the community may be swinging too far towards ban/delete vs. discuss/push back. I think the question of platforming is a good one to consider, but I also know that I personally learn more from discussion of why something sucks than just not seeing it. I absolutely do not have time in my life to keep up on every misogynist, transphobic, homophobic, etc. jerk in the world. And I don’t want a page full of that shit. But if something gets through for whatever reason, or is presented in a different context, I think I would rather have space to have that discussion from time to time.
How do you find that line? Probably actually through flagging. If something is so problematic that 30 people can identify it out of the gate, it should go. If it’s just a few, maybe it’s noting that in the comments and discussing - not to be fair to the poster necessarily but because how else do we all, maybe including them, learn?
It seems to me we’re moving from a growth mindset here, where we all have things to learn, to a fixed one, where things should be “obvious.” I think it’s possible to have good lines for unacceptable that still allow room for “hey this wasn’t great and here’s why” that can remain as a part of the discussion.
posted by warriorqueen at 9:39 AM on October 7, 2023 [60 favorites]
I do think pushing back on misogynistic content is great. And if someone is extremely consistently posting that kind of thing then I think a chat is good. I also don’t really want to have actively harmful content posted.
But I do think that the community may be swinging too far towards ban/delete vs. discuss/push back. I think the question of platforming is a good one to consider, but I also know that I personally learn more from discussion of why something sucks than just not seeing it. I absolutely do not have time in my life to keep up on every misogynist, transphobic, homophobic, etc. jerk in the world. And I don’t want a page full of that shit. But if something gets through for whatever reason, or is presented in a different context, I think I would rather have space to have that discussion from time to time.
How do you find that line? Probably actually through flagging. If something is so problematic that 30 people can identify it out of the gate, it should go. If it’s just a few, maybe it’s noting that in the comments and discussing - not to be fair to the poster necessarily but because how else do we all, maybe including them, learn?
It seems to me we’re moving from a growth mindset here, where we all have things to learn, to a fixed one, where things should be “obvious.” I think it’s possible to have good lines for unacceptable that still allow room for “hey this wasn’t great and here’s why” that can remain as a part of the discussion.
posted by warriorqueen at 9:39 AM on October 7, 2023 [60 favorites]
But I think we do the site a disservice when we talk too freely about banning people forever, erasing posts, etc.,
I think it's fine for my opinion to exist alongside ones like yours, without saying that it does the site a disservice. I comment like anyone does here because I care, deeply. I didn't ask anyone to agree with me, but I do expect to be able to speak "too" freely on it.
posted by tiny frying pan at 9:40 AM on October 7, 2023 [5 favorites]
I think it's fine for my opinion to exist alongside ones like yours, without saying that it does the site a disservice. I comment like anyone does here because I care, deeply. I didn't ask anyone to agree with me, but I do expect to be able to speak "too" freely on it.
posted by tiny frying pan at 9:40 AM on October 7, 2023 [5 favorites]
MetaFilter: MetaFilter: And that's MetaFilter of late 2023 distilled into one short MetaTalk thread! ...MetaFilter: And that's the MetaFilter of late 2023 distilled into one short MetaTalk thread! ...MetaFilter: And that's MetaFilter of late 2023 distilled into one short MetaTalk thread! ...
...all the way down.
I'm in favor of civil, if strenuous, comments followed, if necessary, by flagging and, if warranted, sending comments to mods. Expect your ox to be prodded now and then. You have the right to own your hot buttons, as do I mine.
Site guidelines cover the ground.
posted by mule98J at 9:41 AM on October 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
...all the way down.
I'm in favor of civil, if strenuous, comments followed, if necessary, by flagging and, if warranted, sending comments to mods. Expect your ox to be prodded now and then. You have the right to own your hot buttons, as do I mine.
Site guidelines cover the ground.
posted by mule98J at 9:41 AM on October 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
Site guidelines cover the ground.
That's what's interesting, though. Nobody seems to be in any doubt that the post violated site guidelines, quite unambiguously. AND YET many people seem to be unsure of whether this post merited deletion. Make it make sense.
In the interest of full disclosure, I am owning my hot button issue: it often seems like misogyny is a special exception to our community guidelines. There's often special pleading applied to misogyny (and misogyny alone) that aw come on is this really that big a deal can't we just tolerate it and let it slide into obscurity by merely ignoring it, etc.
posted by MiraK at 9:49 AM on October 7, 2023 [14 favorites]
That's what's interesting, though. Nobody seems to be in any doubt that the post violated site guidelines, quite unambiguously. AND YET many people seem to be unsure of whether this post merited deletion. Make it make sense.
In the interest of full disclosure, I am owning my hot button issue: it often seems like misogyny is a special exception to our community guidelines. There's often special pleading applied to misogyny (and misogyny alone) that aw come on is this really that big a deal can't we just tolerate it and let it slide into obscurity by merely ignoring it, etc.
posted by MiraK at 9:49 AM on October 7, 2023 [14 favorites]
A few thoughts:
1. I, like many, looked at the post, saw it was a video about a topic that isn’t personally interesting, read a few comments that suggested the creator was a tool, and decided I had better things to do with my remaining years of life.
2. I don’t think a single bad post or comment should be a reason to ban, but it should go “in a user’s permanent file,” because the mods should consider patterns of behavior. There are a few topics where I might suspend this (e.g. Holocaust denial), but member’s tenure and activity should be taken to account (the person in question has low but consistent activity across 15+ years, most of it inoffensive). A new sign up posting that video would make me feel different.
3. phunniemee is a long-standing member with a good track record. I took that as over-the-top humor, and a glance at her profile page suggests as much — she links to about as many people as I do after a similar time on the site. Basically, humor folks. Unless you want to believe she’s actually diabolical, which seems out of character.
posted by GenjiandProust at 9:50 AM on October 7, 2023 [22 favorites]
1. I, like many, looked at the post, saw it was a video about a topic that isn’t personally interesting, read a few comments that suggested the creator was a tool, and decided I had better things to do with my remaining years of life.
2. I don’t think a single bad post or comment should be a reason to ban, but it should go “in a user’s permanent file,” because the mods should consider patterns of behavior. There are a few topics where I might suspend this (e.g. Holocaust denial), but member’s tenure and activity should be taken to account (the person in question has low but consistent activity across 15+ years, most of it inoffensive). A new sign up posting that video would make me feel different.
3. phunniemee is a long-standing member with a good track record. I took that as over-the-top humor, and a glance at her profile page suggests as much — she links to about as many people as I do after a similar time on the site. Basically, humor folks. Unless you want to believe she’s actually diabolical, which seems out of character.
posted by GenjiandProust at 9:50 AM on October 7, 2023 [22 favorites]
Oh,
4.Deleting that post was a good call, but I see why it took as long as it did. Flags and contact form!
posted by GenjiandProust at 9:52 AM on October 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
4.Deleting that post was a good call, but I see why it took as long as it did. Flags and contact form!
posted by GenjiandProust at 9:52 AM on October 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
no, we are not going to ban phunniemee!! not all humor lands as intended (although I laughed, but I'm a crass animal). attempting some levity in a thread like this is not a bad thing, even if you don't agree with it.
nor do I think we should ban the OP. deleting the thread was the right thing to do. it violated the guidelines. yeah it was slow to get attention, we all know why.
should the OP post other such content in the future, a warning, a timeout. if they cannot learn to abide by the guidelines than, yes, we ban them.
I am worried about Metafilter, all. we are like, going through puberty or menopause or a psychotic episode. I hope we will survive. I may not post a lot but I really love this place.
posted by supermedusa at 10:06 AM on October 7, 2023 [23 favorites]
nor do I think we should ban the OP. deleting the thread was the right thing to do. it violated the guidelines. yeah it was slow to get attention, we all know why.
should the OP post other such content in the future, a warning, a timeout. if they cannot learn to abide by the guidelines than, yes, we ban them.
I am worried about Metafilter, all. we are like, going through puberty or menopause or a psychotic episode. I hope we will survive. I may not post a lot but I really love this place.
posted by supermedusa at 10:06 AM on October 7, 2023 [23 favorites]
If a post sucks in a forest and nobody clicks the links, does it… I mean, good god.
posted by atoxyl at 10:31 AM on October 7, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 10:31 AM on October 7, 2023 [3 favorites]
> I took that as a joke
...
> I took that as over-the-top humor
...
> not all humor lands as intended
Well, exactly. This all feels a bit "do as i say not as i do", no? Like, where is the line? Some replies here show the implications of the tactic were rather offensive.
FWIW I had a feeling the reply wasn't *entirely* serious, but I really don't know. I also really don't care, personally, as I've been online long enough to remember the likes of usenet and killfiles.
And also FWIW I think throwing around the ban hammer so quickly is also over the top.
And also also FWIW (and the mods can probably confirm this): I have never flagged anyone or anything on any meta* site. Ever. I trust the community as a whole to handle that, but this entire thread has me doubting that. Which is kind of why I waded in, and other comments here have expressed my thoughts better than I can, so I'll wade back out again...
posted by lawrencium at 10:32 AM on October 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
...
> I took that as over-the-top humor
...
> not all humor lands as intended
Well, exactly. This all feels a bit "do as i say not as i do", no? Like, where is the line? Some replies here show the implications of the tactic were rather offensive.
FWIW I had a feeling the reply wasn't *entirely* serious, but I really don't know. I also really don't care, personally, as I've been online long enough to remember the likes of usenet and killfiles.
And also FWIW I think throwing around the ban hammer so quickly is also over the top.
And also also FWIW (and the mods can probably confirm this): I have never flagged anyone or anything on any meta* site. Ever. I trust the community as a whole to handle that, but this entire thread has me doubting that. Which is kind of why I waded in, and other comments here have expressed my thoughts better than I can, so I'll wade back out again...
posted by lawrencium at 10:32 AM on October 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
I have never flagged anyone or anything on any meta* site. Ever.
I mean, you could have, as a favor to the rest of us, so the site works better for vulnerable people.
posted by tigrrrlily at 11:40 AM on October 7, 2023 [18 favorites]
I mean, you could have, as a favor to the rest of us, so the site works better for vulnerable people.
posted by tigrrrlily at 11:40 AM on October 7, 2023 [18 favorites]
Imagine being so inured to hate speech against women [...] that you feel like splitting hairs about whether or not misogyny this violent and this blatant is truly causing harm or whether it is merely "disliked" by over-sensitive women who tend to overreact to "micro"-aggressions.
What a terrible way to mischaracterize what I said. I literally cannot tell if you're being honest with this, or if you're being mean.
posted by mittens at 11:42 AM on October 7, 2023 [11 favorites]
What a terrible way to mischaracterize what I said. I literally cannot tell if you're being honest with this, or if you're being mean.
posted by mittens at 11:42 AM on October 7, 2023 [11 favorites]
I wasn't singling out your comment, mittens, but yours was among the ones that prompted my (honest) response. Is it a mischaracterization? You personally didn't imply anything about oversensitivity or overreaction but you did say it was "Puritanical" and "big dramatic moral judgment" or somesuch (in a mocking tone) to object to - I keep having to repeat - literally black pill misogynistic, violent, overtly hateful content. You are among those who are downplaying and minimizing the hate in that video. I cannot imagine why. And again, just so this doesn't get taken as a personal dispute, you're only one among many who are saying similar things. Consider my mind boggled. It's like you're all making a special exception for misogyny as being nbd.
posted by MiraK at 11:59 AM on October 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by MiraK at 11:59 AM on October 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
Well, exactly. This all feels a bit "do as i say not as i do", no? Like, where is the line? Some replies here show the implications of the tactic were rather offensive.
Eh, in my case, it was familiarity with the site and knowledge of the particular poster. Since it seemed unlike her, a quick check showed that there were not a huge number of anomalous contacts on her page, although even checking seemed like overkill. Someone with a much more casual relationship with the site would not get that, which is why I often delete my own comment in-process if they seem too in-jokey, although sometimes I cannot resist.
And also also FWIW (and the mods can probably confirm this): I have never flagged anyone or anything on any meta* site. Ever. I trust the community as a whole to handle that, but this entire thread has me doubting that.
...so... if... everyone... took this approach, nothing would ever get flagged, and the mods would have much less information to go on. It's a "community weblog" for a reason, and flags, comments, use of the contact form are all ways to build that community sense. I know some people long for the far-off days when "anything went," but, for me, the first five years on this site were a constant struggle against racism and sexism which I am glad we are past (yeah, I know, we're not *great* at any of this, nor trans issues especially, but it was worse in 2010 (cue cold comfort icon)). And that shift happened partly because members were willing to fight those fights on the front page and here in MeTa, but also because other members who weren't willing or able to fight publicly used flags and the contact form to give the mods a better idea of the community they were moderating for.
Sorry if that's a long-winded reply to what may have been an off-the-cuff response, but it's really important. The community needs to speak if it's going to be a community, and that can't always be the relatively small number of "loud" members who have the time and energy to make themselves sheard.
posted by GenjiandProust at 12:07 PM on October 7, 2023 [6 favorites]
Eh, in my case, it was familiarity with the site and knowledge of the particular poster. Since it seemed unlike her, a quick check showed that there were not a huge number of anomalous contacts on her page, although even checking seemed like overkill. Someone with a much more casual relationship with the site would not get that, which is why I often delete my own comment in-process if they seem too in-jokey, although sometimes I cannot resist.
