Support NeoGAF

[zumphry]

A poster posting a racist comment for example doesn't mean the site is racist.

but letting racist comments go unchecked is indicative of the kind of culture that's allowed to grow and spread throughout the site.

We have given you way more then you have given us.

you're not a mod. don't act so self-important lol.

 

[Subpar Spatula]

No I don't agree with you. A poster posting a racist comment for example doesn't mean the site is racist. No more than you trolling means the site is full of trolls.

I see, you think you are just doing your duty and keyboard battling scum...

Nope. You are just here to cause an issue. Exactly why you have posted more here in the last 24 hours than you have for 6 months. You are trying to get banned, but banned your way.

You say the site is worse. But what you are doing shows exactly why it isn't. Had you come her before and spoke so hatefully against the site and it's members, you would have never been allowed to make so many posts. Your warning would have been a ban, not a conversation with a mod and the community. Even though people are pretty certain of your intentions, they have given you more then enough time to change your attitude. We have given you way more then you have given us.

Thank you for proving yourself wrong.

If a site doesn't remove racist content then it is by definition enabling it. I even reported it so the higher ups do know. It's like if I managed a restaurant and there are reports of hair being in all the food, but I as an owner shrug it off then that means I do condone it, and it is now part of the restaurant. It's like if YouTube enables IcePoseidon or other racist streamers / YouTubers then YouTube is enabling this behavior and the site's image and character are forever intertwined with racism and bigotry. It's why companies fire people who are known to be publicly racist because they help form the image of a company. Jared Foggle has zero to do with SubWay but when the charges came down SubWay immediately disowned him because you have to set that line down or else people will see you differently.

An issue? Calling out bad behavior isn't creating an issue, it's called doing the right thing. Like, look at this thread (first page): https://www.neogaf.com/threads/how-legit-is-modern-feminism.1462723/#post-253278280

Look at the posts, look at these:

3rd wave feminism is when feminism jumped the shark, but may have provided some net good to society in the early years of it, and 4th wave is all about being an attention whore.

HMMMMMMM

Feminism was a victim of its own success in accomplishing goal number one, bringing western women into the public sphere on a relatively equal footing with men.

Once that equal opportunity was provided, the biological and personality differences between typical men and women were revealed to be very deeply ingrained and not "socially constructed." This is one of those "hate facts" that everybody actually knows but will never speak of openly, or you end up like Lawrence Summers, who was sympathetic to feminist goals. "Third-wave" feminists are not all that interested in equality, they prefer doing battle against the implacable reality of biology.

HMMMMMMMMM

Like, the trend is there.

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/a-shooting-that-you-will-likely-not-see-on-cnn.1462630/

HMMM

Like, these are the threads you see on the communities that wanted to destroy NeoGAF. It's really fucking hard to say they didn't succeed.

You either accept that or you don't, but a lot accepted that and moved on because it's been shown time and time again those types of "civil discussions" and what not don't lead anywhere except people being purposely mean to one another.


Like, Voat's biggest NeoGAF targeted is EvilOre, and maybe once in a month you get a NeoGAF mention. That's the reality of your current situation: they're here already so they don't need to gossip about it elsewhere. Their target is ResetEra because they actively remove them so it becomes a game to them all. They got no beef with people here because the people they have beef with have left, and it's no fun spreading misery to a place that doesn't seem to care about it anymore.

 

[Musky_Cheese]

but letting racist comments go unchecked is indicative of the kind of culture that's allowed to grow and spread throughout the site.



you're not a mod. don't act so self-important lol.

I'm not acting like a mod. "We" are the posters who are engaging in conversation even though "we" have doubts about the sincerity of the poster.

Good job jumping in and getting something wrong.

 

[Corrik]

You can have a discussion without offending someone. If you offend someone, apologize, and the conversation goes on.

Also, "offended" is a blanket term. You have to be more specific. Let's say I was discussing racism with another person (who happens to be black), I constantly drop the N-word. Do you think that's just something that should be overlooked because we're having a "civil" conversation?

Saying, "people will always be offended" is just an easy way to saying, "I want to say anything without consequence."



"... agree with me"? No. You got this wrong. The community agreed it was bad. So did a lot of the world. Like, imagine going outside in America and having a legit conversation with someone about whether or not Trump is actually racist? You are either trolling, willfully ignorant (HIGHLY UNLIKELY IF YOU'RE DISCUSSING POLITICS), or just straight up racist.

