What went wrong in the dubious_dude/nouvelle_person thread? February 15, 2025 11:48 AM Subscribe
In early December, there was a contentious AskMe thread that went badly and led to the loss of a site member. nouvelle-personne's departure has continued to be an argument for various things in MetaTalk and around community governance, and it would be helpful to me to have a succinct, consensus account of what went wrong.
In early December, there was a contentious AskMe thread that went badly and led to the loss of a site member. nouvelle-personne's departure has continued to be an argument for various things in MetaTalk and around community governance, and it would be helpful to me to have a succinct, consensus account of what went wrong.
Some initial observations: the entire question is so fraught, and there’s tremendous charity and thoughtfulness in n-p’s replies. The underlying scenario pits a Deaf person who has stage 4 metastatic cancer and suffering from fairly severe anxiety against a Black Uber driver who had an urgent need to use a restroom. nouvelle-person was the first one to really capture the full story of what was likely going on, point out key features of the narrative that made it make sense, and ultimately prevent dubious_dude from filing a police report that could have caused significant harm.
If that were all, it would look like a successful AskMe to me. But it also led to nouvelle-person trying to post a MetaTalk post and then quitting the site a minute later. So what went wrong?
The thread as it appears today has apparently been heavily edited, in ways that make the true order of events difficult to determine. I’d be interested in understanding the way that thread developed: what went badly, which comments were erased and restored, and what other communication was happening simultaneously? Ultimately, what should moderators have done differently?
Several members raised the issue in the lengthy Brand New Day post, but it wasn't a focused discussion. In a recent thread, Brandon Blatcher suggested that we open up a MetaTalk post specifically to clarify what happened and open it up for discussion. My sense is that the original thread was chaotic and must have been hard to prune under the standard AskMe guidelines--for instance, the last few comments from nouvelle_personne seem to have been initially deleted before being restored.
Here's the beginning of one argument about mistakes the moderators made: which comment does this refer to? Because if the mods deleted this comment, then that's clearly terrible. But this comment is not normally the sort of thing that would stand in AskMe, and a deletion would normally make sense. It seems like it was restored after n-p left.
Some framing questions: what comments were deleted? Was anything by nouvelle-person deleted and never restored? Were there comments by other members that were responding to n-p that would help explain why they went from giving the best and most helpful answers in the thread to closing their account?
I've asked for a succinct account, but a succinct account doesn't have to be simple! In particular, the thing that nouvelle-personne herself cites as a reason for leaving is not the moderators' behavior, but the comments by others in the same thread: 37 other users who counseled or upvoted that dubious_dude should call the police. There's been so much attention on the moderators, here, but it may be that the fault is in our selves.
[Moderator note: In light of various issues with this thread, the OP asked to have some of this post's text changed, based on a comment they submitted]
In early December, there was a contentious AskMe thread that went badly and led to the loss of a site member. nouvelle-personne's departure has continued to be an argument for various things in MetaTalk and around community governance, and it would be helpful to me to have a succinct, consensus account of what went wrong.
Some initial observations: the entire question is so fraught, and there’s tremendous charity and thoughtfulness in n-p’s replies. The underlying scenario pits a Deaf person who has stage 4 metastatic cancer and suffering from fairly severe anxiety against a Black Uber driver who had an urgent need to use a restroom. nouvelle-person was the first one to really capture the full story of what was likely going on, point out key features of the narrative that made it make sense, and ultimately prevent dubious_dude from filing a police report that could have caused significant harm.
If that were all, it would look like a successful AskMe to me. But it also led to nouvelle-person trying to post a MetaTalk post and then quitting the site a minute later. So what went wrong?
The thread as it appears today has apparently been heavily edited, in ways that make the true order of events difficult to determine. I’d be interested in understanding the way that thread developed: what went badly, which comments were erased and restored, and what other communication was happening simultaneously? Ultimately, what should moderators have done differently?
Several members raised the issue in the lengthy Brand New Day post, but it wasn't a focused discussion. In a recent thread, Brandon Blatcher suggested that we open up a MetaTalk post specifically to clarify what happened and open it up for discussion. My sense is that the original thread was chaotic and must have been hard to prune under the standard AskMe guidelines--for instance, the last few comments from nouvelle_personne seem to have been initially deleted before being restored.
Here's the beginning of one argument about mistakes the moderators made: which comment does this refer to? Because if the mods deleted this comment, then that's clearly terrible. But this comment is not normally the sort of thing that would stand in AskMe, and a deletion would normally make sense. It seems like it was restored after n-p left.
Some framing questions: what comments were deleted? Was anything by nouvelle-person deleted and never restored? Were there comments by other members that were responding to n-p that would help explain why they went from giving the best and most helpful answers in the thread to closing their account?
I've asked for a succinct account, but a succinct account doesn't have to be simple! In particular, the thing that nouvelle-personne herself cites as a reason for leaving is not the moderators' behavior, but the comments by others in the same thread: 37 other users who counseled or upvoted that dubious_dude should call the police. There's been so much attention on the moderators, here, but it may be that the fault is in our selves.
[Moderator note: In light of various issues with this thread, the OP asked to have some of this post's text changed, based on a comment they submitted]
This post was deleted for the following reason: Poster's Request -- loup
I would like the mods to post the text of the MeTa nouvelle-personne tried to post so that she can finally speak for herself, as she is clearly extremely capable of when not being kneecapped by moderation.
posted by phunniemee at 11:57 AM on February 15 [15 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 11:57 AM on February 15 [15 favorites]
where’d my paragraph breaks go?!
No idea, added them back in, let me know if specifics if they're wrong and where the apostrophes problems are.
I would agree that leaving DD's personal stuff is a good way to go, let me if you want the post edited for that and how
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 11:59 AM on February 15
No idea, added them back in, let me know if specifics if they're wrong and where the apostrophes problems are.
I would agree that leaving DD's personal stuff is a good way to go, let me if you want the post edited for that and how
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 11:59 AM on February 15
this felt like a wild misapplication of policy all over. The fact that the microaggressions policy was so actively ignored in that thread depressed the hell out of me, and threw into stark relief just how little the moderation was actually engaging with the _content_ of the site. Instead, they react on a hair trigger to dispute, try to shut down any discussion, and later act as if user frustration has appeared out of nowhere.
A mod note saying "please be aware that you are all coming across as kinda racist here" would probably have done a lot to circumvent pretty much everything.
posted by sagc at 12:02 PM on February 15 [16 favorites]
A mod note saying "please be aware that you are all coming across as kinda racist here" would probably have done a lot to circumvent pretty much everything.
posted by sagc at 12:02 PM on February 15 [16 favorites]
DD hasn’t posted since that question either, has he? I miss him. He may be anxious but he’s working on it; the idea that he has the “wrong” relationship with the site rubs me the wrong way.
posted by Vatnesine at 12:25 PM on February 15 [27 favorites]
posted by Vatnesine at 12:25 PM on February 15 [27 favorites]
The only people using Metafilter wrong are the ones who think we're better off hearing from fewer voices.
posted by phunniemee at 12:30 PM on February 15 [15 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 12:30 PM on February 15 [15 favorites]
This was not and is not dubious_dude’s “fault”.
posted by bowbeacon at 12:37 PM on February 15 [31 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 12:37 PM on February 15 [31 favorites]
corrections made anotherpanacea!
I don't agree that saying this was DD's fault is helpful.
Back in a few with a timeline of everything and the text of n_p's meta post.
edited to change "isn't helpful" to "is helpful"
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 12:39 PM on February 15
I don't agree that saying this was DD's fault is helpful.
Back in a few with a timeline of everything and the text of n_p's meta post.
edited to change "isn't helpful" to "is helpful"
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 12:39 PM on February 15
And I’m kind of leaning towards thinking that a lot of this is his fault….
You're wrong. And taking this tone in this MeTa is both unhelpful and, imo, a cruel sideswipe to a user who is already struggling. Not a good look.
I don't agree that saying this was DD's fault isn't helpful.
Sorry Brandon, are you saying, as a moderator, that you do think it was dd's fault?
posted by fight or flight at 12:48 PM on February 15 [8 favorites]
You're wrong. And taking this tone in this MeTa is both unhelpful and, imo, a cruel sideswipe to a user who is already struggling. Not a good look.
I don't agree that saying this was DD's fault isn't helpful.
Sorry Brandon, are you saying, as a moderator, that you do think it was dd's fault?
posted by fight or flight at 12:48 PM on February 15 [8 favorites]
I don't agree that saying this was DD's fault isn't helpful.
I think/hope you might have wanted an odd number of negatives in that sentence.
posted by ambrosen at 12:49 PM on February 15 [2 favorites]
I think/hope you might have wanted an odd number of negatives in that sentence.
posted by ambrosen at 12:49 PM on February 15 [2 favorites]
Just to be clear: is the intent to figure out what went wrong in this one single, undoubtedly very bad and ugly Ask, or is it to use that Ask as a proxy for everything that is wrong with MetaFilter moderation? Because it sure feels like that's the direction MeTa has been heading in recent months, given how many MeTas this Ask has come up in, and the existence of this MeTa is kind of the final boss of that, to use a bad metaphor.
I AM NOT SAYING THAT THAT IS A BAD THING.
I just want to be clear of the intent of this MeTa in particular. What will the Oversight Committee look to take away from what it learns here?
posted by pdb at 12:53 PM on February 15 [2 favorites]
I AM NOT SAYING THAT THAT IS A BAD THING.
I just want to be clear of the intent of this MeTa in particular. What will the Oversight Committee look to take away from what it learns here?
posted by pdb at 12:53 PM on February 15 [2 favorites]
Timeline of incident, written in factual way of what happened:
12/10/2024
10:44 am ET: N_p posted this comment.
10:49-10:55 am ET: The comment was flagged
10:57 am ET: The comment was deleted by loup, the mod on duty, but with no note.
11:12 am ET: N_p posts a comment noting the deletion with no note
11: 16 am ET: N_p submits a MetaTalk post (which will be reproduced further down in the thread).
11:17 am ET: N_p closes their account
12:03 pm ET: N_p's comment noting the deletion with no note was removed and remained invisible to public until reinstated on 2/15 for clarity in this MetaTalk.
12:05 pm ET: a mod note about the deletions is posted
1:17pm: The original comment is reinstated.
Why? The original deletion was ok policy wise (attack other users), but it was decide that there was a larger message about being black in America that n_p was expressing and that Brandon thought was worth publishing, even if it was technically against the guidelines.
3:10pm ET: Apologies from Brandon and loup emailed to n_p
12/12/2024
8:52 pm: N_p reopens their account.
9:11pm: Mods sent an email to n_p about refraining from publishing their submitted Meta as is, but that they are welcome to rewrite it to be less combative.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 1:22 PM on February 15 [2 favorites]
12/10/2024
10:44 am ET: N_p posted this comment.
10:49-10:55 am ET: The comment was flagged
10:57 am ET: The comment was deleted by loup, the mod on duty, but with no note.
11:12 am ET: N_p posts a comment noting the deletion with no note
11: 16 am ET: N_p submits a MetaTalk post (which will be reproduced further down in the thread).
11:17 am ET: N_p closes their account
12:03 pm ET: N_p's comment noting the deletion with no note was removed and remained invisible to public until reinstated on 2/15 for clarity in this MetaTalk.
12:05 pm ET: a mod note about the deletions is posted
1:17pm: The original comment is reinstated.
Why? The original deletion was ok policy wise (attack other users), but it was decide that there was a larger message about being black in America that n_p was expressing and that Brandon thought was worth publishing, even if it was technically against the guidelines.
3:10pm ET: Apologies from Brandon and loup emailed to n_p
12/12/2024
8:52 pm: N_p reopens their account.
9:11pm: Mods sent an email to n_p about refraining from publishing their submitted Meta as is, but that they are welcome to rewrite it to be less combative.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 1:22 PM on February 15 [2 favorites]
I think/hope you might have wanted an odd number of negatives in that sentence.
Yes, a correction has been made to the original comment.
Moderation wise, I think we erred in not putting a note in the thread to try and steer things into calmer waters, and then made things worse by deleting the comment with no note. edited to clarify second sentence.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 1:24 PM on February 15 [1 favorite]
Yes, a correction has been made to the original comment.
Moderation wise, I think we erred in not putting a note in the thread to try and steer things into calmer waters, and then made things worse by deleting the comment with no note. edited to clarify second sentence.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 1:24 PM on February 15 [1 favorite]
Here's the text of n_p's MeTa. The line breaks went wonky here, so but i believe I fixed them:
In this thread I can't believe that THREE DAYS AGO we had a fucking CLASS WAR over whether Dubious Dude should TIP an uber driver.... and SEVENTY TWO HOURS later, THIRTY SEVEN OF YOU (I COUNTED CAREFULLY) advised or "liked" the idea of him getting a Black uber driver banned from his employment or even possibly MURDERED BY COPS IN THE WOODS because this poor innocent agonized Black man had the GALL to have diarrhea and could not possibly guess that his passenger would not be able to hold the thought in his head for half a fucking hour that when someone has to urgently shit, the urgency amplifies with time.
And the FUCKING IRONY that it's DUBIOUS DUDE, the man who literally writes MONTHLY ARIAS about his poo, who tentatively led the lynch mob in debating getting a Black man murdered over.... a toilet problem. Dubious Dude was holding the lighter to the torches here and asking, "so... nothing actually happened and i'm home safe now, but still.... should i flame up this motherfucker and ruin a Black man's life?" and THIRTY SEVEN OF YOU were like "Favourite added" or even
YES YOU ARE O B L I G A T E D!!!!! OBLIGATED! THIS BLACK MAN MIGHT SHIT AGAIN!!!
IT'S MORE IMPORTANT NOT TO CALL THE DEATH SQUAD ON AN UBER DRIVER THAN IT IS TO TIP HIM FIVE FUCKING WHITE SAVIOUR DOLLARS. DO YOU FUCKING GET THAT???? HOW SHALLOW ARE YOUR FUCKING POLITICS??????
What the fuck is the so-called left???? I despair. I really fucking do. My heart pounded into my fucking EYEBALLS reading this thread. I wept. I fucking CRIED over this. Every few months you just show me how much you HATE me. Fucking BULLIES with your #blacksquares on #instagram2020 but safe and sound with your vigilante squad on speed dial today and you don't even THINK about anyone else's position. We're not even HUMANS to you. All that matters are your own FEEEEELINGS OF FEAR ABOUT BLAAAAHHHCK PEOPLE WHO ARE ALL KIDNAPPING DEGENERATE METH HEADS if they so much as fucking fart. You are fucking SCARY!
Deleted within like 10 minutes. Followed by, AND DID YOU JUST DIRTY DELETE MY COMMENT CALLING OUT HOW RACIST THIS THREAD IS WITHOUT A LEAVING A MOD NOTE?
Never mind, I'll write it for you. "One comment deleted, because white feelings are more important than Black safety." or "One comment deleted, because Black people should be nicer about their agony while we're politely debate getting them murdered." or, "nouvelle-personne finally buttoned. What a relief, that Black woman was always so "angry" when we debated calling our murderfriends on people who look like her family." I'm done.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 1:31 PM on February 15 [3 favorites]
In this thread I can't believe that THREE DAYS AGO we had a fucking CLASS WAR over whether Dubious Dude should TIP an uber driver.... and SEVENTY TWO HOURS later, THIRTY SEVEN OF YOU (I COUNTED CAREFULLY) advised or "liked" the idea of him getting a Black uber driver banned from his employment or even possibly MURDERED BY COPS IN THE WOODS because this poor innocent agonized Black man had the GALL to have diarrhea and could not possibly guess that his passenger would not be able to hold the thought in his head for half a fucking hour that when someone has to urgently shit, the urgency amplifies with time.
And the FUCKING IRONY that it's DUBIOUS DUDE, the man who literally writes MONTHLY ARIAS about his poo, who tentatively led the lynch mob in debating getting a Black man murdered over.... a toilet problem. Dubious Dude was holding the lighter to the torches here and asking, "so... nothing actually happened and i'm home safe now, but still.... should i flame up this motherfucker and ruin a Black man's life?" and THIRTY SEVEN OF YOU were like "Favourite added" or even
YES YOU ARE O B L I G A T E D!!!!! OBLIGATED! THIS BLACK MAN MIGHT SHIT AGAIN!!!
IT'S MORE IMPORTANT NOT TO CALL THE DEATH SQUAD ON AN UBER DRIVER THAN IT IS TO TIP HIM FIVE FUCKING WHITE SAVIOUR DOLLARS. DO YOU FUCKING GET THAT???? HOW SHALLOW ARE YOUR FUCKING POLITICS??????
What the fuck is the so-called left???? I despair. I really fucking do. My heart pounded into my fucking EYEBALLS reading this thread. I wept. I fucking CRIED over this. Every few months you just show me how much you HATE me. Fucking BULLIES with your #blacksquares on #instagram2020 but safe and sound with your vigilante squad on speed dial today and you don't even THINK about anyone else's position. We're not even HUMANS to you. All that matters are your own FEEEEELINGS OF FEAR ABOUT BLAAAAHHHCK PEOPLE WHO ARE ALL KIDNAPPING DEGENERATE METH HEADS if they so much as fucking fart. You are fucking SCARY!
Deleted within like 10 minutes. Followed by, AND DID YOU JUST DIRTY DELETE MY COMMENT CALLING OUT HOW RACIST THIS THREAD IS WITHOUT A LEAVING A MOD NOTE?
Never mind, I'll write it for you. "One comment deleted, because white feelings are more important than Black safety." or "One comment deleted, because Black people should be nicer about their agony while we're politely debate getting them murdered." or, "nouvelle-personne finally buttoned. What a relief, that Black woman was always so "angry" when we debated calling our murderfriends on people who look like her family." I'm done.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 1:31 PM on February 15 [3 favorites]
So the MeTa deemed too spicy for Mefites to handle was 90% comments she already posted by volume? That the mods then reinstated? But you couldn't just push the MeTa through so we could have that conversation in the appropriate forum?
I am even more baffled by the moderation decisions here. None of the fallout from this was necessary.
The queue needs to be abolished.
posted by phunniemee at 1:35 PM on February 15 [33 favorites]
I am even more baffled by the moderation decisions here. None of the fallout from this was necessary.
The queue needs to be abolished.
posted by phunniemee at 1:35 PM on February 15 [33 favorites]
That could have made a really good metatalk thread. Instead, we spent two months talking about moderators.
posted by mittens at 1:41 PM on February 15 [15 favorites]
posted by mittens at 1:41 PM on February 15 [15 favorites]
Agreed.
posted by Mr. Yuck at 1:42 PM on February 15 [4 favorites]
posted by Mr. Yuck at 1:42 PM on February 15 [4 favorites]
I’m still astounded at how nouvelle-personne was treated in that situation. One roadblock after another to shut someone up. I can’t fathom how anyone could think any of those moderation choices were appropriate. That whole situation continues to be a shameful stain on this website and has altered how I feel about participating here.
And a huge side-eye to the people who favourited that shit; an equal side-eye to those who then did the dirty unfavourite when the spotlight was on. Slimy.
posted by chococat at 2:37 PM on February 15 [17 favorites]
And a huge side-eye to the people who favourited that shit; an equal side-eye to those who then did the dirty unfavourite when the spotlight was on. Slimy.
posted by chococat at 2:37 PM on February 15 [17 favorites]
What will the Oversight Committee look to take away from what it learns here?
Well the committee is a collection of individuals right now. My preference is to provide a step between “start a Meta” and “just deal,” not drop Metas unless they are purposeful. But of course we’re all reading along.
posted by warriorqueen at 3:13 PM on February 15 [4 favorites]
Well the committee is a collection of individuals right now. My preference is to provide a step between “start a Meta” and “just deal,” not drop Metas unless they are purposeful. But of course we’re all reading along.
posted by warriorqueen at 3:13 PM on February 15 [4 favorites]
Have either nouvelle-personne or dubious_dude been asked for their consent to being the focus of a metatalk thread?
If they were not asked/did not consent, i think having this discussion is very wrong.
posted by 15L06 at 3:18 PM on February 15 [13 favorites]
If they were not asked/did not consent, i think having this discussion is very wrong.
posted by 15L06 at 3:18 PM on February 15 [13 favorites]
I want to add that i read metatalk daily, and follow the various discussion threads. So my strong distaste of this thread is not the result of not reading metatalk. I just don't comment anymore (this being an exception).
posted by 15L06 at 3:22 PM on February 15
posted by 15L06 at 3:22 PM on February 15
I think the MeTa was fine and should have gone up. It would have been reasonable to move most of it to [more inside]. With a note, of course.
posted by snofoam at 3:27 PM on February 15 [5 favorites]
posted by snofoam at 3:27 PM on February 15 [5 favorites]
And a huge side-eye to the people who favourited that shit; an equal side-eye to those who then did the dirty unfavourite when the spotlight was on. Slimy.
Or "educable."
posted by Pudding Yeti at 4:07 PM on February 15 [5 favorites]
Or "educable."
posted by Pudding Yeti at 4:07 PM on February 15 [5 favorites]
Have either nouvelle-personne or dubious_dude been asked for their consent to being the focus of a metatalk thread?
This is all posts on a public website, no expectation of privacy attaches IMO.
posted by axiom at 4:30 PM on February 15 [10 favorites]
This is all posts on a public website, no expectation of privacy attaches IMO.
posted by axiom at 4:30 PM on February 15 [10 favorites]
This is posts about members of our community, on our community website. Calling people out has long been something thought of as a last resort. Certainly the very least courtesy has been to let them know its happening, but really, we should be asking whether they would prefer not to be dragged into the spotlight.
posted by biffa at 4:55 PM on February 15 [8 favorites]
posted by biffa at 4:55 PM on February 15 [8 favorites]
I think it is fine to alert them to the discussion. I think suppressing conversation now, when n-p was so angry about her viewpoint being suppressed, would be bitterly ironic. I strongly oppose avoiding a conversation just because it’s uncomfortable, but the fact that some in the community advocate for that at least demonstrates that modding decisions do align with what some of the userbase want.
posted by solotoro at 5:46 PM on February 15 [7 favorites]
posted by solotoro at 5:46 PM on February 15 [7 favorites]
I really hope the op contacted both parties involved. apparently, we don't need permission to go ahead and relitigate a thread as interesting as it is. I would have left the original meta talk thread go up that's me.. so I would like to know if both parties were notified at least
posted by clavdivs at 5:59 PM on February 15 [2 favorites]
posted by clavdivs at 5:59 PM on February 15 [2 favorites]
There's no way that's remotely acceptable for metatalk. There's literally no bar for the new metafilter. Presumably there will be firings and elections and this place will become... something.
posted by Wood at 6:49 PM on February 15 [3 favorites]
posted by Wood at 6:49 PM on February 15 [3 favorites]
Presumably there will be firings and elections and this place will become... something.
The Committee of Public Safety!
posted by kbanas at 6:54 PM on February 15 [2 favorites]
The Committee of Public Safety!
posted by kbanas at 6:54 PM on February 15 [2 favorites]
Wood, do you think the tone of the proposed MeTa might have something to do with the silent deletions from mods, supporting a racist environment? Maybe?
posted by sagc at 7:27 PM on February 15 [7 favorites]
posted by sagc at 7:27 PM on February 15 [7 favorites]
I've probably been hauled into metatalk more than a lot of people, one ethos of metafilter I never want to see disappear is what I was thinking but what kbanas wrote within 2.3 seconds of rereading the context and parameters of this thread without (apparently) the acknowledgment of the two parties involved.
again, has the OP or anyone contacted the two parties.
"...He lives on little and has no physical needs. He has only one mission: to talk. And he talks all the time.”
-Marquis de Condorcet.
posted by clavdivs at 8:08 PM on February 15 [2 favorites]
again, has the OP or anyone contacted the two parties.
"...He lives on little and has no physical needs. He has only one mission: to talk. And he talks all the time.”
-Marquis de Condorcet.
posted by clavdivs at 8:08 PM on February 15 [2 favorites]
I'm still of the opinion that yes, by taking OP somewhere that was off the route requested - and NOT a reasonable detour - that it *was* kidnapping by definition, regardless of the driver's intent.
There's also a huge safety issue inherent in being locked into the car. If there was an accident (or the driver had a medical issue) and the driver was unable to unlock the doors, the passenger being unable to unlock their door themselves is a huge issue. And in many places, it's false imprisonment.
So we've got two potential criminal issues there. It's possible to commit a crime by recklessness or carelessness rather than intent, and it's possible that the driver's actions fall within that portion of possibility - but it doesn't make it justifiable.
See, the real issue I have with it? Sure, OP could have contacted Uber and requested another ride - if the driver had STOPPED somewhere they could have - but additionally, THE DRIVER THEMSELVES should have contacted Uber, told Uber they were unable to complete the ride, and had a replacement sent.
That would have followed Uber policy and prevented all the rest of it. If the driver had time to travel to multiple gas stations, they had time to contact Uber and request a replacement - and should have.
Blaming OP's disability for the issue isn't appropriate - especially since the driver was well aware that OP was unable to understand them. The possibility that the driver had forgotten in the moment - well, that too would have been prevented if the driver had simply followed policy in the first place - which would require the driver to relinquish the fare, which is probably what the driver was probably trying to avoid.
One last question - if the passenger had been a young female (of any race), rather than a disabled adult male cancer patient, would everyone be so concerned about driver's safety instead of the passenger's?
And THAT is what I see as what went wrong in that thread.
The inappropriate prioritization of the driver's safety over the passenger's.
posted by stormyteal at 9:23 PM on February 15 [5 favorites]
There's also a huge safety issue inherent in being locked into the car. If there was an accident (or the driver had a medical issue) and the driver was unable to unlock the doors, the passenger being unable to unlock their door themselves is a huge issue. And in many places, it's false imprisonment.
So we've got two potential criminal issues there. It's possible to commit a crime by recklessness or carelessness rather than intent, and it's possible that the driver's actions fall within that portion of possibility - but it doesn't make it justifiable.
See, the real issue I have with it? Sure, OP could have contacted Uber and requested another ride - if the driver had STOPPED somewhere they could have - but additionally, THE DRIVER THEMSELVES should have contacted Uber, told Uber they were unable to complete the ride, and had a replacement sent.
That would have followed Uber policy and prevented all the rest of it. If the driver had time to travel to multiple gas stations, they had time to contact Uber and request a replacement - and should have.
Blaming OP's disability for the issue isn't appropriate - especially since the driver was well aware that OP was unable to understand them. The possibility that the driver had forgotten in the moment - well, that too would have been prevented if the driver had simply followed policy in the first place - which would require the driver to relinquish the fare, which is probably what the driver was probably trying to avoid.
One last question - if the passenger had been a young female (of any race), rather than a disabled adult male cancer patient, would everyone be so concerned about driver's safety instead of the passenger's?
And THAT is what I see as what went wrong in that thread.
The inappropriate prioritization of the driver's safety over the passenger's.
posted by stormyteal at 9:23 PM on February 15 [5 favorites]
yikes
posted by sagc at 9:27 PM on February 15 [18 favorites]
posted by sagc at 9:27 PM on February 15 [18 favorites]
child locks: not even once, go straight to jail
posted by sagc at 9:41 PM on February 15 [6 favorites]
posted by sagc at 9:41 PM on February 15 [6 favorites]
a cruel sideswipe to a user who is already struggling.
I went out of my way to pull up some of the background that I think makes dubious_dude’s situation particularly understandable. He’s dying of cancer!
Jumped down without reading anything after this to say this is enormously fucked and if someone was looking to make a MeTa that made an argument for the stupid queue and/or heavier deletions of MeTas they couldn't do much better than this post fucking hell and I'm saying that as someone who thought the AskMe that started all of this should've been deleted to begin with
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 12:30 AM on February 16 [9 favorites]
I went out of my way to pull up some of the background that I think makes dubious_dude’s situation particularly understandable. He’s dying of cancer!
Jumped down without reading anything after this to say this is enormously fucked and if someone was looking to make a MeTa that made an argument for the stupid queue and/or heavier deletions of MeTas they couldn't do much better than this post fucking hell and I'm saying that as someone who thought the AskMe that started all of this should've been deleted to begin with
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 12:30 AM on February 16 [9 favorites]
That could have made a really good metatalk thread.
About the horrors of caps lock abuse, maybe
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 12:33 AM on February 16 [3 favorites]
About the horrors of caps lock abuse, maybe
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 12:33 AM on February 16 [3 favorites]
I think that’s right; we don’t need permission
I guess I have to spell it out.
DID YOU CONTACT ANY OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED BEFORE MAKING THIS METATALK THREAD.
Yikes, see what you mean, the 3 QOUNSAR caplock paradigm.
posted by clavdivs at 1:08 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
I guess I have to spell it out.
DID YOU CONTACT ANY OF THE PARTIES INVOLVED BEFORE MAKING THIS METATALK THREAD.
Yikes, see what you mean, the 3 QOUNSAR caplock paradigm.
posted by clavdivs at 1:08 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
Clavs, you've been here since the dawn of time, you know it's not a requirement to contact ppl before posting a thread about their public activity on the site. Stop acting like it is. If you think it should be, open your own thread about it.
posted by donnagirl at 5:11 AM on February 16 [18 favorites]
posted by donnagirl at 5:11 AM on February 16 [18 favorites]
So we've got two potential criminal issues there.
Based on the retelling of someone whose anxiety is so severe that they cannot eat popcorn without community support and whose ability to to trial and error basic tasks is so limited that they needed help wiping a few drops of pee from around their toilet. I didn't go trawling through anyone's post history for this, these are just two of many examples I remember because I'm active on Ask.
Being driven to an intersection in the "middle of nowhere" describes most intersections between major towns in the United States. It also was never made clear in the Ask if d_d tried leaning forward to the driver's seat to press the unlock button at any point. We only know the narrative from the perspective of one person who has a very, very long history of experiencing inappropriate and outsize reaction to minor stressors, no matter what else may be going on in their life. I'm dubious of the narrative.
Like I said in the original thread, I don't discount at all that this was a very stressful situation for them to be in, but even OP agreed the next day that it didn't rise to the level of a crime. Doubling down to say this is literally kidnapping isn't particularly helpful in my opinion. Especially since the legal definition of kidnapping requires use of force or deception. Maybe the Uber driver was just pretending to shit his pants.
posted by phunniemee at 5:33 AM on February 16 [26 favorites]
Based on the retelling of someone whose anxiety is so severe that they cannot eat popcorn without community support and whose ability to to trial and error basic tasks is so limited that they needed help wiping a few drops of pee from around their toilet. I didn't go trawling through anyone's post history for this, these are just two of many examples I remember because I'm active on Ask.
Being driven to an intersection in the "middle of nowhere" describes most intersections between major towns in the United States. It also was never made clear in the Ask if d_d tried leaning forward to the driver's seat to press the unlock button at any point. We only know the narrative from the perspective of one person who has a very, very long history of experiencing inappropriate and outsize reaction to minor stressors, no matter what else may be going on in their life. I'm dubious of the narrative.
Like I said in the original thread, I don't discount at all that this was a very stressful situation for them to be in, but even OP agreed the next day that it didn't rise to the level of a crime. Doubling down to say this is literally kidnapping isn't particularly helpful in my opinion. Especially since the legal definition of kidnapping requires use of force or deception. Maybe the Uber driver was just pretending to shit his pants.
posted by phunniemee at 5:33 AM on February 16 [26 favorites]
Brandon: I’m curious… why didn’t you eventually release the post from the queue? I had assumed that you didn’t release the post from the queue because she had already closed her account. Is that right?
It wasn't and would not have been released as is, because it was so combative in tone and attacking others, albeit with great points. The goal was to work her to express all those points but in a less combative way.
People are going to disagree with that line of thought and that's fine, but it's not new to MeTa.
has the OP or anyone contacted the two parties
D_D and N&P have been informed of the existence of this thread and encouraged to participate or not in whatever way that's best for them.
This thread seems to be turning into an argument and judgement about dubious_dude's actions and that's not fair or tenable for the long term health of MeTa as it currently is. I would ask that people not do that and focus instead on
1. moderation decisions made and what can be learned from those actions and inactions.
2. how users can deal with difficult Ask MetaFilter questions in a general sense as opposed to the specifics of this particular one.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:26 AM on February 16 [5 favorites]
It wasn't and would not have been released as is, because it was so combative in tone and attacking others, albeit with great points. The goal was to work her to express all those points but in a less combative way.
People are going to disagree with that line of thought and that's fine, but it's not new to MeTa.
has the OP or anyone contacted the two parties
D_D and N&P have been informed of the existence of this thread and encouraged to participate or not in whatever way that's best for them.
This thread seems to be turning into an argument and judgement about dubious_dude's actions and that's not fair or tenable for the long term health of MeTa as it currently is. I would ask that people not do that and focus instead on
1. moderation decisions made and what can be learned from those actions and inactions.
2. how users can deal with difficult Ask MetaFilter questions in a general sense as opposed to the specifics of this particular one.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:26 AM on February 16 [5 favorites]
I think there's a lot to reflect on in that thread. I was on the wrong side of it and although I could explain where I was coming from, it's not super relevant.
But as a community I think we can reflect on:
- are we collectively being aware of the experiences of racialized people when we answer?