And also also FWIW (and the mods can probably confirm this): I have never flagged anyone or anything on any meta* site. Ever. I trust the community as a whole to handle that, but this entire thread has me doubting that.
...so... if... everyone... took this approach, nothing would ever get flagged, and the mods would have much less information to go on. It's a "community weblog" for a reason, and flags, comments, use of the contact form are all ways to build that community sense. I know some people long for the far-off days when "anything went," but, for me, the first five years on this site were a constant struggle against racism and sexism which I am glad we are past (yeah, I know, we're not *great* at any of this, nor trans issues especially, but it was worse in 2010 (cue cold comfort icon)). And that shift happened partly because members were willing to fight those fights on the front page and here in MeTa, but also because other members who weren't willing or able to fight publicly used flags and the contact form to give the mods a better idea of the community they were moderating for.
Sorry if that's a long-winded reply to what may have been an off-the-cuff response, but it's really important. The community needs to speak if it's going to be a community, and that can't always be the relatively small number of "loud" members who have the time and energy to make themselves sheard.
posted by GenjiandProust at 12:07 PM on October 7, 2023 [6 favorites]
>>I wasn't singling out your comment, mittens, but yours was among the ones that prompted my (honest) response. Is it a mischaracterization? You personally didn't imply anything about oversensitivity or overreaction but you did say it was "Puritanical" and "big dramatic moral judgment" or somesuch (in a mocking tone) to object to - I keep having to repeat - literally black pill misogynistic, violent, overtly hateful content.
What mittens actually said was this:
>But if you look at the sad lawyer video FPP, it seemed like the community's natural immune system was working pretty well. Pushback was happening. And on a community discussion board, that's what needs to happen. A little back and forth. "This is bad, and I will now tell you why." Right? Not, "oh you mentioned Lex Fridman in your FPP so you need to be called out" b/c unless you spend a thousand hours a day online maybe you don't know who Lex Fridman is.
I mean, don't get me wrong, there's nothing I love better than big dramatic moral judgments. I would've been a GREAT puritan! But I think we do the site a disservice when we talk too freely about banning people forever, erasing posts, etc., without really thinking through what we owe to the discussion before that happens.
So you've pulled the two quotes terms out of context. The context was that we should not be automatically jumping to deletion every time but also thinking about ways in which, on a discussion website, that maybe discussion is a tactic that could be used more, in general.
I agree with mittens' and with warriorqueen's asking us to think about what we're actually trying to accomplish here and whether the tools we're using are doing that. The very cop-like framework that has been set up for moderation -- no discussion, no community correction, just officials swooping in and cleaning up the mess -- has swung out of the realm of "useful to keep community members from screaming at each other" and into "a way for community members to scream at each other." There's a place where we can engage each other as community members instead, and give some grace to people's imperfections. (Before this happens: Please don't take this to mean I'm defending the video. I'm not watching the video. I'm commenting on a continual process of calls for deletions, bannings, and moderator intervention rather than community conversation/discussion.)
posted by lapis at 12:45 PM on October 7, 2023 [41 favorites]
What mittens actually said was this:
>But if you look at the sad lawyer video FPP, it seemed like the community's natural immune system was working pretty well. Pushback was happening. And on a community discussion board, that's what needs to happen. A little back and forth. "This is bad, and I will now tell you why." Right? Not, "oh you mentioned Lex Fridman in your FPP so you need to be called out" b/c unless you spend a thousand hours a day online maybe you don't know who Lex Fridman is.
I mean, don't get me wrong, there's nothing I love better than big dramatic moral judgments. I would've been a GREAT puritan! But I think we do the site a disservice when we talk too freely about banning people forever, erasing posts, etc., without really thinking through what we owe to the discussion before that happens.
So you've pulled the two quotes terms out of context. The context was that we should not be automatically jumping to deletion every time but also thinking about ways in which, on a discussion website, that maybe discussion is a tactic that could be used more, in general.
I agree with mittens' and with warriorqueen's asking us to think about what we're actually trying to accomplish here and whether the tools we're using are doing that. The very cop-like framework that has been set up for moderation -- no discussion, no community correction, just officials swooping in and cleaning up the mess -- has swung out of the realm of "useful to keep community members from screaming at each other" and into "a way for community members to scream at each other." There's a place where we can engage each other as community members instead, and give some grace to people's imperfections. (Before this happens: Please don't take this to mean I'm defending the video. I'm not watching the video. I'm commenting on a continual process of calls for deletions, bannings, and moderator intervention rather than community conversation/discussion.)
posted by lapis at 12:45 PM on October 7, 2023 [41 favorites]
lawrencium: I have never flagged anyone or anything on any meta* site. Ever. I trust the community as a whole to handle that
How can the community handle that if its members don't handle it? Or are you not part of the community as a whole?
You and me (and others) flagging stuff is how the community handles that.
posted by Too-Ticky at 12:51 PM on October 7, 2023 [12 favorites]
How can the community handle that if its members don't handle it? Or are you not part of the community as a whole?
You and me (and others) flagging stuff is how the community handles that.
posted by Too-Ticky at 12:51 PM on October 7, 2023 [12 favorites]
> Eh, in my case, it was familiarity with the site and knowledge of the particular poster.
And that's *exactly* my point about the echo chamber.
Oh it's only so-and-so, or such-and-such. They're like that. Just a joke. No harm. Check their history. All good!
I have to deal with this in some of the communities I've ended up being, essentially, a moderator of due to volunteering to organise workshops, conferences, meetups, get togethers. There's a COC, and we have to enforce it. And the "oh it's just X, they've always been like that" isn't an excuse that holds water anymore. People that have been pillars in the community for, literally, decades turn out to be toxic.
I'm not saying that's the case here at all. But my point is: echo chamber.
> ...so... if... everyone... took this approach, nothing would ever get flagged
Yes, but the vast majority *don't* take that approach. Like I said: I trust the community to self moderate. As this thread has shown, sometimes that doesn't quite work as intended.
Metafilter still feels like one of the last bastions of the old web. The *good* parts of it. I hope we can keep it that way.
*wades back out again*
posted by lawrencium at 12:52 PM on October 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
And that's *exactly* my point about the echo chamber.
Oh it's only so-and-so, or such-and-such. They're like that. Just a joke. No harm. Check their history. All good!
I have to deal with this in some of the communities I've ended up being, essentially, a moderator of due to volunteering to organise workshops, conferences, meetups, get togethers. There's a COC, and we have to enforce it. And the "oh it's just X, they've always been like that" isn't an excuse that holds water anymore. People that have been pillars in the community for, literally, decades turn out to be toxic.
I'm not saying that's the case here at all. But my point is: echo chamber.
> ...so... if... everyone... took this approach, nothing would ever get flagged
Yes, but the vast majority *don't* take that approach. Like I said: I trust the community to self moderate. As this thread has shown, sometimes that doesn't quite work as intended.
Metafilter still feels like one of the last bastions of the old web. The *good* parts of it. I hope we can keep it that way.
*wades back out again*
posted by lawrencium at 12:52 PM on October 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
I think that calling for a deletion of misogynistic content is perfectly OK behavior. In fact, here we go: misogynistic content should be nuked from orbit and the user given a warning that misogynistic content is not OK to post on the site. Something that they should have known already, but hey not everyone knows that MeFi is different from their other haunts. So they should be told that, because it's... true... right?
posted by tigrrrlily at 12:54 PM on October 7, 2023 [16 favorites]
posted by tigrrrlily at 12:54 PM on October 7, 2023 [16 favorites]
> Eh, in my case, it was familiarity with the site and knowledge of the particular poster.
And that's *exactly* my point about the echo chamber.
Oh it's only so-and-so, or such-and-such. They're like that. Just a joke. No harm. Check their history. All good!
I don't want this to become a back and forth, but:
This is not what "echo chamber" means. It's an example of community history. A long time community member gets their longtime activity added to the consideration. If a member, for example, has a history of being shitty on a topic, I will assume that a shitty comment is, indeed, them being shitty. Again. I am more likely to flag and contact the mods. If they have a history of generally being sensible or sensible on that topic, I will assume that they have misstated something and maybe ask them to clarify, either in the thread or by memail.
Newer or more casual members I have less of an idea about, and they require a different approach, even if Brand New Days sometimes confuse the issue.
This is very different than an "echo chamber" where only one opinion is allowed.
posted by GenjiandProust at 1:11 PM on October 7, 2023 [10 favorites]
And that's *exactly* my point about the echo chamber.
Oh it's only so-and-so, or such-and-such. They're like that. Just a joke. No harm. Check their history. All good!
I don't want this to become a back and forth, but:
This is not what "echo chamber" means. It's an example of community history. A long time community member gets their longtime activity added to the consideration. If a member, for example, has a history of being shitty on a topic, I will assume that a shitty comment is, indeed, them being shitty. Again. I am more likely to flag and contact the mods. If they have a history of generally being sensible or sensible on that topic, I will assume that they have misstated something and maybe ask them to clarify, either in the thread or by memail.
Newer or more casual members I have less of an idea about, and they require a different approach, even if Brand New Days sometimes confuse the issue.
This is very different than an "echo chamber" where only one opinion is allowed.
posted by GenjiandProust at 1:11 PM on October 7, 2023 [10 favorites]
> [adds lawrencium to contacts
weirdly (and maybe it's a flaw), I also do a thing where I sometimes add somebody as a contact who repeatedly annoys me around here. But what usually ends up happening is I come to understand better where they're coming from, see them as less as of a villain. It may be that we just happen to differ (perhaps strongly) on some things, not all things. It's almost as if human beings are complex and multidimensional or something.
posted by philip-random at 1:12 PM on October 7, 2023 [19 favorites]
weirdly (and maybe it's a flaw), I also do a thing where I sometimes add somebody as a contact who repeatedly annoys me around here. But what usually ends up happening is I come to understand better where they're coming from, see them as less as of a villain. It may be that we just happen to differ (perhaps strongly) on some things, not all things. It's almost as if human beings are complex and multidimensional or something.
posted by philip-random at 1:12 PM on October 7, 2023 [19 favorites]
The context was that we should not be automatically jumping to deletion every time but also thinking about ways in which, on a discussion website, that maybe discussion is a tactic that could be used more, in general.
This sometimes can be a better alternative than a quick deletion. Several comments above noticed that the video was more likely to be ignored than watched by most MeFites. I don't know it that's true. But it seems MeFites, who might be hurt by such nonsense (as the pots/video) would quickly pass it by unread.
I would never argue to admit blatantly racist or sexist posts to MetaFilter. But I also would be cautious about attaching "-isms" to posts or comments without thinking them over. Sometimes a discussion serves the site better than a deletion. I'm not arguing against flags and notes to the mods. This is part of our community's culture now, and I believe it has merit.
I made a comment several years ago, beginning with the phrase, "I don't have a dog in this fight, but..." A MeFite named Sweetkid replied, "Maybe you should." I have never forgot her gentle prodding, and as time went by and I read more of her comments, I began to understand that she had a dog in that fight, and something of what it took for her to be on the Blue in that thread.
posted by mule98J at 2:53 PM on October 7, 2023 [22 favorites]
This sometimes can be a better alternative than a quick deletion. Several comments above noticed that the video was more likely to be ignored than watched by most MeFites. I don't know it that's true. But it seems MeFites, who might be hurt by such nonsense (as the pots/video) would quickly pass it by unread.
I would never argue to admit blatantly racist or sexist posts to MetaFilter. But I also would be cautious about attaching "-isms" to posts or comments without thinking them over. Sometimes a discussion serves the site better than a deletion. I'm not arguing against flags and notes to the mods. This is part of our community's culture now, and I believe it has merit.
I made a comment several years ago, beginning with the phrase, "I don't have a dog in this fight, but..." A MeFite named Sweetkid replied, "Maybe you should." I have never forgot her gentle prodding, and as time went by and I read more of her comments, I began to understand that she had a dog in that fight, and something of what it took for her to be on the Blue in that thread.
posted by mule98J at 2:53 PM on October 7, 2023 [22 favorites]
sometimes one accepts the levity that one might not like.
posted by clavdivs at 3:20 PM on October 7, 2023
posted by clavdivs at 3:20 PM on October 7, 2023
I miss sweetkid on a regular basis.
posted by GenjiandProust at 5:30 PM on October 7, 2023 [9 favorites]
posted by GenjiandProust at 5:30 PM on October 7, 2023 [9 favorites]
TIL about contacts
posted by tofu_crouton at 6:15 PM on October 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by tofu_crouton at 6:15 PM on October 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
I am puzzled as to how this post could have sat in the MetaTalk queue for several hours, and yet while it was waiting mods didn't choose to investigate further about the link, either by watching the video, reading the comments, communicating with the poster of this MeTa, etc. I don't know how long it waited, but at least 8 hours? Then it was posted from queue, and then loup removed the post four hours later.
Whether or not a post breaks Guidelines is not something you solicit community input on! Comment #1 on this post should have been a mod with either "We've reviewed the post mentioned here and decided to remove it, please use this space to discuss" or "We're letting it remain, please use this space to discuss"
If not, what's the point of queuing MetaTalk posts, especially ones that claim "this post elsewhere on the site breaks guidelines"?
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 6:32 PM on October 7, 2023 [21 favorites]
Whether or not a post breaks Guidelines is not something you solicit community input on! Comment #1 on this post should have been a mod with either "We've reviewed the post mentioned here and decided to remove it, please use this space to discuss" or "We're letting it remain, please use this space to discuss"
If not, what's the point of queuing MetaTalk posts, especially ones that claim "this post elsewhere on the site breaks guidelines"?
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 6:32 PM on October 7, 2023 [21 favorites]
I don't know how long it waited, but at least 8 hours?
Eight days.
posted by mochapickle at 7:13 PM on October 7, 2023 [5 favorites]
Eight days.
posted by mochapickle at 7:13 PM on October 7, 2023 [5 favorites]
I am puzzled as to how this post could have sat in the MetaTalk queue for several hours, and yet while it was waiting mods didn't choose to investigate further about the link, either by watching the video, reading the comments, communicating with the poster of this MeTa, etc. I don't know how long it waited, but at least 8 hours? Then it was posted from queue, and then loup removed the post four hours later.*gestures wildly at the last several years of metatalk*
posted by Alterscape at 7:36 PM on October 7, 2023 [5 favorites]
This thread has been up for 3 hours
linking to shitheads from MeFi amplifies them.
My what an urgent and important place this is.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 8:05 PM on October 7, 2023 [6 favorites]
linking to shitheads from MeFi amplifies them.
My what an urgent and important place this is.
posted by Tell Me No Lies at 8:05 PM on October 7, 2023 [6 favorites]
literally black pill misogynistic, violent, overtly hateful content.
I only watched a few minutes of the first video because of this Meta. I couldn't be bothered to watch more because I don't have enough interest in this type of video to give them more of my time, and I am especially not a fan of self important guys blathering on and on like they have special insights to share, most of the time they really don't. (See "stop giving men microphones".) Anyway, I just wanted to get an idea of this content that was being complained about. I found it crass and uninteresting but I didn't actually hear anything that in my world (and I am a woman living in a particularly sexist society, more so than the US) would qualify as violent, overtly hateful and misogynistic. Maybe there are clearer examples of that in the rest of the video or the other one, but I haven't seen anyone bring up those examples. And I do think reasonable people can disagree on how violently or overtly misogynistic this content seems to be without being accused so emphatically of being ok with misogyny themselves. No? Maybe?
posted by bitteschoen at 12:54 AM on October 8, 2023 [16 favorites]
I only watched a few minutes of the first video because of this Meta. I couldn't be bothered to watch more because I don't have enough interest in this type of video to give them more of my time, and I am especially not a fan of self important guys blathering on and on like they have special insights to share, most of the time they really don't. (See "stop giving men microphones".) Anyway, I just wanted to get an idea of this content that was being complained about. I found it crass and uninteresting but I didn't actually hear anything that in my world (and I am a woman living in a particularly sexist society, more so than the US) would qualify as violent, overtly hateful and misogynistic. Maybe there are clearer examples of that in the rest of the video or the other one, but I haven't seen anyone bring up those examples. And I do think reasonable people can disagree on how violently or overtly misogynistic this content seems to be without being accused so emphatically of being ok with misogyny themselves. No? Maybe?
posted by bitteschoen at 12:54 AM on October 8, 2023 [16 favorites]
The community needs to speak if it's going to be a community, and that can't always be the relatively small number of "loud" members who have the time and energy to make themselves heard.
I want everyone to picture me dressed as a majorette and standing behind GenjiandProust here and doing an acrobatics routine while holding two big flags, both of which simply read "THIS".
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:58 AM on October 8, 2023 [17 favorites]
I want everyone to picture me dressed as a majorette and standing behind GenjiandProust here and doing an acrobatics routine while holding two big flags, both of which simply read "THIS".
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 4:58 AM on October 8, 2023 [17 favorites]
I didn't actually hear anything that in my world (and I am a woman living in a particularly sexist society, more so than the US) would qualify as violent, overtly hateful and misogynistic.
Seeing people on fire about how terrible the content was made me curious, so I scanned the whole transcript of the first video and found nothing I would call misogynistic, certainly nothing violent, really nothing remarkable at all. He's negative about marriage, but it's not like marriage is a feminist invention. I concluded the bad stuff must be in the second video, but I didn't feel motivated to read the transcript of an even longer video about a topic I'm not very interested in. Or is it just that the creator is known to be misogynistic so everything he creates is seen as poison? I'd be interested in an example of some of the worst content.
posted by Redstart at 6:56 AM on October 8, 2023 [1 favorite]
Seeing people on fire about how terrible the content was made me curious, so I scanned the whole transcript of the first video and found nothing I would call misogynistic, certainly nothing violent, really nothing remarkable at all. He's negative about marriage, but it's not like marriage is a feminist invention. I concluded the bad stuff must be in the second video, but I didn't feel motivated to read the transcript of an even longer video about a topic I'm not very interested in. Or is it just that the creator is known to be misogynistic so everything he creates is seen as poison? I'd be interested in an example of some of the worst content.
posted by Redstart at 6:56 AM on October 8, 2023 [1 favorite]
I don't have a problem with this particular deletion, which I think was never going to fly once people actually looked at the content. But I think it's worth looking back at the last user survey results. Some extracts I thought were interesting
posted by TheophileEscargot at 6:59 AM on October 8, 2023 [25 favorites]
Question 2: How do you currently feel about participating on MetaFilter?In general, Metafilter users as a whole are not crying out for more anger and more call-outs and more deletions.
The site feels more aggressive. Commenters routinely mentioned not participating or hesitating to participate due to the fear of saying the wrong thing – or even the right thing in the wrong way – and very quickly finding themselves at the bottom of a pile-on. Vocal members tend to dominate discussions, particularly in MetaTalk.
...
Moderation matters. While many members credited moderation as a primary reason the site works well, several others commented about past negative interactions with moderation and management and concerns about moderation decisions they felt were aggressive or inconsistent and left lasting impressions.
Question 4: What is the biggest non-technical challenge you face when participating on MetaFilter?
In general, the issue was not about being disagreed with, but the way in which that disagreement was shared. There were a lot of different ways these were worded. Some mentioned, in a generic way, pile-ons, or being attacked. Some mentioned specifically feeling unwelcome for their political views. There was a lot of talk about bad-faith readings, and a general unwillingness to ask for a clarification or follow-up, leading to people being afraid to participate.
Question 7: What’s one thing you wish were different about MetaFilter right now?
132 responses were generally about something relating to what the responder viewed as a negative aspect of MetaFilter culture. Mostly this was about tension, aggressive tone policing, pile ons, and the like...
posted by TheophileEscargot at 6:59 AM on October 8, 2023 [25 favorites]
I started quoting and writing a post about the content and then Metafilter ate the comment before I could post and I'm so tired yall I don't want to copy it all again. These are my impressions. There isn't a real connected transcript for the 1st one so it's hard to direct quote easily.
There's a lot of gold digger stuff. Not giving blow jobs or giving sex ended a marriage or made a man cheat. In a long part about how a woman stopped giving blow jobs and the man stopped buying her fav granola and the marriage ended. He is good friends with Joe Rogan, not a crime but worth mentioning, he thought.
Some weird stuff that's hard to parse
I mean, it can also be incredibly adventurous going out into the world by yourself and then coming back to the we with a full report. Coming back and saying like, “Oh my God, guess what I saw? Guess what I did?Like, “We have to go there together now because all I could think about was you. While I was there I was like, oh my god, she would love this.” That’s magical, that’s amazing. Look what I brought you back. I went for this and then I got you this present from there. There’s something … and we know this. I always thought it was when you watch the old westerns where the hero’s leaving and he’s walking away from the cabin, he’s going to go fight the gunfight. And she runs up and she goes, “Please don’t go, don’t go, stay here with me.” And he kisses her and then he goes. If he goes like, “Yeah, you’re right, I’ll just stay here, it’s cool. I didn’t want to deal with that anyway.” He’s not the hero anymore then.
Huh?
He tells a story of a guy likening women to cars and trading up for a new car but you could lease, not buy.
The tone is overall more that women are at fault for divorce or problems in divorce or custody, but that both people should be working for connection.
I think it definitely sways towards sexist thoughts but isn't straight red pill stuff on the surface. I haven't delved into really who this guy is though or what his books say.
These were my impressions and that's it. I'm not making any other commentary about this incident on MeFi nor should this be taken as evidence for or against the link posting or a reason to yell at me please.
posted by tiny frying pan at 7:56 AM on October 8, 2023 [10 favorites]
There's a lot of gold digger stuff. Not giving blow jobs or giving sex ended a marriage or made a man cheat. In a long part about how a woman stopped giving blow jobs and the man stopped buying her fav granola and the marriage ended. He is good friends with Joe Rogan, not a crime but worth mentioning, he thought.
Some weird stuff that's hard to parse
I mean, it can also be incredibly adventurous going out into the world by yourself and then coming back to the we with a full report. Coming back and saying like, “Oh my God, guess what I saw? Guess what I did?Like, “We have to go there together now because all I could think about was you. While I was there I was like, oh my god, she would love this.” That’s magical, that’s amazing. Look what I brought you back. I went for this and then I got you this present from there. There’s something … and we know this. I always thought it was when you watch the old westerns where the hero’s leaving and he’s walking away from the cabin, he’s going to go fight the gunfight. And she runs up and she goes, “Please don’t go, don’t go, stay here with me.” And he kisses her and then he goes. If he goes like, “Yeah, you’re right, I’ll just stay here, it’s cool. I didn’t want to deal with that anyway.” He’s not the hero anymore then.
Huh?
He tells a story of a guy likening women to cars and trading up for a new car but you could lease, not buy.
The tone is overall more that women are at fault for divorce or problems in divorce or custody, but that both people should be working for connection.
I think it definitely sways towards sexist thoughts but isn't straight red pill stuff on the surface. I haven't delved into really who this guy is though or what his books say.
These were my impressions and that's it. I'm not making any other commentary about this incident on MeFi nor should this be taken as evidence for or against the link posting or a reason to yell at me please.
posted by tiny frying pan at 7:56 AM on October 8, 2023 [10 favorites]
Since people are asking, I think the subject of the main video comes off as a misandrist and a misogynist; maybe his overall disdain for humanity distracts from the misogyny. But you can't convince me that his bit in the first few minutes about female attractiveness being the highest value commodity, because men become rich and powerful in order to get a woman (but she better play that stock right before her value plummets as she ages, amirite?) is not misogyny. And then later, further than I watched, he has a whole segment about how rough divorced men have it compared to divorced women because society is so unsympathetic to men. Apparently all women who cheat are sympathetic figures in the public imagination, while men who cheat are monsters? He also complains about Beyoncé's Run the World (Girls) being played at school dances! There's more, but if none of this seems misogynistic at all to some of you, then I think we're operating with different definitions of misogyny. Personally, I will not be debating whether the above mentioned items are misogynistic. I have already spent way too much of my limited life span on this video than I should have.
But I agree I didn't see anything violent or black pilled.
posted by the primroses were over at 7:58 AM on October 8, 2023 [18 favorites]
But I agree I didn't see anything violent or black pilled.
posted by the primroses were over at 7:58 AM on October 8, 2023 [18 favorites]
Nobody seems to be in any doubt that the post violated site guidelines, quite unambiguously. AND YET many people seem to be unsure of whether this post merited deletion. Make it make sense.
Speaking for myself, it's not that I'm okay with letting the misogyny in, or whatever; I just don't always agree with the rules. In particular, I don't typically favor the solution of nuking posts and having the site pre-sanitized for me—in general, I prefer some healthy diversity (aka, not an echo chamber), as long as the thread doesn't get overly shitty and angry. Sometimes I'm in favor of deletion, but it's subjective; hard-and-fast rules are tricky.
As far as how bad the content was? I have a low threshold for assholes who refuse to respect women in general. I noped out when the guy used the word "pussy" in the first 20 seconds (handy!) because, like it or not, in 2023—with the possible exception of certain drag queens—that's a dogwhistle, and I don't like the dogs he's calling.
posted by heyho at 8:01 AM on October 8, 2023 [13 favorites]
Speaking for myself, it's not that I'm okay with letting the misogyny in, or whatever; I just don't always agree with the rules. In particular, I don't typically favor the solution of nuking posts and having the site pre-sanitized for me—in general, I prefer some healthy diversity (aka, not an echo chamber), as long as the thread doesn't get overly shitty and angry. Sometimes I'm in favor of deletion, but it's subjective; hard-and-fast rules are tricky.