- intersectionality is hard (Deaf vs. Black)
- n_p could have used some allyship I think in not having to be the sole or one of a few voices in that thread
- toning the answers down where possible - not picking on anyone here but words like kidnapping are fraught
- at the same time being aware not everyone is on their best day every day, so raising concerns with each other rather than flying off the handle (this is not directed at n_p AT ALL and not at anyone in this thread, just overall)
On that note I would like to ask people to be aware of that and not re-litigate in this thread. We should accept that n_p was expressing an important point of view and regardless of whatever you think in your secret heart, they had a real point to make.
I know I enjoy MetaFilter as a break, often popping in between tasks or when I need to think something over in the back of my brain. Sometimes that leads to me not taking the time to do the thinking I should.
On the moderation side there was actually a lot of context:
- a thread on the Blue about an Asian woman's experience on a plane had been moderated, at best, later than people had identified the issue at the same time that:
- a member was policed in MetaTalk for being negative about a BIPOC? Global?-themed post that was...well let's just say it wouldn't have passed my comms team's filter
- then the Ask thread happened, and on the heels of that, the turning down of the MetaTalk (in skimming the timeline, did n_p receive the 'no' before closing their account?)
- this is an Ask where I think a proactive, early well-timed mod note "Hey everyone please be aware of the racialized context of employment and policing in the US" might have helped a lot. It's not going to be the case that the mods will catch all of those but this was a missed opportunity.
- using the phrase 'combative' (if that was in the message sent to n_p and not just a summary item) seems like a really bad choice of language for someone who is feeling that Black experience is being negated and policed. Whether I agree with the decision or not, there are so many other ways to write things. "Hey, n_p, so glad to see you are back. We would love to see a discussion about your experience in that thread and how we can support BIPOC concerns on the site. I was wondering if you'd be willing to edit a few things to keep the temperature a bit lower at the start of the discussion - what do you think?"
I can't speak for BIPOC members. But as an ally, what I think is that the context and climate of those weeks on the site was one that was plenty full of moderation errors of the type that resulted in the creation of the BIPOC board, and that snowballed (besides the thread itself, which, see above.)
I think some reflection about that would be good. Part of the issue with moderation right now is that everyone is part time, and it seems like there's never really any effort to look at what's trending for members and be sensitive to. Like I see that when it come to something like political posts, but to me, this was an opportunity missed to really take the first two experience and moderate both the Ask and the MetaTalk submission a bit differently.
posted by warriorqueen at 6:29 AM on February 16 [23 favorites]
But as a community I think we can reflect on:
- are we collectively being aware of the experiences of racialized people when we answer?
- intersectionality is hard (Deaf vs. Black)
- n_p could have used some allyship I think in not having to be the sole or one of a few voices in that thread
- toning the answers down where possible - not picking on anyone here but words like kidnapping are fraught
- at the same time being aware not everyone is on their best day every day, so raising concerns with each other rather than flying off the handle (this is not directed at n_p AT ALL and not at anyone in this thread, just overall)
On that note I would like to ask people to be aware of that and not re-litigate in this thread. We should accept that n_p was expressing an important point of view and regardless of whatever you think in your secret heart, they had a real point to make.
I know I enjoy MetaFilter as a break, often popping in between tasks or when I need to think something over in the back of my brain. Sometimes that leads to me not taking the time to do the thinking I should.
On the moderation side there was actually a lot of context:
- a thread on the Blue about an Asian woman's experience on a plane had been moderated, at best, later than people had identified the issue at the same time that:
- a member was policed in MetaTalk for being negative about a BIPOC? Global?-themed post that was...well let's just say it wouldn't have passed my comms team's filter
- then the Ask thread happened, and on the heels of that, the turning down of the MetaTalk (in skimming the timeline, did n_p receive the 'no' before closing their account?)
- this is an Ask where I think a proactive, early well-timed mod note "Hey everyone please be aware of the racialized context of employment and policing in the US" might have helped a lot. It's not going to be the case that the mods will catch all of those but this was a missed opportunity.
- using the phrase 'combative' (if that was in the message sent to n_p and not just a summary item) seems like a really bad choice of language for someone who is feeling that Black experience is being negated and policed. Whether I agree with the decision or not, there are so many other ways to write things. "Hey, n_p, so glad to see you are back. We would love to see a discussion about your experience in that thread and how we can support BIPOC concerns on the site. I was wondering if you'd be willing to edit a few things to keep the temperature a bit lower at the start of the discussion - what do you think?"
I can't speak for BIPOC members. But as an ally, what I think is that the context and climate of those weeks on the site was one that was plenty full of moderation errors of the type that resulted in the creation of the BIPOC board, and that snowballed (besides the thread itself, which, see above.)
I think some reflection about that would be good. Part of the issue with moderation right now is that everyone is part time, and it seems like there's never really any effort to look at what's trending for members and be sensitive to. Like I see that when it come to something like political posts, but to me, this was an opportunity missed to really take the first two experience and moderate both the Ask and the MetaTalk submission a bit differently.
posted by warriorqueen at 6:29 AM on February 16 [23 favorites]
(And Brandon, aware of the awkwardness of me saying don't use combative to you. Taking that from a general comms lens.)
posted by warriorqueen at 6:30 AM on February 16 [4 favorites]
posted by warriorqueen at 6:30 AM on February 16 [4 favorites]
Also, sorry, still adjusting - all of the above is me speaking just for myself.
posted by warriorqueen at 6:34 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
posted by warriorqueen at 6:34 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
It feels like if nouvelle-personne's MetaTalk had just happened, we'd have all the same stuff, the same hey don't attack people but also hey, you have a lot of worthy points to discuss. Kind of like this thread.
My belief is the community can handle "hot" threads like their original MetaTalk. If THIS post can be live, which could absolutely be perceived to contain personal attacks, theirs could have been too, and it would have been more productive and focused on mod actions.
posted by tiny frying pan at 6:43 AM on February 16 [11 favorites]
My belief is the community can handle "hot" threads like their original MetaTalk. If THIS post can be live, which could absolutely be perceived to contain personal attacks, theirs could have been too, and it would have been more productive and focused on mod actions.
posted by tiny frying pan at 6:43 AM on February 16 [11 favorites]
For me, nouvelle-personne's comments (which I saw in real-time) were a wake-up call. I'm inclined to judge situations more by 'dry' facts and less by context and intent, so in my head, things were adding up to 'I think that's probably illegal, the driver was wrong'. That's the way my brain thinks, but for my actions, I want to involve my heart as well and then context, intent and consequences come in.
Their comment reminded me that participating in AskMe isn't (just) some intellectual exercise, but a moral one as well.
As for the incivility, well, a non-Western friend once pointed out to me the injustice of refusing to listen to people who are drawing attention to a great wrong unless / until they calm down. I've taken that to heart and found that actually, it is possible to have a conversation with someone while they're worked up.
posted by demi-octopus at 7:09 AM on February 16 [38 favorites]
Their comment reminded me that participating in AskMe isn't (just) some intellectual exercise, but a moral one as well.
As for the incivility, well, a non-Western friend once pointed out to me the injustice of refusing to listen to people who are drawing attention to a great wrong unless / until they calm down. I've taken that to heart and found that actually, it is possible to have a conversation with someone while they're worked up.
posted by demi-octopus at 7:09 AM on February 16 [38 favorites]
It wasn't and would not have been released as is, because it was so combative in tone and attacking others
And yet the full, unedited text of the comment (that is most of the submitted metatalk) was reinstated in the thread, and the full, unedited text of the metatalk was reproduced here in this thread, and we are all able to bravely soldier on. A black woman being mad isn't actually violence, it turns out.
Excellent, thank you! I think that’s the right approach and is why I think we need a queue.
All the queue did in this instance was silence nouvelle-personne and drag this out for months.
As a woman who has received unsolicited feedback on my combative and attacking tone since I was, I dunno maybe 8 years old?? this kind critique of is so odious.
posted by phunniemee at 7:17 AM on February 16 [39 favorites]
And yet the full, unedited text of the comment (that is most of the submitted metatalk) was reinstated in the thread, and the full, unedited text of the metatalk was reproduced here in this thread, and we are all able to bravely soldier on. A black woman being mad isn't actually violence, it turns out.
Excellent, thank you! I think that’s the right approach and is why I think we need a queue.
All the queue did in this instance was silence nouvelle-personne and drag this out for months.
As a woman who has received unsolicited feedback on my combative and attacking tone since I was, I dunno maybe 8 years old?? this kind critique of is so odious.
posted by phunniemee at 7:17 AM on February 16 [39 favorites]
Loup should have left a note, but they were otherwise acting in keeping with the standard AskMe principles and subsite content policy. (I think this also includes emailing deleted comments to the user so they can rewrite.)
This wasn't done with this level of care, I don't think. It appeared loup saw caps and swearing and deleted it in Ask, bim bam done.
Who here has had a deleted comment emailed to them with the ask of a rewrite? I never have, I've been here over 20 years.
posted by tiny frying pan at 8:02 AM on February 16 [7 favorites]
This wasn't done with this level of care, I don't think. It appeared loup saw caps and swearing and deleted it in Ask, bim bam done.
Who here has had a deleted comment emailed to them with the ask of a rewrite? I never have, I've been here over 20 years.
posted by tiny frying pan at 8:02 AM on February 16 [7 favorites]
how were they acting in keeping with the guidelines to let so many microaggressions stand without any mod intervention? And not leaving a note was, in fact, an extremely significant failure, not a little oopsie.
posted by sagc at 8:13 AM on February 16 [4 favorites]
posted by sagc at 8:13 AM on February 16 [4 favorites]
When Civility Is Used As A Cudgel Against People Of Color
And so, pushing back against the status quo will be seen as inherently uncivil by the people who want to maintain it. And there are always higher standards expected of those people pushing back.posted by lapis at 8:25 AM on February 16 [20 favorites]
Rutgers professor Brittney Cooper writes about white reaction to black anger in her book Eloquent Rage: A Black Feminist Discovers Her Superpower. Since the Black Lives Matter movement blossomed, Cooper says, the mere fact that blacks are protesting affects how white society sees those protests.
"Black anger, black rage, black distress over injustice is seen as, one, unreasonable and outsized; and, two, as a thing that must be neutralized and contained quickly." Cooper says this often takes the form of whites "preaching at black people about how they're bad and how they're ungrateful for being angry."
Letter from a Birmingham Jail
First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.posted by lapis at 8:28 AM on February 16 [15 favorites]
I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.
In your statement you assert that our actions, even though peaceful, must be condemned because they precipitate violence. But is this a logical assertion? Isn't this like condemning a robbed man because his possession of money precipitated the evil act of robbery? Isn't this like condemning Socrates because his unswerving commitment to truth and his philosophical inquiries precipitated the act by the misguided populace in which they made him drink hemlock? Isn't this like condemning Jesus because his unique God consciousness and never ceasing devotion to God's will precipitated the evil act of crucifixion? We must come to see that, as the federal courts have consistently affirmed, it is wrong to urge an individual to cease his efforts to gain his basic constitutional rights because the quest may precipitate violence. Society must protect the robbed and punish the robber.
anotherpanacea, I thought I was obviously talking about the various commenters having their own little freakouts about how scared they'd be.
posted by sagc at 8:32 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
posted by sagc at 8:32 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
Not for nothing, but the microaggression policy does not include “don’t ever call the police.”
I do not believe the microaggession policy is fully understood by the current moderation team. I think it's a lot of good sounding words created with positive intent, applied imperfectly by people who have continued to demonstrate a significant inability to read for context.
posted by phunniemee at 8:33 AM on February 16 [14 favorites]
I do not believe the microaggession policy is fully understood by the current moderation team. I think it's a lot of good sounding words created with positive intent, applied imperfectly by people who have continued to demonstrate a significant inability to read for context.
posted by phunniemee at 8:33 AM on February 16 [14 favorites]
I'm not sure why this is getting framed as being against dubious_dude. His framing was off, yes, but what was mindboggling to me were the volume and intensity of comments agreeing with him that his life had been in danger and he should call the police.
And it's actually pretty easy to see the ways to navigate intersectionality if you look at the actual power dynamics with the actual people involved, including the hypothetical police. Calling in the police has a higher than average probability of putting both the customer and driver in danger, as police brutality against Deaf people is also a concern, and of course police brutality against Black people is a huge national issue that doesn't go away simply because the person who called them in has a disability.
This is not an Oppression Olympics situation where dubious_dude's privilege needs to be weighed against the driver's and the person with the least privilege wins. This is a situation where there are known potential consequences to bringing the police into the situation, and so looking at whether the danger of the situation is high enough to warrant the potential danger of involving police is what matters. Nouvelle-personne was pointing out that it wasn't, while so many commenters just seemed to completely ignore the structural issues at play. And it was wrong that nouvelle-personne got deleted and silenced for doing that, when her point should have been completely obvious to everyone commenting in that thread. Especially, as phunniemee points out, anyone with any awareness of the numerous times dubious_dude has blown things out of proportion due to his anxiety.
posted by lapis at 8:41 AM on February 16 [29 favorites]
And it's actually pretty easy to see the ways to navigate intersectionality if you look at the actual power dynamics with the actual people involved, including the hypothetical police. Calling in the police has a higher than average probability of putting both the customer and driver in danger, as police brutality against Deaf people is also a concern, and of course police brutality against Black people is a huge national issue that doesn't go away simply because the person who called them in has a disability.
This is not an Oppression Olympics situation where dubious_dude's privilege needs to be weighed against the driver's and the person with the least privilege wins. This is a situation where there are known potential consequences to bringing the police into the situation, and so looking at whether the danger of the situation is high enough to warrant the potential danger of involving police is what matters. Nouvelle-personne was pointing out that it wasn't, while so many commenters just seemed to completely ignore the structural issues at play. And it was wrong that nouvelle-personne got deleted and silenced for doing that, when her point should have been completely obvious to everyone commenting in that thread. Especially, as phunniemee points out, anyone with any awareness of the numerous times dubious_dude has blown things out of proportion due to his anxiety.
posted by lapis at 8:41 AM on February 16 [29 favorites]
N-p’s anger was a harsh light illuminating our racism brightly. I am embarrassed to think that we told this woman to calm down before we’d allow her words to stand.
posted by Vatnesine at 9:01 AM on February 16 [55 favorites]
posted by Vatnesine at 9:01 AM on February 16 [55 favorites]
☝️
posted by tiny frying pan at 9:02 AM on February 16 [3 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 9:02 AM on February 16 [3 favorites]
You guys think it's ok to write a post saying someone is "dying"????
Ok so wait. You people actually think this thread is ok? THIS made it past the hallowed queue?
He has a cancer diagnosis, is undergoing treatment, is still up and about taking ubers and visiting friends, but you think it's not mentally destabilizing for a person, and incredibly anxiety provoking, to say multiple times that he's "dying"?
He's not fucking "dying", he's ill, and how fucking dare you write about someone that way????? How callous can you be????
THIS IS NOT AN INTELLECTUAL EXERCISE
Y'all are FUCKING MESSED UP
EDIT THE FUCKING POST NOW AND APOLOGIZE TO DD. What the FUCKING FUCK
posted by nouvelle-personne at 9:03 AM on February 16 [86 favorites]
Ok so wait. You people actually think this thread is ok? THIS made it past the hallowed queue?
He has a cancer diagnosis, is undergoing treatment, is still up and about taking ubers and visiting friends, but you think it's not mentally destabilizing for a person, and incredibly anxiety provoking, to say multiple times that he's "dying"?
He's not fucking "dying", he's ill, and how fucking dare you write about someone that way????? How callous can you be????
THIS IS NOT AN INTELLECTUAL EXERCISE
Y'all are FUCKING MESSED UP
EDIT THE FUCKING POST NOW AND APOLOGIZE TO DD. What the FUCKING FUCK
posted by nouvelle-personne at 9:03 AM on February 16 [86 favorites]
I think the central moderation question this brings up is, how to respond when a user has a valid perspective but is also clearly feeling intense emotions and that is making them communicate in a way that might prolong conflict rather than resolve it?
The mod answer, not one in this instance but in others, is to delete, delete, delete. That doesn't work, in part because if people have already consumed the text, you can't make its effects disappear. And it's really going to hurt the user with the valid point - you're indirectly tell them "your ideas are so toxic we need to pretend they never happened." Yikes! Of course that's going to hurt.
"Hey, n_p, so glad to see you are back. We would love to see a discussion about your experience in that thread and how we can support BIPOC concerns on the site. I was wondering if you'd be willing to edit a few things to keep the temperature a bit lower at the start of the discussion - what do you think?"
I think warriorqueen's language is excellent - yes, tone-policing can be bad, but the admittedly hard job of moderating is finding a way to make users to adhere to agreed terms that are agreed upon because most members believe they are good for the functioning of the space. Sometimes that means asking members with valid points to make them in ways that encourage conversation rather than shut it down.
But to be clear, I don't think anything should have been deleted. I'm not sure if this is technically possible (I think it is?) but I actually think the best solution would have been for a mod to step in with a note saying "Hey all, there are some really worthwhile points being made here, and in the spirit of giving people time to absorb them, we're going to freeze this thread for 10min for new comments - we hope this gives people time to digest."
posted by coffeecat at 9:08 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
The mod answer, not one in this instance but in others, is to delete, delete, delete. That doesn't work, in part because if people have already consumed the text, you can't make its effects disappear. And it's really going to hurt the user with the valid point - you're indirectly tell them "your ideas are so toxic we need to pretend they never happened." Yikes! Of course that's going to hurt.
"Hey, n_p, so glad to see you are back. We would love to see a discussion about your experience in that thread and how we can support BIPOC concerns on the site. I was wondering if you'd be willing to edit a few things to keep the temperature a bit lower at the start of the discussion - what do you think?"
I think warriorqueen's language is excellent - yes, tone-policing can be bad, but the admittedly hard job of moderating is finding a way to make users to adhere to agreed terms that are agreed upon because most members believe they are good for the functioning of the space. Sometimes that means asking members with valid points to make them in ways that encourage conversation rather than shut it down.
But to be clear, I don't think anything should have been deleted. I'm not sure if this is technically possible (I think it is?) but I actually think the best solution would have been for a mod to step in with a note saying "Hey all, there are some really worthwhile points being made here, and in the spirit of giving people time to absorb them, we're going to freeze this thread for 10min for new comments - we hope this gives people time to digest."
posted by coffeecat at 9:08 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
Another way to get at what I'm trying to say:
Let's say fire = conflict. The general mod approach seems to assume that getting rid of conflict can be done best by throwing a big bucket of water on the fire (deletions). But that doesn't actually work in this setting - it hurts people, it causes the conflict to fester (I mean, this Metatalk is about something that happened months ago). In a discussion community, in order for people to reduce conflict they need to work through it by listening to each other. It's more of a gradual process of slowly removing fuel from the fire. If you succeed, the community can really grow. I'm not saying it's not a challenge, but that's ideally the job of any moderation.
posted by coffeecat at 9:20 AM on February 16 [4 favorites]
Let's say fire = conflict. The general mod approach seems to assume that getting rid of conflict can be done best by throwing a big bucket of water on the fire (deletions). But that doesn't actually work in this setting - it hurts people, it causes the conflict to fester (I mean, this Metatalk is about something that happened months ago). In a discussion community, in order for people to reduce conflict they need to work through it by listening to each other. It's more of a gradual process of slowly removing fuel from the fire. If you succeed, the community can really grow. I'm not saying it's not a challenge, but that's ideally the job of any moderation.
posted by coffeecat at 9:20 AM on February 16 [4 favorites]
This website is like some kind of vicious puritan.
The level of pyschological and social violence you're all ok with.... as long as it doesn't use (GASP) all caps or (HORroRS) a SWEAR WORD. Because THAT'S a bridge too far.
That original post was VIOLENT against the Black uber driver.
This post is wildly psychologically harmful to DD.
For real, examine your values. The word fuck or some emphatic language is not worse than racism. It's certainly not worse than declaring someone's goddam life expectancy in an idle public thread that you started WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT ARE YOU KIDDING ME
posted by nouvelle-personne at 9:21 AM on February 16 [64 favorites]
The level of pyschological and social violence you're all ok with.... as long as it doesn't use (GASP) all caps or (HORroRS) a SWEAR WORD. Because THAT'S a bridge too far.
That original post was VIOLENT against the Black uber driver.
This post is wildly psychologically harmful to DD.
For real, examine your values. The word fuck or some emphatic language is not worse than racism. It's certainly not worse than declaring someone's goddam life expectancy in an idle public thread that you started WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT ARE YOU KIDDING ME
posted by nouvelle-personne at 9:21 AM on February 16 [64 favorites]
Ugh, fair and an excellent point. I'll use the contact form to ask the mods to edit (even though it's not my post.)
posted by warriorqueen at 9:30 AM on February 16 [3 favorites]
posted by warriorqueen at 9:30 AM on February 16 [3 favorites]
The one somewhat hard and fast rule I am aware of on this site is that responses in AskMetafilter have to be answers to the question that was asked. Rants or commentaries outside the scope of answering the question, no matter how sincerely written or whether or not they are written by someone from an underrepresented group, are not exceptions to this rule. What I saw as a moderation error when this first occurred was not the deletion of the comment that was clearly a commentary rather than an answer, but that is was done silently and without comment. It was essentially “disappeared”. Instead of possibly calming things down by writing something along the lines of “Reminder: all responses in AskMe need to answer the question, if you have issues with the question please take it to Metatalk”, the writer received silent erasure after writting an extremely heartfelt commentary, which I’m sure caused anger and the situation was escalated rather than soothed.
As it relates to the MetaTalk that never left the queue, I’m thinking of the insightful comment former mod rrestless_nomad made the other day about Metatalk really being a space for members to hash out issues together vs. a space for members to communicate with the mods. The insistence from the mods that n-p create the perfectly worded Metatalk before it was allowed to go live instead of just letting whatever she had written fly and allow the community to discuss it together was an own goal. Frankly, it was condescending, the idea that somehow the community would be unable to have a rational discussion about a complicated topic because, heaven forbid, some emotional language may have been involved. This could have been hashed out months ago, instead of being cryptically brought up on the regularly for months if mods actually trusted this community to have a complicated discussion.
Finally, and I don’t know that there is a cure for this last point, I find the current Metafilter user base has a tendency towards extreme thinking, using the worst of recent headlines as the only available outcome, which didn’t help the initial thread. So lots of answers of either “Of course you should call the police, you were KIDNAPPED, SIR” on one end, with “Do not call the police, you are sentencing the driver to death” on the other. Some answerers toning done the heat a few notches may have helped too.
posted by The Gooch at 9:36 AM on February 16 [10 favorites]
As it relates to the MetaTalk that never left the queue, I’m thinking of the insightful comment former mod rrestless_nomad made the other day about Metatalk really being a space for members to hash out issues together vs. a space for members to communicate with the mods. The insistence from the mods that n-p create the perfectly worded Metatalk before it was allowed to go live instead of just letting whatever she had written fly and allow the community to discuss it together was an own goal. Frankly, it was condescending, the idea that somehow the community would be unable to have a rational discussion about a complicated topic because, heaven forbid, some emotional language may have been involved. This could have been hashed out months ago, instead of being cryptically brought up on the regularly for months if mods actually trusted this community to have a complicated discussion.
Finally, and I don’t know that there is a cure for this last point, I find the current Metafilter user base has a tendency towards extreme thinking, using the worst of recent headlines as the only available outcome, which didn’t help the initial thread. So lots of answers of either “Of course you should call the police, you were KIDNAPPED, SIR” on one end, with “Do not call the police, you are sentencing the driver to death” on the other. Some answerers toning done the heat a few notches may have helped too.
posted by The Gooch at 9:36 AM on February 16 [10 favorites]
I mean, I'm not sure how productive it is to make a Metatalk just about this one thread because it makes it seem like what happened there was a rarity, whereas I'd say it's part of a larger pattern of how mod's deal with conflict - they try to extinguish it as quickly as possible (doesn't work) instead of trying to address the conflict by guiding users to work through it collectively.
A similar instance that comes to mind was a user asked a question that boiled down to "How do I manage an autistic employee" and an autistic person responded by telling them that their approach was wrong, there was some back and forth, and eventually the mods deleted one of the autistic user's answers that personally, I found to be very enlightening to read as an observer, but I guess it upset the Asker too much? Seeing that made me distrust the moderation ethics here.
posted by coffeecat at 9:51 AM on February 16 [13 favorites]
A similar instance that comes to mind was a user asked a question that boiled down to "How do I manage an autistic employee" and an autistic person responded by telling them that their approach was wrong, there was some back and forth, and eventually the mods deleted one of the autistic user's answers that personally, I found to be very enlightening to read as an observer, but I guess it upset the Asker too much? Seeing that made me distrust the moderation ethics here.
posted by coffeecat at 9:51 AM on February 16 [13 favorites]
Hey, catching up this thread and a few emails about it, so please give me a few minutes to digest all that, thank you.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 9:54 AM on February 16 [1 favorite]
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 9:54 AM on February 16 [1 favorite]
I think moderators squelching any conflict is a problem, but I also think that the question of what to do when a thread in AskMe is full of racism or other oppressions and someone points it out is worth asking, too. Simply falling back on procedural norms (like, "Well, they're not answering the question so delete it") is perpetuating a racist societal status quo, and it's a problem.
posted by lapis at 9:55 AM on February 16 [10 favorites]
posted by lapis at 9:55 AM on February 16 [10 favorites]
And because he repeatedly comes off extremely badly
Wow.
If you have reason to tell d_d, to his face and in context, what you are thinking about him, that's your business.
But this "everybody talked about you behind your back, and in conclusion we looks down on you" setup comes off pretty nasty to me! Presenting it as a way to be fair to d_d is not helping. Count me out of the whole judging.
posted by away for regrooving at 9:58 AM on February 16 [11 favorites]
Wow.
If you have reason to tell d_d, to his face and in context, what you are thinking about him, that's your business.
But this "everybody talked about you behind your back, and in conclusion we looks down on you" setup comes off pretty nasty to me! Presenting it as a way to be fair to d_d is not helping. Count me out of the whole judging.
posted by away for regrooving at 9:58 AM on February 16 [11 favorites]
which might be what Brandon was suggesting he might have worked with n-p to do
Clarity on this would be great for the what went wrong with the moderation here post mortem. Because an ask to remove details personalizing this about d_d seems reasonable, but that is not what the narrative Brandon shared says. Mods told n-p to be less combative.
Since the comment was reinstated and the only additional commentary n_p put on their MeTa was the paragraph beginning with "Never mind, I'll write it for you. "One comment deleted, because white feelings are more important than Black safety." it certainly reads to me like the part the moderators felt was "combative " was the part that chastised them.
posted by phunniemee at 10:07 AM on February 16 [14 favorites]
Clarity on this would be great for the what went wrong with the moderation here post mortem. Because an ask to remove details personalizing this about d_d seems reasonable, but that is not what the narrative Brandon shared says. Mods told n-p to be less combative.
Since the comment was reinstated and the only additional commentary n_p put on their MeTa was the paragraph beginning with "Never mind, I'll write it for you. "One comment deleted, because white feelings are more important than Black safety." it certainly reads to me like the part the moderators felt was "combative " was the part that chastised them.
posted by phunniemee at 10:07 AM on February 16 [14 favorites]
- intersectionality is hard (Deaf vs. Black)
what, this is not rock ‘em sock ‘em oppression wrassling to be judged by white hearing people
posted by knock my sock and i'll clean your clock at 10:26 AM on February 16 [6 favorites]
what, this is not rock ‘em sock ‘em oppression wrassling to be judged by white hearing people
posted by knock my sock and i'll clean your clock at 10:26 AM on February 16 [6 favorites]
Sorry, that was poor wording for sure.
posted by warriorqueen at 10:40 AM on February 16 [1 favorite]
posted by warriorqueen at 10:40 AM on February 16 [1 favorite]
And was the opposite of my intention - I meant the framing of vs was bad. Intersectionality is doing too much lifting in my sentence.
posted by warriorqueen at 10:42 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
posted by warriorqueen at 10:42 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
I think moderators squelching any conflict is a problem, but I also think that the question of what to do when a thread in AskMe is full of racism or other oppressions and someone points it out is worth asking, too.
For sure! But I still think it's probably more productive to talk about the broader problem of what to do when a user (or users) are making valid points but something has (for reasons rooted in real structural inequalities) driven them to a place of "fight response," how should mods respond? Rather than just pick apart this one old thread. Because this comes up a lot.
Another example was that thread from the Oscars when Will Smith slapped Chris Rock. Users who had experienced or witnessed domestic violence were making valid points, but I wouldn't say that thread went well, to put it mildly. When it was particularly fighty, it was also moving very fast - no doubt hard for the mods to keep up. Deletions happened, but it didn't really solve anything.
So again I'll ask - how hard would it be for mods to temporarily freeze a thread when it's reached a certain threshold for conflict? Say just 5min, to give everyone a chance to cool down a little, and remember every user is a person with various struggles none of us know about, etc. (This is one idea - I'm sure other users will have other ideas)
Finally, I'll just throw out - in her book, The Art of Gathering, professional facilitator Priya Parker makes a case for good heat:
"You may have learned, as I did, never to talk about sex politics or religion at the dinner table. It's a good rule in that it preserves harmony. That's its intention. But it strips away a core ingredient of meaning, which is heat, burning relevance. The best gatherings learn to cultivate good controversy by creating the conditions for it, because human connection is as threatened by unhealthy peace as by unhealthy conflict."
So yeah, I do think this site needs to get better at cultivating good controversy - right now we have a site filled with unhealthy peace and unhealthy conflict - as well as some great discussion too! But the unhealthy peace/conflict is getting in the way of the good stuff, and driving users away.
posted by coffeecat at 10:45 AM on February 16 [5 favorites]
For sure! But I still think it's probably more productive to talk about the broader problem of what to do when a user (or users) are making valid points but something has (for reasons rooted in real structural inequalities) driven them to a place of "fight response," how should mods respond? Rather than just pick apart this one old thread. Because this comes up a lot.
Another example was that thread from the Oscars when Will Smith slapped Chris Rock. Users who had experienced or witnessed domestic violence were making valid points, but I wouldn't say that thread went well, to put it mildly. When it was particularly fighty, it was also moving very fast - no doubt hard for the mods to keep up. Deletions happened, but it didn't really solve anything.
So again I'll ask - how hard would it be for mods to temporarily freeze a thread when it's reached a certain threshold for conflict? Say just 5min, to give everyone a chance to cool down a little, and remember every user is a person with various struggles none of us know about, etc. (This is one idea - I'm sure other users will have other ideas)
Finally, I'll just throw out - in her book, The Art of Gathering, professional facilitator Priya Parker makes a case for good heat:
"You may have learned, as I did, never to talk about sex politics or religion at the dinner table. It's a good rule in that it preserves harmony. That's its intention. But it strips away a core ingredient of meaning, which is heat, burning relevance. The best gatherings learn to cultivate good controversy by creating the conditions for it, because human connection is as threatened by unhealthy peace as by unhealthy conflict."
So yeah, I do think this site needs to get better at cultivating good controversy - right now we have a site filled with unhealthy peace and unhealthy conflict - as well as some great discussion too! But the unhealthy peace/conflict is getting in the way of the good stuff, and driving users away.
posted by coffeecat at 10:45 AM on February 16 [5 favorites]
Ok, caught up.
I'm leaving the original MeTa wording as is, because comments have already reacted to what was written, so changing it now would make things more confusing.
(in skimming the timeline, did n_p receive the 'no' before closing their account?)
There was only a minute between the posting of the Meta and closing of the account, so no. Which doesn't excuse anything, just making the factual timeline clear.
this is an Ask where I think a proactive, early well-timed mod note "Hey everyone please be aware of the racialized context of employment and policing in the US" might have helped a lot. It's not going to be the case that the mods will catch all of those but this was a missed opportunity.
Agreed but also want to encourage members to leave similar notes, even if it seems as though it goes against the AskMe rules or guidelines. Mods can't be everywhere at once and reminding others of community guidelines is generally fine. If it's a problem in a particular thread, we can deal with that.
I mention this not as some means of escaping accountability, but there was a similar situation in another thread. One member noted that another member was seemingly going against guidelines. That exchange between members went fine, where the person doing the offensive thing agreed with the callout and the thread moved along fine. From a moderator perspective I might drop another note reminding people of the Content Policy and citing what rules were broken, but that's about it.
So again I'll ask - how hard would it be for mods to temporarily freeze a thread when it's reached a certain threshold for conflict?
It's currently impossible to pause a thread on teh front page or in Ask. Metatalk is the only place on the site that allows the closing of a thread and reopening it. This works really well when people are trying organize things or trade stuff.
But I still think it's probably more productive to talk about the broader problem of what to do when a user (or users) are making valid points but something has (for reasons rooted in structural inequalities) driven them to a place of "fight response," how should mods respond?
When members start yelling at each other, that generally escalates things where at least two people (if not more) are yelling at each other. It ceases to matter who's right and becomes about "you're yelling at me". Yes, there can be a lot embedded and unconscious racism, sexism, and all the other isms in that. But nobody likes to yelled at, so we do discourage members from doing that to each other and will continue to advise that it not be done, even as we leave notes instead of deleting things as a first step.
(I tried to MeMail Brandon this but the links get lost. Took me a moment to find a real email address.