As far as how bad the content was? I have a low threshold for assholes who refuse to respect women in general. I noped out when the guy used the word "pussy" in the first 20 seconds (handy!) because, like it or not, in 2023—with the possible exception of certain drag queens—that's a dogwhistle, and I don't like the dogs he's calling.
posted by heyho at 8:01 AM on October 8, 2023 [13 favorites]
Oh and one more thing was he said a few times that sort of "we can't even decide what gender we are nowadays" comment.
posted by tiny frying pan at 8:20 AM on October 8, 2023 [13 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 8:20 AM on October 8, 2023 [13 favorites]
based on the above excerpts I feel comfortable calling that misogyny!
posted by supermedusa at 8:26 AM on October 8, 2023 [12 favorites]
posted by supermedusa at 8:26 AM on October 8, 2023 [12 favorites]
Apparently all women who cheat are sympathetic figures in the public imagination, while men who cheat are monsters?
That's a really strange read of the social norms (I mean his read, not yours). My own knee-jerk response to "cheating wife" is, here's a person who is now at risk for being murdered in a way that may inspire leniency from the state (see crimes of passion). Is that what is meant by a sympathetic figure?
posted by eirias at 8:27 AM on October 8, 2023 [1 favorite]
That's a really strange read of the social norms (I mean his read, not yours). My own knee-jerk response to "cheating wife" is, here's a person who is now at risk for being murdered in a way that may inspire leniency from the state (see crimes of passion). Is that what is meant by a sympathetic figure?
posted by eirias at 8:27 AM on October 8, 2023 [1 favorite]
Thanks tiny frying pan, the primroses were over and heyho for providing more examples of how shitty the content in question was. It sounds even shittier than my quick impression from a few minutes viewing. I don't think I'd call that violent or black pilled either but yeahhhh I can see the misogyny in those instances you all quoted. Thanks really, I didn't mean to be lazy I just couldn't stomach listening to this guy blabber on.
posted by bitteschoen at 8:32 AM on October 8, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by bitteschoen at 8:32 AM on October 8, 2023 [6 favorites]
Don't ever apologize for having good instincts, bitteschoen.
posted by the primroses were over at 8:37 AM on October 8, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by the primroses were over at 8:37 AM on October 8, 2023 [4 favorites]
I guess as a result of the presence of this thread and that thread in my browsing history, I have now been served two or three Lex Fridman videos on my YouTube homepage, including one in which he and another man discuss Roger Penrose and the Nobel Prize, presumably whether he should have gotten one by now.
So he is getting something out of the exposure, negative as it has been.
But I still don’t think that thread should have been deleted.
There aren’t enough threads, there aren’t enough comments, and there aren’t enough commenters —and there are too many deletions. The mods are moderating themselves right out of a job, at this point.
posted by jamjam at 8:40 AM on October 8, 2023 [2 favorites]
So he is getting something out of the exposure, negative as it has been.
But I still don’t think that thread should have been deleted.
There aren’t enough threads, there aren’t enough comments, and there aren’t enough commenters —and there are too many deletions. The mods are moderating themselves right out of a job, at this point.
posted by jamjam at 8:40 AM on October 8, 2023 [2 favorites]
It doesn't feel like the moderators spent a lot of time on this, to me. I kind of want more mod involvement, similar to what The Pluto Gangsta said above.
posted by tiny frying pan at 8:49 AM on October 8, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 8:49 AM on October 8, 2023 [5 favorites]
I'm genuinely confused at how confused some commenters are about the existence of black pill misogyny in the video.
In just the first ten minutes this man says, almost verbatim (I refuse to check), that women (he means beautiful women only) neither do nor offer nothing of value except be hot (i.e. exist) while men are off being productive and innovating all over the place just to win women's notice. This is foundational black pill ideology.
How do you listen to something like this and not think it's hate speech? Nobody here would be so lackadaisical if this guy had said, for example, that white people are out there being productive and innovative and taking initiative to do real pro-social work while nonwhite people offer nothing of value except _______ [insert stereotypical devalued trait of nonwhite people]. Seriously. Think about it for half a second, and tell me y'all aren't holding misogyny to a different standard here.
posted by MiraK at 10:24 AM on October 8, 2023 [9 favorites]
In just the first ten minutes this man says, almost verbatim (I refuse to check), that women (he means beautiful women only) neither do nor offer nothing of value except be hot (i.e. exist) while men are off being productive and innovating all over the place just to win women's notice. This is foundational black pill ideology.
How do you listen to something like this and not think it's hate speech? Nobody here would be so lackadaisical if this guy had said, for example, that white people are out there being productive and innovative and taking initiative to do real pro-social work while nonwhite people offer nothing of value except _______ [insert stereotypical devalued trait of nonwhite people]. Seriously. Think about it for half a second, and tell me y'all aren't holding misogyny to a different standard here.
posted by MiraK at 10:24 AM on October 8, 2023 [9 favorites]
Folks who have expressed disagreement with the idea that this video qualifies as genuinely hateful/ seriously misogynistic/black pill. Folks who are minimizing the hate in the video down to "micro" aggressions, some mild sexism which doesn't really cause real harm. Please read through the thread, there's lots of people who are saying this and several quite recently.
posted by MiraK at 10:32 AM on October 8, 2023
posted by MiraK at 10:32 AM on October 8, 2023
MiraK, you seem to see something I'm missing. Can you please link to the comment that says the content isn't misogynistic?
posted by heyho at 10:39 AM on October 8, 2023
posted by heyho at 10:39 AM on October 8, 2023
Good grief. Just take a look at all the comments here who are saying they'd be fine with this post not getting deleted - or outright objecting to the deletion. These are people who are either totally fine with misogynistic content being hosted and amplified on this site (because they think misogyny is nbd, perhaps), OR they're people who think that this content isn't misogynistic. It's not exactly hidden.
posted by MiraK at 10:46 AM on October 8, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by MiraK at 10:46 AM on October 8, 2023 [6 favorites]
MiraK, you've already admitted that this is a hot button issue for you, what purpose does it serve to threadsit here and continue to watch it get mashed? As someone who also has hot button issues which frequently get ignored (and not deleted!) on this site, you're not going to change anyone's mind by letting yourself get dragged into the argument over and over.
Ironically, a much better place for this discussion would have been the original post. A robust comment section and an informative discussion is why most of us are here, after all. That and the croutons.
posted by fight or flight at 10:47 AM on October 8, 2023 [11 favorites]
Ironically, a much better place for this discussion would have been the original post. A robust comment section and an informative discussion is why most of us are here, after all. That and the croutons.
posted by fight or flight at 10:47 AM on October 8, 2023 [11 favorites]
MiraK, I think you might be reading the one use of '"micro"-aggressions' in the thread differently than I am, but I took the quotes to be an indication that Going to Maine knew it wasn't actually that "micro" for the person experiencing it. They are, after all, agreeing that the video broke the guidelines and could be deleted.
posted by sagc at 10:47 AM on October 8, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by sagc at 10:47 AM on October 8, 2023 [2 favorites]
fight or flight, it seems unfair that you'd use my disclosure against me in this particular way: that because I openly admit this is a hot button issue, therefore I should step away from the thread. A reframe of "hot button issue" is "issue that I have a personal stake in" and "issue that I have thought about deeply and can contribute to". I'm following the discussion and adding to it constructively and respectfully because I want to? and because that's what MetaTalk is for? It kind of seems like you're personally attacking me when you tell me, essentially, to stfu and gtfo.
posted by MiraK at 10:57 AM on October 8, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by MiraK at 10:57 AM on October 8, 2023 [8 favorites]
In just the first ten minutes this man says, almost verbatim (I refuse to check), that women (he means beautiful women only) neither do nor offer nothing of value except be hot (i.e. exist) while men are off being productive and innovating all over the place just to win women's notice.
That's not at all what he says. I can see how you could easily assume that's what he believes, but it's not what he says and I (a woman) didn't read all the same things you did into his statements. I think it's entirely possible for a reasonable person who is not a misogynist to listen to the video without thinking it's hate speech. (Because I think I'm a reasonable person who is not a misogynist.)
posted by Redstart at 10:59 AM on October 8, 2023 [3 favorites]
That's not at all what he says. I can see how you could easily assume that's what he believes, but it's not what he says and I (a woman) didn't read all the same things you did into his statements. I think it's entirely possible for a reasonable person who is not a misogynist to listen to the video without thinking it's hate speech. (Because I think I'm a reasonable person who is not a misogynist.)
posted by Redstart at 10:59 AM on October 8, 2023 [3 favorites]
MiraK, I'm sorry if my comment came across that way, I didn't mean it like that at all. My advice comes from a place of solidarity in wanting the site to be better and more aware of these sorts of issues and experience of grinding myself against similar walls with small positive outcome, as I can see happening here. In my experience, it's sometimes better to step back and conserve your personal energy. Maybe my advice is misplaced, in which case feel free to ignore it.
posted by fight or flight at 11:05 AM on October 8, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by fight or flight at 11:05 AM on October 8, 2023 [3 favorites]
> That's not at all what he says. I can see how you could easily assume that's what he believes, but it's not what he says
That is exactly what he says, explicitly, in so many words. It starts before the two minute mark -
Interviewer: you live in New York where there's there's a financial industry there's -
This Guy: oh yeah there's all kinds of industries here
I:oh yeah
TG: but to me sometimes I I wonder if female attractiveness isn't the mo the highest valued commodity
I: 100 it is 100 it is yeah yeah of course
TG: because men are becoming rich and powerful in order to get a woman
I: of course
TG: the woman they want -
I: of course
TG: what a what an attractive woman - and when I say attractive I don't just mean attractive -- I, I mean even just sexually confident. I mean, what an unbelievably lucrative career that is!
I: [assenting noises]
TG: Like, I do divorces for people that you know, woman walks out with 200- 300 million dollars -
I: ["whoa" or something that sounds like that]
TG: He was an analyst at Goldman Sachs who built a hedge fund, and then sold it, and then used his trading algorithm to build it up to 500 million dollars. She was hot.
I: [laughter]
TG: ... and [she] slept with him for a while and then stopped and started sleeping with other people and playing tennis and having Botox ... and she's going to get half! Like that's fucking incredible, like you know what he had to do to get that??
I: [laughter]
TG: And what she had -- I'll fuck that guy for 200 million dollars, are you kidding me?! Like that's insane, that's incredible like ..
I: [laughter]
TG: ... And God bless, I mean, I'm not saying that this woman... this is - the rules of the game, you know, but you can't argue that that's not easier than going to Harvard!
I:no for sure
TG: but then but then the payoff, [I mean] the trade-off, for that is that when they hit a certain age the value
I Right!
TG: ... any stock if you hold it too long it's going to go down, you know, like so play - play the stock the right way, I mean, and that's what I think if we were a little more honest about the nature of male/female coupling ...
posted by MiraK at 11:18 AM on October 8, 2023 [11 favorites]
That is exactly what he says, explicitly, in so many words. It starts before the two minute mark -
Interviewer: you live in New York where there's there's a financial industry there's -
This Guy: oh yeah there's all kinds of industries here
I:oh yeah
TG: but to me sometimes I I wonder if female attractiveness isn't the mo the highest valued commodity
I: 100 it is 100 it is yeah yeah of course
TG: because men are becoming rich and powerful in order to get a woman
I: of course
TG: the woman they want -
I: of course
TG: what a what an attractive woman - and when I say attractive I don't just mean attractive -- I, I mean even just sexually confident. I mean, what an unbelievably lucrative career that is!
I: [assenting noises]
TG: Like, I do divorces for people that you know, woman walks out with 200- 300 million dollars -
I: ["whoa" or something that sounds like that]
TG: He was an analyst at Goldman Sachs who built a hedge fund, and then sold it, and then used his trading algorithm to build it up to 500 million dollars. She was hot.
I: [laughter]
TG: ... and [she] slept with him for a while and then stopped and started sleeping with other people and playing tennis and having Botox ... and she's going to get half! Like that's fucking incredible, like you know what he had to do to get that??
I: [laughter]
TG: And what she had -- I'll fuck that guy for 200 million dollars, are you kidding me?! Like that's insane, that's incredible like ..
I: [laughter]
TG: ... And God bless, I mean, I'm not saying that this woman... this is - the rules of the game, you know, but you can't argue that that's not easier than going to Harvard!
I:no for sure
TG: but then but then the payoff, [I mean] the trade-off, for that is that when they hit a certain age the value
I Right!
TG: ... any stock if you hold it too long it's going to go down, you know, like so play - play the stock the right way, I mean, and that's what I think if we were a little more honest about the nature of male/female coupling ...
posted by MiraK at 11:18 AM on October 8, 2023 [11 favorites]
Good grief. Just take a look at all the comments here who are saying they'd be fine with this post not getting deleted - or outright objecting to the deletion. These are people who are either totally fine with misogynistic content being hosted and amplified on this site (because they think misogyny is nbd, perhaps), OR they're people who think that this content isn't misogynistic. It's not exactly hidden.
I didn't miss that. I am one of the people saying I hate misogyny but don't favor deletions. I took the time to explain the nuance of my thinking around it because you'd asked for someone to make it make sense. I'm sorry that didn't help or didn't register. If you want to instead draw your own conclusions about me and others, I can live with that. I mean, I don't delight in watching you run headlong down the wrong path, but you do you.
posted by heyho at 11:36 AM on October 8, 2023 [5 favorites]
I didn't miss that. I am one of the people saying I hate misogyny but don't favor deletions. I took the time to explain the nuance of my thinking around it because you'd asked for someone to make it make sense. I'm sorry that didn't help or didn't register. If you want to instead draw your own conclusions about me and others, I can live with that. I mean, I don't delight in watching you run headlong down the wrong path, but you do you.
posted by heyho at 11:36 AM on October 8, 2023 [5 favorites]
Yeah, MiraK, we're reading the same words but we're not interpreting them the same way. When I read that, I understand him to be saying: "I think female attractiveness is the most highly valued commodity. A lot of men become rich and powerful just so they can get women they find attractive. Being an attractive woman can be lucrative because rich people will marry you and you can get some of their money. But it becomes harder to use your looks to get money as you get older."
I mean, that's all 100% true, right? He's not claiming women offer nothing of value except their looks or that only men are being productive and innovative. He's just making the undeniably true statement that many people value being with a woman they consider hot and that it's possible for a woman to profit from her looks if she wants to. He's not saying it's a good thing for men to value women's looks so highly. If anything, he's warning against it (though largely for financial reasons.)
posted by Redstart at 11:40 AM on October 8, 2023 [6 favorites]
I mean, that's all 100% true, right? He's not claiming women offer nothing of value except their looks or that only men are being productive and innovative. He's just making the undeniably true statement that many people value being with a woman they consider hot and that it's possible for a woman to profit from her looks if she wants to. He's not saying it's a good thing for men to value women's looks so highly. If anything, he's warning against it (though largely for financial reasons.)
posted by Redstart at 11:40 AM on October 8, 2023 [6 favorites]
Maybe we should focus less on the guest of the podcast, who unequivocally said some weird shit, maybe we can focus more on the podcast guy in the 2nd link instead, someone who is also weird and I thankfully never heard of until today?
1
2
3
posted by tiny frying pan at 11:57 AM on October 8, 2023 [3 favorites]
1
2
3
posted by tiny frying pan at 11:57 AM on October 8, 2023 [3 favorites]
It's only blackpill content if it comes from the Noir Pilule region of France, otherwise its just sparkling misogyny.
posted by Jarcat at 11:59 AM on October 8, 2023 [34 favorites]
posted by Jarcat at 11:59 AM on October 8, 2023 [34 favorites]
you live in New York where there's there's a financial industry there's - [...]
I honestly don't know why I'm putting this thread in my recent activity, but I read that part of the transcript as describing a view of women that is pervasive in the financial industry in nyc (that would definitely align with views of women that form part of what I know as blackpill ideology). Like others, I would definitely suspect the guy buys in to some or all of these views based on the way he talks about women in the transcripts, but (and I have definitely far less than full confidence in this) it doesn't appear that he outright expressed that agreement. I haven't (and won't) watched the video so I'm possibly parsing that specific bit in a different way than I would if I'd seen it...
anyways, good deletion, it's unfortunate that it took so long to get there, but wow are those auto-transcripts hard to get much out of.
posted by advil at 12:06 PM on October 8, 2023 [1 favorite]
I honestly don't know why I'm putting this thread in my recent activity, but I read that part of the transcript as describing a view of women that is pervasive in the financial industry in nyc (that would definitely align with views of women that form part of what I know as blackpill ideology). Like others, I would definitely suspect the guy buys in to some or all of these views based on the way he talks about women in the transcripts, but (and I have definitely far less than full confidence in this) it doesn't appear that he outright expressed that agreement. I haven't (and won't) watched the video so I'm possibly parsing that specific bit in a different way than I would if I'd seen it...
anyways, good deletion, it's unfortunate that it took so long to get there, but wow are those auto-transcripts hard to get much out of.
posted by advil at 12:06 PM on October 8, 2023 [1 favorite]
I mean, that's all 100% true, right?
... in the same way that statistics about IQ differences between races are "true", sure. Which is to say, in a hateful and bigoted and selective way, yes, this is "true". "Truths" presented in this framing in this way are only ever a vehicle for spreading hateful narratives. By talking about these things in this particular way using this particular framing, you're telling on yourself. Stop justifying and excusing blatant misogyny. I've flagged your comment for justifying misogyny. SMH.
posted by MiraK at 12:11 PM on October 8, 2023 [5 favorites]
... in the same way that statistics about IQ differences between races are "true", sure. Which is to say, in a hateful and bigoted and selective way, yes, this is "true". "Truths" presented in this framing in this way are only ever a vehicle for spreading hateful narratives. By talking about these things in this particular way using this particular framing, you're telling on yourself. Stop justifying and excusing blatant misogyny. I've flagged your comment for justifying misogyny. SMH.
posted by MiraK at 12:11 PM on October 8, 2023 [5 favorites]
You seem to be saying that it's misogyny just to refer to the fact that some people are attracted to women for their looks. (Or maybe to refer to it without explicitly condemning it?) I honestly don't understand your point of view.
posted by Redstart at 12:22 PM on October 8, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by Redstart at 12:22 PM on October 8, 2023 [2 favorites]
People are getting awfully close to sealioning MiraK, here.
posted by The corpse in the library at 12:55 PM on October 8, 2023 [29 favorites]
posted by The corpse in the library at 12:55 PM on October 8, 2023 [29 favorites]
maybe we can focus more on the podcast guy in the 2nd link instead, someone who is also weird and I thankfully never heard of until today?
I'd never heard of him either but oh dear, from your links I just learnt he's that podcast guy who invited Kanye West to expand on his promise to go full antisemitism mode... yikes. That alone says everything I need to know.
posted by bitteschoen at 12:58 PM on October 8, 2023 [7 favorites]
I'd never heard of him either but oh dear, from your links I just learnt he's that podcast guy who invited Kanye West to expand on his promise to go full antisemitism mode... yikes. That alone says everything I need to know.
posted by bitteschoen at 12:58 PM on October 8, 2023 [7 favorites]
People are getting awfully close to sealioning MiraK, here.
Also, since, the post has already been deleted, having any further discussion over whether it is or isn't misogynistic is pointless and also gets off-topic and too close to attacking the poster.
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 1:17 PM on October 8, 2023 [10 favorites]
Also, since, the post has already been deleted, having any further discussion over whether it is or isn't misogynistic is pointless and also gets off-topic and too close to attacking the poster.
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 1:17 PM on October 8, 2023 [10 favorites]
To me, at least, the whole "a little more honest about the nature of male/female coupling ..." (not just that one line, but in combination with the rest of it) feels like a dog-whistly endorsement of a red-pill worldview: that that it is a fundamental truth of human nature and evolutionary psychology that (straight) men universally only want hot young women, and (straight) women only want to marry rich men, and it behooves everyone to be cynical and transactional about all of this because you can't fight how our genes programmed our brains.
And of course he doesn't come right out and say it that way, and that's the nature of dog-whistles; some people are going to hear it and some people are going to say "What are you talking about, I didn't hear anything." But the video has gotten posted and favorably received on /r/mensrights, so I don't think it's just making stuff up out of thin air to say it's gesturing in that general direction.
posted by Jeanne at 1:20 PM on October 8, 2023 [39 favorites]
And of course he doesn't come right out and say it that way, and that's the nature of dog-whistles; some people are going to hear it and some people are going to say "What are you talking about, I didn't hear anything." But the video has gotten posted and favorably received on /r/mensrights, so I don't think it's just making stuff up out of thin air to say it's gesturing in that general direction.
posted by Jeanne at 1:20 PM on October 8, 2023 [39 favorites]
The transcript and further discussion have been really clarifying, and I appreciate MiraK taking the time to be very specific. Here I guess is the question it raises for me--and maybe this is just restating Redstart's point: At what point does a bald statement about the commodification of rich-people heterosexuality cross the line from being just grim and depressing (how do people even live like that?), to being a misogynistic act? And not misogynist in the more systemic sense that everything in a patriarchal system is touched by, informed by, interested in furthering, misogyny, because obviously that's too broad and you'd never be able to say anything about human relationships. Clearly people are arraying themselves on either side of that line in regards to this (interestingly no one seems to be particularly celebrating the video), but what's not clear to me is their rationale for being on the 'misogyny' rather than the 'depressing' side of the line. (ETA I think Jeanne just answered my question, on preview.)
posted by mittens at 1:22 PM on October 8, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by mittens at 1:22 PM on October 8, 2023 [1 favorite]
Ironically, a much better place for this discussion would have been the original post. A robust comment section and an informative discussion is why most of us are here, after all. That and the croutons.
posted by Sebmojo at 1:27 PM on October 8, 2023 [8 favorites]
posted by Sebmojo at 1:27 PM on October 8, 2023 [8 favorites]
"Dog whistle" and "gesturing at" are not "explicitly" or "blatantly." That's kind of the point of dog whistles and gestures. As mittens is saying, the argument seems to be about where on that spectrum things become so harmful as to require total censoring, versus being discussed and pushed back against. I don't think anyone's arguing for misogyny.
posted by lapis at 1:31 PM on October 8, 2023 [12 favorites]
posted by lapis at 1:31 PM on October 8, 2023 [12 favorites]
MiraK, my last sentence in response to you was over the line, and I'm sorry. I respect you, I'm with you on most of this, and I wish I'd thought that through better.
posted by heyho at 1:56 PM on October 8, 2023 [12 favorites]
posted by heyho at 1:56 PM on October 8, 2023 [12 favorites]
I think it's worth pointing out that "deleted" threads on metafilter aren't truly deleted, all it does is kill the discussion. If I Google for "I wish I knew no astronomy when stars appear." then it's right there as the third link, and I can click through to it in a private window (i.e. reading the "deleted" thread is not exclusive to subscribers).
YMMV of course, but there's a broader discussion about what "deletion" really means on metafilter. Such is the nature of using a quote or phrase that might tickle whatever search engines base their algorithms on. If you're going to remove content because it's against the COC or guidelines then you should actually remove it *completely*, no? At the least kill off the links that give the source a search engine boost? Otherwise you're still leaving a trail of breadcrumbs.
I mostly consume the content here via RSS, so I see a not insignificant amount of content that actually has been "deleted" by the time I read it. Which is sometimes surprising.
posted by lawrencium at 2:14 PM on October 8, 2023 [2 favorites]
YMMV of course, but there's a broader discussion about what "deletion" really means on metafilter. Such is the nature of using a quote or phrase that might tickle whatever search engines base their algorithms on. If you're going to remove content because it's against the COC or guidelines then you should actually remove it *completely*, no? At the least kill off the links that give the source a search engine boost? Otherwise you're still leaving a trail of breadcrumbs.
I mostly consume the content here via RSS, so I see a not insignificant amount of content that actually has been "deleted" by the time I read it. Which is sometimes surprising.
posted by lawrencium at 2:14 PM on October 8, 2023 [2 favorites]
You seem to be saying that it's misogyny just to refer to the fact that some people are attracted to women for their looks.
Well, it seems, for the transcripts and comments, that the idea is all women have to offer is their looks, which, yes, is absolutely misogynist. Do you want to live in a world where the only thing you have to offer is sexual attraction?
I think all heterosexual relationships are hemmed in by misogyny, and it takes a lot of work to push back on that. Frankly, the baseline misogyny that suffuses our culture is so obvious, that I’m amazed that straight people put up with it, leaving aside the small but loud group that benefits from it.
posted by GenjiandProust at 3:22 PM on October 8, 2023 [13 favorites]
Well, it seems, for the transcripts and comments, that the idea is all women have to offer is their looks, which, yes, is absolutely misogynist. Do you want to live in a world where the only thing you have to offer is sexual attraction?
I think all heterosexual relationships are hemmed in by misogyny, and it takes a lot of work to push back on that. Frankly, the baseline misogyny that suffuses our culture is so obvious, that I’m amazed that straight people put up with it, leaving aside the small but loud group that benefits from it.
posted by GenjiandProust at 3:22 PM on October 8, 2023 [13 favorites]
At what point does a bald statement about the commodification of rich-people heterosexuality cross the line from being just grim and depressing (how do people even live like that?), to being a misogynistic act?
It becomes misogyny when it's characterised as 'women are like this', which is clearly the viewpoint of the person making the statements in this case.
It's absolutely possible to discuss the issue in an objective way, but that's not what's going on in that video, nor is it the way the post was presented.
posted by dg at 5:40 PM on October 8, 2023 [10 favorites]
It becomes misogyny when it's characterised as 'women are like this', which is clearly the viewpoint of the person making the statements in this case.
It's absolutely possible to discuss the issue in an objective way, but that's not what's going on in that video, nor is it the way the post was presented.
posted by dg at 5:40 PM on October 8, 2023 [10 favorites]
Just because a lot of people agree that something is true doesn't mean it's not misogynistic, it just makes a lot of people misogynists.
posted by tigrrrlily at 6:26 PM on October 8, 2023 [16 favorites]
posted by tigrrrlily at 6:26 PM on October 8, 2023 [16 favorites]
Just because a lot of people agree that something is true doesn't mean it's not misogynistic, it just makes a lot of people misogynists.
posted by tigrrrlily at 9:26 PM on October 8 [1 favorite +] [!]
Is there a reason to keep this thread open, other than to give more people the opportunity to say "If you disagree with my interpretation, you're a misogynist"?