MeFiMail is a great tool for sending a lot of links. Sending things to my personal address is absolutely not advised, because it ended up in the spam folder and I would not have looked in there had it not been mentioned here.
Please use the Contact Us link. It goes to every mod, which is important when I'm not on duty (which is today) and other moderators.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:59 AM on February 16
I'm leaving the original MeTa wording as is, because comments have already reacted to what was written, so changing it now would make things more confusing.
(in skimming the timeline, did n_p receive the 'no' before closing their account?)
There was only a minute between the posting of the Meta and closing of the account, so no. Which doesn't excuse anything, just making the factual timeline clear.
this is an Ask where I think a proactive, early well-timed mod note "Hey everyone please be aware of the racialized context of employment and policing in the US" might have helped a lot. It's not going to be the case that the mods will catch all of those but this was a missed opportunity.
Agreed but also want to encourage members to leave similar notes, even if it seems as though it goes against the AskMe rules or guidelines. Mods can't be everywhere at once and reminding others of community guidelines is generally fine. If it's a problem in a particular thread, we can deal with that.
I mention this not as some means of escaping accountability, but there was a similar situation in another thread. One member noted that another member was seemingly going against guidelines. That exchange between members went fine, where the person doing the offensive thing agreed with the callout and the thread moved along fine. From a moderator perspective I might drop another note reminding people of the Content Policy and citing what rules were broken, but that's about it.
So again I'll ask - how hard would it be for mods to temporarily freeze a thread when it's reached a certain threshold for conflict?
It's currently impossible to pause a thread on teh front page or in Ask. Metatalk is the only place on the site that allows the closing of a thread and reopening it. This works really well when people are trying organize things or trade stuff.
But I still think it's probably more productive to talk about the broader problem of what to do when a user (or users) are making valid points but something has (for reasons rooted in structural inequalities) driven them to a place of "fight response," how should mods respond?
When members start yelling at each other, that generally escalates things where at least two people (if not more) are yelling at each other. It ceases to matter who's right and becomes about "you're yelling at me". Yes, there can be a lot embedded and unconscious racism, sexism, and all the other isms in that. But nobody likes to yelled at, so we do discourage members from doing that to each other and will continue to advise that it not be done, even as we leave notes instead of deleting things as a first step.
(I tried to MeMail Brandon this but the links get lost. Took me a moment to find a real email address.
MeFiMail is a great tool for sending a lot of links. Sending things to my personal address is absolutely not advised, because it ended up in the spam folder and I would not have looked in there had it not been mentioned here.
Please use the Contact Us link. It goes to every mod, which is important when I'm not on duty (which is today) and other moderators.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:59 AM on February 16
I'm fairly annoyed that (what appears to be from a cursory look at the profile, I didn't like stalk his history or anything) a cis white dude decided to unnecessarily relitigate a complex intersectional situation without, apparently, bothering to check with either of the people who were directly involved, neither of whom is a cis white dude.
i mean, these are real people (as nouvelle personne eloquently and rightfully angrily explains) and she should not have to come in to a second MeTa to explain shit.
The situation sucked. The original conversation on Metafilter got real ugly. And now it's being rehashed why? This is just one more example of why POC and LGBTQ+ people often do not feel welcome in this community. We are, I repeat, real people with real feelings.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:02 AM on February 16 [23 favorites]
i mean, these are real people (as nouvelle personne eloquently and rightfully angrily explains) and she should not have to come in to a second MeTa to explain shit.
The situation sucked. The original conversation on Metafilter got real ugly. And now it's being rehashed why? This is just one more example of why POC and LGBTQ+ people often do not feel welcome in this community. We are, I repeat, real people with real feelings.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:02 AM on February 16 [23 favorites]
No one on MetaFilter can yell at each other. It's text. There's no volume the writer can set for their comment that's higher than the prevailing conversation. All caps might stand out more but it's still not actually "yelling." A writer might use all-caps in ways that they might use speaking more slowly for emphasis, rather than more loudly, for example.
People can (and obviously do) interpret someone as yelling at them. We need to keep in mind, however, that that's always an interpretation, and that conscious and unconscious bias are really quick to sneak into interpretations.
posted by lapis at 11:07 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
People can (and obviously do) interpret someone as yelling at them. We need to keep in mind, however, that that's always an interpretation, and that conscious and unconscious bias are really quick to sneak into interpretations.
posted by lapis at 11:07 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
It's currently impossible to pause a thread on the front page or in Ask. Metatalk is the only place on the site that allows the closing of a thread and reopening it.
Impossible because of the tech/code, or just impossible because it's against guidelines?
posted by coffeecat at 11:14 AM on February 16
Impossible because of the tech/code, or just impossible because it's against guidelines?
posted by coffeecat at 11:14 AM on February 16
I mean, writing in caps is pretty universally understood as yelling and has been for at least as long as the Internet's been publicly available.
the question is, are POC or LGBTQ+ people or people with disabilities allowed to yell sometimes when we feel we're being attacked? Pretty clear to me is that the answer on Metafilter is "well, there's no RULE against it but we'll definitely be judging you for it."
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:16 AM on February 16 [10 favorites]
the question is, are POC or LGBTQ+ people or people with disabilities allowed to yell sometimes when we feel we're being attacked? Pretty clear to me is that the answer on Metafilter is "well, there's no RULE against it but we'll definitely be judging you for it."
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:16 AM on February 16 [10 favorites]
a) "There was only a minute between the posting of the Meta and closing of the account, so no."
This is missing a negation, isn't it? I know I harp on proofreading a lot, but it's always things like this, that completely flip the meaning around. Please have more respect for the users.
b) "Agreed but also want to encourage members to leave similar notes, even if it seems as though it goes against the AskMe rules or guidelines."
Huh? Why would people not expect this to be deleted? Policy should reflect moderator behavior, moderator behavior should reflect policy. This is a gap moderators should work to close, not actively widen.
Finally, characterizing all this as "When members start yelling at each other" seems to be, yet again, a dismissive characterization of what's going on, or at least a prioritization of decorum over other community values around diversity. As phunniemee points out, all this happened against a backdrop of moderation failures that seem to have stepped from similar choices.
posted by sagc at 11:27 AM on February 16 [4 favorites]
This is missing a negation, isn't it? I know I harp on proofreading a lot, but it's always things like this, that completely flip the meaning around. Please have more respect for the users.
b) "Agreed but also want to encourage members to leave similar notes, even if it seems as though it goes against the AskMe rules or guidelines."
Huh? Why would people not expect this to be deleted? Policy should reflect moderator behavior, moderator behavior should reflect policy. This is a gap moderators should work to close, not actively widen.
Finally, characterizing all this as "When members start yelling at each other" seems to be, yet again, a dismissive characterization of what's going on, or at least a prioritization of decorum over other community values around diversity. As phunniemee points out, all this happened against a backdrop of moderation failures that seem to have stepped from similar choices.
posted by sagc at 11:27 AM on February 16 [4 favorites]
And now it's being rehashed why?
Well at least n-p is back? Did we take a bad situation that caused a member to button and hash it out to the point they unbuttoned just to say "wtf come on people"
It's a mistake to say this is all on the mods, maybe take a step back to determine what outcomes people want
Lately MeTa looks and feels like what a site would be when enough people like to engage with acrimony and grar on the daily. Maybe you're looking for improvement or to Save MeFi, but is this working?
posted by ginger.beef at 11:27 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
Well at least n-p is back? Did we take a bad situation that caused a member to button and hash it out to the point they unbuttoned just to say "wtf come on people"
It's a mistake to say this is all on the mods, maybe take a step back to determine what outcomes people want
Lately MeTa looks and feels like what a site would be when enough people like to engage with acrimony and grar on the daily. Maybe you're looking for improvement or to Save MeFi, but is this working?
posted by ginger.beef at 11:27 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
I don't think it's working, but I have hopes it's a wave that will pass that's sort of like pent up frustration. Not that people shouldn't be thoughtful about it anyway when possible.
posted by warriorqueen at 11:36 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
posted by warriorqueen at 11:36 AM on February 16 [2 favorites]
a) "There was only a minute between the posting of the Meta and closing of the account, so no."
This is missing a negation, isn't it?
The original question was:
(in skimming the timeline, did n_p receive the 'no' before closing their account?)
...So I think that there is no error in proofreading or missing negation here:
Q: Did n-p receive the mod response before closing their account? A: Since there was only a minute between the two events, no, they did not receive the response in that interim.
posted by axiom at 11:51 AM on February 16 [5 favorites]
This is missing a negation, isn't it?
The original question was:
(in skimming the timeline, did n_p receive the 'no' before closing their account?)
...So I think that there is no error in proofreading or missing negation here:
Q: Did n-p receive the mod response before closing their account? A: Since there was only a minute between the two events, no, they did not receive the response in that interim.
posted by axiom at 11:51 AM on February 16 [5 favorites]
a bit of wisdom from the Conflict Resolution world:
you cannot negotiate the past.
I'm not sure that's what's happening here, but if it is, don't expect positive results.
Something happened that hurt people. I can't be undone.
Search for common ground and a better future. Focus on what is desirable and possible now - you can't negotiate the past.
posted by philip-random at 11:53 AM on February 16 [7 favorites]
you cannot negotiate the past.
I'm not sure that's what's happening here, but if it is, don't expect positive results.
Something happened that hurt people. I can't be undone.
Search for common ground and a better future. Focus on what is desirable and possible now - you can't negotiate the past.
posted by philip-random at 11:53 AM on February 16 [7 favorites]
nouvelle-personne, truly glad to see you are back. I am glad you took the time and trouble to comment.
I want to quote and repeat your comments, as to me they are very, very important. As one of the two people made a topic of this thread they are what is worth reading and taking on board in this thread.
nouvelle-personne wrote
You guys think it's ok to write a post saying someone is "dying"????
Ok so wait. You people actually think this thread is ok? THIS made it past the hallowed queue?
He has a cancer diagnosis, is undergoing treatment, is still up and about taking ubers and visiting friends, but you think it's not mentally destabilizing for a person, and incredibly anxiety provoking, to say multiple times that he's "dying"?
He's not fucking "dying", he's ill, and how fucking dare you write about someone that way????? How callous can you be????
THIS IS NOT AN INTELLECTUAL EXERCISE
Y'all are FUCKING MESSED UP
EDIT THE FUCKING POST NOW AND APOLOGIZE TO DD. What the FUCKING FUCK
posted by nouvelle-personne at 9:03 AM on February 16
[25 favorites −] Favorite added
And later:
This website is like some kind of vicious puritan.
The level of pyschological and social violence you're all ok with.... as long as it doesn't use (GASP) all caps or (HORroRS) a SWEAR WORD. Because THAT'S a bridge too far.
That original post was VIOLENT against the Black uber driver.
This post is wildly psychologically harmful to DD.
For real, examine your values. The word fuck or some emphatic language is not worse than racism. It's certainly not worse than declaring someone's goddam life expectancy in an idle public thread that you started WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT ARE YOU KIDDING ME
posted by nouvelle-personne at 9:21 AM on February 16
[18 favorites −]
My suggestion is to take nouvelle-personne's opinion serious and give it the weigth it deserves.
posted by 15L06 at 12:00 PM on February 16 [16 favorites]
I want to quote and repeat your comments, as to me they are very, very important. As one of the two people made a topic of this thread they are what is worth reading and taking on board in this thread.
nouvelle-personne wrote
You guys think it's ok to write a post saying someone is "dying"????
Ok so wait. You people actually think this thread is ok? THIS made it past the hallowed queue?
He has a cancer diagnosis, is undergoing treatment, is still up and about taking ubers and visiting friends, but you think it's not mentally destabilizing for a person, and incredibly anxiety provoking, to say multiple times that he's "dying"?
He's not fucking "dying", he's ill, and how fucking dare you write about someone that way????? How callous can you be????
THIS IS NOT AN INTELLECTUAL EXERCISE
Y'all are FUCKING MESSED UP
EDIT THE FUCKING POST NOW AND APOLOGIZE TO DD. What the FUCKING FUCK
posted by nouvelle-personne at 9:03 AM on February 16
[25 favorites −] Favorite added
And later:
This website is like some kind of vicious puritan.
The level of pyschological and social violence you're all ok with.... as long as it doesn't use (GASP) all caps or (HORroRS) a SWEAR WORD. Because THAT'S a bridge too far.
That original post was VIOLENT against the Black uber driver.
This post is wildly psychologically harmful to DD.
For real, examine your values. The word fuck or some emphatic language is not worse than racism. It's certainly not worse than declaring someone's goddam life expectancy in an idle public thread that you started WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT ARE YOU KIDDING ME
posted by nouvelle-personne at 9:21 AM on February 16
[18 favorites −]
My suggestion is to take nouvelle-personne's opinion serious and give it the weigth it deserves.
posted by 15L06 at 12:00 PM on February 16 [16 favorites]
It's a mistake to say this is all on the mods, maybe take a step back to determine what outcomes people want
Sure. I want this thread closed because it was a dick move: unintentionally, I am perfectly willing to assume, but nevertheless a dick move that serves no purpose.
Unless n-p or DD would like to comment further, I don't know what more discussion is going to do productively.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:27 PM on February 16 [6 favorites]
Sure. I want this thread closed because it was a dick move: unintentionally, I am perfectly willing to assume, but nevertheless a dick move that serves no purpose.
Unless n-p or DD would like to comment further, I don't know what more discussion is going to do productively.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:27 PM on February 16 [6 favorites]
axiom, as far as I'm aware, there was no "posting of the Meta" that occurred.
posted by sagc at 12:37 PM on February 16 [1 favorite]
posted by sagc at 12:37 PM on February 16 [1 favorite]
So far, the evidence offered still seems to suggest they mostly followed protocol, but made important though small errors that they then fixed as best they could.
Yikes
posted by ftrtts at 12:50 PM on February 16 [7 favorites]
Yikes
posted by ftrtts at 12:50 PM on February 16 [7 favorites]
The way this post talks about dd makes me cringe. I, personally, would not want the community weighing in on a post that describes me in that way and I don't think anyone would.
Edit it, and apologize, like nouvelle-personne said. Please.
posted by tiny frying pan at 12:52 PM on February 16 [20 favorites]
Edit it, and apologize, like nouvelle-personne said. Please.
posted by tiny frying pan at 12:52 PM on February 16 [20 favorites]
I posted this at Brandon’s prompting and with his specific expression of thanks—he invited a post on it and I told him I’d do it.
Fair.
posted by tivalasvegas at 1:07 PM on February 16 [1 favorite]
Fair.
posted by tivalasvegas at 1:07 PM on February 16 [1 favorite]
Sure, days O' old, one wasn't notified they've been hauled into meta. Someone posts 'meta'. A courtesy if you will.
the best of my knowledge, I do not recall a metatalk thread that relitigates, if you will, an ongoing issue with moderation using the thread in question with personal details of members as part of their thesis.
I also think it's fair, tiva but the onus is upon the op for the desired feedback, simply, could this thread have been written without the personal details.
posted by clavdivs at 2:20 PM on February 16 [3 favorites]
the best of my knowledge, I do not recall a metatalk thread that relitigates, if you will, an ongoing issue with moderation using the thread in question with personal details of members as part of their thesis.
I also think it's fair, tiva but the onus is upon the op for the desired feedback, simply, could this thread have been written without the personal details.
posted by clavdivs at 2:20 PM on February 16 [3 favorites]
I posted this at Brandon’s prompting and with his specific expression of thanks...The framing is mine, and he initially counseled against including d_d..."
So wait, like Brandon called you up and said "hey buddy, why don't you post a thread about that one thing nearly everyone agrees was handled so incredibly bad"? And you were like "Sure" and then he was like "thanks, you're a pal but maybe don't put in kind of gross details about that one user" and you were like "no can do friend" and here we are?
posted by donnagirl at 2:20 PM on February 16 [5 favorites]
So wait, like Brandon called you up and said "hey buddy, why don't you post a thread about that one thing nearly everyone agrees was handled so incredibly bad"? And you were like "Sure" and then he was like "thanks, you're a pal but maybe don't put in kind of gross details about that one user" and you were like "no can do friend" and here we are?
posted by donnagirl at 2:20 PM on February 16 [5 favorites]
This exchange here, I think.
Not great, Brandon!
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:24 PM on February 16 [3 favorites]
Not great, Brandon!
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:24 PM on February 16 [3 favorites]
Serious question: Wasn't the BIPOC Committee created to help address complaints just like NP's? If so, why weren't they involved?
posted by Violet Blue at 2:47 PM on February 16 [14 favorites]
posted by Violet Blue at 2:47 PM on February 16 [14 favorites]
Another great question.
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:53 PM on February 16 [6 favorites]
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:53 PM on February 16 [6 favorites]
Serious question: Wasn't the BIPOC Committee created to help address complaints just like NP's? If so, why weren't they involved?
In a way they were, since the BIPOC committee is half mods.
posted by phunniemee at 2:54 PM on February 16 [5 favorites]
In a way they were, since the BIPOC committee is half mods.
posted by phunniemee at 2:54 PM on February 16 [5 favorites]
The goal was to work her
shuddddderrrrr
Can you please not? Jesus Christ.
I know, I realize: there's a typo. There is, as there very often is, a word left out. "Work with her," probably? "Work on her," more skincrawlingly? It doesn't really matter which word you elided. Expressing the goal more precisely would not have made the goal less disgustingly patronizing. She didn't need to be worked. She'd done her work; she'd done her work well. It was your work to look carefully at her work, appreciate that work, see that it was good work, and allow it to remain so that it could have its good effect.
posted by Don Pepino at 3:21 PM on February 16 [16 favorites]
shuddddderrrrr
Can you please not? Jesus Christ.
I know, I realize: there's a typo. There is, as there very often is, a word left out. "Work with her," probably? "Work on her," more skincrawlingly? It doesn't really matter which word you elided. Expressing the goal more precisely would not have made the goal less disgustingly patronizing. She didn't need to be worked. She'd done her work; she'd done her work well. It was your work to look carefully at her work, appreciate that work, see that it was good work, and allow it to remain so that it could have its good effect.
posted by Don Pepino at 3:21 PM on February 16 [16 favorites]
Don Pepino, no offense intended. But that seems like a very big overreaction to what you, yourself, admit is a typo? I am 99% sure it was meant to be "work with her" - Brandon (also no offense) is not the best typist. I don't think "work with her" is offensive?
posted by Glinn at 3:37 PM on February 16 [7 favorites]
posted by Glinn at 3:37 PM on February 16 [7 favorites]
Saying "I am also glad nouvelle_person is back" is not much of a contribution to this thread, but it's true, so I'm saying it.
posted by Lemkin at 3:39 PM on February 16 [7 favorites]
posted by Lemkin at 3:39 PM on February 16 [7 favorites]
But that seems like a very big overreaction to what you, yourself, admit is a typo?
Hard disagree. It's a well-described, perfectly reasonable reaction to a continual lack of attention to detail when BB is communicating with us. Since his job is to be a liaison between us and the rest of the staff, being able to understand and trust what you see him communicate is super important. Many of his comments contain typos, sentences that don't resolve, and self-contradictions. For having communication as a core job duty, BB is startlingly bad at communicating what he means.
posted by donnagirl at 4:03 PM on February 16 [13 favorites]
Hard disagree. It's a well-described, perfectly reasonable reaction to a continual lack of attention to detail when BB is communicating with us. Since his job is to be a liaison between us and the rest of the staff, being able to understand and trust what you see him communicate is super important. Many of his comments contain typos, sentences that don't resolve, and self-contradictions. For having communication as a core job duty, BB is startlingly bad at communicating what he means.
posted by donnagirl at 4:03 PM on February 16 [13 favorites]
++1 glad to see n-p back here.
posted by Dashy at 4:08 PM on February 16 [7 favorites]
posted by Dashy at 4:08 PM on February 16 [7 favorites]
Sure. I want this thread closed because it was a dick move: unintentionally, I am perfectly willing to assume, but nevertheless a dick move that serves no purpose.
Agreed.
For those of you expressing happiness at seeing n-p "back": read the two comments she's made in this thread again. Actually read them, don't read into them. Without presuming to speak for her, do you honestly think she's going to stick around at this point? Why? What exactly about how this thread has gone is helping her want to do that?
This thread should never have existed. It's a horrible precedent to set, it's gone as badly as I feared it would have, and it sure as hell isn't solving whatever problem it may have wanted to solve (which still isn't clear!).
posted by pdb at 4:16 PM on February 16 [6 favorites]
Agreed.
For those of you expressing happiness at seeing n-p "back": read the two comments she's made in this thread again. Actually read them, don't read into them. Without presuming to speak for her, do you honestly think she's going to stick around at this point? Why? What exactly about how this thread has gone is helping her want to do that?
This thread should never have existed. It's a horrible precedent to set, it's gone as badly as I feared it would have, and it sure as hell isn't solving whatever problem it may have wanted to solve (which still isn't clear!).
posted by pdb at 4:16 PM on February 16 [6 favorites]
That thread apparently kept d_d from taking actions which could have badly harmed the Uber driver and wouldn't have helped d_d or anyone else as near as I can tell.
And n_p's comments were essential to that outcome.
A whole lotta things went wrong and were wrong with it, but I saw it when there were no comments yet and I thought it could not fail to be a disaster in a bunch of ways and could not bear to follow it.
I can't help being a little impressed that it didn't turn out worse, and I think n_p deserves credit for that and so does BB.
posted by jamjam at 4:18 PM on February 16 [1 favorite]
And n_p's comments were essential to that outcome.
A whole lotta things went wrong and were wrong with it, but I saw it when there were no comments yet and I thought it could not fail to be a disaster in a bunch of ways and could not bear to follow it.
I can't help being a little impressed that it didn't turn out worse, and I think n_p deserves credit for that and so does BB.
posted by jamjam at 4:18 PM on February 16 [1 favorite]
Impossible because of the tech/code, or just impossible because it's against guidelines?
Because of code, it's literally not a feature except for Metatalk threads.
In a way they were, since the BIPOC committee is half mods.
I don't believe so, it's just five people last time I checked, two of whom were mods.
This exchange here, I think.
Not great, Brandon!
If saying thank you after someone make a MeTa to address issues is wrong, I'm going to be wrong a lot.
Otherwise are folks agreeing this is worth closing at this point or is there something more about this incident that needs to be addressed?
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:25 PM on February 16
Because of code, it's literally not a feature except for Metatalk threads.
In a way they were, since the BIPOC committee is half mods.
I don't believe so, it's just five people last time I checked, two of whom were mods.
This exchange here, I think.
Not great, Brandon!
If saying thank you after someone make a MeTa to address issues is wrong, I'm going to be wrong a lot.
Otherwise are folks agreeing this is worth closing at this point or is there something more about this incident that needs to be addressed?
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:25 PM on February 16
I don't believe so, it's just five people last time I checked, two of whom were mods
Forgive me my egregious oversight, as of 2.5 weeks prior to d_d's question, the BIPOC board was half mods.
posted by phunniemee at 4:31 PM on February 16 [13 favorites]
Forgive me my egregious oversight, as of 2.5 weeks prior to d_d's question, the BIPOC board was half mods.
posted by phunniemee at 4:31 PM on February 16 [13 favorites]
A User: You made 100 typos in just this thread.
A Mod: I don't believe so, I just made 97 typos in this thread last time I checked.
posted by snofoam at 4:39 PM on February 16 [15 favorites]
A Mod: I don't believe so, I just made 97 typos in this thread last time I checked.
posted by snofoam at 4:39 PM on February 16 [15 favorites]
Forgive me my egregious oversight, as of 2.5 weeks prior to d_d's question, the BIPOC board was half mods.
Checking my email records, looks like I resigned / left from the BIPOC board on November 19, 2024. I could have sworn there was a public comment about this, but if not, then here's one now.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:46 PM on February 16
Checking my email records, looks like I resigned / left from the BIPOC board on November 19, 2024. I could have sworn there was a public comment about this, but if not, then here's one now.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:46 PM on February 16
The public comment is what I linked to in the comment of mine that you're quoting.
posted by phunniemee at 4:48 PM on February 16 [8 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 4:48 PM on February 16 [8 favorites]
That AskMe thread was MetaFilter at its very worst and perhaps a reflection of the US bias that understandably exists here. Someone asked a question about a bizarre interaction they had and a bunch of armchair warriors leap to their keyboards demanding that the police be called with cries of 'kidnapping' and similar nonsense, when it was clear to even the most casual observer that there was not the slightest whiff of criminal or any form of harmful intent. I've observed over a long time here that people often jump to 'sue them into oblivion' or 'call the police' (or both) as a catch-all solution where someone feels even the slightest bit scared or threatened.
I don't live in the US and I do live somewhere where racial issues are barely even a thing in most people's daily lives (not to say they don't exist) and it was crystal clear to me that calling the police in this situation was the absolute worst thing anyone could do and would literally put a person's life at risk. It was obvious to me that calling the police, at the very best, would leave a person already at risk every single day from being targeted by police with a record of 'alleged' criminal behaviour that would follow them forever. While I did advise against doing that, I wish, in retrospect, I had done so much more strongly. So many people here claim to be allies to all the minority groups, but so many people jumped in to suggest a black person be put directly in the sights of police for nothing more than an embarrassing incident that could have happened to anyone. In that thread, many members of MetaFilter showed their true face.
Yes, the moderators fucked up big-time in that thread. Every person that recommended calling the police also fucked up big-time. Only dubious_dude knows what actually made them decide not to call the police, but I'm confident nouvelle-personne's advice pushed them that way. Re-reading that thread, I don't know that anyone else was being clear enough to get through the 'CALL THE POLICE RIGHT NOW' messages that were overwhelming the thread (me included). We all fucked up and it was at lest mostly through the intervention of nouvelle-personne that a person already no doubt tormented by the most embarrassing night of their life didn't get their life tossed in the bin.
Nothing can change what happened in that thread, for sure. But there are things we can do to not have it happen again.
posted by dg at 4:52 PM on February 16 [22 favorites]
I don't live in the US and I do live somewhere where racial issues are barely even a thing in most people's daily lives (not to say they don't exist) and it was crystal clear to me that calling the police in this situation was the absolute worst thing anyone could do and would literally put a person's life at risk. It was obvious to me that calling the police, at the very best, would leave a person already at risk every single day from being targeted by police with a record of 'alleged' criminal behaviour that would follow them forever. While I did advise against doing that, I wish, in retrospect, I had done so much more strongly. So many people here claim to be allies to all the minority groups, but so many people jumped in to suggest a black person be put directly in the sights of police for nothing more than an embarrassing incident that could have happened to anyone. In that thread, many members of MetaFilter showed their true face.
Yes, the moderators fucked up big-time in that thread. Every person that recommended calling the police also fucked up big-time. Only dubious_dude knows what actually made them decide not to call the police, but I'm confident nouvelle-personne's advice pushed them that way. Re-reading that thread, I don't know that anyone else was being clear enough to get through the 'CALL THE POLICE RIGHT NOW' messages that were overwhelming the thread (me included). We all fucked up and it was at lest mostly through the intervention of nouvelle-personne that a person already no doubt tormented by the most embarrassing night of their life didn't get their life tossed in the bin.
Nothing can change what happened in that thread, for sure. But there are things we can do to not have it happen again.
- Members, before proferring your advice on AskMe, read the fucking question. Make sure you know what the context is and what actually happened. Think about the possible ramifications of your advice. In this case, I would hope those advocating involving the police would, given even a modicum of thought, realise telling the police a black man kidnapped you when he didn't has potentially terrible consequences. Be a critical friend - point out the consequences if someone else gives clearly dangerous advice. I see people here in this thread putting more effort into arguing over what was clearly a typo than people were putting in to counter dangerous advice in the AskMe thread.
- Moderators - when someone posts something that is as fraught with risk as this was, fucking do something immediately. Delete the question if you have to, but at least put a note in place pointing out the risk and then don't fucking delete someone's urgent and critical advice just because it's a little shouty (being shouty was absolutely justified, BTW). Stop hiding behind so-called policy (most of which either doesn't exist or is secret squirrel bullshit) and step up and manage threads. Use your common sense and common decency a bit more and you won't need to make so many excuses.
posted by dg at 4:52 PM on February 16 [22 favorites]
Without presuming to speak for her, do you honestly think she's going to stick around at this point? Why? What exactly about how this thread has gone is helping her want to
Um, vocal support for her and her contributions? Sorry if that seems naive. Just trying to ally.
posted by Dashy at 5:44 PM on February 16 [4 favorites]
Um, vocal support for her and her contributions? Sorry if that seems naive. Just trying to ally.
posted by Dashy at 5:44 PM on February 16 [4 favorites]
You know, the kind of support she didn't get before.
posted by Dashy at 5:54 PM on February 16 [7 favorites]
posted by Dashy at 5:54 PM on February 16 [7 favorites]
> BB is startlingly bad at communicating what he means.
remember when we thought loup was bad at communicating with us? #MissMeYet
posted by glonous keming at 6:21 PM on February 16 [4 favorites]
remember when we thought loup was bad at communicating with us? #MissMeYet
posted by glonous keming at 6:21 PM on February 16 [4 favorites]
For those of you expressing happiness at seeing n-p "back": read the two comments she's made in this thread again. Actually read them, don't read into them. Without presuming to speak for her, do you honestly think she's going to stick around at this point?
As one of those people: I haven't the slightest idea. But, unless you have some inside information, neither do you.
In the meantime, I'm glad her engagement has gone from zero to, at least temporarily, not-zero. I am pleased by this and make no apology for saying so.
posted by Lemkin at 7:17 PM on February 16 [4 favorites]
As one of those people: I haven't the slightest idea. But, unless you have some inside information, neither do you.
In the meantime, I'm glad her engagement has gone from zero to, at least temporarily, not-zero. I am pleased by this and make no apology for saying so.
posted by Lemkin at 7:17 PM on February 16 [4 favorites]
My brother is a retired Black US Navy veteran. He rides a Harley, is festooned with flags and vet signifiers and goes out in the woods to play survival games with his vet friends. I sometimes think about how it's good that he can be accepted as a Black man in that environment, for what it's worth.
I think it's remarkably like what passes for acceptance here at metafilter. There's some space for some people who fit into Metafilter's own Overton window.
I have to watch my language here because this isn't a remotely accepting space for me to talk about my family. If I expressed myself honestly, my comments and account would be shit-canned in a heartbeat.
Is it widely agreed that the goal here is to create a space for POC and LGBTQ+ people who are left of liberal?
posted by Wood at 7:39 PM on February 16 [6 favorites]
I think it's remarkably like what passes for acceptance here at metafilter. There's some space for some people who fit into Metafilter's own Overton window.
I have to watch my language here because this isn't a remotely accepting space for me to talk about my family. If I expressed myself honestly, my comments and account would be shit-canned in a heartbeat.
Is it widely agreed that the goal here is to create a space for POC and LGBTQ+ people who are left of liberal?
posted by Wood at 7:39 PM on February 16 [6 favorites]
Wood: those of us on MetaFilter who are left-of-liberal don't tend to be super accepted regardless of our skin color.
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:46 PM on February 16 [8 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:46 PM on February 16 [8 favorites]
Is it widely agreed that the goal here is to create a space for POC and LGBTQ+ people who are left of liberal?
No. The far left represents one group here, not all, by any means. Experience of the site tends to differ by thread. Please feel free to say what you like.
posted by Violet Blue at 8:59 PM on February 16
No. The far left represents one group here, not all, by any means. Experience of the site tends to differ by thread. Please feel free to say what you like.
posted by Violet Blue at 8:59 PM on February 16
Correction: That should be "thread and subsite." As far as subsites go, the Gray is famously the most raucous.
posted by Violet Blue at 9:06 PM on February 16
posted by Violet Blue at 9:06 PM on February 16
Is it widely agreed that the goal here is to create a space for POC and LGBTQ+ people who are willing to engage in honest and respectful discussion left of liberal?
Yes? At least, I hope so.
posted by dg at 10:25 PM on February 16 [6 favorites]
Yes? At least, I hope so.
posted by dg at 10:25 PM on February 16 [6 favorites]
I am thankful for everyone who chooses to spend time here and share their thoughts. I think I have become a better person because of my MeFi life.
To the original question of what went wrong, and setting aside all positive responses they offered, this remark felt like a cruel callout (and I hesitate to repost it because WTF), but I think it's went too far:
And the FUCKING IRONY that it's DUBIOUS DUDE, the man who literally writes MONTHLY ARIAS about his poo, who tentatively led the lynch mob in debating getting a Black man murdered over.....
It was too personal and ugly and blamey.
posted by yes I said yes I will Yes at 4:14 AM on February 17 [7 favorites]
To the original question of what went wrong, and setting aside all positive responses they offered, this remark felt like a cruel callout (and I hesitate to repost it because WTF), but I think it's went too far:
And the FUCKING IRONY that it's DUBIOUS DUDE, the man who literally writes MONTHLY ARIAS about his poo, who tentatively led the lynch mob in debating getting a Black man murdered over.....
It was too personal and ugly and blamey.
posted by yes I said yes I will Yes at 4:14 AM on February 17 [7 favorites]
create a space for POC and LGBTQ+ people
All comments matter.
posted by snofoam at 7:20 AM on February 17 [3 favorites]
All comments matter.
posted by snofoam at 7:20 AM on February 17 [3 favorites]
Less of these 'All Lives Matter' feints, please? "Is it widely agreed that the goal here is to create a space for POC and LGBTQ+ people who are left of liberal?" is a complicated yes/no question with a lot of small print, and it's like, the shreds of that small print are all over this thread. But it is a yes/no question.
posted by Ashenmote at 7:21 AM on February 17 [9 favorites]
posted by Ashenmote at 7:21 AM on February 17 [9 favorites]
>It was too personal and ugly and blamey.
Yes, it was. Please keep in mind the context that I had just spent over TWO HOURS writing impersonal, and beautiful, and generous comments to explain to DD and the rest of you that the driver was not kidnapping him. I had also spent time in a previous thread defending DD taking ubers at all when some people here were telling him to suck it up and walk as if he was a spoiled prince for needing an uber in a cold icy city when we all know he's undergoing immune-suppressing treatment AND has poor balance due to his inner ear anatomy.
But after all the time and effort I had just expended to tell this man to stop saying a Black man kidnapped him, he responded by saying that the man MIGHT BE ON METH and "Such a sticky situation!", in other words, IGNORING WHAT I WROTE. And almost FORTY people here were STILL going on and on about calling the cops. NONE OF YOU WERE LISTENING SO I YELLED.
Do you people think it's hypothetical that cops beat the fuck out of Black people or even kill us in situations like this? Do you think giving this man a police record is trivial? Do you understand that when a cop pulls up in the woods of a red state at 2am, the Black man might get killed? (And frankly the Deaf gay white guy who's half-drunk and acting erratic isn't really safe either?) Are you all so fucking privileged that you think cops HELP people???
Did you notice that Phunimee ALSO made jokes about DD's shit posts and 83 of you liked that comment? So once again, I guess it's ok to be personal as long as you don't swear or use all caps.
As kindly as I can possibly put this, you have engaged dozens of members of an internet community in your poop anxiety for literally years. I have spent more time reading about how you personally feel about pooping than you spent engaged in this scenario.... But I would hope in the cold light and reason of day that you, a person who has experienced and publicly shared many butt crises, could give grace to another fellow person experiencing a butt crisis.
posted by phunniemee [83 favorites +]
Have you noticed yet that Brandon Blatcher and Loup both have absolutely GARBAGE race politics and zero awareness of the racism they enact in their shit moderation of this site??? BEING ANTI-RACIST DOESN'T COME AS A PACKAGE DEAL WITH THE SKIN COLOUR. Just like women are perfectly able to uphold patriarchy and behave in misogynistic ways, racialized people need to LEARN about anti-racism in order to not just reproduce it as Loup and Brandon do constantly. For fuck's sake Brandon wrote the rice cooker / eating cats post. That's his race politic.
Did you notice that you have collectively decided that the right time to talk about that shockingly racist Uber thread is today, "when a white man decides to talk about it dispassionately" even to the point of being FRANKLY ABUSIVE TO DD to discuss his health in the most callous and pessimistic way possible, but none of you even noticed that until I started yelling about it? You didn't notice because panacea was being "polite" and using the right salad forks and not sWeArInG. But did you notice how even though I was rude and "combative" and "shouty" and whatever other fucking synonyms you want to trot out to say "yucky angry Black woman" in the racist-to-Uber-driver thread, and am swearing and using all caps again here.... I'm still the person who's most vocally sticking up for DD?
That's because my politics aren't about being fucking POLITE. Yours shouldn't be either.
posted by nouvelle-personne at 7:30 AM on February 17 [80 favorites]
Yes, it was. Please keep in mind the context that I had just spent over TWO HOURS writing impersonal, and beautiful, and generous comments to explain to DD and the rest of you that the driver was not kidnapping him. I had also spent time in a previous thread defending DD taking ubers at all when some people here were telling him to suck it up and walk as if he was a spoiled prince for needing an uber in a cold icy city when we all know he's undergoing immune-suppressing treatment AND has poor balance due to his inner ear anatomy.
But after all the time and effort I had just expended to tell this man to stop saying a Black man kidnapped him, he responded by saying that the man MIGHT BE ON METH and "Such a sticky situation!", in other words, IGNORING WHAT I WROTE. And almost FORTY people here were STILL going on and on about calling the cops. NONE OF YOU WERE LISTENING SO I YELLED.
Do you people think it's hypothetical that cops beat the fuck out of Black people or even kill us in situations like this? Do you think giving this man a police record is trivial? Do you understand that when a cop pulls up in the woods of a red state at 2am, the Black man might get killed? (And frankly the Deaf gay white guy who's half-drunk and acting erratic isn't really safe either?) Are you all so fucking privileged that you think cops HELP people???
Did you notice that Phunimee ALSO made jokes about DD's shit posts and 83 of you liked that comment? So once again, I guess it's ok to be personal as long as you don't swear or use all caps.
As kindly as I can possibly put this, you have engaged dozens of members of an internet community in your poop anxiety for literally years. I have spent more time reading about how you personally feel about pooping than you spent engaged in this scenario.... But I would hope in the cold light and reason of day that you, a person who has experienced and publicly shared many butt crises, could give grace to another fellow person experiencing a butt crisis.
posted by phunniemee [83 favorites +]
Have you noticed yet that Brandon Blatcher and Loup both have absolutely GARBAGE race politics and zero awareness of the racism they enact in their shit moderation of this site??? BEING ANTI-RACIST DOESN'T COME AS A PACKAGE DEAL WITH THE SKIN COLOUR. Just like women are perfectly able to uphold patriarchy and behave in misogynistic ways, racialized people need to LEARN about anti-racism in order to not just reproduce it as Loup and Brandon do constantly. For fuck's sake Brandon wrote the rice cooker / eating cats post. That's his race politic.
Did you notice that you have collectively decided that the right time to talk about that shockingly racist Uber thread is today, "when a white man decides to talk about it dispassionately" even to the point of being FRANKLY ABUSIVE TO DD to discuss his health in the most callous and pessimistic way possible, but none of you even noticed that until I started yelling about it? You didn't notice because panacea was being "polite" and using the right salad forks and not sWeArInG. But did you notice how even though I was rude and "combative" and "shouty" and whatever other fucking synonyms you want to trot out to say "yucky angry Black woman" in the racist-to-Uber-driver thread, and am swearing and using all caps again here.... I'm still the person who's most vocally sticking up for DD?
That's because my politics aren't about being fucking POLITE. Yours shouldn't be either.
posted by nouvelle-personne at 7:30 AM on February 17 [80 favorites]
Did you notice that you have collectively decided that the right time to talk about that shockingly racist Uber thread is today, "when a white man decides to talk about it dispassionately" even to the point of being FRANKLY ABUSIVE TO DD to discuss his health in the most callous and pessimistic way possible
I sure as hell did notice, and my eyebrows haven't come back down yet. I found it incredibly unkind and un-neighborly to not involve DD and you (n_p) in originating this thread. It was not "required" to ask your permission, but in a community -- that's what we do. We include. This was a big fail of community. This was never going to be a community discussion with that starting place.
The other thing I'd like people to consider is this: those of us who've read DD's questions over years know very well that he is incredibly, and probably overly, sensitive to what other people think of him and how they treat him.
I can only imagine the anxiety and apoplexy this thread, openly discussing his mistake and his poop habits, is causing him.
I hope he's ok.
posted by Dashy at 7:50 AM on February 17 [22 favorites]
I sure as hell did notice, and my eyebrows haven't come back down yet. I found it incredibly unkind and un-neighborly to not involve DD and you (n_p) in originating this thread. It was not "required" to ask your permission, but in a community -- that's what we do. We include. This was a big fail of community. This was never going to be a community discussion with that starting place.
The other thing I'd like people to consider is this: those of us who've read DD's questions over years know very well that he is incredibly, and probably overly, sensitive to what other people think of him and how they treat him.
I can only imagine the anxiety and apoplexy this thread, openly discussing his mistake and his poop habits, is causing him.
I hope he's ok.
posted by Dashy at 7:50 AM on February 17 [22 favorites]
That's because my politics aren't about being fucking POLITE. Yours shouldn't be either.
posted by nouvelle-personne at 10:30 AM
This also feels unkind and unnecessary. One's politics are their choice but is it possible to be kind on this site?
The level of grar here is too much. Gotta button.
posted by yes I said yes I will Yes at 8:04 AM on February 17
posted by nouvelle-personne at 10:30 AM
This also feels unkind and unnecessary. One's politics are their choice but is it possible to be kind on this site?
The level of grar here is too much. Gotta button.
posted by yes I said yes I will Yes at 8:04 AM on February 17
This also feels unkind and unnecessary. One's politics are their choice but is it possible to be kind on this site?
Kind and polite are not even remotely the same thing. As, I would argue, nouvelle-personne's comments make ABUNDANTLY clear.
posted by dizziest at 8:07 AM on February 17 [26 favorites]
Kind and polite are not even remotely the same thing. As, I would argue, nouvelle-personne's comments make ABUNDANTLY clear.
posted by dizziest at 8:07 AM on February 17 [26 favorites]
Dozens of you over the past weeks have called me "shouty" "combative" "fighty" "angry" "yelling" "rude" and now "ugly" and "grar".
Fuck even the email Brandon keeps telling you all that he sent me was this:
Dec 12
Hey, Just a heads up that we're decided not to post your MetaTalk post as it's currently worded, because the post itself presents as very fighty. If you'd like to reword and resubmit it to talk about the racism on the site, that's totally fine. That doesn't mean make it passive, but less all caps would probably be good.
Take care,
Brandon Blatcher
MetaFilter Moderator
Calling my response to injustice "ugly" is tone policing. Calling my explanation of racism "grar" is dismissive. Diminishing my knowledge as "fighty"?? Written supposedly as an olive branch to address bad moderation, and written by a BLACK MODERATOR??? ... I don't even have words for that, it felt like getting an email from fucking Candace Owens.
Repeatedly harping on my eTiQuEtTe is fucking SHAMEFUL.
All of it is gaslighting, and all of it is racist.
Metafilter:
Fine with racism, can't handle discomfort.
posted by nouvelle-personne at 8:09 AM on February 17 [51 favorites]
Fuck even the email Brandon keeps telling you all that he sent me was this:
Dec 12
Hey, Just a heads up that we're decided not to post your MetaTalk post as it's currently worded, because the post itself presents as very fighty. If you'd like to reword and resubmit it to talk about the racism on the site, that's totally fine. That doesn't mean make it passive, but less all caps would probably be good.
Take care,
Brandon Blatcher
MetaFilter Moderator
Calling my response to injustice "ugly" is tone policing. Calling my explanation of racism "grar" is dismissive. Diminishing my knowledge as "fighty"?? Written supposedly as an olive branch to address bad moderation, and written by a BLACK MODERATOR??? ... I don't even have words for that, it felt like getting an email from fucking Candace Owens.
Repeatedly harping on my eTiQuEtTe is fucking SHAMEFUL.
All of it is gaslighting, and all of it is racist.
Metafilter:
Fine with racism, can't handle discomfort.
posted by nouvelle-personne at 8:09 AM on February 17 [51 favorites]
Now that we have that all out in the open
What do people want out of this?
posted by ginger.beef at 8:27 AM on February 17 [3 favorites]
What do people want out of this?
posted by ginger.beef at 8:27 AM on February 17 [3 favorites]
The level of grar here is too much. Gotta button
Other options not taken:
1. Stop reading contentious MetaTalk threads for a while
2. Stop reading contentious MetaTalk threads forever
3. Stop reading MetaTalk at all forever
4. Stop reading MetaFilter at all forever
5. Close the account without announcing it
posted by Lemkin at 8:49 AM on February 17 [10 favorites]
Other options not taken:
1. Stop reading contentious MetaTalk threads for a while
2. Stop reading contentious MetaTalk threads forever
3. Stop reading MetaTalk at all forever
4. Stop reading MetaFilter at all forever
5. Close the account without announcing it
posted by Lemkin at 8:49 AM on February 17 [10 favorites]
The level of grar here is too much. Gotta button.
Oh nooooooo. Plz come back and tone police people of color and sympathize with billionaires and remain optimistic for fascist regimes more.
posted by donnagirl at 8:55 AM on February 17 [16 favorites]
Oh nooooooo. Plz come back and tone police people of color and sympathize with billionaires and remain optimistic for fascist regimes more.
posted by donnagirl at 8:55 AM on February 17 [16 favorites]
It seems like what could be gotten out of this is an examination into how moderation upholds systemic structures of racism and ableism. We are not operating on a level playing field in the US, especially not today and moderation as a one size fits all tool doesn't create an equitable experience for users. I think that would mean mods need to be open about the biases or things that are uncomfortable and that a post mortem isn't viewed so dispassionately - ie that impact is acknowledged even if intent wasn't there.
That said, wow - it gets so personal so fast, that doesn't feel great. It makes me nervous to post because I wonder what stupid stuff I've written about since joining this website. And it's tough to know who will be a good actor and whether it's safe to share stuff when people's posting history is brought up in these discussions, as was the case for dd and yes I said yes.
posted by ajarbaday at 9:42 AM on February 17 [2 favorites]
That said, wow - it gets so personal so fast, that doesn't feel great. It makes me nervous to post because I wonder what stupid stuff I've written about since joining this website. And it's tough to know who will be a good actor and whether it's safe to share stuff when people's posting history is brought up in these discussions, as was the case for dd and yes I said yes.
posted by ajarbaday at 9:42 AM on February 17 [2 favorites]
Fine with racism, can't handle discomfort.
That seems a little harsh I'm pretty sure a lot of people have completed employer-mandated workshops - some lasting an entire workday! - that provided them with an official Not Racist certificate they could print and put up in their cubes. If HR says they're an ally, who are we to argue?
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:45 AM on February 17 [2 favorites]
That seems a little harsh I'm pretty sure a lot of people have completed employer-mandated workshops - some lasting an entire workday! - that provided them with an official Not Racist certificate they could print and put up in their cubes. If HR says they're an ally, who are we to argue?
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:45 AM on February 17 [2 favorites]
Nothing has changed on Metafilter except most if not all of us from #POCtakeover have stopped engaging in this site because of its racism. We tried and while some people have learned... the racism of Metafilter Mods have not... which is ironic because we have new mods and a BIPOC board. But as n_p astutely points out... it's not about identity but about politics and BB telling n_p that their MetaTalk post was "fighty" is a clear example of tone policing!
Also as n_p points out, this metatalk Should have been heavily edited to not make this a personal examination of d_d's health status. Like wtf????? It's ableist asf. I hope d_d is ok. This metatalk is gross in its wording.
I wiped my old account and didnt rejoin until recently; now I don't engage with people who don't get it. Had to comment at least once here to bring up the fact that Metafilter is fine upholding the status quo and hemorrhaging users who have made the site better like n_p.
posted by mxjudyliza at 10:11 AM on February 17 [25 favorites]
Also as n_p points out, this metatalk Should have been heavily edited to not make this a personal examination of d_d's health status. Like wtf????? It's ableist asf. I hope d_d is ok. This metatalk is gross in its wording.
I wiped my old account and didnt rejoin until recently; now I don't engage with people who don't get it. Had to comment at least once here to bring up the fact that Metafilter is fine upholding the status quo and hemorrhaging users who have made the site better like n_p.
posted by mxjudyliza at 10:11 AM on February 17 [25 favorites]
It makes me nervous to post because I wonder what stupid stuff I've written about since joining this website.
Hey, it's not like I dug back to the early aughts to find those comments. They were just in my recent memory - her username stuck in my head and she has a lot of the kind of Nice MiddleAged White Lady "concerns" that grate on me. But if it's wrong to bring up her history when she is tone policing someone else's history, I guess I'm wrong.
posted by donnagirl at 10:13 AM on February 17 [5 favorites]
Hey, it's not like I dug back to the early aughts to find those comments. They were just in my recent memory - her username stuck in my head and she has a lot of the kind of Nice MiddleAged White Lady "concerns" that grate on me. But if it's wrong to bring up her history when she is tone policing someone else's history, I guess I'm wrong.
posted by donnagirl at 10:13 AM on February 17 [5 favorites]
But, a 10 year member buttoned
If we can't put up with grating on one another a little, what's the point
posted by ginger.beef at 10:17 AM on February 17 [3 favorites]
If we can't put up with grating on one another a little, what's the point
posted by ginger.beef at 10:17 AM on February 17 [3 favorites]
feels like we've got our circular firing squad in full effect right about now.
I suggested it before. I'll be more emphatic now. This is what comes from trying to negotiate the past. It's a fool's game. Good people get hurt by people they agree with on most things.
posted by philip-random at 10:28 AM on February 17 [9 favorites]
I suggested it before. I'll be more emphatic now. This is what comes from trying to negotiate the past. It's a fool's game. Good people get hurt by people they agree with on most things.
posted by philip-random at 10:28 AM on February 17 [9 favorites]
because we have new mods and a BIPOC board.
I think the existence of the BIPOC board is debatable at this point.
posted by Vatnesine at 10:46 AM on February 17 [6 favorites]
I think the existence of the BIPOC board is debatable at this point.
posted by Vatnesine at 10:46 AM on February 17 [6 favorites]
The BIPOC board is 50% 40% mods and the minutes are what, a full year out of date?
posted by phunniemee at 10:50 AM on February 17 [8 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 10:50 AM on February 17 [8 favorites]
This is so upsetting.
posted by vanilla.extract at 11:18 AM on February 17 [4 favorites]
posted by vanilla.extract at 11:18 AM on February 17 [4 favorites]
But, a 10 year member buttoned
If we can't put up with grating on one another a little, what's the point
I didn't say anything to her or about her until she called n-p "unkind", declared she was quitting bc of the grar, and buttoned. I was just saying goodbye, in case she checked back after buttoning.
posted by donnagirl at 12:06 PM on February 17 [5 favorites]
If we can't put up with grating on one another a little, what's the point
I didn't say anything to her or about her until she called n-p "unkind", declared she was quitting bc of the grar, and buttoned. I was just saying goodbye, in case she checked back after buttoning.
posted by donnagirl at 12:06 PM on February 17 [5 favorites]
Also; let's save our sorrows for long-time members buttoning when they're actually chased out, not when they're suddenly bothered by tone and decide to flounce
posted by donnagirl at 12:07 PM on February 17 [17 favorites]
posted by donnagirl at 12:07 PM on February 17 [17 favorites]
Here’s the problem with Metafilter. This site thinks of “diversity” as its own end, as though people are a set of mugs and you’re trying to collect the rainbow.
You think having a Black or Latinx mod or a BIPOC board is the POINT in and of itself. You think that means this site can’t be racist because it has some different coloured people in high-visibility places.
But some people have actually spent time and effort to understand dynamics and systems of oppression. When people have done that work, they will be able to see and point out that things are wrong, and they will have emotions about those things, and they may *express an emotion* or *use a swear* and they will demand change.
And those types of convos aren’t comfortable. They make people feel guilty, and that feels bad. But those bad feelings can lead to good outcomes, like increased insight and better action next time. And THAT is supposed to be the positive outcome of diversity.
But so many people here actively hate that. You get stuck in “this is uncomfortable” and “I feel uncomfortable when I encounter dissent or am told that I had a harmful response, so I will do ANYTHING to make it stop. I will demean the ideas by picking on the tone and label it as angry or fighty or combative, or I will suddenly turn into Emily Post and slap down breaches of etiquette like all caps or swearing because that's too ugly for my superior tastes.” So you refuse to engage in those convos, or you engage by policing them, deleting them, disappearing them.
How many of you flagged ME for yelling but you didn't flag the idea of calling the cops on an innocent man?
So I wrote a meta talk post which was topical and clear and timely... but you deemed it as “too fighty”. Then, today, you’re all happy to engage with the topic because it's on on YOUR playing field… when a white man decides to “intellectualize” “what went wrong with that angry Black woman and Deaf guy over there.
Panacea and Brandon didn’t even attempt to ASK me and DD if this post would be ok, or invite us to collaborate on it, or even just let us read and ok it before Panacea posted it. Like... what the actual fuck.
But THAT’S what you want…you PREFER to read about racism that's discussed coldly, months later, in distant, academic, callous langauge, by a Robin D'Angelo type figure who will colonize and examine the issue of racism at arms length and incorrectly. You want to read about a white guy’s frame of it. But God fucking forbid you FEEL a Black woman’s take on it. Because the actual Black woman was “fighty” and you’re too weak to handle a few capital letters on a computer screen. You want white comfort.
And that’s true of the majority of users in that thread, on this site, and certainly of the people in positions of authority. Cortex used to delete my posts constantly (written under a different handle). And now Brandon and Loup are doing the same. The only difference is that they aren’t white, and people think that just being a BIE-POCK means their race politics must ok. But that’s wrong, and their race politics are actively harmful.
The goal of diversifying the mod team was supposed to be that it would diversify the perspectives on structural oppression and improve the leadership team... so that someone who GETS IT can help point out the problem and get paid to take on the emotional carnage of steering the convos. The point was to hire someone who could hopefully identify the actual bad behaviour - the RACISM - instead of just clutching their pearls and deleting a swear word because iTs fIgHtY.
Did Loup engage with my comments like a fellow POC who could see the racism in the thread and stick up for my points? No, he dirty deleted my comments and then vanished forever from the convo. I even emailed him and told him why he owed me an apology, and he ignored it.
Did Brandon engage with that post like a fellow Black person who felt aghast on behalf of the Uber driver? No, he upheld the deletions (until he got yelled at).
Did Brandon send me a mod DM as a fellow Black person who was aghast at the racism in that thread? This might look like saying, “holy crap that was fucked, I totally empathize with your pain in that thread and I hope you’re ok. I am not going to post the MeTalk you wrote because Mefites can't handle it (he should have blamed THE COMMUNITY, not ME!!!!) I hope you understand. And it it’s not fair to tone police you - but if you write it more moderately I think it will change some minds, and I can help you do that if you’re willing? Or since I’m being paid to handle race stuff, and I’m on the BIPOC board, I can write a draft of a MetaTalk thread for you, and you can look it over and see if you want to post some version of it?” No, he did not.
Did either of the BIPOC mods engage with me as a fellow BIPOC and create an “us” to stand united against racism? No. They joined the wrong “us”. They punished me as an outsider, and silenced ME... to uphold the racist part!!
Loup and Brandon COULD have helped teach you all, including DD, why 40 of you were being racist in that thread. But I’m not sure either of them actually even understand it themselves.
So... the site has mods in a few different colours but their politics are, quite uniformly, TO UPHOLD WHITE SUPREMACIST ABLEIST COMFORT. They are not brown experts being paid to decode and teach.
Instead I was the one giving myself a cortisol waterboard and screaming alone into the wind about racism... while the “diversity representatives” of the paid mod team acted as a pair of brown truncheons:
- stuffing a gag in my mouth and disappearing me (Loup repeatedly deleting my posts),
- breaking their own guidelines (Loup not leaving deletion notes despite that having been a huge topic that week),
- silencing me (Brandon deleting my MetaTalk post),
- condescendingly admonishing me to be “less fighty” (Brandon in my DMs)
- and then disappearing themselves (where the fuck is Loup).
Brandon even mis-represented his contact with me, by making it sound like he emailed me with something productive, or an apology, when he actually sent an incredibly shitty non-apology (instead of Loup, the person who actually deleted me, apologizing). In those emails, I actually replied in detail to explain to both Brandon and Loup why their actions sucked and I asked them to apologize. But they ignored the email and did not apologize, and Brandon just went and told you all, "NP has been reached out to". (Hint: That kind of nonspecific passive language is usually a clue that someone's shitty behaviour is being politely hidden)
It is a white supremacist act for you all to feel smug about your brown skinned moderators when you carefully chose two with bad politics and no teeth. How the fuck am *I* the person who got the most scolded in that situation????
It’s because the only brown people you like are the ones who don't tell you you’re racist. This is not supposed to be the goal of #diversity.
I’ve been a member of MeFi for over seventeen years under like 5 handles. If I add up all my favourites and best answers, I rank in the top 5 all time users on AskMe. And I keep quitting because the racism here is so gross and the mod team keeps slapping me with dozens of deletions when I point it out. It’s so unfair and awful and sad.
So yeah, I’m not back. I will not give any more care and energy to this population.
Dubious Dude, on the off chance you’re reading this, I truly hope your health is ok and I’m sorry I was rude and glib in talking about your previous posts. I'm still mad so this will be a shitty apology but it's the best I can do today:
I hope the reasons for my escalation are now more clear to you. I have been unjustly harmed by cops, as have about 80% of the Black people I know, including very vulnerable people I love. So your post was extremely triggering to me and I was actually quite devastated that I explained things so nicely for so long... and you still said it was "sticky" and implied that you weren’t sure whether you should still call the cops. I was literally hyperventilating because I was so triggered.
I was also super pissed that you finally changed your mind - not based on MY post - but only later after some nonBlack people paraphrased my points in “nicer” language. THEY got your approval, changed your mind, and got rewarded with dozens of favorites from the community, while my posts had hardly any at the time. That was a situation of their theft and sanitation of my ideas was being lauded... while I was still being scolded and ignored, even though I was right and I said it first. was pissed at you and at the whole site for that, and at the mods who were already deleting me while letting others make the exact same points and even the same rude comments but just in “nicer” words. That really hurt my feelings and made me absolutely furious.
But - despite those very justified feelings - my recalling your past posts in my comment was not fair fodder for me just because I was pissed at you, so I am truly sorry that I did that. And I feel shitty that you haven’t been back because I know how useful this site has been as a resource for you. I'm ashamed and sad that my dysregulation led to you being uncomfortable to participate here (even though your dysregulation also led to ME being uncomfortable to participate here lol). Ironic, huh.
Anyway - I am sorry, and I hope you will come back. This site can fucking HURT and man the politics suck, but it can also offer genuinely good advice about some situations, and that has value, and I hope you feel able to come back later and cherry pick the good parts of AskMetafilter.
posted by nouvelle-personne at 12:30 PM on February 17 [136 favorites]
You think having a Black or Latinx mod or a BIPOC board is the POINT in and of itself. You think that means this site can’t be racist because it has some different coloured people in high-visibility places.
But some people have actually spent time and effort to understand dynamics and systems of oppression. When people have done that work, they will be able to see and point out that things are wrong, and they will have emotions about those things, and they may *express an emotion* or *use a swear* and they will demand change.
And those types of convos aren’t comfortable. They make people feel guilty, and that feels bad. But those bad feelings can lead to good outcomes, like increased insight and better action next time. And THAT is supposed to be the positive outcome of diversity.
But so many people here actively hate that. You get stuck in “this is uncomfortable” and “I feel uncomfortable when I encounter dissent or am told that I had a harmful response, so I will do ANYTHING to make it stop. I will demean the ideas by picking on the tone and label it as angry or fighty or combative, or I will suddenly turn into Emily Post and slap down breaches of etiquette like all caps or swearing because that's too ugly for my superior tastes.” So you refuse to engage in those convos, or you engage by policing them, deleting them, disappearing them.
How many of you flagged ME for yelling but you didn't flag the idea of calling the cops on an innocent man?
So I wrote a meta talk post which was topical and clear and timely... but you deemed it as “too fighty”. Then, today, you’re all happy to engage with the topic because it's on on YOUR playing field… when a white man decides to “intellectualize” “what went wrong with that angry Black woman and Deaf guy over there.
Panacea and Brandon didn’t even attempt to ASK me and DD if this post would be ok, or invite us to collaborate on it, or even just let us read and ok it before Panacea posted it. Like... what the actual fuck.
But THAT’S what you want…you PREFER to read about racism that's discussed coldly, months later, in distant, academic, callous langauge, by a Robin D'Angelo type figure who will colonize and examine the issue of racism at arms length and incorrectly. You want to read about a white guy’s frame of it. But God fucking forbid you FEEL a Black woman’s take on it. Because the actual Black woman was “fighty” and you’re too weak to handle a few capital letters on a computer screen. You want white comfort.
And that’s true of the majority of users in that thread, on this site, and certainly of the people in positions of authority. Cortex used to delete my posts constantly (written under a different handle). And now Brandon and Loup are doing the same. The only difference is that they aren’t white, and people think that just being a BIE-POCK means their race politics must ok. But that’s wrong, and their race politics are actively harmful.
The goal of diversifying the mod team was supposed to be that it would diversify the perspectives on structural oppression and improve the leadership team... so that someone who GETS IT can help point out the problem and get paid to take on the emotional carnage of steering the convos. The point was to hire someone who could hopefully identify the actual bad behaviour - the RACISM - instead of just clutching their pearls and deleting a swear word because iTs fIgHtY.
Did Loup engage with my comments like a fellow POC who could see the racism in the thread and stick up for my points? No, he dirty deleted my comments and then vanished forever from the convo. I even emailed him and told him why he owed me an apology, and he ignored it.
Did Brandon engage with that post like a fellow Black person who felt aghast on behalf of the Uber driver? No, he upheld the deletions (until he got yelled at).
Did Brandon send me a mod DM as a fellow Black person who was aghast at the racism in that thread? This might look like saying, “holy crap that was fucked, I totally empathize with your pain in that thread and I hope you’re ok. I am not going to post the MeTalk you wrote because Mefites can't handle it (he should have blamed THE COMMUNITY, not ME!!!!) I hope you understand. And it it’s not fair to tone police you - but if you write it more moderately I think it will change some minds, and I can help you do that if you’re willing? Or since I’m being paid to handle race stuff, and I’m on the BIPOC board, I can write a draft of a MetaTalk thread for you, and you can look it over and see if you want to post some version of it?” No, he did not.
Did either of the BIPOC mods engage with me as a fellow BIPOC and create an “us” to stand united against racism? No. They joined the wrong “us”. They punished me as an outsider, and silenced ME... to uphold the racist part!!
Loup and Brandon COULD have helped teach you all, including DD, why 40 of you were being racist in that thread. But I’m not sure either of them actually even understand it themselves.
So... the site has mods in a few different colours but their politics are, quite uniformly, TO UPHOLD WHITE SUPREMACIST ABLEIST COMFORT. They are not brown experts being paid to decode and teach.
Instead I was the one giving myself a cortisol waterboard and screaming alone into the wind about racism... while the “diversity representatives” of the paid mod team acted as a pair of brown truncheons:
- stuffing a gag in my mouth and disappearing me (Loup repeatedly deleting my posts),
- breaking their own guidelines (Loup not leaving deletion notes despite that having been a huge topic that week),
- silencing me (Brandon deleting my MetaTalk post),
- condescendingly admonishing me to be “less fighty” (Brandon in my DMs)
- and then disappearing themselves (where the fuck is Loup).
Brandon even mis-represented his contact with me, by making it sound like he emailed me with something productive, or an apology, when he actually sent an incredibly shitty non-apology (instead of Loup, the person who actually deleted me, apologizing). In those emails, I actually replied in detail to explain to both Brandon and Loup why their actions sucked and I asked them to apologize. But they ignored the email and did not apologize, and Brandon just went and told you all, "NP has been reached out to". (Hint: That kind of nonspecific passive language is usually a clue that someone's shitty behaviour is being politely hidden)
It is a white supremacist act for you all to feel smug about your brown skinned moderators when you carefully chose two with bad politics and no teeth. How the fuck am *I* the person who got the most scolded in that situation????
It’s because the only brown people you like are the ones who don't tell you you’re racist. This is not supposed to be the goal of #diversity.
I’ve been a member of MeFi for over seventeen years under like 5 handles. If I add up all my favourites and best answers, I rank in the top 5 all time users on AskMe. And I keep quitting because the racism here is so gross and the mod team keeps slapping me with dozens of deletions when I point it out. It’s so unfair and awful and sad.
So yeah, I’m not back. I will not give any more care and energy to this population.
Dubious Dude, on the off chance you’re reading this, I truly hope your health is ok and I’m sorry I was rude and glib in talking about your previous posts. I'm still mad so this will be a shitty apology but it's the best I can do today:
I hope the reasons for my escalation are now more clear to you. I have been unjustly harmed by cops, as have about 80% of the Black people I know, including very vulnerable people I love. So your post was extremely triggering to me and I was actually quite devastated that I explained things so nicely for so long... and you still said it was "sticky" and implied that you weren’t sure whether you should still call the cops. I was literally hyperventilating because I was so triggered.
I was also super pissed that you finally changed your mind - not based on MY post - but only later after some nonBlack people paraphrased my points in “nicer” language. THEY got your approval, changed your mind, and got rewarded with dozens of favorites from the community, while my posts had hardly any at the time. That was a situation of their theft and sanitation of my ideas was being lauded... while I was still being scolded and ignored, even though I was right and I said it first. was pissed at you and at the whole site for that, and at the mods who were already deleting me while letting others make the exact same points and even the same rude comments but just in “nicer” words. That really hurt my feelings and made me absolutely furious.
But - despite those very justified feelings - my recalling your past posts in my comment was not fair fodder for me just because I was pissed at you, so I am truly sorry that I did that. And I feel shitty that you haven’t been back because I know how useful this site has been as a resource for you. I'm ashamed and sad that my dysregulation led to you being uncomfortable to participate here (even though your dysregulation also led to ME being uncomfortable to participate here lol). Ironic, huh.