(A few threads below we have "If you disagree with my interpretation, you're a Nazi sympathizer -- or a Putinist" -- so this is clearly a current trend.)
A deletion was requested and it happened. A few people thought it wasn't really necessary, but no one seems especially broken up about it. Some asshole said some dumb shit in a video, and no one is defending what he said. It was suggested that the dumb shit he said was hurtful so the thread was zapped.
Once it was deleted, people continued to argue, and eventually we got a transcript of the dumb shit that asshole said. So now instead of being in an hour-long video that hardly anyone bothered to watch, it was right here for anyone to read. If the point was to protect people from harm, precisely the opposite was accomplished.
And to what end? So we can continue to fight with each other and decide who is most righteous?
Let's shut this down.
posted by neroli at 7:08 PM on October 8, 2023 [38 favorites]
posted by tigrrrlily at 9:26 PM on October 8 [1 favorite +] [!]
Is there a reason to keep this thread open, other than to give more people the opportunity to say "If you disagree with my interpretation, you're a misogynist"?
(A few threads below we have "If you disagree with my interpretation, you're a Nazi sympathizer -- or a Putinist" -- so this is clearly a current trend.)
A deletion was requested and it happened. A few people thought it wasn't really necessary, but no one seems especially broken up about it. Some asshole said some dumb shit in a video, and no one is defending what he said. It was suggested that the dumb shit he said was hurtful so the thread was zapped.
Once it was deleted, people continued to argue, and eventually we got a transcript of the dumb shit that asshole said. So now instead of being in an hour-long video that hardly anyone bothered to watch, it was right here for anyone to read. If the point was to protect people from harm, precisely the opposite was accomplished.
And to what end? So we can continue to fight with each other and decide who is most righteous?
Let's shut this down.
posted by neroli at 7:08 PM on October 8, 2023 [38 favorites]
phunniemee probably needs fodder for contacts list shenanigans
posted by Sebmojo at 7:28 PM on October 8, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by Sebmojo at 7:28 PM on October 8, 2023 [6 favorites]
(A few threads below we have "If you disagree with my interpretation, you're a Nazi sympathizer -- or a Putinist" -- so this is clearly a current trend.)
It's a trend that's as old as Metatalk. This is incredibly mild and civilised compared to how MeTa used to be. It may not be good, but it's a current tend in the same way sex is new.
posted by Dysk at 10:56 PM on October 8, 2023 [5 favorites]
It's a trend that's as old as Metatalk. This is incredibly mild and civilised compared to how MeTa used to be. It may not be good, but it's a current tend in the same way sex is new.
posted by Dysk at 10:56 PM on October 8, 2023 [5 favorites]
Sometimes the guttering torch holding hand knows not what the pitchfork holding hand is waving around wildly.
posted by y2karl at 5:00 AM on October 9, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by y2karl at 5:00 AM on October 9, 2023 [3 favorites]
>Just because a lot of people agree that something is true doesn't mean it's not misogynistic, it just makes a lot of people misogynists.
posted by tigrrrlily at 9:26 PM on October 8 [1 favorite +] [!]
Is there a reason to keep this thread open, other than to give more people the opportunity to say "If you disagree with my interpretation, you're a misogynist"?
Well... I guess a fella could read tigrrrlily's comment as calling a specific member misogynist, if he really wanted to, but, it seems to me that was the more general statement that "just because a lot of people believe something, it doesn't mean it isn't X, just that a lot of people in society are X."
It's true that a lot of people think that the foundation of heterosexual relations is wealthy older men pursuing younger attractive women. People on this site have stated as much in the past. There are entire web communities devoted to the idea, and it's on display in much of our media. That doesn't make it "true" in a universal sense, nor does it make it non-misogynist just because of the volume of people holding the view.
In a similar sense, less than 200 years ago, a very large number of people in the US thought enslaving people from Africa was just fine; that doesn't mean that it wasn't racist then and somehow became racist once slavery was abolished; it was normal and common and racist.
So, lacking the ability to peer into people's souls to discern their true intent, I have no idea if the original question was asked in good faith or not. A number of people responded to "is it misogynist..." with "yes." None of them, tigrrrlily, went on to add "and you're misogynist for asking."
The Nazi thread is... well, different. It was created to address a very aggressive derail in another thread (about Canadian politics) that attempted to argue that joining the SS could have been OK under certain circumstances and motivations. That the derail was allowed to continue as long as it did is concerning, and I think the MeTa that arose from it did deal with some of those issues. People mostly stayed away from "that member is a Nazi" and stuck with "that is a very Nazi-friendly argument," which, again, I hope we can all agree are not the same thing. However, the thread now has gone way off topic, been through at least two extra acrimonious cycles, and probably could stand to be closed.
I think this thread has made it's point and the goal of deleting the FPP was achieved, so I have no problem with this thread being closed as well. However, I think your analysis of the problems with this thread are off base, likely arising from the well-worn online technique of reacting to the last thing said rather than the entire thread. If we are going to discuss nuanced topics, we need to use nuanced methods.
posted by GenjiandProust at 8:07 AM on October 9, 2023 [6 favorites]
posted by tigrrrlily at 9:26 PM on October 8 [1 favorite +] [!]
Is there a reason to keep this thread open, other than to give more people the opportunity to say "If you disagree with my interpretation, you're a misogynist"?
Well... I guess a fella could read tigrrrlily's comment as calling a specific member misogynist, if he really wanted to, but, it seems to me that was the more general statement that "just because a lot of people believe something, it doesn't mean it isn't X, just that a lot of people in society are X."
It's true that a lot of people think that the foundation of heterosexual relations is wealthy older men pursuing younger attractive women. People on this site have stated as much in the past. There are entire web communities devoted to the idea, and it's on display in much of our media. That doesn't make it "true" in a universal sense, nor does it make it non-misogynist just because of the volume of people holding the view.
In a similar sense, less than 200 years ago, a very large number of people in the US thought enslaving people from Africa was just fine; that doesn't mean that it wasn't racist then and somehow became racist once slavery was abolished; it was normal and common and racist.
So, lacking the ability to peer into people's souls to discern their true intent, I have no idea if the original question was asked in good faith or not. A number of people responded to "is it misogynist..." with "yes." None of them, tigrrrlily, went on to add "and you're misogynist for asking."
The Nazi thread is... well, different. It was created to address a very aggressive derail in another thread (about Canadian politics) that attempted to argue that joining the SS could have been OK under certain circumstances and motivations. That the derail was allowed to continue as long as it did is concerning, and I think the MeTa that arose from it did deal with some of those issues. People mostly stayed away from "that member is a Nazi" and stuck with "that is a very Nazi-friendly argument," which, again, I hope we can all agree are not the same thing. However, the thread now has gone way off topic, been through at least two extra acrimonious cycles, and probably could stand to be closed.
I think this thread has made it's point and the goal of deleting the FPP was achieved, so I have no problem with this thread being closed as well. However, I think your analysis of the problems with this thread are off base, likely arising from the well-worn online technique of reacting to the last thing said rather than the entire thread. If we are going to discuss nuanced topics, we need to use nuanced methods.
posted by GenjiandProust at 8:07 AM on October 9, 2023 [6 favorites]
Fully agree with the deletion; that content was repugnant and rife with misogyny, on its face. If you don't think it's misogynistic, some additional study might help reframe your understanding. Google's Oxford Languages goes with "dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women." I think we could all agree that bar was readily cleared in the FPP.
Also, I think we are seeing a false dilemma pop up. Those arguing against deletion are doing so on breadth-of-content grounds:
in general, I prefer some healthy diversity (aka, not an echo chamber)
A robust comment section and an informative discussion is why most of us are here, after all.
But even aside from the offensiveness of the interview, this is just lousy content. It is nothing but cliches and shopworn tropes. You can likely have this same conversation at a dive bar dear you as soon as this afternoon, should you wish. These ideas and statements are common as dirt, boring as hell, not insightful, interesting, compelling, mind-expanding, or even challenging. They're just the same old crap. Nobody comes to MeFi for such lame content.
Even if you want to retain the diversity of views that includes views that will sometimes challenge shibboleths and sacred cows, this doesn't represent that all. Come at us with something intelligent. Let's not go to the mat defending garbage on the basis of principle. As noted above, there's a big wide internet available for that. The bar for quality should be at least as high as that for human rights.
Also, finally, I remain confused about the lack of mod action. Yes, it's an hour-long video, but I got three minutes in and that three minutes would have been enough to convince me to either read the transcript or skip forward through it to understand what the deeper content was, or ask the next mods to, or leave a note in the thread that I was busy doing that and had an eye on things. Just not responding because it was long doesn't make sense to me.
posted by Miko at 10:01 AM on October 9, 2023 [25 favorites]
Also, I think we are seeing a false dilemma pop up. Those arguing against deletion are doing so on breadth-of-content grounds:
in general, I prefer some healthy diversity (aka, not an echo chamber)
A robust comment section and an informative discussion is why most of us are here, after all.
But even aside from the offensiveness of the interview, this is just lousy content. It is nothing but cliches and shopworn tropes. You can likely have this same conversation at a dive bar dear you as soon as this afternoon, should you wish. These ideas and statements are common as dirt, boring as hell, not insightful, interesting, compelling, mind-expanding, or even challenging. They're just the same old crap. Nobody comes to MeFi for such lame content.
Even if you want to retain the diversity of views that includes views that will sometimes challenge shibboleths and sacred cows, this doesn't represent that all. Come at us with something intelligent. Let's not go to the mat defending garbage on the basis of principle. As noted above, there's a big wide internet available for that. The bar for quality should be at least as high as that for human rights.
Also, finally, I remain confused about the lack of mod action. Yes, it's an hour-long video, but I got three minutes in and that three minutes would have been enough to convince me to either read the transcript or skip forward through it to understand what the deeper content was, or ask the next mods to, or leave a note in the thread that I was busy doing that and had an eye on things. Just not responding because it was long doesn't make sense to me.
posted by Miko at 10:01 AM on October 9, 2023 [25 favorites]
To me this thread and the Nazi thread have something in common which is a request for a quicker, stronger enforcement of site norms against hateful rhetoric. A lot of folks here are arguing that there is some value in keeping some misogyny around and arguing against it within the original thread for educational purposes, I guess, or because it’s not serious enough to merit deletion or, as one person put it, censorship.
And MiraK is arguing that there’s a lot more value in not tolerating misogyny, and I agree.
posted by mai at 10:02 AM on October 9, 2023 [21 favorites]
And MiraK is arguing that there’s a lot more value in not tolerating misogyny, and I agree.
posted by mai at 10:02 AM on October 9, 2023 [21 favorites]
I think there can be value in putting up well-curated, readily-accessible examples of horrible attitudes, mainly because I can rely on y'all to argue and stay mostly on the 'didn't get fired' side of civility and end up balanced on a position that is roughly aligned with basic decency.
As a youngish autistic person who lived in, effectively, a horrible-attitudes echo chamber for the first 15-20 years of my life, I don't think I can sufficiently state how much I love and value MetaFilter for its role in making me a better person. Y'all taught me how to debate nicely and mostly on-topic and respect other people's opinions even when I don't agree with them, and how to carefully and logically break down a toxic argument without becoming toxic myself. That's hella life skills. The site only has this value to me (and to other people in similar situations who I've pointed at the site) because a wide variety of opinions are allowed to be aired, even if only to be torn down, disassembled, and shown to be the trash that they are.
However, a post that consists entirely of a link to an hour-long YouTube video with no transcript except the auto-generated ones (which suck ass) is not a valuable post, regardless of the video content. I tend to agree with the removal of the post in question on the grounds of 'seriously, who has time to watch that' but not on the grounds of this specific objectionable content.
posted by ngaiotonga at 11:48 AM on October 9, 2023 [13 favorites]
As a youngish autistic person who lived in, effectively, a horrible-attitudes echo chamber for the first 15-20 years of my life, I don't think I can sufficiently state how much I love and value MetaFilter for its role in making me a better person. Y'all taught me how to debate nicely and mostly on-topic and respect other people's opinions even when I don't agree with them, and how to carefully and logically break down a toxic argument without becoming toxic myself. That's hella life skills. The site only has this value to me (and to other people in similar situations who I've pointed at the site) because a wide variety of opinions are allowed to be aired, even if only to be torn down, disassembled, and shown to be the trash that they are.
However, a post that consists entirely of a link to an hour-long YouTube video with no transcript except the auto-generated ones (which suck ass) is not a valuable post, regardless of the video content. I tend to agree with the removal of the post in question on the grounds of 'seriously, who has time to watch that' but not on the grounds of this specific objectionable content.
posted by ngaiotonga at 11:48 AM on October 9, 2023 [13 favorites]
I'm just not sure what you're calling for, do you want 190 comments calling kanuck a monster and then having them banned? Do you want some sort of "shitty take alert" system so the whole community gets a call to pile-on?
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 12:52 on October 6 [60 favorites +] [!]
Come on folks! Only 29 more comments to go!!!
posted by slogger at 11:54 AM on October 9, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 12:52 on October 6 [60 favorites +] [!]