Anyway - I am sorry, and I hope you will come back. This site can fucking HURT and man the politics suck, but it can also offer genuinely good advice about some situations, and that has value, and I hope you feel able to come back later and cherry pick the good parts of AskMetafilter.
posted by nouvelle-personne at 12:30 PM on February 17 [136 favorites]
As of this afternoon, I'm 99% certain he's fine and going about his business as usual.
posted by kimberussell at 12:39 PM on February 17 [4 favorites]
posted by kimberussell at 12:39 PM on February 17 [4 favorites]
I needed that laugh, thank you
posted by nouvelle-personne at 12:42 PM on February 17 [3 favorites]
posted by nouvelle-personne at 12:42 PM on February 17 [3 favorites]
nouvelle-personne, you're a fucking saint
I literally reset my Metafilter password so I could log in on my work computer to favorite that comment immediately
my only regret is that I have only one favorite to give
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:46 PM on February 17 [10 favorites]
I literally reset my Metafilter password so I could log in on my work computer to favorite that comment immediately
my only regret is that I have only one favorite to give
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:46 PM on February 17 [10 favorites]
let's save our sorrows
nouvelle-personne came back long enough to set the record straight and another member that we know of has buttoned
plenty of sorrows to go around
posted by ginger.beef at 1:13 PM on February 17 [1 favorite]
nouvelle-personne came back long enough to set the record straight and another member that we know of has buttoned
plenty of sorrows to go around
posted by ginger.beef at 1:13 PM on February 17 [1 favorite]
my only regret is that I have only one favorite to give
ah, but this is what favorites are for, adding to yours.
posted by clavdivs at 2:09 PM on February 17 [2 favorites]
ah, but this is what favorites are for, adding to yours.
posted by clavdivs at 2:09 PM on February 17 [2 favorites]
Jesus. Thank you nouvelle-personne. You and your efforts are more than we deserve. I’m deeply grateful and I know it’s not even close to enough.
posted by toodleydoodley at 4:39 PM on February 17 [10 favorites]
posted by toodleydoodley at 4:39 PM on February 17 [10 favorites]
Hey all.
I know my response is late, but I needed some time to process and decide how/if to respond. I vacillated between responding or not, but ultimately decided it was time to respond.
First of all, nouvelle-personne, thank you for your apology. I accept, and want to share my own apology/explanation. I had no idea or foresight that my Ask would generate this at the time. I was in a bad place and was overwhelmed with responses from friends, family, even my supervisor, suggesting I call the police, some insisting if I didn't, he would do it again. I was unsure, so as I always almost do (did), reached out to AskMe, which had helped me many times. Your initial response was very helpful on its own, and in hindsight, I wish I had taken that at full face value and made my decision right there and then. I was processing everything and stuck in my own inertia, hence my followup response. I acknowledge the effects of that, and apologize. I should have listened better. I liked how you were hammering the points home, and don't think your comments should have been removed, honestly. We need more people to speak up, especially in today's climate, and am still sad this led to you buttoning. I agree that the moderation overall could have been done better and more clearly, and I also acknowledge that my original Ask was fraught with my own anxiety/stress. I'm glad you came back in this thread. I appreciate you, really, I do.
With that said, this is addressing the wider community now. This is really hard to say.
I first discovered this community back in 2011. At that time, I was in my gap year and completely uncertain of my future. I was very conflict-adverse (still am, I suppose) and struggling to advocate for myself. I've done some Google searches for various things, and ran into AskMe from time to time, and was always impressed with the candor of responses and perspectives. I especially enjoyed reading the Ask/Guess culture thread, and sometimes still reread it, because I thoroughly enjoy different perspectives. I'm a people person at heart, so those kind of threads are always fascinating to see. I was having some struggles with my roommates at the time, so figured, why not, I'll sign up and see. Already at the beginning, I felt some answers were a bit snarky, but that could have been me being sensitive. I kept going, asking question after question. Over the years. For more than ten years. Through AskMe, I navigated roommate situations, birthday blues, various health issues, friendship conflicts, family frustrations, and random questions about appliances/household items.
Through that journey, I had some sharp responders who did help me to see other perspectives, but to be frank, some of those sharp responses hurt. Made me feel inadequate, like a bad person, like I did something wrong. In some situations, I had. But some were woefully sharp and hurtful. I forged on, because I felt the community truly had helped me grow. As the years went by, some people said I was being controlling, without clear context, towards my friends. It was not until a few kind folks explained what exactly they meant and why, which helped me to understand. In the interim, I was taken very aback because it was never my intention to control people, and I didn't understand exactly what the responses meant.
It was around that point where I started to hesitate, feel uncertain about posting Asks. But I continued, as the site had always been a resource, even for weird situations like popcorn-eating (I'm afraid of cracking my teeth and incurring a huge dentist bill), and especially questions surrounding dirt, as I am a germaphobe. However, I started to worry about my reputation here, and if it was "oh, it's d_d again" was coloring some of the responses/perspectives. People started to bring my past Asks up as a reference point, which in some cases, were valid, but in some others, felt like my past was being used against me in a way.
I also felt my questions were taken as such that I had bad intentions; ie, the Uber tip thread. The only reason I brought that up was because I was seeing conflicting responses online, particularly Reddit. I was not trying to create a class war or imply that I was against tipping. Yes, it's expensive and adds up, but I was trying to understand why it was important; and I got the helpful responses I needed.
I was thinking about leaving the site altogether or using another username as a "reset"; this was about a year ago. I felt like my reputation here was tarnished, like people looked down on me or thought the worst of me. However, I kept going on. After the Uber Ask, though, I felt it was time. I felt finished. I felt in over my head and I felt terrible about what happened.
Now, today. Well, Saturday, but the mods alerted me on Sunday.
Wow.
I'm of two minds on this. The most important point of this thread is to ensure what happened with nouvelle-personne was to be determined, and to ensure that kind of thing doesn't happen again. For that, I am 100% on board, and I am glad a thread was opened after the situation was basically left unfinished/hanging. Bravo for that part.
However, were those comments about me really necessary? "Coming across as extremely badly", this is my fault, those kinds of comments, snarky comments about my past Asks ("can't eat popcorn without community support"... wow)... I honestly felt like I was under a witch hunt. Looking at my past, using my past questions, judging me. I am already struggling with all the stress of the political climate nowadays, my future job/livelihood certainty, and my own health/lifespan. I didn't need this on top of everything.
I know I'm not perfect. None of us are. And I will acknowledge some of my questions, in hindsight, were... dubious (no pun intended). Some of them, I could have handled myself or used my own resources. However, my intentions were never bad. I never intended to hurt anyone, to throw anyone under the bus, to cause trouble. I felt safe and comfortable reaching out to AskMe because of all the helpful responses. Believe it or not, I changed my mind on some situations or people because of you! You might not see it, but you really helped me over the years.
Sadly, I'm at that point (and have slowly been building for a while) that I feel like I'm tiptoeing on eggshells. What I say might anger some. While I can't expect to please everyone, I feel like I'm being thrown under a looking glass with 10x zoom.
I really wish the OP here could have focused on what happened to nouvelle-personne and how the mods could do better, and how this can be avoided in the future, without a need to mention me and say those things about me.
With all that said, I made a bittersweet decision. This will be my last post/response as dubious_dude. I'm done. I may come here in the form of another user, but my time as d_d is done. As much as this community has helped me, I feel like I've overstayed and outgrown my welcome here. It'll be hard, yes, but it's time. It's sad because as I navigate my cancer journey, I was hoping to continue reaching out for support, but it's time. I have a therapist and friends. I'll be fine.
I wish all of you the best. I wouldn't be surprised if some of you are angered by this post, what I wrote. Damned if I do, damned if I don't. I know my truth. I mean well, I've always meant well, and I know many of you do. I really appreciate the kind users.
I'll miss our connection as d_d/AskMe. Thanks for a (mostly) good run since 2011. Believe it or not, you did make a difference.
Peace and kindness to all. 🙏🏼🤟🏼
posted by dubious_dude at 5:11 PM on February 17 [85 favorites]
I know my response is late, but I needed some time to process and decide how/if to respond. I vacillated between responding or not, but ultimately decided it was time to respond.
First of all, nouvelle-personne, thank you for your apology. I accept, and want to share my own apology/explanation. I had no idea or foresight that my Ask would generate this at the time. I was in a bad place and was overwhelmed with responses from friends, family, even my supervisor, suggesting I call the police, some insisting if I didn't, he would do it again. I was unsure, so as I always almost do (did), reached out to AskMe, which had helped me many times. Your initial response was very helpful on its own, and in hindsight, I wish I had taken that at full face value and made my decision right there and then. I was processing everything and stuck in my own inertia, hence my followup response. I acknowledge the effects of that, and apologize. I should have listened better. I liked how you were hammering the points home, and don't think your comments should have been removed, honestly. We need more people to speak up, especially in today's climate, and am still sad this led to you buttoning. I agree that the moderation overall could have been done better and more clearly, and I also acknowledge that my original Ask was fraught with my own anxiety/stress. I'm glad you came back in this thread. I appreciate you, really, I do.
With that said, this is addressing the wider community now. This is really hard to say.
I first discovered this community back in 2011. At that time, I was in my gap year and completely uncertain of my future. I was very conflict-adverse (still am, I suppose) and struggling to advocate for myself. I've done some Google searches for various things, and ran into AskMe from time to time, and was always impressed with the candor of responses and perspectives. I especially enjoyed reading the Ask/Guess culture thread, and sometimes still reread it, because I thoroughly enjoy different perspectives. I'm a people person at heart, so those kind of threads are always fascinating to see. I was having some struggles with my roommates at the time, so figured, why not, I'll sign up and see. Already at the beginning, I felt some answers were a bit snarky, but that could have been me being sensitive. I kept going, asking question after question. Over the years. For more than ten years. Through AskMe, I navigated roommate situations, birthday blues, various health issues, friendship conflicts, family frustrations, and random questions about appliances/household items.
Through that journey, I had some sharp responders who did help me to see other perspectives, but to be frank, some of those sharp responses hurt. Made me feel inadequate, like a bad person, like I did something wrong. In some situations, I had. But some were woefully sharp and hurtful. I forged on, because I felt the community truly had helped me grow. As the years went by, some people said I was being controlling, without clear context, towards my friends. It was not until a few kind folks explained what exactly they meant and why, which helped me to understand. In the interim, I was taken very aback because it was never my intention to control people, and I didn't understand exactly what the responses meant.
It was around that point where I started to hesitate, feel uncertain about posting Asks. But I continued, as the site had always been a resource, even for weird situations like popcorn-eating (I'm afraid of cracking my teeth and incurring a huge dentist bill), and especially questions surrounding dirt, as I am a germaphobe. However, I started to worry about my reputation here, and if it was "oh, it's d_d again" was coloring some of the responses/perspectives. People started to bring my past Asks up as a reference point, which in some cases, were valid, but in some others, felt like my past was being used against me in a way.
I also felt my questions were taken as such that I had bad intentions; ie, the Uber tip thread. The only reason I brought that up was because I was seeing conflicting responses online, particularly Reddit. I was not trying to create a class war or imply that I was against tipping. Yes, it's expensive and adds up, but I was trying to understand why it was important; and I got the helpful responses I needed.
I was thinking about leaving the site altogether or using another username as a "reset"; this was about a year ago. I felt like my reputation here was tarnished, like people looked down on me or thought the worst of me. However, I kept going on. After the Uber Ask, though, I felt it was time. I felt finished. I felt in over my head and I felt terrible about what happened.
Now, today. Well, Saturday, but the mods alerted me on Sunday.
Wow.
I'm of two minds on this. The most important point of this thread is to ensure what happened with nouvelle-personne was to be determined, and to ensure that kind of thing doesn't happen again. For that, I am 100% on board, and I am glad a thread was opened after the situation was basically left unfinished/hanging. Bravo for that part.
However, were those comments about me really necessary? "Coming across as extremely badly", this is my fault, those kinds of comments, snarky comments about my past Asks ("can't eat popcorn without community support"... wow)... I honestly felt like I was under a witch hunt. Looking at my past, using my past questions, judging me. I am already struggling with all the stress of the political climate nowadays, my future job/livelihood certainty, and my own health/lifespan. I didn't need this on top of everything.
I know I'm not perfect. None of us are. And I will acknowledge some of my questions, in hindsight, were... dubious (no pun intended). Some of them, I could have handled myself or used my own resources. However, my intentions were never bad. I never intended to hurt anyone, to throw anyone under the bus, to cause trouble. I felt safe and comfortable reaching out to AskMe because of all the helpful responses. Believe it or not, I changed my mind on some situations or people because of you! You might not see it, but you really helped me over the years.
Sadly, I'm at that point (and have slowly been building for a while) that I feel like I'm tiptoeing on eggshells. What I say might anger some. While I can't expect to please everyone, I feel like I'm being thrown under a looking glass with 10x zoom.
I really wish the OP here could have focused on what happened to nouvelle-personne and how the mods could do better, and how this can be avoided in the future, without a need to mention me and say those things about me.
With all that said, I made a bittersweet decision. This will be my last post/response as dubious_dude. I'm done. I may come here in the form of another user, but my time as d_d is done. As much as this community has helped me, I feel like I've overstayed and outgrown my welcome here. It'll be hard, yes, but it's time. It's sad because as I navigate my cancer journey, I was hoping to continue reaching out for support, but it's time. I have a therapist and friends. I'll be fine.
I wish all of you the best. I wouldn't be surprised if some of you are angered by this post, what I wrote. Damned if I do, damned if I don't. I know my truth. I mean well, I've always meant well, and I know many of you do. I really appreciate the kind users.
I'll miss our connection as d_d/AskMe. Thanks for a (mostly) good run since 2011. Believe it or not, you did make a difference.
Peace and kindness to all. 🙏🏼🤟🏼
posted by dubious_dude at 5:11 PM on February 17 [85 favorites]
d_d and n-p, both of you deserve better than what you’ve been given. I’ve always believed that the measure of a person is most accurate during times of stress and you’ve both shown that you are remarkable human beings. MetaFilter is better from you being in this community but I’m pretty sure that you have suffered for being here. You’ve paid a high price and I’m not sure that you got your moneys worth in return. I’m sorry that you’ve been treated badly and I’m sorry that you’ve continued to be treated badly from the very beginning of this post.
posted by ashbury at 8:20 PM on February 17 [10 favorites]
posted by ashbury at 8:20 PM on February 17 [10 favorites]
Allowing this post to stand was very poor judgement and deeply, deeply unfair to both the named parties.
posted by rpfields at 8:54 PM on February 17 [17 favorites]
posted by rpfields at 8:54 PM on February 17 [17 favorites]
You didn't deserve this d_d, it was unnecessary and mean. Wishing you the best. Hoping to see you again on Ask in some form.
And nouvelle-personne also deserved better, at about 100 different points in this whole mess.
posted by Threeve at 9:26 PM on February 17 [13 favorites]
And nouvelle-personne also deserved better, at about 100 different points in this whole mess.
posted by Threeve at 9:26 PM on February 17 [13 favorites]
I feel like I've overstayed and outgrown my welcome here.
I get where you're coming from with this, but it's absolutely not true. The whole purpose of AskMe is to help people and there's no tally of asking vs answering. Some people need more help (or are more willing to ask) than others, is all.
I hope both you and nouvelle-personne stay here, but you both have to make your own choices and I wish you both well no matter what those choices are.
posted by dg at 10:22 PM on February 17 [8 favorites]
I get where you're coming from with this, but it's absolutely not true. The whole purpose of AskMe is to help people and there's no tally of asking vs answering. Some people need more help (or are more willing to ask) than others, is all.
I hope both you and nouvelle-personne stay here, but you both have to make your own choices and I wish you both well no matter what those choices are.
posted by dg at 10:22 PM on February 17 [8 favorites]
I am really sorry to see you go, d_d. I hope that you are able to come back, maybe with a new account, but it’s understandable why it might do more harm than good.
It seems like too much to hope that after more than two decades of AskMefi culture prizing “tough love” answers that this would change that. By that I don’t mean the kind of answer nouvelle-personne gave with valuable perspective, I mean the condescension about people who use AskMeFi to ask questions that might seem overly anxious or obvious.
As a late-diagnosed autistic woman (with the all too common CPTSD co-diagnosis), let me tell you, some of us really struggle to figure out situations that others have never had to think twice about. There’s this feeling here that if someone is asking “too many” questions that it indicates they need more tough love. I hate this about this place. It you’re starting to recognize someone’s username to the point where you want to make jokes about what they’re asking that’s an indication they won’t benefit from your wisdom.
It wasn’t until I started getting into Reddit (and specifically subreddits for neurodivergent folks) that I realized how fucked up the culture here is — and I stopped using AskMeFi and started using Reddit. No longer did I have to spend hours trying to write a question that wasn’t going to be taken the wrong way. The way people get rewarded here for questioning the premise of questions and assuming that how we experience the world is the same as everyone else so therefore things that are easy for us are easy for others is doing so much harm.
posted by the thorn bushes have roses at 11:46 PM on February 17 [23 favorites]
It seems like too much to hope that after more than two decades of AskMefi culture prizing “tough love” answers that this would change that. By that I don’t mean the kind of answer nouvelle-personne gave with valuable perspective, I mean the condescension about people who use AskMeFi to ask questions that might seem overly anxious or obvious.
As a late-diagnosed autistic woman (with the all too common CPTSD co-diagnosis), let me tell you, some of us really struggle to figure out situations that others have never had to think twice about. There’s this feeling here that if someone is asking “too many” questions that it indicates they need more tough love. I hate this about this place. It you’re starting to recognize someone’s username to the point where you want to make jokes about what they’re asking that’s an indication they won’t benefit from your wisdom.
It wasn’t until I started getting into Reddit (and specifically subreddits for neurodivergent folks) that I realized how fucked up the culture here is — and I stopped using AskMeFi and started using Reddit. No longer did I have to spend hours trying to write a question that wasn’t going to be taken the wrong way. The way people get rewarded here for questioning the premise of questions and assuming that how we experience the world is the same as everyone else so therefore things that are easy for us are easy for others is doing so much harm.
posted by the thorn bushes have roses at 11:46 PM on February 17 [23 favorites]
I usually stay out of MeTa threads but I wanted to unmute for a second to thank nouvelle-personne for the 100 megaton truth bombs she's been dropping here. I appreciate your perspective and how well you communicate it.
It's clear to me this was a major mod screw up on several fronts. One of the reasons I avoid MeTa threads is that they no longer produce change. At best, someone updates a policy (that is ignored) or forms a committee (that does nothing). Maybe I'm cynical, but the mod team will probably fumble the next challenge in a similar way. I would love to be proven wrong. Moderation is hard, important work and we as an organization and community seem to be getting worse at it.
posted by Horselover Fat at 6:27 AM on February 18 [12 favorites]
It's clear to me this was a major mod screw up on several fronts. One of the reasons I avoid MeTa threads is that they no longer produce change. At best, someone updates a policy (that is ignored) or forms a committee (that does nothing). Maybe I'm cynical, but the mod team will probably fumble the next challenge in a similar way. I would love to be proven wrong. Moderation is hard, important work and we as an organization and community seem to be getting worse at it.
posted by Horselover Fat at 6:27 AM on February 18 [12 favorites]
as per d-d: Looking at my past, using my past questions, judging me.
should this be modded away? we are all a click away from another MeFite opening up our history to weaponize (and often take out of context) a comment or post we've made in the past. Is this the kind of thing we expect the mods to address?
We jump on the mods for making quick calls, missing context, etc. This behaviour is true of many members of the community, also. I hope we aren't too focused on what needs to change with the modding. Modding is one component of a community, it can improve in this community, but this mess is reflective of a lot more than modding failures.
posted by ginger.beef at 6:59 AM on February 18 [2 favorites]
should this be modded away? we are all a click away from another MeFite opening up our history to weaponize (and often take out of context) a comment or post we've made in the past. Is this the kind of thing we expect the mods to address?
We jump on the mods for making quick calls, missing context, etc. This behaviour is true of many members of the community, also. I hope we aren't too focused on what needs to change with the modding. Modding is one component of a community, it can improve in this community, but this mess is reflective of a lot more than modding failures.
posted by ginger.beef at 6:59 AM on February 18 [2 favorites]
I used to be in the BIPOC board until shortly after this incident with n-p, and it was the direct precursor to me exiting the BIPOC board. That thread and its aftermath were a wake up call to me personally on how much of the work of the BIPOC board is theater, the fact that it exists just for the sake of existing "look, we have a BIPOC board!" - and how the board lacks both power and any semblance of an agenda.
As far as I know there has been no BIPOC board acknowledgement or steps taken or any kind of movement from the board towards making the community better. What is the point of the board? Damned if I know. I was in it for over a year and I have no idea what we did during that time. There was such a vast gulf between the ability of the moderators who were members of the board vs. the non-moderators who were members of the board, specifically in our capacity to DO anything on the site, affect policy or effect change, hold anyone accountable, etc. that the non-moderator members might as well have not existed, not been on the board.
There was no way for the BIPOC board to address the harms to the community (let alone to individual MeFites like n-p) in the days and weeks following. The mods are not answerable to the BIPOC board. The BIPOC board has no effect on moderator decisions or policy. When n-p left, this became more clear to me than it had ever been.
Since I wasn't able to see any way to work to change policy to prevent what happened to n-p from happening again, I bowed out of the BIPOC board, and also been away from Metafilter since then. It's difficult for me to feel like a part of this community now.
posted by MiraK at 7:38 AM on February 18 [48 favorites]
As far as I know there has been no BIPOC board acknowledgement or steps taken or any kind of movement from the board towards making the community better. What is the point of the board? Damned if I know. I was in it for over a year and I have no idea what we did during that time. There was such a vast gulf between the ability of the moderators who were members of the board vs. the non-moderators who were members of the board, specifically in our capacity to DO anything on the site, affect policy or effect change, hold anyone accountable, etc. that the non-moderator members might as well have not existed, not been on the board.
There was no way for the BIPOC board to address the harms to the community (let alone to individual MeFites like n-p) in the days and weeks following. The mods are not answerable to the BIPOC board. The BIPOC board has no effect on moderator decisions or policy. When n-p left, this became more clear to me than it had ever been.
Since I wasn't able to see any way to work to change policy to prevent what happened to n-p from happening again, I bowed out of the BIPOC board, and also been away from Metafilter since then. It's difficult for me to feel like a part of this community now.
posted by MiraK at 7:38 AM on February 18 [48 favorites]
I've felt for a very long time that the BIPOC board was simply checking a box.
Disappointing doesn't even begin to cover it.
posted by WithWildAbandon at 8:42 AM on February 18 [7 favorites]
Disappointing doesn't even begin to cover it.
posted by WithWildAbandon at 8:42 AM on February 18 [7 favorites]
Yeah I'm not sure what to say except :( - definitely reading and taking everything on board the best I can. Mira, I'll reach out in MeMail later - totally fine if you don't want to answer - just with some questions as we stand up the MOC. Reaching out to the BIPOC board was/is on this week's to-do list.
posted by warriorqueen at 9:09 AM on February 18 [9 favorites]
posted by warriorqueen at 9:09 AM on February 18 [9 favorites]
This is to amplify and Nth nouvelle-personne's comment from upthread, because I can't be here without mentioning it:
> You guys think it's ok to write a post saying someone is "dying"????
> Ok so wait. You people actually think this thread is ok? THIS made it past the hallowed queue?
> He has a cancer diagnosis, is undergoing treatment, is still up and about taking ubers and visiting friends, but you think it's not mentally destabilizing for a person, and incredibly anxiety provoking, to say multiple times that he's "dying"?
> He's not fucking "dying", he's ill, and how fucking dare you write about someone that way????? How callous can you be????
> THIS IS NOT AN INTELLECTUAL EXERCISE
> Y'all are FUCKING MESSED UP
> EDIT THE FUCKING POST NOW AND APOLOGIZE TO DD. What the FUCKING FUCK
How is this post still up in this form? Can the mods not even ask the poster's permission to edit out the bits that talk about another user "dying"? This is harm, direct harm, targeted harm to a metafilter user. Are the mods going to ignore it?
posted by MiraK at 10:19 AM on February 18 [16 favorites]
> You guys think it's ok to write a post saying someone is "dying"????
> Ok so wait. You people actually think this thread is ok? THIS made it past the hallowed queue?
> He has a cancer diagnosis, is undergoing treatment, is still up and about taking ubers and visiting friends, but you think it's not mentally destabilizing for a person, and incredibly anxiety provoking, to say multiple times that he's "dying"?
> He's not fucking "dying", he's ill, and how fucking dare you write about someone that way????? How callous can you be????
> THIS IS NOT AN INTELLECTUAL EXERCISE
> Y'all are FUCKING MESSED UP
> EDIT THE FUCKING POST NOW AND APOLOGIZE TO DD. What the FUCKING FUCK
How is this post still up in this form? Can the mods not even ask the poster's permission to edit out the bits that talk about another user "dying"? This is harm, direct harm, targeted harm to a metafilter user. Are the mods going to ignore it?
posted by MiraK at 10:19 AM on February 18 [16 favorites]
Brandon said he had decided not to edit it. I reached out and asked and I believe the poster did as well.
posted by warriorqueen at 10:47 AM on February 18 [1 favorite]
posted by warriorqueen at 10:47 AM on February 18 [1 favorite]
d_d has already seen this thread and checked in about it, so the harm has already been done. Not much point in editing the post at this point. It'd only make even less sense to someone catching up.
posted by echo target at 10:47 AM on February 18 [2 favorites]
posted by echo target at 10:47 AM on February 18 [2 favorites]
Brandon said he had decided not to edit it.
The queue works guys, please stop asking questions about this infallible process.
posted by phunniemee at 10:48 AM on February 18 [12 favorites]
The queue works guys, please stop asking questions about this infallible process.
posted by phunniemee at 10:48 AM on February 18 [12 favorites]
The queue works guys, please stop asking questions about this infallible process.
There's a whole MeTa about the queue. If there is one thing anyone who frequents MeTa knows at this point, it is your feelings about the queue. How is the constant adding of heat yielding any light whatsoever? What is the purpose of this?
posted by ginger.beef at 11:00 AM on February 18 [14 favorites]
There's a whole MeTa about the queue. If there is one thing anyone who frequents MeTa knows at this point, it is your feelings about the queue. How is the constant adding of heat yielding any light whatsoever? What is the purpose of this?
posted by ginger.beef at 11:00 AM on February 18 [14 favorites]
The phrase "own goal" feels worn out, but I can't think of a better way to describe this whole scenario. We're going to relitigate "what happened" in a two month old thread? With no new information or insight to discuss? At a mod's suggestion?! Only now we're going to try to blame the original question asker for the whole situation?! And while we're at it, we'll talk about someone's private medical situation behind their back?!!
And somehow, even given that awful setup, the thread has gone EVEN WORSE than I would have thought. It's driven off d_d, and revealed that even the members of the BIPOC board don't know what the BIPOC board does. Even more people are even more angry with each other, and there's been no decision to do anything even slightly differently in the future.
Perhaps future MetaTalks can pose an actual question that could be answered, like "Do we value civility over correctness?" or "Is it acceptable to consider context from an asker's previous questions when answering in Ask?" Or maybe we'll all meet here again in April to see if we can get yet another poster from the original thread to button.
posted by echo target at 11:13 AM on February 18 [15 favorites]
And somehow, even given that awful setup, the thread has gone EVEN WORSE than I would have thought. It's driven off d_d, and revealed that even the members of the BIPOC board don't know what the BIPOC board does. Even more people are even more angry with each other, and there's been no decision to do anything even slightly differently in the future.
Perhaps future MetaTalks can pose an actual question that could be answered, like "Do we value civility over correctness?" or "Is it acceptable to consider context from an asker's previous questions when answering in Ask?" Or maybe we'll all meet here again in April to see if we can get yet another poster from the original thread to button.
posted by echo target at 11:13 AM on February 18 [15 favorites]
... and revealed that even the members of the BIPOC board don't know what the BIPOC board does.
I don't think you meant to say that knowing this is a bad outcome, but I think it is worth saying that revealing this is a good outcome of this post.
A lot of people have probably taken some comfort believing that even if MetaFilter is in a disjointed, liminal state, at least their values are being reflected in the way this site is organized, and have taken the site's assertions about the board at face value. They've paid money to support this particular work. I don't often say anyone deserves anything, but members of this community deserve to hear this particular conversation play out.
posted by A forgotten .plan file at 11:27 AM on February 18 [4 favorites]
I don't think you meant to say that knowing this is a bad outcome, but I think it is worth saying that revealing this is a good outcome of this post.
A lot of people have probably taken some comfort believing that even if MetaFilter is in a disjointed, liminal state, at least their values are being reflected in the way this site is organized, and have taken the site's assertions about the board at face value. They've paid money to support this particular work. I don't often say anyone deserves anything, but members of this community deserve to hear this particular conversation play out.
posted by A forgotten .plan file at 11:27 AM on February 18 [4 favorites]
What is the purpose of this?
What is the purpose of anything. We're all collectively watching the death throes of a website I believe most of us have cared a great deal about over the last few decades. None of this has a greater purpose, none of it matters, it's all just more bullshit for the couple hundred of us active users who are still uselessly flailing around here. Everyone else is gone or has given up.
What I do care about is that when Metafilter dies that no one comes back to post mortem it by saying oh it's nouvelle-personne's fault for being mouthy or dubious_dude's fault for being anxious or phunniemee's fault for being mean or cassowaries' fault for confusing people who don't know what Australia is or anotherpanacea's fault for writing a tone deaf MeTa or warriorqueen's fault for not making the MOC sin eater for the mods or etc etc etc. When Metafilter dies it'll be squarely the result of the absolutely shitass poor management it suffered in its twilight years and the staff's steadfast refusal to try to do anything differently or more thoughtfully or with more than 2 contiguous weeks worth of effort. If we're all fucking dying here, I'm using my last comment to remind people why.
posted by phunniemee at 11:59 AM on February 18 [37 favorites]
What is the purpose of anything. We're all collectively watching the death throes of a website I believe most of us have cared a great deal about over the last few decades. None of this has a greater purpose, none of it matters, it's all just more bullshit for the couple hundred of us active users who are still uselessly flailing around here. Everyone else is gone or has given up.
What I do care about is that when Metafilter dies that no one comes back to post mortem it by saying oh it's nouvelle-personne's fault for being mouthy or dubious_dude's fault for being anxious or phunniemee's fault for being mean or cassowaries' fault for confusing people who don't know what Australia is or anotherpanacea's fault for writing a tone deaf MeTa or warriorqueen's fault for not making the MOC sin eater for the mods or etc etc etc. When Metafilter dies it'll be squarely the result of the absolutely shitass poor management it suffered in its twilight years and the staff's steadfast refusal to try to do anything differently or more thoughtfully or with more than 2 contiguous weeks worth of effort. If we're all fucking dying here, I'm using my last comment to remind people why.
posted by phunniemee at 11:59 AM on February 18 [37 favorites]
> d_d has already seen this thread and checked in about it, so the harm has already been done.
If d_d is human, which he is, he will be reading this thread multiple times, checking back in and wondering how he could have communicated his feelings better and looking at what we are saying about him now. The harm has already been done, yes, but the harm is also continuing to be done for as long as the wording stays up. With not even a mod note near the wording to say that the user has requested its removal but it's staying up! For shame!
Protecting readers' right to have perfect and full context for a thread is not more important than a real person being harmed so directly and in such a targeted way. Other users will be happy to explain what's happening to anyone who is confused, surely. There is no reason this should stay up.
It takes my breath away that Brandon told one user in private that he was not going to edit anything, and that is the full extent of the moderator response to targeted cruelty towards one ill user of this site.
Where is your humanity, Brandon? Other moderators? What does your conscience say when you weigh someone's callous judgments of a human being's mortality as nbd, meh, or necessary because of ~context~?
posted by MiraK at 12:18 PM on February 18 [21 favorites]
If d_d is human, which he is, he will be reading this thread multiple times, checking back in and wondering how he could have communicated his feelings better and looking at what we are saying about him now. The harm has already been done, yes, but the harm is also continuing to be done for as long as the wording stays up. With not even a mod note near the wording to say that the user has requested its removal but it's staying up! For shame!
Protecting readers' right to have perfect and full context for a thread is not more important than a real person being harmed so directly and in such a targeted way. Other users will be happy to explain what's happening to anyone who is confused, surely. There is no reason this should stay up.
It takes my breath away that Brandon told one user in private that he was not going to edit anything, and that is the full extent of the moderator response to targeted cruelty towards one ill user of this site.
Where is your humanity, Brandon? Other moderators? What does your conscience say when you weigh someone's callous judgments of a human being's mortality as nbd, meh, or necessary because of ~context~?
posted by MiraK at 12:18 PM on February 18 [21 favorites]
We're all collectively watching the death throes of a website I believe most of us have cared a great deal about over the last few decades.
please, speak for yourself.
If I'm seeing the failure/death throes of anything, it's Metatalk as it currently functions -- not the site as a whole.
But I'm not even sold on the Metatalk doomism. This particular Meta was always a bad idea. The hope is that we learn something from it ... or as echo target just put it:
The phrase "own goal" feels worn out, but I can't think of a better way to describe this whole scenario. We're going to relitigate "what happened" in a two month old thread? With no new information or insight to discuss?
(and so on).