Come on folks! Only 29 more comments to go!!!
posted by slogger at 11:54 AM on October 9, 2023 [2 favorites]
phunniemee probably needs fodder for contacts list shenanigans
I just want to know if I'm on the list???!?
posted by pullayup at 12:14 PM on October 9, 2023 [2 favorites]
I just want to know if I'm on the list???!?
posted by pullayup at 12:14 PM on October 9, 2023 [2 favorites]
GenjiandProust pretty much explained what I meant. I didn't mean to call out any particular MeFite as more misogynistic than average.
posted by tigrrrlily at 12:20 PM on October 9, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by tigrrrlily at 12:20 PM on October 9, 2023 [2 favorites]
You guys know we can like, scroll up and read the thread and see people/their behavior being called misogynistic, right? Posters even clarifying that they are specifically talking about people in the thread.
Good deletion, could do without the rhetorical gaslighting though
posted by Jarcat at 2:33 PM on October 9, 2023 [3 favorites]
Good deletion, could do without the rhetorical gaslighting though
posted by Jarcat at 2:33 PM on October 9, 2023 [3 favorites]
I think it definitely sways towards sexist thoughts but isn't straight red pill stuff on the surface.
The guy's opening boast about drowning in "pussy" after his divorce, how it was like eating so much of a good thing that he got tired of it - that's literally the Fresh and Fit candy store analogy. I'm sure most people here missed the reference, but any red-pilled dudebro definitely knew what he was talking about without having to use the words "high value man" or "sexual market value".
For what it's worth, that youtube channel can also be pretty bad on trans issues. He used his channel to interview "detransitioners" Laura Becker and Shape Shifter, who are darlings of far-right transphobes who are working to make it harder for trans people to obtain gender affirming care (not going to link, but if you google their names you'll see they're very active in spreading transphobia in the usual places like Fox News, RT, The Washington Examiner, and the Daily Mail).
That channel is gross in how he promotes people with some pretty terrible views; he's the Joe Rogan of poverty porn. I was disappointed that someone thought it'd be a good idea to post one of his videos to Metafilter.
posted by peeedro at 6:41 PM on October 9, 2023 [17 favorites]
The guy's opening boast about drowning in "pussy" after his divorce, how it was like eating so much of a good thing that he got tired of it - that's literally the Fresh and Fit candy store analogy. I'm sure most people here missed the reference, but any red-pilled dudebro definitely knew what he was talking about without having to use the words "high value man" or "sexual market value".
For what it's worth, that youtube channel can also be pretty bad on trans issues. He used his channel to interview "detransitioners" Laura Becker and Shape Shifter, who are darlings of far-right transphobes who are working to make it harder for trans people to obtain gender affirming care (not going to link, but if you google their names you'll see they're very active in spreading transphobia in the usual places like Fox News, RT, The Washington Examiner, and the Daily Mail).
That channel is gross in how he promotes people with some pretty terrible views; he's the Joe Rogan of poverty porn. I was disappointed that someone thought it'd be a good idea to post one of his videos to Metafilter.
posted by peeedro at 6:41 PM on October 9, 2023 [17 favorites]
The guy's opening boast about drowning in "pussy" after his divorce, how it was like eating so much of a good thing that he got tired of it -
I didn't see it in the "transcript" to be honest. What I did see convinced me anyway. Already noted here that the YouTube channel creator is a creep.
posted by tiny frying pan at 7:36 PM on October 9, 2023 [1 favorite]
I didn't see it in the "transcript" to be honest. What I did see convinced me anyway. Already noted here that the YouTube channel creator is a creep.
posted by tiny frying pan at 7:36 PM on October 9, 2023 [1 favorite]
Mod note: One comment deleted. Comments made to hurt/pick on other users is never OK. Please re-visit this page for participation guidelines.
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 5:26 PM on October 10, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 5:26 PM on October 10, 2023 [4 favorites]
Mod note: Two more deleted. Making sarcastic comments after a mod leaves a note about a comment violating guidelines is not the ideal form of participation either. Feel free to drop us a message here if you have further concerns.
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 6:21 PM on October 10, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 6:21 PM on October 10, 2023 [2 favorites]
Noting that I have been reading the site for probably 15+ years, participating for like 14 years, had seen phunniemee's participation many times, and read their first comment in this thread as completely serious and not exaggerated at all. I read zero markers of sarcasm or play in the comment that would have caused me to think I was being trolled. I was 100% willing to believe that a longtime MeFite, annoyed by a perceived lack of moderator action, would develop and use this tactic.
Separately:
MiraK, hi, thanks for clarifying your thinking in this thread. Some confusion has arisen for me because of the word "blackpill" and some other words you use to describe the interview video. I think I'm like several people here in this particular confusion so let me lay out my (probably really pedantic) question.
The first sentence of your post says that the offending material was "straight-up blackpill content". You later said:
Based on what others have said in this MetaTalk and in the original front page post thread, the video does not, to me, fit into my understanding of the term "blackpill," although it might be "redpill". And I may also be defining words like "blatant" or "violent" or "overtly hateful" differently than you would. Thanks, the primroses were over, for linking to the English Wikipedia description.
I understand "blackpill" to be extreme sexist nihilism. To me, "straight-up blackpill content" would be something like a person literally saying "there is no reason for any man to ever get married because all women are monsters." Or "non-attractive men will literally never be able to find romantic or sexual relationships, and therefore should commit violent acts in revenge." And I understand "red pill" to be less nihlistic, still misogynist of course. I'll quote the English Wikipedia summary of an Anti-Defamation League explanation of the difference:
And when I think "violent" or "overtly hateful" I think of actual solicitation to physical violence; does that happen in this video? Or does he explicitly say that he hates specific groups of people? Maybe the word "overtly" means something different to you than to me.
I understand that many people, understanding the subtext of the things James Sexton and Lex Fridman say in the video and podcast, and knowing context such as Fridman's reputation, can "hear" their misogynist dogwhistles better than some others can. I liked what lapis said:
To wrap up, MiraK, I care about what you have noticed, and folks like you have sensitive antennae to notice things that need noticing! I am glad for every single person who flags things to bring them to mod attention. I do think the Contact form is sometimes a good tool to use, because the Contact form is visually larger on the screen than the flag-with-note text area, so it's easier to edit a longish report, and the Contact workflow makes it easier for the staff to email you back. So I hope that is useful in the future.
posted by brainwane at 6:51 AM on October 11, 2023 [36 favorites]
Separately:
MiraK, hi, thanks for clarifying your thinking in this thread. Some confusion has arisen for me because of the word "blackpill" and some other words you use to describe the interview video. I think I'm like several people here in this particular confusion so let me lay out my (probably really pedantic) question.
The first sentence of your post says that the offending material was "straight-up blackpill content". You later said:
I for one would not have a problem autobanning people who post blackpill and/or redpill content on MetaFilter. Not saying the mods should ban kanuck or anyone else who posts this shit, but good grief, how could banning blackpill/redpill assholes possibly be a bad thing?!So you started off saying that this was blatantly blackpill content, and then you broadened the scope to discuss blackpill and redpill content as a whole, but have maintained that the specific offending content was "literally black pill misogynistic, violent, overtly hateful content."
Based on what others have said in this MetaTalk and in the original front page post thread, the video does not, to me, fit into my understanding of the term "blackpill," although it might be "redpill". And I may also be defining words like "blatant" or "violent" or "overtly hateful" differently than you would. Thanks, the primroses were over, for linking to the English Wikipedia description.
I understand "blackpill" to be extreme sexist nihilism. To me, "straight-up blackpill content" would be something like a person literally saying "there is no reason for any man to ever get married because all women are monsters." Or "non-attractive men will literally never be able to find romantic or sexual relationships, and therefore should commit violent acts in revenge." And I understand "red pill" to be less nihlistic, still misogynist of course. I'll quote the English Wikipedia summary of an Anti-Defamation League explanation of the difference:
Researchers at the ADL have said that incels can also follow the red pill ideology. Those who believe they can improve their chances with women are adherents to the red pill, whereas only incels who believe they have no power to change their position in society or chances with women are blackpilled. The ADL writes that, among incels, the beliefs summarized as "red pill" center around the idea that feminism has unbalanced society to favor women and give them too much power. Redpilled incels believe they have the opportunity to fight back against this system which disadvantages them, which they do by trying to make themselves more attractive to women. Conversely, blackpilled incels are those who believe they can do nothing to change their situation. The ADL writes, "This is where the incel movement takes on characteristics of a death cult". Those who have taken the black pill are left with few options, says the ADL: giving up on life (referred to by incels as "LDAR", an abbreviation for "lie down and rot"), dying by suicide, or committing mass violence. [Reference: "The Extremist Medicine Cabinet: A Guide to Online 'Pills'". Anti-Defamation League. November 6, 2019. Archived from the original on May 18, 2020. Retrieved May 26, 2020.]As I understand it, Sexton doesn't suggest mass or individual violence, or utter nihilism about the possibility of all hetero romantic or sexual relationships. So it might be red pill but it isn't black pill. I think you disagree, so I'd like to better understand what you mean when you say "black pill".
And when I think "violent" or "overtly hateful" I think of actual solicitation to physical violence; does that happen in this video? Or does he explicitly say that he hates specific groups of people? Maybe the word "overtly" means something different to you than to me.
I understand that many people, understanding the subtext of the things James Sexton and Lex Fridman say in the video and podcast, and knowing context such as Fridman's reputation, can "hear" their misogynist dogwhistles better than some others can. I liked what lapis said:
"Dog whistle" and "gesturing at" are not "explicitly" or "blatantly." That's kind of the point of dog whistles and gestures. As mittens is saying, the argument seems to be about where on that spectrum things become so harmful as to require total censoring, versus being discussed and pushed back against. I don't think anyone's arguing for misogyny.We should be on the watch for misogyny and other bigotries! And we should fight back in a variety of ways! But when we differ in our names for various categories of bigotry then it's harder for us to get on the same page and then say "here's how we should react to this category" (like, delete category A + ban user, delete category B + warn user, delete a category C post + email poster to ask whether they can find a different source that isn't gross, heavily mod category D and support users who put out a Bat-Signal to ask for in-thread participation from people affected by that particular oppression, etc.).
To wrap up, MiraK, I care about what you have noticed, and folks like you have sensitive antennae to notice things that need noticing! I am glad for every single person who flags things to bring them to mod attention. I do think the Contact form is sometimes a good tool to use, because the Contact form is visually larger on the screen than the flag-with-note text area, so it's easier to edit a longish report, and the Contact workflow makes it easier for the staff to email you back. So I hope that is useful in the future.
posted by brainwane at 6:51 AM on October 11, 2023 [36 favorites]
Maybe a much shorter version of what I just wrote is:
"Pernicious" is really bad! And is not the same as "blatant." And I want to better understand what other MeFites think of as one versus the other, so we can make and use different tools that will work differently to notice and push back against them.
posted by brainwane at 7:35 AM on October 11, 2023 [4 favorites]
"Pernicious" is really bad! And is not the same as "blatant." And I want to better understand what other MeFites think of as one versus the other, so we can make and use different tools that will work differently to notice and push back against them.
posted by brainwane at 7:35 AM on October 11, 2023 [4 favorites]
brainwane, this is one of the most constructive contributions to a MeTa I've seen
thank you
posted by elkevelvet at 9:02 AM on October 11, 2023 [2 favorites]
thank you
posted by elkevelvet at 9:02 AM on October 11, 2023 [2 favorites]
Can't speak for anyone else but I have no problem with the mods deciding to delete some shitty video by some shitty guy, who's in league with other shitty people. My problem is with the idea that somehow the entire community failed here.
But that's why it's especially horrifying when content like this not only gets posted but stays up for long periods, clearly having been seen by a lot of people in the community yet getting only the weakest and most polite pushback ("eh, he said something iffy, I'm not watching that"). It was IMO utterly inadequate as a response to hate of this level and caliber.
I really wish more people had called kanuck out and reported his post. ... I think the very safety of MetaFilter has perhaps lulled us into not responding more strongly to overtly hateful content. This should not have been received so lackadaisically by our community
I mean this isn't actionable, it's just "none of you are the fine people I thought you were and I am very disappointed in all of you."
So, for me to come to the same conclusion/ produce the same reaction as MiraK to this post, I would have had to:
-See the post in the first place (didn't!)
-View the video at some length (would absolutely never be arsed)
-Be "online" enough in a very specific way so as to be conversant in the nuances of "redpill"/"blackpill" (both terms I had barely ever encountered until this Meta!)
-Be familiar with the other output of Beavis and/or Butthead so as to know it is bad
-Have the time and energy to flag, draft a contact to the mods, and post angrily so everyone knows I agree this is Bad.
And that would be true for every FPP, basically, just in case something slipped in under an innocuous title or format.
I mean I know we want a high bar for FPP creation, don't get me wrong! And we want a high bar for commentary, too. But is the bar for even visiting Metafilter, basically, "this is a kingdom whose expanses you are bound to scan constantly for threats and incursions, responding with proportionate force"? It's a website I visit when I'm on a bathroom break, ffs.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 12:57 PM on October 11, 2023 [44 favorites]
But that's why it's especially horrifying when content like this not only gets posted but stays up for long periods, clearly having been seen by a lot of people in the community yet getting only the weakest and most polite pushback ("eh, he said something iffy, I'm not watching that"). It was IMO utterly inadequate as a response to hate of this level and caliber.