Let's not do this kind of stuff. Again, I'm going to point back to Conflict Resolution 101.
Search for common ground and a better future. Focus on what is desirable and possible now - you can't negotiate the past.
posted by philip-random at 12:25 PM on February 18 [6 favorites]
please, speak for yourself.
If I'm seeing the failure/death throes of anything, it's Metatalk as it currently functions -- not the site as a whole.
But I'm not even sold on the Metatalk doomism. This particular Meta was always a bad idea. The hope is that we learn something from it ... or as echo target just put it:
The phrase "own goal" feels worn out, but I can't think of a better way to describe this whole scenario. We're going to relitigate "what happened" in a two month old thread? With no new information or insight to discuss?
(and so on).
Let's not do this kind of stuff. Again, I'm going to point back to Conflict Resolution 101.
Search for common ground and a better future. Focus on what is desirable and possible now - you can't negotiate the past.
posted by philip-random at 12:25 PM on February 18 [6 favorites]
We're all collectively watching the death throes of a website
Don't be doomerist. MetaFilter is shrinking. It's not dying, and it's never been dying. I hear people say that a lot in MeTa, and yet there's still posts on MeFi every day, there's still Asks every day, it's still a community - it's just not thee same community, in size or in composition, it was 10 years ago. Are there fewer users now? Hell yes there are. Does that mean this site is "dying"? No. It's still chugging along, in its own small way, doing its own small thing. It's not what it was. Nothing on the internet is the same it was 10 years ago. And that's fine! People change. Things change. MeFi is gonna be a small niche site for a small number of people at this point. So be it.
it's all just more bullshit for the couple hundred of us active users who are still uselessly flailing around here.
I don't find MeFi useless, at all. Please stop doing this.
If we're all fucking dying here, I'm using my last comment to remind people why.
You don't speak for me. "We" are not dying. I like it here. I still read most every thread on MetaFilter/Ask/Talk, even if I don't comment in MeFi and only participate in Ask and here. I'm still donating every month, and I'm still going to do so through whatever transition has already started and will be continuing over the next period of time. So don't include me in your "we're all fucking dying" cohort.
"MetaFilter is dying" is a poisonous narrative, has been for a while, and it needs to be stopped. "Metafilter is changing in ways I do not like" is probably closer to the mark, for a lot of folks, and that's a different discussion. But it's not dying.
posted by pdb at 12:25 PM on February 18 [23 favorites]
Don't be doomerist. MetaFilter is shrinking. It's not dying, and it's never been dying. I hear people say that a lot in MeTa, and yet there's still posts on MeFi every day, there's still Asks every day, it's still a community - it's just not thee same community, in size or in composition, it was 10 years ago. Are there fewer users now? Hell yes there are. Does that mean this site is "dying"? No. It's still chugging along, in its own small way, doing its own small thing. It's not what it was. Nothing on the internet is the same it was 10 years ago. And that's fine! People change. Things change. MeFi is gonna be a small niche site for a small number of people at this point. So be it.
it's all just more bullshit for the couple hundred of us active users who are still uselessly flailing around here.
I don't find MeFi useless, at all. Please stop doing this.
If we're all fucking dying here, I'm using my last comment to remind people why.
You don't speak for me. "We" are not dying. I like it here. I still read most every thread on MetaFilter/Ask/Talk, even if I don't comment in MeFi and only participate in Ask and here. I'm still donating every month, and I'm still going to do so through whatever transition has already started and will be continuing over the next period of time. So don't include me in your "we're all fucking dying" cohort.
"MetaFilter is dying" is a poisonous narrative, has been for a while, and it needs to be stopped. "Metafilter is changing in ways I do not like" is probably closer to the mark, for a lot of folks, and that's a different discussion. But it's not dying.
posted by pdb at 12:25 PM on February 18 [23 favorites]
I read phunniemee's comment as an angry grief, and so it is odd to see subsequent comments essentially saying you're grieving wrong.
posted by mittens at 12:33 PM on February 18 [18 favorites]
posted by mittens at 12:33 PM on February 18 [18 favorites]
I'm not grieving wrong, I'm grieving in ways you do not like 😘
posted by phunniemee at 12:35 PM on February 18 [18 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 12:35 PM on February 18 [18 favorites]
"Brandon Blatcher and Loup both have absolutely GARBAGE race politics and zero awareness of the racism they enact in their shit moderation of this site??? BEING ANTI-RACIST [...etc]"
No they don't. And your ranting makes mefi a worse place. You don't talk to people who work somewhere like that.
I know you think anybody who tells you "no" is tone policing etc. And you're doing the lords work. But you you're not.
Again: Don't rant at people who work here. If you find yourself reaching for the caps lock again take a breath and go outside.
This whole post and relitigating this occurrence was a bad idea.
posted by jouke at 12:38 PM on February 18 [4 favorites]
No they don't. And your ranting makes mefi a worse place. You don't talk to people who work somewhere like that.
I know you think anybody who tells you "no" is tone policing etc. And you're doing the lords work. But you you're not.
Again: Don't rant at people who work here. If you find yourself reaching for the caps lock again take a breath and go outside.
This whole post and relitigating this occurrence was a bad idea.
posted by jouke at 12:38 PM on February 18 [4 favorites]
This whole post and relitigating this occurrence was a bad idea.
It was at the request of the mods.
posted by phunniemee at 12:43 PM on February 18 [13 favorites]
It was at the request of the mods.
posted by phunniemee at 12:43 PM on February 18 [13 favorites]
I read phunniemee's comment as an angry grief
Other people did not read it that way. Including me.
posted by Glinn at 12:44 PM on February 18 [4 favorites]
Other people did not read it that way. Including me.
posted by Glinn at 12:44 PM on February 18 [4 favorites]
Other people did not read it that way. Including me.
Ok.
posted by fennario at 12:49 PM on February 18 [7 favorites]
Ok.
posted by fennario at 12:49 PM on February 18 [7 favorites]
Remember when speaking for others would get your comment removed?
posted by bowbeacon at 12:50 PM on February 18 [6 favorites]
posted by bowbeacon at 12:50 PM on February 18 [6 favorites]
a succinct, consensus account of what went wrong
Sounds like a job for MetaTalk!
posted by Mid at 12:54 PM on February 18 [2 favorites]
Sounds like a job for MetaTalk!
posted by Mid at 12:54 PM on February 18 [2 favorites]
“ Brandon Blatcher and Loup both have absolutely GARBAGE race politics and zero awareness of the racism they enact in their shit moderation of this site??? BEING ANTI-RACIST [...etc]"”
Idk your actual race but your profile shows a white cartoon character so I’m guessing white. N-p is making a comment she’s qualified to make, as a Black woman, and you should tread cautiously before telling her she is wrong wo qualifying your own racialized experience. If you read the whole comment and the whole thread, the context is that having mods of color who reinforce white supremacy due to their own internalized racism is not solving metafilter’s racism problem, but rather exacerbating it.
posted by toodleydoodley at 12:58 PM on February 18 [18 favorites]
Idk your actual race but your profile shows a white cartoon character so I’m guessing white. N-p is making a comment she’s qualified to make, as a Black woman, and you should tread cautiously before telling her she is wrong wo qualifying your own racialized experience. If you read the whole comment and the whole thread, the context is that having mods of color who reinforce white supremacy due to their own internalized racism is not solving metafilter’s racism problem, but rather exacerbating it.
posted by toodleydoodley at 12:58 PM on February 18 [18 favorites]
It was at the request of the mods.
posted by phunniemee at 12:43 PM on February 18
I think that's a really uncharitable reading of events.
You said: "Is this a fucking joke to you? The only nouvelle-personne MeTa that mattered died in the queue because moderators said no. Please be serious. Stop telling people to put in MeTas when y'all choked the only one that mattered."
anotherpanacea says, in response: "I am preparing a MeTa post on that."
Brandon says, in response to you: "If members do have an issue with something was handled, MeTa is and has been a recourse for that and it will continued to be suggested for it. Folks can choose to see that as some sort of joke, but that's their personal choice to make." and then, in response to anotherpanacea, "Thank you!"
Unless I'm missing some additional context, which is possible, how can that be interpreted as "at the request of the mods"....?
posted by kbanas at 1:05 PM on February 18 [3 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 12:43 PM on February 18
I think that's a really uncharitable reading of events.
You said: "Is this a fucking joke to you? The only nouvelle-personne MeTa that mattered died in the queue because moderators said no. Please be serious. Stop telling people to put in MeTas when y'all choked the only one that mattered."
anotherpanacea says, in response: "I am preparing a MeTa post on that."
Brandon says, in response to you: "If members do have an issue with something was handled, MeTa is and has been a recourse for that and it will continued to be suggested for it. Folks can choose to see that as some sort of joke, but that's their personal choice to make." and then, in response to anotherpanacea, "Thank you!"
Unless I'm missing some additional context, which is possible, how can that be interpreted as "at the request of the mods"....?
posted by kbanas at 1:05 PM on February 18 [3 favorites]
Based on the retelling of someone whose anxiety is so severe that they cannot eat popcorn without community support
........
However, were those comments about me really necessary? "Coming across as extremely badly", this is my fault, those kinds of comments, snarky comments about my past Asks ("can't eat popcorn without community support"... wow)... I honestly felt like I was under a witch hunt. Looking at my past, using my past questions, judging me. I am already struggling with all the stress of the political climate nowadays, my future job/livelihood certainty, and my own health/lifespan. I didn't need this on top of everything.
Hmm words have meaning and can hurt. Who could have possibly seen that coming?
posted by cooker girl at 1:13 PM on February 18 [10 favorites]
........
However, were those comments about me really necessary? "Coming across as extremely badly", this is my fault, those kinds of comments, snarky comments about my past Asks ("can't eat popcorn without community support"... wow)... I honestly felt like I was under a witch hunt. Looking at my past, using my past questions, judging me. I am already struggling with all the stress of the political climate nowadays, my future job/livelihood certainty, and my own health/lifespan. I didn't need this on top of everything.
Hmm words have meaning and can hurt. Who could have possibly seen that coming?
posted by cooker girl at 1:13 PM on February 18 [10 favorites]
Unless I'm missing some additional context, which is possible, how can that be interpreted as "at the request of the mods"....?
Otherwise, if people to discuss the nouvelle-personne situation, I'd recommend starting a new MeTa. It's being talked about in another Meta currently, it keeps coming up in various other MeTas, so it would be productive to have a thread devoted to that.posted by lapis at 1:37 PM on February 18 [9 favorites]
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 10:02 AM on February 15 [1 favorite +] [⚑]
Thanks lapis!
posted by kbanas at 1:38 PM on February 18 [1 favorite]
posted by kbanas at 1:38 PM on February 18 [1 favorite]
The breathtaking irony of tone-policing a Black woman in this thread, after ALL THIS, is... wow, it's really something. Jouke, outstanding job proving n-p's point about how racist this place is.
posted by maryellenreads at 1:38 PM on February 18 [25 favorites]
posted by maryellenreads at 1:38 PM on February 18 [25 favorites]
What really went wrong in this scenario? That is, what actually created the circumstances that led to that awful thread playing out the way it did? Simply, lack of leadership. It's easy to blame the mods or particular users for this and that and point fingers at people who are doing their best. That best may be woefully short of what is needed, but that's not the fault of the person doing their best, it's the fault of the person or group that should be training them and encouraging them to do better or, if they can't, moving them on. Nobody is leading the staff and there hasn't been any real or effective leadership for years. I hope the nascent board can step up and provide that leadership, I really do. Let's hope the farce that the BIPOC board has become isn't a predictor of how the board will operate. That's not to criticise those who have given up their time to be there - there's no mechanism for the output of such a board even to be properly considered because there's no captain to this ship and no-one to hold anyone accountable.
I agree our focus should be on the future, albeit informed by the past. Who is driving that future though? Without leadership, the ship will zig-zag across the ocean until it eventually finds land the hard way.
posted by dg at 1:58 PM on February 18 [8 favorites]
I agree our focus should be on the future, albeit informed by the past. Who is driving that future though? Without leadership, the ship will zig-zag across the ocean until it eventually finds land the hard way.
posted by dg at 1:58 PM on February 18 [8 favorites]
I've been struggling to find a way to word this all day but I am not impressed with some version of "bUt No RuLe SaYs i HaVe tO" as a retort - including by someone setting themselves out for the Moderation Oversight Committee - to the suggestion that the two people that were going to be discussed should have been given a heads up* in a "fraught" (OPs word) post that discussed sensitive and personal issues. The FAQ very much says that being considerate and respectful, and sensitive to context, is part of the site guidelines, and that failed here from the moment of the original post. If this is the Moderation Oversight Committee vibe, I don't see moderation improving. This entire post shows such poor judgment, in my opinion.
*I'm not even saying asking their permission, just the courtesy of a basic heads up, although if we were being our best selves I think we would ask and get their buy-in before writing a post like this. If we want to do anything to figure out what could have gone better in the original AskMe thread, coming from a place of respecting the people involved is a good starting point.
posted by fennario at 2:05 PM on February 18 [15 favorites]
*I'm not even saying asking their permission, just the courtesy of a basic heads up, although if we were being our best selves I think we would ask and get their buy-in before writing a post like this. If we want to do anything to figure out what could have gone better in the original AskMe thread, coming from a place of respecting the people involved is a good starting point.
posted by fennario at 2:05 PM on February 18 [15 favorites]
Based on the retelling of someone whose anxiety is so severe that they cannot eat popcorn without community support
>Hmm words have meaning and can hurt. Who could have possibly seen that coming?
I stand by what I said. Having severe anxiety isn't a moral failing. It is an important context to have when receiving new information from someone with severe anxiety, since it colors every experience you have.
I am claustrophobic and getting much worse about it as I age. I had a panic attack the last time I got on an airplane. If someone tells me they're travelling this weekend and I remind them that they're getting on a death tube in the sky from which there will be no escape, it's important context to know that the information is coming from someone who is an absolute bug out menace to her fellow passengers without a diazepam.
Can I frequently be an asshole in the way that I communicate? Yes, and I can own that. You don't like it that's cool, stop favoriting my shit. But you know what I don't do? Make leadership decisions about this website. I'd love if the folks who do have that power could take ownership over their actions, too.
posted by phunniemee at 2:12 PM on February 18 [10 favorites]
>Hmm words have meaning and can hurt. Who could have possibly seen that coming?
I stand by what I said. Having severe anxiety isn't a moral failing. It is an important context to have when receiving new information from someone with severe anxiety, since it colors every experience you have.
I am claustrophobic and getting much worse about it as I age. I had a panic attack the last time I got on an airplane. If someone tells me they're travelling this weekend and I remind them that they're getting on a death tube in the sky from which there will be no escape, it's important context to know that the information is coming from someone who is an absolute bug out menace to her fellow passengers without a diazepam.
Can I frequently be an asshole in the way that I communicate? Yes, and I can own that. You don't like it that's cool, stop favoriting my shit. But you know what I don't do? Make leadership decisions about this website. I'd love if the folks who do have that power could take ownership over their actions, too.
posted by phunniemee at 2:12 PM on February 18 [10 favorites]
If this is the Moderation Oversight Committee vibe, I don't see moderation improving. This entire post shows such poor judgment, in my opinion.
Official from me as the de facto setter-upper: It is not the vibe for the committee.
I will point out that the scope of the committee remains to a) be a place for second thought and for members to come to about individual moderation decisions and to work towards resolving them b) gain a better understanding of issues around moderation. This is a short-term approach on the order of 6 months once we're up and running, so that when we have a permanent board there's more information from an informed member perspective.
Unofficial sharing from me: I'm not speaking for anotherpanacea here but I will say the committee has discussed this post and I would in general characterize things as:
1) This post was not discussed with the committee before it went up and although I haven't taken a poll because well, here it is, I don't think a majority of the committee would have supported it in this form. FWIW, I would not, although I kind of hate having to say that. But I will say it because I think the issues in this post are really core to important principles on this site and in general.
My initial response was not to post in it except to clarify that, but I ignored my better instincts in the hope that we could talk about some of the structural issues. I don't think that was met, and I rushed in feeling pressured, and I regret that.
2) There was a request to remove the MOC reference in the post but that was denied, and I guess fair enough.
3) Having more formal language and processes for when things are official is definitely something the MOC will always do from now on, so if it doesn't say official, it isn't official (and members are asked to make it clear when they are speaking personally, although being a group of humans, errors may occur. However, it's much easier to say all official comms will be officially labelled.)
4) Part of the weirdness of things right now is just that we ended up with a pretty large committee with somewhat diverse views and so we're still feeling some things out that in a more typical structure would probably be more clear. My preference would have been to fly lower on the radar for a while but we keep getting brought up, so, glorious forming-storming stage is where we're at.
posted by warriorqueen at 2:32 PM on February 18 [14 favorites]
Official from me as the de facto setter-upper: It is not the vibe for the committee.
I will point out that the scope of the committee remains to a) be a place for second thought and for members to come to about individual moderation decisions and to work towards resolving them b) gain a better understanding of issues around moderation. This is a short-term approach on the order of 6 months once we're up and running, so that when we have a permanent board there's more information from an informed member perspective.
Unofficial sharing from me: I'm not speaking for anotherpanacea here but I will say the committee has discussed this post and I would in general characterize things as:
1) This post was not discussed with the committee before it went up and although I haven't taken a poll because well, here it is, I don't think a majority of the committee would have supported it in this form. FWIW, I would not, although I kind of hate having to say that. But I will say it because I think the issues in this post are really core to important principles on this site and in general.
My initial response was not to post in it except to clarify that, but I ignored my better instincts in the hope that we could talk about some of the structural issues. I don't think that was met, and I rushed in feeling pressured, and I regret that.
2) There was a request to remove the MOC reference in the post but that was denied, and I guess fair enough.
3) Having more formal language and processes for when things are official is definitely something the MOC will always do from now on, so if it doesn't say official, it isn't official (and members are asked to make it clear when they are speaking personally, although being a group of humans, errors may occur. However, it's much easier to say all official comms will be officially labelled.)
4) Part of the weirdness of things right now is just that we ended up with a pretty large committee with somewhat diverse views and so we're still feeling some things out that in a more typical structure would probably be more clear. My preference would have been to fly lower on the radar for a while but we keep getting brought up, so, glorious forming-storming stage is where we're at.
posted by warriorqueen at 2:32 PM on February 18 [14 favorites]
warriorqueen, I respect your response and some of it does not surprise me as I hoped this likely was not an official MOC action. You seem to be in a tough situation with mods and perhaps some committee members/volunteers jumping the gun in terms of referring issues to the MOC or appearing to act on its behalf. Almost poisoning the well, in a sense before, you can even really dig it and start pulling water. I think it is important and helpful for the community to understand that this was not written officially on behalf of or as cooperative action from the (still in set-up phase) MOC. Again, appreciate you responding.
posted by fennario at 2:40 PM on February 18 [7 favorites]
posted by fennario at 2:40 PM on February 18 [7 favorites]
Engaging only with the post here, and having watched the original train wreck go down.
I am someone who thinks the deletions on AskMe have gotten far too aggressive recently, and in particular have disagreed with several of Brandon's et al's deletions. This is not the topic here but sets my perspective.
I think the deletion of n_p's inflammatory comments was 100% correct. There is absolutely no need to bring up an asker's personal medical history for any reason, and using it to badger and insult them is simply cruel. I also think it was fine to hold back her clearly enraged ALLL CASPSL RANTIG@!&^#%$ MeTa post. Had she stuck around for 15 whole fucking minutes I'm sure she'd have been able to work out a more reasonably phrased way to call a bunch of strangers assholes without calling them literal murderers who clearly suggest murdering this black man.
Which brings me to my next point: as some may have noticed, I am very active on Ask, and have been for nearly a decade (I lurked since the literal beginning). And during that time, I have repeatedly noticed n_p as someone who seems always willing to make nasty or snide personal comments about other users. I have noticed this both directed at individuals, and also at entire categories and classes of people. I know I can get salty here at times, but she has always stood out to me as especially mean, and somehow continually getting away with it.
So I'm not at all sad to see her take her ball and leave.
d_d is another story entirely. I mostly only known him to have asked questions. And yes I may have rolled my eyes at some of his continuing problems. But damn, what a rough lot he's been dealt, and for all that I've never seen him be mean here to anyone in any way. Leaving aside the thorny substance of the ill-fated question about a bad uber trip, he didn't cause any problem and certainly didn't deserve to be publicly humiliated for his medical conditions. I hope he's in ok-ish health and eventually comes back.
posted by SaltySalticid at 2:45 PM on February 18 [7 favorites]
I am someone who thinks the deletions on AskMe have gotten far too aggressive recently, and in particular have disagreed with several of Brandon's et al's deletions. This is not the topic here but sets my perspective.
I think the deletion of n_p's inflammatory comments was 100% correct. There is absolutely no need to bring up an asker's personal medical history for any reason, and using it to badger and insult them is simply cruel. I also think it was fine to hold back her clearly enraged ALLL CASPSL RANTIG@!&^#%$ MeTa post. Had she stuck around for 15 whole fucking minutes I'm sure she'd have been able to work out a more reasonably phrased way to call a bunch of strangers assholes without calling them literal murderers who clearly suggest murdering this black man.
Which brings me to my next point: as some may have noticed, I am very active on Ask, and have been for nearly a decade (I lurked since the literal beginning). And during that time, I have repeatedly noticed n_p as someone who seems always willing to make nasty or snide personal comments about other users. I have noticed this both directed at individuals, and also at entire categories and classes of people. I know I can get salty here at times, but she has always stood out to me as especially mean, and somehow continually getting away with it.
So I'm not at all sad to see her take her ball and leave.
d_d is another story entirely. I mostly only known him to have asked questions. And yes I may have rolled my eyes at some of his continuing problems. But damn, what a rough lot he's been dealt, and for all that I've never seen him be mean here to anyone in any way. Leaving aside the thorny substance of the ill-fated question about a bad uber trip, he didn't cause any problem and certainly didn't deserve to be publicly humiliated for his medical conditions. I hope he's in ok-ish health and eventually comes back.
posted by SaltySalticid at 2:45 PM on February 18 [7 favorites]
The way people talk about loup is really worse--it's become this running fucking joke around here that they're on a performance improvement plan and have an accountability partner,
Please read item 2 under Admin.
posted by phunniemee at 2:47 PM on February 18 [9 favorites]
Please read item 2 under Admin.
posted by phunniemee at 2:47 PM on February 18 [9 favorites]
Again, appreciate you responding.
No prob. I’m rushing out to drop one kid off, pick one up, and go to agility with the dog but in a quick skim of current comments think it will be obvious there are individual views here.
And I was probably not clear enough here.
posted by warriorqueen at 2:53 PM on February 18 [1 favorite]
No prob. I’m rushing out to drop one kid off, pick one up, and go to agility with the dog but in a quick skim of current comments think it will be obvious there are individual views here.
And I was probably not clear enough here.
posted by warriorqueen at 2:53 PM on February 18 [1 favorite]
There is an option where things are not deleted, where moderators have a sense that "call the police due to a misunderstanding" is a dangerous overreaction, and where they leave a comment in the thread asking people to re-think that (or a "that's been covered, no need to repeat it").
posted by lapis at 2:54 PM on February 18 [3 favorites]
posted by lapis at 2:54 PM on February 18 [3 favorites]
anotherpanacea, please stop digging. The mods can defend themselves or not, and you've demonstrated various misunderstandings in this thread.
posted by sagc at 2:55 PM on February 18 [26 favorites]
posted by sagc at 2:55 PM on February 18 [26 favorites]
I felt it deserved the medical history I mentioned above
Whether or not it deserved this, there is a SPECIFIC thing that has been brought up repeatedly, and STILL needs to be changed. To write in a public post the person may see, that they are "dying of cancer" is utterly thoughtless and horrible. I don't think you meant it that way, but it is that way.
COULD WE PLEASE CHANGE THIS to "living with a cancer diagnosis". Surely you can see the difference?
It should have been enough when n_p mentioned it the first time. Or at least the second time. Seriously, please change this?
posted by Glinn at 2:58 PM on February 18 [31 favorites]
Whether or not it deserved this, there is a SPECIFIC thing that has been brought up repeatedly, and STILL needs to be changed. To write in a public post the person may see, that they are "dying of cancer" is utterly thoughtless and horrible. I don't think you meant it that way, but it is that way.
COULD WE PLEASE CHANGE THIS to "living with a cancer diagnosis". Surely you can see the difference?
It should have been enough when n_p mentioned it the first time. Or at least the second time. Seriously, please change this?
posted by Glinn at 2:58 PM on February 18 [31 favorites]
The mods' silence and resolute inaction in spite of the OP's desire to reword their post is truly damning. Shame on the mods.
posted by MiraK at 3:24 PM on February 18 [5 favorites]
posted by MiraK at 3:24 PM on February 18 [5 favorites]
I didn't like the rewrite either. Please just make some kind of change to remove the offensive things in the original post, mods, as already stated. And don't fall back on, no we can't, because of a confusing historical record. Make it a little less ugly. Please.
posted by tiny frying pan at 3:28 PM on February 18 [2 favorites]
posted by tiny frying pan at 3:28 PM on February 18 [2 favorites]
Mod note: Hi folks, I am just now getting into this thread and seeing the request to change the language in the post. I've made that change and am catching up on other comments and requests that have been made.
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 3:30 PM on February 18 [6 favorites]
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 3:30 PM on February 18 [6 favorites]
if we were being our best selves I think we would ask and get their buy-in before writing a post like this.
you will not find universal agreement on that here
I happen to think, given the history and the emotions about this particular incident, it would have been better to approach the two MeFites and seek their input in advance, as you suggest. That way, we could start things with "n_p and d-d aren't interested, let's not do this MeTa" or "here are their statements on how they think things could have gone better, to get the discussion started." In hindsight, we would have been on surer footing. Maybe that's not how things are done elsewhere, but arguing from how things have worked in this case, the results we have speak for themselves.
posted by ginger.beef at 3:48 PM on February 18
you will not find universal agreement on that here
I happen to think, given the history and the emotions about this particular incident, it would have been better to approach the two MeFites and seek their input in advance, as you suggest. That way, we could start things with "n_p and d-d aren't interested, let's not do this MeTa" or "here are their statements on how they think things could have gone better, to get the discussion started." In hindsight, we would have been on surer footing. Maybe that's not how things are done elsewhere, but arguing from how things have worked in this case, the results we have speak for themselves.
posted by ginger.beef at 3:48 PM on February 18
Having more formal language and processes for when things are official is definitely something the MOC will always do from now on, so if it doesn't say official, it isn't official (and members are asked to make it clear when they are speaking personally
I think you've got this backward - I would assume a person was speaking on their own behalf unless they stated otherwise. Expecting members to remember to add the disclaimer on every comment except official ones strongly discourages members from engaging with others except as 'officials'. Surely the much-promised but little-delivered new site could include a capacity to flag comments as 'official' in some way so members can participate as members (mods included) and still be able to use their official voice when appropriate?
posted by dg at 3:55 PM on February 18 [3 favorites]
I think you've got this backward - I would assume a person was speaking on their own behalf unless they stated otherwise. Expecting members to remember to add the disclaimer on every comment except official ones strongly discourages members from engaging with others except as 'officials'. Surely the much-promised but little-delivered new site could include a capacity to flag comments as 'official' in some way so members can participate as members (mods included) and still be able to use their official voice when appropriate?
posted by dg at 3:55 PM on February 18 [3 favorites]
if we were being our best selves I think we would ask and get their buy-in before writing a post like this.
you will not find universal agreement on that here
Oh I know. Not here, nor anywhere.
posted by fennario at 3:58 PM on February 18
you will not find universal agreement on that here
Oh I know. Not here, nor anywhere.
posted by fennario at 3:58 PM on February 18
“ I have repeatedly noticed n_p as someone who seems always willing to make nasty or snide personal comments about other users. I have noticed this both directed at individuals, and also at entire categories and classes of people. I know I can get salty here at times, but she has always stood out to me as especially mean, and somehow continually getting away with it.”
I can’t really let this go by. I also have lurked since the very beginning, although I participate a lot less than you, and I haven’t really noticed that dynamic. What I have noticed, in my life on and off line, is that most of my friends and family who are not white have a lot less (and less and less) patience for white nonsense.
I’m not saying for sure that’s what it is, but I will say that if you’re not wading along hip-deep in micro aggressions every minute of every day, it’s easy not to notice how enraging everything is. But if you are, you’re going along on 90 pmuch all. The. Time. And so, you get more and more blunt and less and less patient and diplomatic, and before you know it, you’re an “angry” or “rude” or “nasty” Black person.
White people just seem so much more diplomatic because nobody’s trying us (or trying to kill us) every minute. No I’m not exaggerating.
posted by toodleydoodley at 5:19 PM on February 18 [41 favorites]
I can’t really let this go by. I also have lurked since the very beginning, although I participate a lot less than you, and I haven’t really noticed that dynamic. What I have noticed, in my life on and off line, is that most of my friends and family who are not white have a lot less (and less and less) patience for white nonsense.
I’m not saying for sure that’s what it is, but I will say that if you’re not wading along hip-deep in micro aggressions every minute of every day, it’s easy not to notice how enraging everything is. But if you are, you’re going along on 90 pmuch all. The. Time. And so, you get more and more blunt and less and less patient and diplomatic, and before you know it, you’re an “angry” or “rude” or “nasty” Black person.
White people just seem so much more diplomatic because nobody’s trying us (or trying to kill us) every minute. No I’m not exaggerating.
posted by toodleydoodley at 5:19 PM on February 18 [41 favorites]
The number of white dudes on this thread who have chosen to take an aggressive stance against n-p's stupendously generous comments on this thread is one of the reasons why this site no longer feels like home. I don't think this is an innocent lack of understanding of what Black people's experience is. It's more mendacious, a studied indifference to Black people's experience combined with innate dismissiveness and contempt for Black women's voices. This is the same white dude-ism that has infected everything else out in the real world, this site is not immune. Please let's be careful whose voices are amplified here. It's an easy slippery slope. The racism here is getting worse and more blatant (and I'm not talking about d_d's post - just this thread).
posted by MiraK at 6:01 PM on February 18 [41 favorites]
posted by MiraK at 6:01 PM on February 18 [41 favorites]
I do agree that what went down in the original Ask should be examined by the Mod Oversight Committee (MOC). But the investigation & discussion should have happened in a committee meeting. Send some MeMails to specific members to fact-find and then take it all back to the group: What guidelines were broken by commenters? Did mod decisions decrease or increase the tension? Are there mod guidelines at all? Was there a moment where escalation could have been defused?
And all we should have seen is a line or two of minutes from the meeting: "Discussed moderation actions in this Ask; rewriting Ask guidelines to include (ABC) and mod best practices to address (XYZ)." We'd see that issues are being discussed and actions are being taken and we'd be satisfied that the MOC has things under control. Progress!
Instead we're having another whole MetaTalk rehashing a two-month-old Ask, dragging dubious_dude and nouvelle-personne through this AGAIN with a director's cut of backlinks and commentary. This is not the way.
posted by kimberussell at 6:06 PM on February 18 [26 favorites]
And all we should have seen is a line or two of minutes from the meeting: "Discussed moderation actions in this Ask; rewriting Ask guidelines to include (ABC) and mod best practices to address (XYZ)." We'd see that issues are being discussed and actions are being taken and we'd be satisfied that the MOC has things under control. Progress!
Instead we're having another whole MetaTalk rehashing a two-month-old Ask, dragging dubious_dude and nouvelle-personne through this AGAIN with a director's cut of backlinks and commentary. This is not the way.
posted by kimberussell at 6:06 PM on February 18 [26 favorites]
Nouvelle-personne's name hasn't registered with me one or the other (I'm sure you're great! Usernames just don't tend to stick in my brain sometimes), so this is not at all directed at them. And I also agree with what toodleydoodley says about people of color's absolutely understandable frustration and anger being used as a way of dismissing them.
That said: There are things that are right, morally, regardless of who says them. It makes zero difference whether nouvelle-personne was sweet or salty or bitter in the past, or now, or in the future. Pointing out that people are being racist isn't something that becomes inaccurate if the person pointing it out doesn't do it in the perfect way. (And there's never a perfect way.) That's exactly what people mean by tone-policing. We're again, in this thread, getting caught up in nouvelle-personne's tone, or whether she's overall a nice friendly person, rather than engage with the racism displayed by the users and moderators in that thread and this one.
I think anotherpanacea set this thread up in such a way as to make it a battle about which of two people were right, when that thread and this thread should be much more about what systemic failures happened and are being perpetuated, and what all our roles in that were, and how we can do better next time.
posted by lapis at 6:12 PM on February 18 [33 favorites]
That said: There are things that are right, morally, regardless of who says them. It makes zero difference whether nouvelle-personne was sweet or salty or bitter in the past, or now, or in the future. Pointing out that people are being racist isn't something that becomes inaccurate if the person pointing it out doesn't do it in the perfect way. (And there's never a perfect way.) That's exactly what people mean by tone-policing. We're again, in this thread, getting caught up in nouvelle-personne's tone, or whether she's overall a nice friendly person, rather than engage with the racism displayed by the users and moderators in that thread and this one.
I think anotherpanacea set this thread up in such a way as to make it a battle about which of two people were right, when that thread and this thread should be much more about what systemic failures happened and are being perpetuated, and what all our roles in that were, and how we can do better next time.
posted by lapis at 6:12 PM on February 18 [33 favorites]
I missed this a few days ago, but sagc is absolutely correct here in terms of mod trust and how to stop threads from derailing:
A mod note saying "please be aware that you are all coming across as kinda racist here" would probably have done a lot to circumvent pretty much everything.
Seriously, i am going to keep banging this drum: mods need to be about 1000% more visible in threads than they currently are, and about 5% as likely to delete shit as they currently are. So many of the problems with community animosity and lack of trust in moderation could be mitigated if the mods were more willing to pop into a thread before everything goes completely to hell and just say "Hey, folks, this isn't okay".
posted by adrienneleigh at 6:42 PM on February 18 [23 favorites]
A mod note saying "please be aware that you are all coming across as kinda racist here" would probably have done a lot to circumvent pretty much everything.
Seriously, i am going to keep banging this drum: mods need to be about 1000% more visible in threads than they currently are, and about 5% as likely to delete shit as they currently are. So many of the problems with community animosity and lack of trust in moderation could be mitigated if the mods were more willing to pop into a thread before everything goes completely to hell and just say "Hey, folks, this isn't okay".
posted by adrienneleigh at 6:42 PM on February 18 [23 favorites]
agree
but it has to be pointed out that there was another very recent meta where the consensus seemed pretty strong that WE NEED TO GET RID OF THE META QUEUE. With the only one really arguing against it being the mod (Brandon) because the queue allowed him to organize his time in such a way as to be present for the metas should they begin to go completely to hell.
given the current functional reality of the site, it does feel like we're asking (demanding?) two mutually exclusive things.
The "we" here being perhaps two different groups but they're both proving pretty loud.
posted by philip-random at 7:04 PM on February 18 [1 favorite]
but it has to be pointed out that there was another very recent meta where the consensus seemed pretty strong that WE NEED TO GET RID OF THE META QUEUE. With the only one really arguing against it being the mod (Brandon) because the queue allowed him to organize his time in such a way as to be present for the metas should they begin to go completely to hell.
given the current functional reality of the site, it does feel like we're asking (demanding?) two mutually exclusive things.
The "we" here being perhaps two different groups but they're both proving pretty loud.
posted by philip-random at 7:04 PM on February 18 [1 favorite]
Please let's be careful whose voices are amplified here.
I WILL KEEP THAT IN MIND THE NEXT TIME I YELL ABOUT PEOPLE'S PRIVACY NOT BEING RESPECTED.
posted by clavdivs at 7:05 PM on February 18 [2 favorites]
I WILL KEEP THAT IN MIND THE NEXT TIME I YELL ABOUT PEOPLE'S PRIVACY NOT BEING RESPECTED.
posted by clavdivs at 7:05 PM on February 18 [2 favorites]
I don't think the mods need to be more visible in MeTa. I think they need to be more visible in the rest of the site. (Not to speak for adrienneleigh!)
posted by lapis at 7:06 PM on February 18 [2 favorites]
posted by lapis at 7:06 PM on February 18 [2 favorites]
mods need to be about 1000% more visible in threads than they currently are, and about 5% as likely to delete shit as they currently are. So many of the problems with community animosity and lack of trust in moderation could be mitigated if the mods were more willing to pop into a thread before everything goes completely to hell and just say "Hey, folks, this isn't okay".
Agreed 100%. But. For a moderation approach like that to work, there needs to be community guidelines in existence to guide such interventions and maximise consistent application, not the Kafkaesque-yet-inadequate set of rules that exist now. It's not enough to pop in and say 'this isn't OK', because that would just start a whole shitfight about 'why not' and 'who says'. This style of intervention needs to be 'this isn't OK because it's not consistent with <this> guideline'. It also requires a lot more moderators and for coverage to be 24/7.
Arguing for more mod presence is not mutually exclusive to arguing for removal of the MeTa queue, but both may be inconsistent with the existing moderation model that consumes a lot of the available funds. Amplifying this is the long-awaited shift to a non-profit that enables things like volunteer moderators, but nothing has been done (or could not have been, maybe) to put all the necessary things in place. I think we're all a bit impatient to get moving with a new model that doesn't exist just yet.
posted by dg at 7:15 PM on February 18 [2 favorites]
Agreed 100%. But. For a moderation approach like that to work, there needs to be community guidelines in existence to guide such interventions and maximise consistent application, not the Kafkaesque-yet-inadequate set of rules that exist now. It's not enough to pop in and say 'this isn't OK', because that would just start a whole shitfight about 'why not' and 'who says'. This style of intervention needs to be 'this isn't OK because it's not consistent with <this> guideline'. It also requires a lot more moderators and for coverage to be 24/7.
Arguing for more mod presence is not mutually exclusive to arguing for removal of the MeTa queue, but both may be inconsistent with the existing moderation model that consumes a lot of the available funds. Amplifying this is the long-awaited shift to a non-profit that enables things like volunteer moderators, but nothing has been done (or could not have been, maybe) to put all the necessary things in place. I think we're all a bit impatient to get moving with a new model that doesn't exist just yet.
posted by dg at 7:15 PM on February 18 [2 favorites]
I don't think the mods need to be more visible in MeTa. I think they need to be more visible in the rest of the site. (Not to speak for adrienneleigh!)
Yes, this is what i mean. I don't care nearly as much what the mods do in MeTa; it's always been the lightly-moderated area, or at least it was that until communications and trust started breaking down so badly between mods and users (these days the mods just do whatever they feel like in the Grey, too.) It's the rest of the community areas where the mods need to, like, actually be paying attention and intervening gently before things go off the rails.
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:17 PM on February 18 [7 favorites]
Yes, this is what i mean. I don't care nearly as much what the mods do in MeTa; it's always been the lightly-moderated area, or at least it was that until communications and trust started breaking down so badly between mods and users (these days the mods just do whatever they feel like in the Grey, too.) It's the rest of the community areas where the mods need to, like, actually be paying attention and intervening gently before things go off the rails.
posted by adrienneleigh at 7:17 PM on February 18 [7 favorites]
People say all sorts of dirty, gross, and racist stuff about loup and Brandon
I'm sorry, what? Are you saying that the criticism of the mods has been racist? I'm going to need some examples here, I think.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 7:28 PM on February 18 [11 favorites]
I'm sorry, what? Are you saying that the criticism of the mods has been racist? I'm going to need some examples here, I think.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 7:28 PM on February 18 [11 favorites]
We'd see that issues are being discussed and actions are being taken and we'd be satisfied that the MOC has things under control. Progress!
I agree.
That would be my preference but the individuals, originally over 20 of them, who joined haven’t yet set rules for themselves. I will say that before we take complaints we’ll make that clear so that people don’t have to worry that their complaints end up in a MOC-driven MetaTalk.
However, I definitely cannot prevent members who joined the MOC from posting off the cuff when we haven’t hashed those things out. And since I don’t control the queue, and Brandon wouldn’t edit the post when I asked (over the details), nor was the post brought up to the MOc in advance, it’s like - yeah, here we are.
I think you've got this backward - I would assume a person was speaking on their own behalf unless they stated otherwise
I wish, but many people here don’t seem to be able to assume that.* Repeatedly. However yea, to be clear I said:
1. When it’s official, it will be clear
2. I’ll ask everyone to be clear otherwise, but it may not always be clear.
* not referring to the current - whatever this is.
posted by warriorqueen at 7:28 PM on February 18 [7 favorites]
I agree.
That would be my preference but the individuals, originally over 20 of them, who joined haven’t yet set rules for themselves. I will say that before we take complaints we’ll make that clear so that people don’t have to worry that their complaints end up in a MOC-driven MetaTalk.
However, I definitely cannot prevent members who joined the MOC from posting off the cuff when we haven’t hashed those things out. And since I don’t control the queue, and Brandon wouldn’t edit the post when I asked (over the details), nor was the post brought up to the MOc in advance, it’s like - yeah, here we are.
I think you've got this backward - I would assume a person was speaking on their own behalf unless they stated otherwise
I wish, but many people here don’t seem to be able to assume that.* Repeatedly. However yea, to be clear I said:
1. When it’s official, it will be clear
2. I’ll ask everyone to be clear otherwise, but it may not always be clear.
* not referring to the current - whatever this is.
posted by warriorqueen at 7:28 PM on February 18 [7 favorites]
You guys think it's ok to write a post saying someone is "dying"????
FWIW, dubious_dude himself has referred to his cancer as terminal and says that he is dying.
I remember this distinctly because I cried a little the first time he posted about his prognosis.
I can't speak for dubiois_dude, but I've unfortunately known several terminally ill people, and one thing that pissed all of them off was when other people ignored the reality of the prognosis and pretended that things were going to be okay when they weren't.
posted by Jacqueline at 7:34 PM on February 18 [6 favorites]
FWIW, dubious_dude himself has referred to his cancer as terminal and says that he is dying.
I remember this distinctly because I cried a little the first time he posted about his prognosis.
I can't speak for dubiois_dude, but I've unfortunately known several terminally ill people, and one thing that pissed all of them off was when other people ignored the reality of the prognosis and pretended that things were going to be okay when they weren't.
posted by Jacqueline at 7:34 PM on February 18 [6 favorites]
This will be my last post/response as dubious_dude. I'm done. I may come here in the form of another user, but my time as d_d is done.
Could you please MeMail me from your new account? I won't tell anyone who you are, but I think about you from time to time and check whether you're still posting. I was super worried when I saw this thread and realized you hadn't posted on AskMe in a long time.
posted by Jacqueline at 7:44 PM on February 18 [3 favorites]
Could you please MeMail me from your new account? I won't tell anyone who you are, but I think about you from time to time and check whether you're still posting. I was super worried when I saw this thread and realized you hadn't posted on AskMe in a long time.
posted by Jacqueline at 7:44 PM on February 18 [3 favorites]
However, I started to worry about my reputation here, and if it was "oh, it's d_d again" was coloring some of the responses/perspectives.
Oh, and speaking as someone who has definitely had the "oh god this guy again" response -- while you're a bit of a weirdo, you're OUR weirdo.
For me, at least, it was never a "I wish this guy would stop posting" reaction, just a "I wonder what sort of predicament he's gotten himself into this week" affectionate exasperation.
posted by Jacqueline at 7:51 PM on February 18 [6 favorites]
Oh, and speaking as someone who has definitely had the "oh god this guy again" response -- while you're a bit of a weirdo, you're OUR weirdo.
For me, at least, it was never a "I wish this guy would stop posting" reaction, just a "I wonder what sort of predicament he's gotten himself into this week" affectionate exasperation.
posted by Jacqueline at 7:51 PM on February 18 [6 favorites]
I'm requesting the mods to please edit or delete any comments in this thread which double down on saying that d_d is dying. This is targeted cruelty and harassment of a member of this site. No one is entitled to speculate so darkly about a real person's private medical condition in public, regardless of d_d's own phrasing used to express his anxiety one time.
posted by MiraK at 3:44 AM on February 19 [13 favorites]
posted by MiraK at 3:44 AM on February 19 [13 favorites]
> So I'm not at all sad to see her take her ball and leave.
Cool cool cool.
posted by lucidium at 4:26 AM on February 19 [6 favorites]
Cool cool cool.
posted by lucidium at 4:26 AM on February 19 [6 favorites]
I agree with those saying this post was poorly thought out. Previously I took the need for a queue at face value (I’ve only been here a few years and I think it may have been in place when I arrived), but if this made it through without substantial edit, what are we doing here?
posted by eirias at 5:16 AM on February 19 [5 favorites]
posted by eirias at 5:16 AM on February 19 [5 favorites]
Three months ago it seemed plausible that Brandon would end up running this place as the new ED/CEO
My guy, with love, you lack so much context for these posts and pronouncements you're making. Three months ago, people were already calling for Brandon to step down, not for him to be raised up. You've pinned all the anger at the mods on this one AskMe rather than the literal years of problematic behavior they've shown. You have no idea why n-p is so upset. Gently, kindly, you have no fucking idea what you're talking about and while everyone doesn't need to be versed in the minutiae of MeTa lore, you don't even have a grasp of the big picture and yet here you are, telling everyone how much they wanted Brandon to get a promotion.
oh for the unshakeable confidence of a mid white guy
posted by donnagirl at 6:11 AM on February 19 [21 favorites]
My guy, with love, you lack so much context for these posts and pronouncements you're making. Three months ago, people were already calling for Brandon to step down, not for him to be raised up. You've pinned all the anger at the mods on this one AskMe rather than the literal years of problematic behavior they've shown. You have no idea why n-p is so upset. Gently, kindly, you have no fucking idea what you're talking about and while everyone doesn't need to be versed in the minutiae of MeTa lore, you don't even have a grasp of the big picture and yet here you are, telling everyone how much they wanted Brandon to get a promotion.
oh for the unshakeable confidence of a mid white guy
posted by donnagirl at 6:11 AM on February 19 [21 favorites]
I honestly think this thread is metatalk at it's absolute worse. The decision to create and publish this post was a bad one, and the framing was awful. I think both nouvelle-personne and dubious_dude have shown remarkable grace.
posted by Cannon Fodder at 6:30 AM on February 19 [34 favorites]
posted by Cannon Fodder at 6:30 AM on February 19 [34 favorites]
oh for the unshakeable confidence of a mid white guy
Ooh ooh are we speaking mid white guy? There was just recently a FPP about Glengarry Glen Ross so I rewatched it last week. I got this folks.
anotherpanacea, you want to learn the first rule you'd know if you ever spent a day in your life? You never open your mouth til you know what the shot is.
posted by phunniemee at 6:43 AM on February 19 [8 favorites]
Ooh ooh are we speaking mid white guy? There was just recently a FPP about Glengarry Glen Ross so I rewatched it last week. I got this folks.
anotherpanacea, you want to learn the first rule you'd know if you ever spent a day in your life? You never open your mouth til you know what the shot is.
posted by phunniemee at 6:43 AM on February 19 [8 favorites]
While I understand the Mod Oversight Committee is still a work in progress and not quite a thing yet, one thing this thread has made abundantly clear: if a MOC member is coming to their position from the perspective of mod apologist and finds themselves “angry and disgusted” when people criticize the mods, that person might not have the kind of even-handed mindset to be a credible member of the committee
posted by The Gooch at 7:10 AM on February 19 [19 favorites]
posted by The Gooch at 7:10 AM on February 19 [19 favorites]
No one is entitled to speculate so darkly about a real person's private medical condition in public, regardless of d_d's own phrasing used to express his anxiety one time.
That, and now that I actually think about it for ten seconds, it's also inaccurate. "Dying" is a specific physical state that most of us will experience only once. dubious_dude isn't experiencing it. He's living, same as all of us. He is going to die, same as all of us, and he's likely to die sooner than we will all die because he has a terminal disease, but dying happens at the end of life, and he's not at the end of life, yet. We know him through this website, where we read his questions that are all about what he should be doing. He's doing many things. If someone is doing, then they're not dying. Dying is a fully immersive experience.
When I first read the post, I got very slightly uncomfortable at "dying," but not enough for my critical faculties to kick in. I thought something like, "Really? Oh no! I knew he had cancer, but I didn't think he was near death. I guess it's been a while since I looked at MetaFilter." And then I went on reading. This is the kind of distanced, half-there way probably a lot of people read on websites. Many days I open Metafilter because I'm thinking: "Goddamnit, loathed co-worker A is not writing me back about project P; the software I need for project X keeps glitching and I can't get IT on it because it's lunchtime; and the sales rep is here again with her swag basket full of cellophane-wrapped squishy rubber animals, branded ballpoint pens, and plate-sized peppermintwhitechocolatemacademianutcaramel gooeycookies so everybody in the building is right now racing to congregate right outside my door and shriek and coo and laugh at the tops of their lungs. Fuck this noise, I need a 'Calgon, take me away!' distraction, STAT! I know: let me see if anyone is fighting on metafilter today."
Then, if I'm lucky, someone not reading in a half-there, distanced way will come into whatever thread I'm using to distract myself and wake me up and remind me that this is real people, not characters in a novel, pay attention, be kind, and don't say stupid thoughtless things that hurt people. For that to happen, you need a sensitive, intelligent person with a complete and deep understanding of the situation in the thread, the kind of understanding that is borne of careful reading, paying attention, remembering site history, and really taking the time to get to know the people involved. You know, somebody like nouvelle-personne, who helped me do an intelligent reading in this thread and in the original Uber thread. That is the kind of skillset you need to moderate effectively.
posted by Don Pepino at 7:10 AM on February 19 [12 favorites]
That, and now that I actually think about it for ten seconds, it's also inaccurate. "Dying" is a specific physical state that most of us will experience only once. dubious_dude isn't experiencing it. He's living, same as all of us. He is going to die, same as all of us, and he's likely to die sooner than we will all die because he has a terminal disease, but dying happens at the end of life, and he's not at the end of life, yet. We know him through this website, where we read his questions that are all about what he should be doing. He's doing many things. If someone is doing, then they're not dying. Dying is a fully immersive experience.
When I first read the post, I got very slightly uncomfortable at "dying," but not enough for my critical faculties to kick in. I thought something like, "Really? Oh no! I knew he had cancer, but I didn't think he was near death. I guess it's been a while since I looked at MetaFilter." And then I went on reading. This is the kind of distanced, half-there way probably a lot of people read on websites. Many days I open Metafilter because I'm thinking: "Goddamnit, loathed co-worker A is not writing me back about project P; the software I need for project X keeps glitching and I can't get IT on it because it's lunchtime; and the sales rep is here again with her swag basket full of cellophane-wrapped squishy rubber animals, branded ballpoint pens, and plate-sized peppermintwhitechocolatemacademianutcaramel gooeycookies so everybody in the building is right now racing to congregate right outside my door and shriek and coo and laugh at the tops of their lungs. Fuck this noise, I need a 'Calgon, take me away!' distraction, STAT! I know: let me see if anyone is fighting on metafilter today."
Then, if I'm lucky, someone not reading in a half-there, distanced way will come into whatever thread I'm using to distract myself and wake me up and remind me that this is real people, not characters in a novel, pay attention, be kind, and don't say stupid thoughtless things that hurt people. For that to happen, you need a sensitive, intelligent person with a complete and deep understanding of the situation in the thread, the kind of understanding that is borne of careful reading, paying attention, remembering site history, and really taking the time to get to know the people involved. You know, somebody like nouvelle-personne, who helped me do an intelligent reading in this thread and in the original Uber thread. That is the kind of skillset you need to moderate effectively.
posted by Don Pepino at 7:10 AM on February 19 [12 favorites]
I think whether and when someone views their terminal diagnosis as dying, or not, is a really subjective and personal opinion. When my daughter had a terminal cancer diagnosis, I thought of her as dying for some time before she was actively and, uhm, exclusively dying. I did not find it to be "fully immersive experience."
Which is exactly why someone who is in such a difficult, sensitive, painful and emotional time in their life deserves a lot of courtesy in how that is spoken of by others, and some extra deference before others choose to speak of it. Let them control, at least, their narrative.
Which is one of the reasons why the most basic level of human courtesy really dictated that some kind of heads up to both of the subjects of this post, before it was posted, whether or not there is a Metafilter rule that required it. We can always choose to live down to rules, to be no kinder than is required, but here, good judgment and good kindness should have led to doing more, and providing - at a minimum - a heads up. Which is why I agree that the individual who authored this post should not be in any kind of moderation leadership position, and should excuse themselves from the committee. This post is really THAT bad, imo.
posted by fennario at 7:31 AM on February 19 [16 favorites]
Which is exactly why someone who is in such a difficult, sensitive, painful and emotional time in their life deserves a lot of courtesy in how that is spoken of by others, and some extra deference before others choose to speak of it. Let them control, at least, their narrative.
Which is one of the reasons why the most basic level of human courtesy really dictated that some kind of heads up to both of the subjects of this post, before it was posted, whether or not there is a Metafilter rule that required it. We can always choose to live down to rules, to be no kinder than is required, but here, good judgment and good kindness should have led to doing more, and providing - at a minimum - a heads up. Which is why I agree that the individual who authored this post should not be in any kind of moderation leadership position, and should excuse themselves from the committee. This post is really THAT bad, imo.
posted by fennario at 7:31 AM on February 19 [16 favorites]
though only warriorqueen has announced herself
Full disclosure, I volunteered for the oversight committee. It was in a moment of rare hope for the future of MeFi, inspired by warriorqueen's commentary and leadership. I did not expect a committee in unanimous agreement and yet I was surprised to find someone who explicitly and repeatedly asserted from the beginning that they volunteered to stand up for the mods in the face of unfair treatment by the users. Then came this MeTa, and the ensuing surprise, dismay, and discussion by the committee. In that discussion, which got heated on my part, I concluded that it was best to at least pause my participation because I simply don't have the bandwidth to fight that fight here and on a committee with someone determined to be obstructionist under the guise of "just gathering info". I'm sad about that. But I'm also so deathly tired of white guys telling me I'm wrong about my own experience.
The rest of the committee is solid and thoughtful, please don't take this MeTa as an indication of anything about them except some guy's need to occupy their space.
posted by donnagirl at 7:57 AM on February 19 [16 favorites]
Full disclosure, I volunteered for the oversight committee. It was in a moment of rare hope for the future of MeFi, inspired by warriorqueen's commentary and leadership. I did not expect a committee in unanimous agreement and yet I was surprised to find someone who explicitly and repeatedly asserted from the beginning that they volunteered to stand up for the mods in the face of unfair treatment by the users. Then came this MeTa, and the ensuing surprise, dismay, and discussion by the committee. In that discussion, which got heated on my part, I concluded that it was best to at least pause my participation because I simply don't have the bandwidth to fight that fight here and on a committee with someone determined to be obstructionist under the guise of "just gathering info". I'm sad about that. But I'm also so deathly tired of white guys telling me I'm wrong about my own experience.
The rest of the committee is solid and thoughtful, please don't take this MeTa as an indication of anything about them except some guy's need to occupy their space.
posted by donnagirl at 7:57 AM on February 19 [16 favorites]
Fuck this noise, I need a 'Calgon, take me away!' distraction, STAT! I know: let me see if anyone is fighting on metafilter today."
LOL, this is how sometimes I end up reading MetaTalk. I was bored yesterday, I wasn't sure where to go on my current project, I had run out of other things to do, eh, let's see what other drama is out there in the world to entertain myself for the next few hours...and then I find this.
This thread is uncomfortable. I feel badly for the called-out participants. I do not like when someone's called out this blatantly and I hated when that happened to hippybear too. This sort of thing will drive people out.
posted by jenfullmoon at 8:44 AM on February 19 [10 favorites]
LOL, this is how sometimes I end up reading MetaTalk. I was bored yesterday, I wasn't sure where to go on my current project, I had run out of other things to do, eh, let's see what other drama is out there in the world to entertain myself for the next few hours...and then I find this.
This thread is uncomfortable. I feel badly for the called-out participants. I do not like when someone's called out this blatantly and I hated when that happened to hippybear too. This sort of thing will drive people out.
posted by jenfullmoon at 8:44 AM on February 19 [10 favorites]
When's the full real long-term Board elections again?
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 8:48 AM on February 19 [4 favorites]
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 8:48 AM on February 19 [4 favorites]
I'll miss our connection as d_d/AskMe. Thanks for a (mostly) good run since 2011. Believe it or not, you did make a difference.
If you somehow see this, thanks for taking the time to post. I hope you'll come back in some form. I know it's not your job to represent either Deaf people or young people for the benefit of this community, so it's not like you owe anybody. But it always make me a little sad when someone your age has been making an effort to participate and finally stops. I will miss your perspective.
posted by BibiRose at 9:28 AM on February 19 [3 favorites]
But I'm not speaking ex officio here, I'm just acknowledging my motivation.
you don’t really get to choose. if you don’t want to speak or be seen as speaking ex officio, leave the officio.
posted by knock my sock and i'll clean your clock at 9:37 AM on February 19 [5 favorites]
you don’t really get to choose. if you don’t want to speak or be seen as speaking ex officio, leave the officio.
posted by knock my sock and i'll clean your clock at 9:37 AM on February 19 [5 favorites]
if you don’t want to speak or be seen as speaking ex officio, leave the officio.
Or at the very least stop declaring yourself a member of the committee in your posts and comments.
posted by donnagirl at 9:45 AM on February 19 [4 favorites]
Or at the very least stop declaring yourself a member of the committee in your posts and comments.
posted by donnagirl at 9:45 AM on February 19 [4 favorites]
”Dying" is a specific physical state that most of us will experience only once
“Dying” to mean “facing a terminal prognosis” is not particularly uncommon usage. I agree that whether to use it should really be d_d’s call, and perhaps that’s symbolic of the bigger issue here, but the bigger issue here is launching a relitigation of the incident with the apparent intention to get mods off the hook, with little consideration of the users involved.
posted by atoxyl at 9:49 AM on February 19 [2 favorites]
“Dying” to mean “facing a terminal prognosis” is not particularly uncommon usage. I agree that whether to use it should really be d_d’s call, and perhaps that’s symbolic of the bigger issue here, but the bigger issue here is launching a relitigation of the incident with the apparent intention to get mods off the hook, with little consideration of the users involved.
posted by atoxyl at 9:49 AM on February 19 [2 favorites]
or phunniemee's fault for being mean or cassowaries' fault for confusing people who don't know what Australia is
These things are not even remotely similar. I love Cassowaries’ posts about Australia and have learned so much from them (although I did already know what Australia is). I do not like mean comments made toward other users, especially when the same user hijacks a thread, and will make repetitive comments throughout. Clearly they don’t think they are being heard, but those type of posters tend to derail threads often times, on purpose I assume. Sometimes people do get really aggressive and mean here. Often POC are unfairly judged for being aggressive. I’m sorry to see NP and thought their comments were enlightening and came from a place of great intelligence. I also thought DD‘s comments were from a place of curiosity and wanting to do the right thing although not necessarily being in the right mindset at the time. I hope they decide to stay. I hope that people who make mean comments toward other users do not stay. While serious issues with over deleting comments by moderators needs to be worked out in a manner that keeps Metafilter an open discussion forum, it’s absolutely necessary that some comments will be deleted to keep people feeling safe from attacks about their posting history, or perceptions being made about them personally that have no bearing on anything posted.
posted by waving at 9:56 AM on February 19 [4 favorites]
These things are not even remotely similar. I love Cassowaries’ posts about Australia and have learned so much from them (although I did already know what Australia is). I do not like mean comments made toward other users, especially when the same user hijacks a thread, and will make repetitive comments throughout. Clearly they don’t think they are being heard, but those type of posters tend to derail threads often times, on purpose I assume. Sometimes people do get really aggressive and mean here. Often POC are unfairly judged for being aggressive. I’m sorry to see NP and thought their comments were enlightening and came from a place of great intelligence. I also thought DD‘s comments were from a place of curiosity and wanting to do the right thing although not necessarily being in the right mindset at the time. I hope they decide to stay. I hope that people who make mean comments toward other users do not stay. While serious issues with over deleting comments by moderators needs to be worked out in a manner that keeps Metafilter an open discussion forum, it’s absolutely necessary that some comments will be deleted to keep people feeling safe from attacks about their posting history, or perceptions being made about them personally that have no bearing on anything posted.
posted by waving at 9:56 AM on February 19 [4 favorites]
I love Cassowaries’ posts about Australia
Absolutely same. And yet someone made an oblique Metatalk complaining about how their posts are confusing for not being labeled more clearly about Australia, and their posts often get comments expressing confusion that e.g. the Australian Broadcasting Corporation article about the elusive western quoll keeps talking about Washington State??? WA?? I think this feedback is ridiculous.
But still (some) people complain about it, just like the framing of this post certainly tried to point the finger at dubious_dude and nouvelle-personne for being messy and them being the cause of the upset about this situation, and the equivalence I'm trying to draw there is that I'm pretty sick of all the "no, it's the users who are wrong" attitude that continues to bubble up during contentious times, when I believe very strongly it's the leadership/staff/moderation of Metafilter that has been failing the community for some time.
posted by phunniemee at 10:12 AM on February 19 [15 favorites]
Absolutely same. And yet someone made an oblique Metatalk complaining about how their posts are confusing for not being labeled more clearly about Australia, and their posts often get comments expressing confusion that e.g. the Australian Broadcasting Corporation article about the elusive western quoll keeps talking about Washington State??? WA?? I think this feedback is ridiculous.
But still (some) people complain about it, just like the framing of this post certainly tried to point the finger at dubious_dude and nouvelle-personne for being messy and them being the cause of the upset about this situation, and the equivalence I'm trying to draw there is that I'm pretty sick of all the "no, it's the users who are wrong" attitude that continues to bubble up during contentious times, when I believe very strongly it's the leadership/staff/moderation of Metafilter that has been failing the community for some time.
posted by phunniemee at 10:12 AM on February 19 [15 favorites]
This is a long thread, so I apologize if I missed something that addresses this, but: I think a mod should drop by and very directly answer the questions at the center of anotherpanacea's question, at least to address the MeTa directly. Specifically:
which comments were erased and restored, and what other communication was happening simultaneously?
what comments were deleted? Was anything by nouvelle-personne deleted and never restored? Were there comments by other members that were responding to n-p that would help explain why they went from giving the best and most helpful answers in the thread to closing their account?
I see that BB stepped in and posted some text from nouvelle-persona, but I don't think I see that these questions were answered.
To me this MeTa seems not very helpful to begin with, but because there does seems to be some community consensus that the moderation approach was the problem, it would probably be helpful to hear from the mods about anotherpanacea's clear questions related to their moderation approach in that FPP.
Again, apologies if that has been answered here already in single comment that I've missed here.
posted by kensington314 at 10:24 AM on February 19 [1 favorite]
which comments were erased and restored, and what other communication was happening simultaneously?
what comments were deleted? Was anything by nouvelle-personne deleted and never restored? Were there comments by other members that were responding to n-p that would help explain why they went from giving the best and most helpful answers in the thread to closing their account?
I see that BB stepped in and posted some text from nouvelle-persona, but I don't think I see that these questions were answered.
To me this MeTa seems not very helpful to begin with, but because there does seems to be some community consensus that the moderation approach was the problem, it would probably be helpful to hear from the mods about anotherpanacea's clear questions related to their moderation approach in that FPP.
Again, apologies if that has been answered here already in single comment that I've missed here.
posted by kensington314 at 10:24 AM on February 19 [1 favorite]
> oh, i thought that was about me
"Is it widely agreed that the goal here is to create a space for POC and LGBTQ+ people who are left of liberal?" is a complicated yes/no question with a lot of small print, and it's like, the shreds of that small print are all over this thread. But it is a yes/no question.
maybe more yes &...
But did you notice how even though I was rude and "combative" and "shouty" and whatever other fucking synonyms you want to trot out to say "yucky angry Black woman" in the racist-to-Uber-driver thread, and am swearing and using all caps again here.... I'm still the person who's most vocally sticking up for DD?
posted by nouvelle-personne
i did
Panacea and Brandon didn’t even attempt to ASK me and DD if this post would be ok, or invite us to collaborate on it, or even just let us read and ok it before Panacea posted it. Like... what the actual fuck.
[subreddit]:
posted by nouvelle-personne
Believe it or not, you did make a difference.
Peace and kindness to all. 🙏🏼🤟🏼
posted by dubious_dude at 5:11 PM
thank you both
are folks agreeing this is worth closing at this point or is there something more about this incident that needs to be addressed?
yeah
posted by HearHere at 2:04 PM on February 19
"Is it widely agreed that the goal here is to create a space for POC and LGBTQ+ people who are left of liberal?" is a complicated yes/no question with a lot of small print, and it's like, the shreds of that small print are all over this thread. But it is a yes/no question.
maybe more yes &...
But did you notice how even though I was rude and "combative" and "shouty" and whatever other fucking synonyms you want to trot out to say "yucky angry Black woman" in the racist-to-Uber-driver thread, and am swearing and using all caps again here.... I'm still the person who's most vocally sticking up for DD?
posted by nouvelle-personne
i did
Panacea and Brandon didn’t even attempt to ASK me and DD if this post would be ok, or invite us to collaborate on it, or even just let us read and ok it before Panacea posted it. Like... what the actual fuck.
[subreddit]:
brandon purposefully let a disaster metatalk be posted and will not let it be edited because he wants to punish the community for disliking the queueThis site can fucking HURT and man the politics suck, but it can also offer genuinely good advice about some situations, and that has value
posted by nouvelle-personne
Believe it or not, you did make a difference.