I really wish more people had called kanuck out and reported his post. ... I think the very safety of MetaFilter has perhaps lulled us into not responding more strongly to overtly hateful content. This should not have been received so lackadaisically by our community
I mean this isn't actionable, it's just "none of you are the fine people I thought you were and I am very disappointed in all of you."
So, for me to come to the same conclusion/ produce the same reaction as MiraK to this post, I would have had to:
-See the post in the first place (didn't!)
-View the video at some length (would absolutely never be arsed)
-Be "online" enough in a very specific way so as to be conversant in the nuances of "redpill"/"blackpill" (both terms I had barely ever encountered until this Meta!)
-Be familiar with the other output of Beavis and/or Butthead so as to know it is bad
-Have the time and energy to flag, draft a contact to the mods, and post angrily so everyone knows I agree this is Bad.
And that would be true for every FPP, basically, just in case something slipped in under an innocuous title or format.
I mean I know we want a high bar for FPP creation, don't get me wrong! And we want a high bar for commentary, too. But is the bar for even visiting Metafilter, basically, "this is a kingdom whose expanses you are bound to scan constantly for threats and incursions, responding with proportionate force"? It's a website I visit when I'm on a bathroom break, ffs.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 12:57 PM on October 11, 2023 [44 favorites]
That Wikipedia entry describes "blackpill" "generally refer[ring] to a set of commonly held beliefs in incel communities, which include biological determinism, fatalism, and defeatism for unattractive people."
This video contains all those elements within the first five minutes.
posted by Miko at 1:49 PM on October 11, 2023 [5 favorites]
This video contains all those elements within the first five minutes.
posted by Miko at 1:49 PM on October 11, 2023 [5 favorites]
I'm also just really disappointed that we're being asked to get into finely dicing abstract pop culture descriptions of various flavors of misogyny and the degrees of shading between "blatant" and "explicit" and "implied" - when the misogyny is clear.
It's clear. And redirecting attention to specific word choice seems very much beside the point.
posted by Miko at 1:53 PM on October 11, 2023 [20 favorites]
It's clear. And redirecting attention to specific word choice seems very much beside the point.
posted by Miko at 1:53 PM on October 11, 2023 [20 favorites]
But we didn’t all watch the video. And we don’t all know what black pills are. I didn’t read the Wikipedia article on pill colors. And I’m just … not that angry, certainly not at metafilter.
posted by Vatnesine at 3:45 PM on October 11, 2023 [9 favorites]
posted by Vatnesine at 3:45 PM on October 11, 2023 [9 favorites]
So you could probably safely opt out of this MeTa, which is about the content of a post.
posted by Miko at 4:24 PM on October 11, 2023 [10 favorites]
posted by Miko at 4:24 PM on October 11, 2023 [10 favorites]
The MeTa is absolutely as much about the community and expectations for its level of engagement as it is about the content of a post.
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 4:27 PM on October 11, 2023 [16 favorites]
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 4:27 PM on October 11, 2023 [16 favorites]
(I have met mefites in person who have built up detailed psychological profiles of other mefites. I myself can barely remember what one community member said between posts. We all have very different levels of involvement in this space and very different ways of relating. I sing think a version of the site where we all remember everyone’s patterns is feasible. That’s a job for the moderators)
posted by Going To Maine at 4:37 PM on October 11, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by Going To Maine at 4:37 PM on October 11, 2023 [4 favorites]
(I do wonder if the subject of this meta even knows it exists.)
posted by Going To Maine at 4:38 PM on October 11, 2023 [3 favorites]
posted by Going To Maine at 4:38 PM on October 11, 2023 [3 favorites]
the misogyny is clear.
And the thread was deleted. Happy about that. The quibbling and equivocating of this thread is a small part of the whole. Trying to focus on the good here.
posted by tiny frying pan at 5:42 PM on October 11, 2023 [1 favorite]
And the thread was deleted. Happy about that. The quibbling and equivocating of this thread is a small part of the whole. Trying to focus on the good here.
posted by tiny frying pan at 5:42 PM on October 11, 2023 [1 favorite]
The MeTa is absolutely as much about the community and expectations for its level of engagement as it is about the content of a post.
…. and it is occasioned by and centered around the content of a specific post.
posted by Miko at 6:47 PM on October 11, 2023 [2 favorites]
…. and it is occasioned by and centered around the content of a specific post.
posted by Miko at 6:47 PM on October 11, 2023 [2 favorites]
I'm the kind of person who would generally flag or push back strongly in comments on content like this, had I read the post/watched the video. But...I didn't, because it takes a lot to get me on board with watching a random one-hour (?) video. I suspect that there are infinitely more people like me with respect to this particular post than there are people who actually watched the video and just shrugged, much less agreed. Probably everyone can afford to relax a little bit here.
posted by praemunire at 11:03 PM on October 11, 2023 [14 favorites]
posted by praemunire at 11:03 PM on October 11, 2023 [14 favorites]
I'm sure I'm going to take cr@p for this and that's okay, but did any of you watch this video past the ~2 minute mark that people mentioned above as being the limit of their tolerance point?
I ask because I watched the entire interview; I don't know anything about the background of the interviewer or the guy being interviewed. But as a 70 year old cis/het feminist woman who has, in her past, one brief marriage and 6 short to long-term relationships -- most of them involving some disposition of assets -- I found this interview to be engaging, amusing, informative and well worth the time.
The interviewee discusses prenup agreements, couple communication, pair bonding, interpersonal relationships, friendships. He has a very interesting view on life and love as represented in this interview.
Perhaps he is responsible for some heinous actions or interviews of which I am unaware, but I am making my judgment based on having watched the entire interview. And I ask if any of you have done that?
I just don't understand what y'all were so offended by apart from a word that I don't like and don't use which was said maybe once, maybe twice, in the beginning of the interview (pussy) -- And I have to wonder if any of you were offended by that word or if it's just my age and background that make me grimace at that.
And then in the comments you all turned on one another In such an upsetting manner that I couldn't even comment last night I just had to close my tablet and walk away.
In fact I envisioned that this thread would be gone when I came back tonight. But here it is and so am I and I'm hoping not to offend or inflame anyone but this is 1 person's impression of the interview And the debacle that followed.
And with 55 years of intense feminism and relationshipś under my belt, I thought this interview was worthwhile.
Perhaps I should just go ahead and button now? ::sigh::
posted by alwayson_slightlyoff at 6:06 PM on October 12, 2023 [14 favorites]
I ask because I watched the entire interview; I don't know anything about the background of the interviewer or the guy being interviewed. But as a 70 year old cis/het feminist woman who has, in her past, one brief marriage and 6 short to long-term relationships -- most of them involving some disposition of assets -- I found this interview to be engaging, amusing, informative and well worth the time.
The interviewee discusses prenup agreements, couple communication, pair bonding, interpersonal relationships, friendships. He has a very interesting view on life and love as represented in this interview.
Perhaps he is responsible for some heinous actions or interviews of which I am unaware, but I am making my judgment based on having watched the entire interview. And I ask if any of you have done that?
I just don't understand what y'all were so offended by apart from a word that I don't like and don't use which was said maybe once, maybe twice, in the beginning of the interview (pussy) -- And I have to wonder if any of you were offended by that word or if it's just my age and background that make me grimace at that.
And then in the comments you all turned on one another In such an upsetting manner that I couldn't even comment last night I just had to close my tablet and walk away.
In fact I envisioned that this thread would be gone when I came back tonight. But here it is and so am I and I'm hoping not to offend or inflame anyone but this is 1 person's impression of the interview And the debacle that followed.
And with 55 years of intense feminism and relationshipś under my belt, I thought this interview was worthwhile.
Perhaps I should just go ahead and button now? ::sigh::
posted by alwayson_slightlyoff at 6:06 PM on October 12, 2023 [14 favorites]
...but did any of you watch this video past the ~2 minute mark that people mentioned above as being the limit of their tolerance point?
Yes I did, and I think it would be advisable for anyone posting a long video to link to a few points of the video to highlight whatever you find interesting/engaging/whatever about the long video. Here's a short post on how to do that or you can just click and hold on any of the timeline bar and select "Copy Video Url At Current Time". That'll create an URL to that specific point in the video. Do that a few times, so people who haven't seen the video can gain a better understanding of the overall video instead of a few minutes or seconds.
For instance, here's the major point of the video in question (IMO), which is a great point to anyone thinking of getting married. It starts at 31:30 and goes to about 37:00.
None of what I personally think is great content in the rest of the video excuses those first 3-4 minutes where the guy is really being an asshole and misogynistic. It would be natural, IMO, for anyone to nope out at that point. Who wants to hear or read that sort of thing when you're on MeFi to be amused, entertained, or educated? Not many, so the deletion is fine and understandable.
But in the future, I do hope people choose to link to a few specific points in a video, so others can gain a better understanding and judgement of the overall content.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:32 PM on October 12, 2023 [11 favorites]
Yes I did, and I think it would be advisable for anyone posting a long video to link to a few points of the video to highlight whatever you find interesting/engaging/whatever about the long video. Here's a short post on how to do that or you can just click and hold on any of the timeline bar and select "Copy Video Url At Current Time". That'll create an URL to that specific point in the video. Do that a few times, so people who haven't seen the video can gain a better understanding of the overall video instead of a few minutes or seconds.
For instance, here's the major point of the video in question (IMO), which is a great point to anyone thinking of getting married. It starts at 31:30 and goes to about 37:00.
None of what I personally think is great content in the rest of the video excuses those first 3-4 minutes where the guy is really being an asshole and misogynistic. It would be natural, IMO, for anyone to nope out at that point. Who wants to hear or read that sort of thing when you're on MeFi to be amused, entertained, or educated? Not many, so the deletion is fine and understandable.
But in the future, I do hope people choose to link to a few specific points in a video, so others can gain a better understanding and judgement of the overall content.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:32 PM on October 12, 2023 [11 favorites]
I swear this MeTa has done a better job of getting people to watch that farkakte video than a post on the blue ever could. People in this thread are rushing to it, analyzing the transcript, and debating the inner meaning of its words like Talmudic scholars, just so that they can prove someone else wrong on the Internet.
Psst mods: Perhaps for the future, when a post is removed for Guideline violations, it should be removed, you get me?
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 9:37 PM on October 12, 2023 [9 favorites]
Psst mods: Perhaps for the future, when a post is removed for Guideline violations, it should be removed, you get me?
posted by The Pluto Gangsta at 9:37 PM on October 12, 2023 [9 favorites]
Yeah I watched more than 2 minutes. And it may be generational, but I’ve listened to enough of this crap already in my life and really don’t want to see it here. Insight into legal aspects of relationships is available from people with far more intelligence and sensitivity and far less Hagar the Horrible-era understandings of gender relations, so no need to seek it within this really icky and questionable video series that trafficks in rubbernecking.
posted by Miko at 9:56 PM on October 12, 2023 [17 favorites]
posted by Miko at 9:56 PM on October 12, 2023 [17 favorites]
And I have to wonder if any of you were offended by that word or if it's just my age and background that make me grimace at that.
It's not the word, it's the ideas he uses it to express, the worldview he holds that leads him to make those statements, and in that language. I'm not fond of the word pussy to refer to my genitals myself, but I have good friends and artistic collaborators who use it regularly. The word itself is not the issue - the perspective it is being used to express in this video is.
posted by Dysk at 11:47 PM on October 13, 2023 [9 favorites]
It's not the word, it's the ideas he uses it to express, the worldview he holds that leads him to make those statements, and in that language. I'm not fond of the word pussy to refer to my genitals myself, but I have good friends and artistic collaborators who use it regularly. The word itself is not the issue - the perspective it is being used to express in this video is.
posted by Dysk at 11:47 PM on October 13, 2023 [9 favorites]
just so that they can prove someone else wrong on the Internet evaluate whether this is the kind of post we want MetaFilter to expose more people to.
posted by Miko at 9:47 AM on October 14, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by Miko at 9:47 AM on October 14, 2023 [2 favorites]
I did not have the faintest idea what blackpill meant before I encountered this thread, so...I guess my life has been enriched.
posted by AdamCSnider at 7:04 PM on October 14, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by AdamCSnider at 7:04 PM on October 14, 2023 [4 favorites]
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
honestly it was a SLYT post with an hour+ video, with a kind of obscure/unrelated seeming title, so I would imagine almost nobody actually even bothered to click the link or read the post/comments? Lord knows I didn't until this thread. Now, popping in for the first time, it seems like 95% of comments are "this guy sucks, what a garbage take" which...yes? It's bad content that got little to no engagement. If engagement is what the poster wanted, well, now they know that posting bad content isn't how they get it.
I really wish more people had called kanuck out and reported his post.
I'm just not sure what you're calling for, do you want 190 comments calling kanuck a monster and then having them banned? Do you want some sort of "shitty take alert" system so the whole community gets a call to pile-on?
posted by We put our faith in Blast Hardcheese at 9:52 AM on October 6, 2023 [65 favorites]