Peace and kindness to all. 🙏🏼🤟🏼
posted by dubious_dude at 5:11 PM
thank you both
are folks agreeing this is worth closing at this point or is there something more about this incident that needs to be addressed?
yeah
posted by HearHere at 2:04 PM on February 19
like a fucking queue is the answer to the problems that produced this regrettable MeTa
posted by ginger.beef at 2:07 PM on February 19 [6 favorites]
posted by ginger.beef at 2:07 PM on February 19 [6 favorites]
like a fucking queue is the answer to the problems that produced this regrettable MeTa
oh my god thank you, this whole thread has been such a bummer but this gave me a genuine lol
posted by phunniemee at 2:11 PM on February 19 [11 favorites]
oh my god thank you, this whole thread has been such a bummer but this gave me a genuine lol
posted by phunniemee at 2:11 PM on February 19 [11 favorites]
brandon purposefully let a disaster metatalk be posted and will not let it be edited because he wants to punish the community for disliking the queue
this is like charlie day pointing at the sign and yelling "carol!"
posted by kbanas at 2:32 PM on February 19 [2 favorites]
this is like charlie day pointing at the sign and yelling "carol!"
posted by kbanas at 2:32 PM on February 19 [2 favorites]
this whole thread has been such a bummer but this gave me a genuine lol
remember, queue rhymes with pyoo
posted by ginger.beef at 2:55 PM on February 19
remember, queue rhymes with pyoo
posted by ginger.beef at 2:55 PM on February 19
Mod note: One more language change made to the main post. My apologies, I was at the end of my shift last night and did not realize I failed to edit the second part of the post that required immediate attention. I've changed it to omit the specific language folks have highlighted as harmful.
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 3:54 PM on February 19
posted by travelingthyme (staff) at 3:54 PM on February 19
you don’t really get to choose. if you don’t want to speak or be seen as speaking ex officio, leave the officio.
I disagree with this in the strongest possible way. Someone who is part of a committee or whatever must be allowed to hold and express their own personal views as well. It's neither fair nor realistic to expect a member of the community to put their personal views aside and only act ex officio at all times. This is why I think it's important that any statements made ex oficio are clearly labeled as such, to allow people the freedom to express their own views.
As an aside, I wonder how many people arguing against the queue being removed are now arguing that this thread should be edited when the thread passed through the queue without question. It's clear the queue does not function as any kind of filter, as claimed by many.
posted by dg at 4:00 PM on February 19 [4 favorites]
I disagree with this in the strongest possible way. Someone who is part of a committee or whatever must be allowed to hold and express their own personal views as well. It's neither fair nor realistic to expect a member of the community to put their personal views aside and only act ex officio at all times. This is why I think it's important that any statements made ex oficio are clearly labeled as such, to allow people the freedom to express their own views.
As an aside, I wonder how many people arguing against the queue being removed are now arguing that this thread should be edited when the thread passed through the queue without question. It's clear the queue does not function as any kind of filter, as claimed by many.
posted by dg at 4:00 PM on February 19 [4 favorites]
Mod note: Another note: the text of the main post has been changed, per OP's request here: https://metatalk.metafilter.com/26574/What-went-wrong-in-the-dubiousdude-nouvelleperson-thread#1436248
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:53 PM on February 19
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 4:53 PM on February 19
I disagree with this in the strongest possible way. Someone who is part of a committee or whatever must be allowed to hold and express their own personal views as well.
you're welcome to disagree. in a general sense, i agree with you. in this case, i think AP shit the bed with this post and has set himself up to not be able to reliably and in good faith distinguish between his views and his authority as a member of the committee. i don't think folks have any reason to trust him to do so.
posted by knock my sock and i'll clean your clock at 7:06 PM on February 19 [16 favorites]
you're welcome to disagree. in a general sense, i agree with you. in this case, i think AP shit the bed with this post and has set himself up to not be able to reliably and in good faith distinguish between his views and his authority as a member of the committee. i don't think folks have any reason to trust him to do so.
posted by knock my sock and i'll clean your clock at 7:06 PM on February 19 [16 favorites]
Someone who is part of a committee or whatever must be allowed to hold and express their own personal views as well.
I think this is pretty reasonable in general. If more members are involved in all aspects of the site as volunteers then probably many of the most active and dedicated members will be participating as both users and volunteers. This seems unavoidable and not bad. We will probably need to develop some kind of guidelines, though, so it things are clear.
While I'm happy to step down from the MOC if my participation is a problem--and indeed it might be...
I think it is healthy to have some people with unpopular views or just different viewpoints to be represented in volunteer roles. Barring someone from a role or removing them should really be a last resort if there is a substantive reason to do so. On the other hand, if someone seems to be a particularly bad fit for a certain role and they offer to step down, it seems like a no brainer to encourage that. In the future there should be a wide variety of volunteer roles for those interested in helping the site, and I'm sure anyone will be able to find a role where they are helpful and valued.
posted by snofoam at 4:59 AM on February 20 [6 favorites]
I think this is pretty reasonable in general. If more members are involved in all aspects of the site as volunteers then probably many of the most active and dedicated members will be participating as both users and volunteers. This seems unavoidable and not bad. We will probably need to develop some kind of guidelines, though, so it things are clear.
While I'm happy to step down from the MOC if my participation is a problem--and indeed it might be...
I think it is healthy to have some people with unpopular views or just different viewpoints to be represented in volunteer roles. Barring someone from a role or removing them should really be a last resort if there is a substantive reason to do so. On the other hand, if someone seems to be a particularly bad fit for a certain role and they offer to step down, it seems like a no brainer to encourage that. In the future there should be a wide variety of volunteer roles for those interested in helping the site, and I'm sure anyone will be able to find a role where they are helpful and valued.
posted by snofoam at 4:59 AM on February 20 [6 favorites]
I think it is healthy to have some people with unpopular views or just different viewpoints to be represented in volunteer roles.
Absolutely - the last thing you want in any committee/board/whatever is a bunch of people who always agree with each other.
posted by dg at 2:13 PM on February 20
Absolutely - the last thing you want in any committee/board/whatever is a bunch of people who always agree with each other.
posted by dg at 2:13 PM on February 20
Absolutely - the last thing you want in any committee/board/whatever is a bunch of people who always agree with each other.
That is certainly true, but there’s a long way between that, and:
I concluded that it was best to at least pause my participation because I simply don't have the bandwidth to fight that fight here and on a committee with someone determined to be obstructionist under the guise of "just gathering info".
I’m not a member of the MOC, mostly due to other commitments at this time. But I hope they will develop some internal processes to prevent obstructionist voices from, well, obstructing progress. I also hope the review process is much closer to what kimberussell describes, than whatever this was intended to be. I say intended, because even the intended outcome was wrong.
posted by bluloo at 3:52 PM on February 20 [6 favorites]
That is certainly true, but there’s a long way between that, and:
I concluded that it was best to at least pause my participation because I simply don't have the bandwidth to fight that fight here and on a committee with someone determined to be obstructionist under the guise of "just gathering info".
I’m not a member of the MOC, mostly due to other commitments at this time. But I hope they will develop some internal processes to prevent obstructionist voices from, well, obstructing progress. I also hope the review process is much closer to what kimberussell describes, than whatever this was intended to be. I say intended, because even the intended outcome was wrong.
posted by bluloo at 3:52 PM on February 20 [6 favorites]
since it seems microaggressions are allowed to stand, regardless of the standing policy, let's see how long this microaggression lasts:
SHUT the FUCK UP you FUCKING DUMBASS WHITE MAN and this DISMISSIVE RACIST shit post
posted by i used to be someone else at 9:29 AM on February 24 [9 favorites]
SHUT the FUCK UP you FUCKING DUMBASS WHITE MAN and this DISMISSIVE RACIST shit post
posted by i used to be someone else at 9:29 AM on February 24 [9 favorites]
What is the point of a microaggression policy if it's applied inconsistently and more often than not, not at all?
What is the point of a bipoc committee if its influence is cut off not just the knees, but at the neck?
We've had contentions threads explaining the problem mefi has with racialized people since before 2015 and still this place doesn't feel safe if you have a skin tone any darker than alabaster or porcelain, and yet it regularly seems to pay itself on the back about its liberal, "inclusive" bent
And every time you bleed more Black people, more non-white people.
By the way, I see this microaggression is still up, even after the originator apologized and concurs with at the very least editing it.
Why bother with having a microaggression policy? Because it seems like y'all want to let it fester until they become outright aggression
posted by i used to be someone else at 9:39 AM on February 24 [10 favorites]
What is the point of a bipoc committee if its influence is cut off not just the knees, but at the neck?
We've had contentions threads explaining the problem mefi has with racialized people since before 2015 and still this place doesn't feel safe if you have a skin tone any darker than alabaster or porcelain, and yet it regularly seems to pay itself on the back about its liberal, "inclusive" bent
And every time you bleed more Black people, more non-white people.
By the way, I see this microaggression is still up, even after the originator apologized and concurs with at the very least editing it.
Why bother with having a microaggression policy? Because it seems like y'all want to let it fester until they become outright aggression
posted by i used to be someone else at 9:39 AM on February 24 [10 favorites]
Mod note: No comments deleted so far. The comment above from i used to be someone else is picking up some flags. Under normal circumstances, this comment would be deleted as a violation of both the Community Guidelines, Content Policy but we'll leave it for context. Now, please bear in mind that our Guidelines, Policy and Microaggressions page serve different purposes (hence why they are 3 separate documents)
The content policy outlines behaviour that is considered inappropriate in the site and may lead to content removal, warnings and further actions as needed.
The Guidelines outline the behavior we hope to see in the site and, when overlooked, we might want to steer the conversation in a different direction (yes this might include content removals).
Lastly, microaggressions page is a a document that outlines what those are and why it's important to be mindful of them. We may delete microaggressions or take other actions depending on the severity and frequency of the microaggression itself, but bear in mind that sometimes, we do believe that allowing members to push back and make informed decisions about a user's stance is better than removing the content itself.
If you have further questions or comments about this or similar decisions please Contact Us .
posted by loup (staff) at 10:57 AM on February 24
The content policy outlines behaviour that is considered inappropriate in the site and may lead to content removal, warnings and further actions as needed.
The Guidelines outline the behavior we hope to see in the site and, when overlooked, we might want to steer the conversation in a different direction (yes this might include content removals).
Lastly, microaggressions page is a a document that outlines what those are and why it's important to be mindful of them. We may delete microaggressions or take other actions depending on the severity and frequency of the microaggression itself, but bear in mind that sometimes, we do believe that allowing members to push back and make informed decisions about a user's stance is better than removing the content itself.
If you have further questions or comments about this or similar decisions please Contact Us .
posted by loup (staff) at 10:57 AM on February 24
so the microaggressions in that original thread were good and should always have been defended by the mods as a learning tool?
is this the secret motivation for leaving the comment [that can easily be read as being] about being horny for teens up?
This seems like not the time/way to poke your head out of hiding, buddy. Or do you care to speak in anything other than vagaries, about the "maybe he's on meth" comment, and the various accusations of kidnapping?
posted by sagc at 11:47 AM on February 24 [3 favorites]
is this the secret motivation for leaving the comment [that can easily be read as being] about being horny for teens up?
This seems like not the time/way to poke your head out of hiding, buddy. Or do you care to speak in anything other than vagaries, about the "maybe he's on meth" comment, and the various accusations of kidnapping?
posted by sagc at 11:47 AM on February 24 [3 favorites]
some of my best friends are on meth!
posted by phunniemee at 11:57 AM on February 24 [4 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 11:57 AM on February 24 [4 favorites]
how are you still taking away lessons from this thread entirely orthogonal to the actual text of what people are posting? None of this came out of nowhere, as people have patiently explained. This is exactly what institutional failure looks like.
I do think your concerns about mod files would benefit from a full Metatalk post, though.
posted by sagc at 12:34 PM on February 24 [7 favorites]
I do think your concerns about mod files would benefit from a full Metatalk post, though.
posted by sagc at 12:34 PM on February 24 [7 favorites]
Can the attackee respond in kind? Like, I don't want to, I'm just curious: do I get to make a free undeleted personal attack in response?
i used to be someone else's swear word-laden comment directly linked to a comment made by jouke. Do you just assume any commentary directed at a dumbass white man is... speaking about you?
posted by phunniemee at 12:36 PM on February 24 [6 favorites]
i used to be someone else's swear word-laden comment directly linked to a comment made by jouke. Do you just assume any commentary directed at a dumbass white man is... speaking about you?
posted by phunniemee at 12:36 PM on February 24 [6 favorites]
I'm out of popcorn
posted by ginger.beef at 12:40 PM on February 24 [2 favorites]
posted by ginger.beef at 12:40 PM on February 24 [2 favorites]
anotherpanacea: are you jouke by another name?
because in "test case" response, i directly link to a comment that is specifically dismissive and and antagonistic to n-p.
in the follow up where I'm a lot more clear about my intention and pointing out part of why the moderation team has *such* a credibility problem is the lack of consistency when it comes to actually following through with their purported guidelines, leading to very clear situations, i *also* link to a longer screed that is *nothing* but an attack on n-p, and yet your long-ass reply to me doesn't say jack shit about that vileness
why is that?
and after this entire thread, framing the causative event as n-p of primarily attacking d_d in order to get away with talking about racism is phenomenally disgusting, abhorrent, and makes one question whether you even understand anything about anti-racism, marginalized folks' anger, or allyship.
truly remarkable that you pulled your whole mask off because you couldn't be bothered to actually read and click the links in what was, fundamentally, a test case.
you'll need a better apology than that.
posted by i used to be someone else at 12:47 PM on February 24 [12 favorites]
because in "test case" response, i directly link to a comment that is specifically dismissive and and antagonistic to n-p.
in the follow up where I'm a lot more clear about my intention and pointing out part of why the moderation team has *such* a credibility problem is the lack of consistency when it comes to actually following through with their purported guidelines, leading to very clear situations, i *also* link to a longer screed that is *nothing* but an attack on n-p, and yet your long-ass reply to me doesn't say jack shit about that vileness
why is that?
and after this entire thread, framing the causative event as n-p of primarily attacking d_d in order to get away with talking about racism is phenomenally disgusting, abhorrent, and makes one question whether you even understand anything about anti-racism, marginalized folks' anger, or allyship.
truly remarkable that you pulled your whole mask off because you couldn't be bothered to actually read and click the links in what was, fundamentally, a test case.
you'll need a better apology than that.
posted by i used to be someone else at 12:47 PM on February 24 [12 favorites]
yeah, no. the fact that you thought you were the target is... interesting.
because I've always heard it's not all white men
that you took it another way is, well. Like I said. Interesting
posted by i used to be someone else at 12:54 PM on February 24 [8 favorites]
because I've always heard it's not all white men
that you took it another way is, well. Like I said. Interesting
posted by i used to be someone else at 12:54 PM on February 24 [8 favorites]
once again demonstrating a misunderstanding of why nouvelle-personelle was angry, who they were "attacking", and why the "attacks" said what they did, all while deciding that the approach to take is "anger at racism is bad, because it's faked in order to get away with attacking people". Is that the hill you want to die on? People subject to racism are faking anger about it to get away with the personal attacks that are their real motivation? Fuck off with that, and fuck off with this thread if that was remotely in your head when your framed it.
This site has never met a barrel that it didn't want to get to know the bottom of.
posted by sagc at 1:00 PM on February 24 [15 favorites]
This site has never met a barrel that it didn't want to get to know the bottom of.
posted by sagc at 1:00 PM on February 24 [15 favorites]
I'm not even sure you're using the word attack right at this point, ap.
posted by phunniemee at 1:02 PM on February 24 [9 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 1:02 PM on February 24 [9 favorites]
Oh and for those playing the home game...
"arias to poop" count:
anotherpanacea - 5
nouvelle-personne - still just the once
edited to update the count since I failed to preview before hitting post, incredible
posted by phunniemee at 1:13 PM on February 24 [9 favorites]
"arias to poop" count:
anotherpanacea - 5
nouvelle-personne - still just the once
edited to update the count since I failed to preview before hitting post, incredible
posted by phunniemee at 1:13 PM on February 24 [9 favorites]
Err, the opposite, no? I'm saying people (including you!) talk about racism to get away with personal attacks. That's... what I've been saying most of the thread? Like, n-p makes great points but then AFTER d-d agrees not to call the cops, she attacks him
honestly, this is a pretty ugly and contemptible way of framing things because it essentially assumes bad faith on the part of any marginalized person speaking to bigotry they are encountering at that moment. it's clear that if you read n-p and d_d's recollections of the event, neither of them were completely aware of the other's immediate situation; indeed, n-p didn't know that d_d had already decided not to call the cops.
the way you're twisting the events and the trying to reframe your argument is harmful to marginalized people precisely because you're demanding that they extend grace to the people that are being bigoted to them as it is all going down, and then castigating them for not being speaking with the appropriate tone
disgusting, and a perfect encapsulation of how so many on this site tends to misunderstand "inclusivity"
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:14 PM on February 24 [19 favorites]
honestly, this is a pretty ugly and contemptible way of framing things because it essentially assumes bad faith on the part of any marginalized person speaking to bigotry they are encountering at that moment. it's clear that if you read n-p and d_d's recollections of the event, neither of them were completely aware of the other's immediate situation; indeed, n-p didn't know that d_d had already decided not to call the cops.
the way you're twisting the events and the trying to reframe your argument is harmful to marginalized people precisely because you're demanding that they extend grace to the people that are being bigoted to them as it is all going down, and then castigating them for not being speaking with the appropriate tone
disgusting, and a perfect encapsulation of how so many on this site tends to misunderstand "inclusivity"
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:14 PM on February 24 [19 favorites]
one might even think a mod would wade in here with a link to the microaggressions policy, but clearly that wouldn't help.
Sorry I said fuck, anotherpanacea. Please leave with your incredibly retrogressive viewpoint, and if it informed how you framed this thread, please leave all the more. Please, please try to understand how you're coming off here.
posted by sagc at 1:17 PM on February 24 [8 favorites]
Sorry I said fuck, anotherpanacea. Please leave with your incredibly retrogressive viewpoint, and if it informed how you framed this thread, please leave all the more. Please, please try to understand how you're coming off here.
posted by sagc at 1:17 PM on February 24 [8 favorites]
I don't think anyone could claim that I had a grand theory when this thread began
jesus christ, man, just take the L, you are not saving face here
posted by knock my sock and i'll clean your clock at 1:17 PM on February 24 [9 favorites]
jesus christ, man, just take the L, you are not saving face here
posted by knock my sock and i'll clean your clock at 1:17 PM on February 24 [9 favorites]
As far as the GDPR shit you keep banging on about. Sure, whatever. But a lot of community members have long memories and I for one think it's perfectly cromulent to bring up someone's past behavior in other threads.
It's basically one of the only reasons the few trans threads here don't immediately get overrun by people typing out anti-trans dogwhistles and bullhorns couches in polite "concerns" and "questions"
we remember who does that sort of bullshit.
I'll definitely remember this about you.
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:17 PM on February 24 [13 favorites]
It's basically one of the only reasons the few trans threads here don't immediately get overrun by people typing out anti-trans dogwhistles and bullhorns couches in polite "concerns" and "questions"
we remember who does that sort of bullshit.
I'll definitely remember this about you.
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:17 PM on February 24 [13 favorites]
People claim this has been answered, but where. And it's... which of these? Or which other thing?These Questions - somebody's Just gotta Ask them!
I would contend that people have spent this entire thread trying to answer you, and nothing has been good enough for you.
posted by sagc at 1:20 PM on February 24 [5 favorites]
if anything at least the monthly hosting costs might go down a bit since i've noticed people scrubbing their profile pics following this... "discussion"
posted by glonous keming at 1:20 PM on February 24 [3 favorites]
posted by glonous keming at 1:20 PM on February 24 [3 favorites]
I think you like saying the arias thing, ap, and that's why you can't quit it. I think you're having a little thrill with it. Back when I was a kid we weren't allowed to say swear words but I also didn't have my media limited and was reading books made for grownups, and sometimes for fun I'd walk around the house with a bookmarked copy of Jurassic Park in my hand and say "quoteunquote shit!" and then brandish the page at my parents. Very clever, legally within the guidelines, nothing they could do about it. So anyway I was 8.
posted by phunniemee at 1:23 PM on February 24 [10 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 1:23 PM on February 24 [10 favorites]
I can’t speak for d_d but I’m, well, dubious of the premise that the poop comment is of central importance. Certainly I think if it were addressed to me in the moment the hardest part of n_p’s response to hear would not have been that but the part that was also the carrier of the most sincere and important message - the “what the fuck why are you trying to ruin this guy’s life?” part. Making it about the poop bit feels like it’s dodging the central question of how to balance the ideal of users being nice to each other with giving people room to speak up about things that matter (or in a case like this, to be human and express understandable frustration about the whole thread not getting it).
posted by atoxyl at 1:35 PM on February 24 [3 favorites]
posted by atoxyl at 1:35 PM on February 24 [3 favorites]
We won't be able to do the same when you inevitably get into hot water and change your name again.
While I've flagged this with a note to the mods, I do also want to say publicly that this is a truly nasty, threatening comment, and I wish you would excuse yourself from this thread.
posted by mittens at 1:37 PM on February 24 [9 favorites]
While I've flagged this with a note to the mods, I do also want to say publicly that this is a truly nasty, threatening comment, and I wish you would excuse yourself from this thread.
posted by mittens at 1:37 PM on February 24 [9 favorites]
But extending grace to dubious-dude is basically what everyone agrees needed to happen.
the whole reason this dust up happened, by the way, was because nouvelle-personelle did not receive the same grace
and commenters like you are underscoring just how that grace only ever seems to go against racially marginalized people.
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:39 PM on February 24 [9 favorites]
the whole reason this dust up happened, by the way, was because nouvelle-personelle did not receive the same grace
and commenters like you are underscoring just how that grace only ever seems to go against racially marginalized people.
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:39 PM on February 24 [9 favorites]
What part is a threat?
And this one I have flagged for sealioning.
posted by mittens at 1:39 PM on February 24 [5 favorites]
And this one I have flagged for sealioning.
posted by mittens at 1:39 PM on February 24 [5 favorites]
oh, ffs. you know some people have buttoned because of, say, rampant transphobia, and weren't banned because they "got in trouble"? Are you trying to achieve a shittiness grand slam here?
You seem physically incapable of understanding just how much grace n-p already extended dubious_dude in that thread, how the rest of the content in the thread impacted how it read, how moderation actions heightened the situation... you're showing yourself to be have some deeply worrying thoughts about how DEI work should happen. Silently, I suppose.
posted by sagc at 1:39 PM on February 24 [10 favorites]
You seem physically incapable of understanding just how much grace n-p already extended dubious_dude in that thread, how the rest of the content in the thread impacted how it read, how moderation actions heightened the situation... you're showing yourself to be have some deeply worrying thoughts about how DEI work should happen. Silently, I suppose.
posted by sagc at 1:39 PM on February 24 [10 favorites]
You think everyone who BNDs has done that because they got in "hot water?" People are allowed to change their names, Jan.
posted by phunniemee at 1:40 PM on February 24 [10 favorites]
posted by phunniemee at 1:40 PM on February 24 [10 favorites]
I'm out of creamed corn
for the record, I just had a mood one day and buttoned, and came back
people button and come back for a myriad of reasons.. cold showers even
posted by ginger.beef at 1:43 PM on February 24 [2 favorites]
for the record, I just had a mood one day and buttoned, and came back
people button and come back for a myriad of reasons.. cold showers even
posted by ginger.beef at 1:43 PM on February 24 [2 favorites]
this is a person whose username implies that they are a Brand New Day account.
I had an account here maybe 20 years ago. I buttoned and killed that one because of the extremely poor response to rampant racism on this site maybe 10-12 years ago. I was not banned.
after a few months or so I came back with a new account. I buttoned and killed that one because of the extremely poor response to rampant transphobia on this site maybe 5 years ago. I was not banned then either.
This new account is a nod to the fact that I did, in fact, used to be someone else. It's a tongue in cheek reference to my being not cis, as well as my history with the site. Clearly the name is tripping you up though, and I am a little irked that i am having to reveal my entire history as well as my racialized and gender minority status because you are being really weridly defensive about how poorly you are accordng yourself in a discussion about race, marginalization, and how majority groups, for whatever their intentions, often replicate and perpetuate systems of discrimination, oppression, and aggression
i do not accept your apologies because it's clear you're just throwing them out and refusing to actually engage or think about what you may be saying and doing that are replicating these problematic systems
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:46 PM on February 24 [21 favorites]
I had an account here maybe 20 years ago. I buttoned and killed that one because of the extremely poor response to rampant racism on this site maybe 10-12 years ago. I was not banned.
after a few months or so I came back with a new account. I buttoned and killed that one because of the extremely poor response to rampant transphobia on this site maybe 5 years ago. I was not banned then either.
This new account is a nod to the fact that I did, in fact, used to be someone else. It's a tongue in cheek reference to my being not cis, as well as my history with the site. Clearly the name is tripping you up though, and I am a little irked that i am having to reveal my entire history as well as my racialized and gender minority status because you are being really weridly defensive about how poorly you are accordng yourself in a discussion about race, marginalization, and how majority groups, for whatever their intentions, often replicate and perpetuate systems of discrimination, oppression, and aggression
i do not accept your apologies because it's clear you're just throwing them out and refusing to actually engage or think about what you may be saying and doing that are replicating these problematic systems
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:46 PM on February 24 [21 favorites]
context: important, actually
posted by sagc at 1:46 PM on February 24 [5 favorites]
posted by sagc at 1:46 PM on February 24 [5 favorites]
If you want someone with an easy to find name to troll and shit on babes, I'm standing right here. I've been posting on Metafilter since before my frontal lobe finished cooking, I'm the same name on Instagram too, please be my guest.
And the reason we all know a lot about each other is that this is a community, and what you read as "attacking someone's posting history" may just actually be "recognizing this person in the context of all who they are." I've got multiple people in this very thread who I am friends with in real life because I liked them on Metafilter first. If you haven't found that value for yourself in your own interactions on this site, look within.
posted by phunniemee at 1:48 PM on February 24 [14 favorites]
And the reason we all know a lot about each other is that this is a community, and what you read as "attacking someone's posting history" may just actually be "recognizing this person in the context of all who they are." I've got multiple people in this very thread who I am friends with in real life because I liked them on Metafilter first. If you haven't found that value for yourself in your own interactions on this site, look within.
posted by phunniemee at 1:48 PM on February 24 [14 favorites]
Y'all seem to know a lot about each other
It's useful to get to know the users of a site, their outlooks, needs and dynamics, prior to talking about the site, yes. Definitely recommended.
posted by mittens at 1:48 PM on February 24 [11 favorites]
It's useful to get to know the users of a site, their outlooks, needs and dynamics, prior to talking about the site, yes. Definitely recommended.
posted by mittens at 1:48 PM on February 24 [11 favorites]
I don't know any of you people and I intend to keep it that way
except Dirty Ol' Town, I know where you live man!!
(I don't, it's a joke)
posted by ginger.beef at 1:52 PM on February 24 [2 favorites]
except Dirty Ol' Town, I know where you live man!!
(I don't, it's a joke)
posted by ginger.beef at 1:52 PM on February 24 [2 favorites]
You think everyone who BNDs has done that because they got in "hot water?" People are allowed to change their names, Jan.
indeed, changing my name and demographic information on this site only cost me $5 and a few minutes, as opposed to $600+ and several months, with doctors notes and legal declarations and at least here I get to control that info, rather than hoping the state does not arbitrarily decide to invalidate any of it
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:52 PM on February 24 [8 favorites]
indeed, changing my name and demographic information on this site only cost me $5 and a few minutes, as opposed to $600+ and several months, with doctors notes and legal declarations and at least here I get to control that info, rather than hoping the state does not arbitrarily decide to invalidate any of it
posted by i used to be someone else at 1:52 PM on February 24 [8 favorites]
Ah, that's fair. If you buttoned for legitimate reasons, I apologize!
Isn’t coming back from a ban with a new name, without clearing it with staff, a rules violation? It would not be my first assumption when someone’s name announces that they are a new account that they are a banned user, and it seems like operating in good faith on the site would entail assuming that people either changed accounts for “legitimate reasons” or were “legitimately” let back in, unless you expressly believe they are evading a ban in an actionable way.
posted by atoxyl at 1:58 PM on February 24 [4 favorites]
Isn’t coming back from a ban with a new name, without clearing it with staff, a rules violation? It would not be my first assumption when someone’s name announces that they are a new account that they are a banned user, and it seems like operating in good faith on the site would entail assuming that people either changed accounts for “legitimate reasons” or were “legitimately” let back in, unless you expressly believe they are evading a ban in an actionable way.
posted by atoxyl at 1:58 PM on February 24 [4 favorites]
we have whole pages on microaggressions. Perhaps you could read them. Sometimes mods fail so badly it should be unsurprising it drives someone to swear.
You don't even seem to think the mods failed in any way, that microaggressions exist, or that, apparently, anything but decorum matters.
posted by sagc at 2:04 PM on February 24 [6 favorites]
You don't even seem to think the mods failed in any way, that microaggressions exist, or that, apparently, anything but decorum matters.
posted by sagc at 2:04 PM on February 24 [6 favorites]
I do not accept your apology because I do not think it's being extended in good faith or that you're actually penitent; given so many of your previous remarks it seems to be coming from a place of bad faith, one of trying to preserve your own face.
Like your entire meltdown here stems from the fact you misunderstood and misread context *from the very beginning* with my test case comment. You could have done the reasonable thing and assumed I wasn't talking about you because my comment had direct links, but instead you decided to show your entire ass in the subsequent replies.
I'm not kidding, every time something like this happens there is a common refrain of "not all men" or "not all white people" and those of us who aren't men and aren't white are painfully aware of this and always have that caveat implied because some of you truly are a credit to your kind
but also, every time something like this happens it is precisely one of those people who will take umbrage even if we weren't even talking about them! And then they replicate the exact problematic behaviors we're talking about.
Like in the most recent "apology" you gave, you're clearly trying to go back to a kind of tone policing, "your minority anger is not justified" bullshit when it was clearly directed at two aggressive, bigoted, personal attacks at n-p, who isn't even here to defend herself anymore.
So no. Apology not accepted, try again when you fix your fucking heart, as the late David Lynch would say
posted by i used to be someone else at 2:06 PM on February 24 [15 favorites]
Like your entire meltdown here stems from the fact you misunderstood and misread context *from the very beginning* with my test case comment. You could have done the reasonable thing and assumed I wasn't talking about you because my comment had direct links, but instead you decided to show your entire ass in the subsequent replies.
I'm not kidding, every time something like this happens there is a common refrain of "not all men" or "not all white people" and those of us who aren't men and aren't white are painfully aware of this and always have that caveat implied because some of you truly are a credit to your kind
but also, every time something like this happens it is precisely one of those people who will take umbrage even if we weren't even talking about them! And then they replicate the exact problematic behaviors we're talking about.
Like in the most recent "apology" you gave, you're clearly trying to go back to a kind of tone policing, "your minority anger is not justified" bullshit when it was clearly directed at two aggressive, bigoted, personal attacks at n-p, who isn't even here to defend herself anymore.
So no. Apology not accepted, try again when you fix your fucking heart, as the late David Lynch would say
posted by i used to be someone else at 2:06 PM on February 24 [15 favorites]
Since it's off-topic for this thread, i posted over in the still-open thread about the queue, because the decision not to post anotherpanacea's MeTa is bullshit.
posted by adrienneleigh at 2:55 PM on February 24 [2 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 2:55 PM on February 24 [2 favorites]
(On-topic: yeah, anotherpanacea, you're really not covering yourself in glory here. Might want to reconsider your approach?)
posted by adrienneleigh at 2:56 PM on February 24 [5 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 2:56 PM on February 24 [5 favorites]
if the man wants to make a bid for ED i say let him speak
posted by glonous keming at 4:04 PM on February 24 [4 favorites]
posted by glonous keming at 4:04 PM on February 24 [4 favorites]
The funny thing is, this gives away the whole game: people have realized they can engage in personal attacks and trolling so long as they pretend to be antiracist. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ As you rightly point out, the actual rules aren't just the formal rules published in the content policy, but the patterns of application by the mods, and this kind of thing gets a pass.
In order to get away with attacking dubious_dude's digestive anxieties, n-p had to couch it in concerns about racism.
You are asserting here that a black person doesn't actually care about a white person calling the cops on another black person. They're just pretending in order to "attack digestive anxieties".
This is an incredibly vile and racist thing to say.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 8:54 PM on February 24 [26 favorites]
In order to get away with attacking dubious_dude's digestive anxieties, n-p had to couch it in concerns about racism.
You are asserting here that a black person doesn't actually care about a white person calling the cops on another black person. They're just pretending in order to "attack digestive anxieties".
This is an incredibly vile and racist thing to say.
posted by TheophileEscargot at 8:54 PM on February 24 [26 favorites]
the man who literally writes MONTHLY ARIAS about his poo
What in the hell does that even mean?
posted by Ursula Hitler at 10:20 PM on February 24
What in the hell does that even mean?
posted by Ursula Hitler at 10:20 PM on February 24
You dragged two innocent people and half the site in here to polish some unrelated chip on your shoulder to a mirror shine?
posted by lucidium at 5:28 AM on February 25 [9 favorites]
posted by lucidium at 5:28 AM on February 25 [9 favorites]
Mod note: Giving everyone a heads up that anotherpanacea has requested a full closure and wipe of his account. Currently, we don't have a way to do this without open threads like this one being closed as well, we apologize for the inconvenience.
If you want to open a new thread to continue this conversation, please go ahead.
posted by loup (staff) at 7:58 AM on February 25 [1 favorite]
If you want to open a new thread to continue this conversation, please go ahead.
posted by loup (staff) at 7:58 AM on February 25 [1 favorite]
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by fight or flight at 11:56 AM on February 15 [35 favorites]