Like, if you get called toxic by a community of people then you may need to step back, reflect on what you said or did, and try to nudge your pride out of the way, and confront yourself on your behavior. Entrenching yourself doesn't work long term. Like, do you think they will hold a grudge against you if you make an effort to do better? No.

Why is it so difficult for you guys to admit any actual wrong doing? Like, do you truly believe they are 100% in the wrong and you are 100% right?

So, if NeoGAF hits you with something and says you are being Toxic. You are going to step back, reflect on what you said or did, and try to nudge your pride of of the way, and confront yourself on your behavior?

It won't be so difficult for you to admit your actual wrong doing when that happens right?

 

[Cybrwzrd]

You can have a discussion without offending someone. If you offend someone, apologize, and the conversation goes on.

Also, "offended" is a blanket term. You have to be more specific. Let's say I was discussing racism with another person (who happens to be black), I constantly drop the N-word. Do you think that's just something that should be overlooked because we're having a "civil" conversation?

Saying, "people will always be offended" is just an easy way to saying, "I want to say anything without consequence."

I'm not going to call someone a "n word" in a civil discussion. Most people wont. Also generally speaking one doesn't call another a "fucking smelly piece of aardvark shit" in civil discourse as well. I don't see anyone here calling other posters those terms.

The problem is this: Controlling speech always leads to a slippery slope where more and more things become unacceptable in the pursuit of the greater good.

Do you know what makes a truly (or lawful) evil person evil (or how to RP one really well in D&D)? The belief that they are making the world a better place no matter what it takes to do so.

You seem to have a desire to silence voices you don't like. That is what makes people like you dangerous and an anathema to what I and apparently others on this site stand for.

And by the way, I stand by my thoughts on feminism. You are free to attribute them to me.

 

[Subpar Spatula]

So, if NeoGAF hits you with something and says you are being Toxic. You are going to step back, reflect on what you said or did, and try to nudge your pride of of the way, and confront yourself on your behavior?

It won't be so difficult for you to admit your actual wrong doing when that happens right?

It would have to be well-argued that I am being toxic. You guys aren't doing that, though, so not much to stand on. Like, if I am called toxic by people who let casual bigotry slide then I am 100% OK with that. It just shows on entrenched you are.

I'm not going to call someone a "n word" in a civil discussion. Most people wont. Also generally speaking one doesn't call another a "fucking smelly piece of aardvark shit" in civil discourse as well. I don't see anyone here calling other posters those terms.

The problem is this: Controlling speech always leads to a slippery slope where more and more things become unacceptable in the pursuit of the greater good.

Do you know what makes a truly (or lawful) evil person evil (or how to RP one really well in D&D)? The belief that they are making the world a better place no matter what it takes to do so.

You seem to have a desire to silence voices you don't like. That is what makes people like you dangerous and an anathema to what I and apparently others on this site stand for.

And by the way, I stand by my thoughts on feminism. You are free to attribute them to me.

No but you will call feminists "attention whores":

3rd wave feminism is when feminism jumped the shark, but may have provided some net good to society in the early years of it, and 4th wave is all about being an attention whore.

You say these things and openly accept it. It's hard not to think why people distance themselves and actively bar you from their conversations. Like, what did you expect?

Canada controls speech and is doing just fine. We even prevent racists and whatnot from visiting. It turns out that if you don't give racists or bigots platforms then they don't cause problems because they never create anything positive. Also, Canada isn't using their free speech laws to silence other people. No slippery slope here or other places that actively target hate speech. Like, you can spout, "slippery slope" all you want but there's plenty of real world examples where that doesn't happen (unless you got a dictator or some sort).

No one is getting hurt with our methods. We're not running folks over with cars, doxxing, threatening ICE on people, shooting up churches, shooting up schools. The Left seems pretty clean when it comes to political or cultural violence.

Silence people? I haven't silenced anyone. Banning someone isn't silencing them. Silencing them would be Putin shooting you for reporting the news. Not being able to talk on ResetEra or other private platforms isn't being silenced. You need to do a bit more research on that part.

 

[Musky_Cheese]

If a site doesn't remove racist content then it is by definition enabling it. I even reported it so the higher ups do know. It's like if I managed a restaurant and there are reports of hair being in all the food, but I as an owner shrug it off then that means I do condone it, and it is now part of the restaurant. It's like if YouTube enables IcePoseidon or other racist streamers / YouTubers then YouTube is enabling this behavior and the site's image and character are forever intertwined with racism and bigotry. It's why companies fire people who are known to be publicly racist because they help form the image of a company. Jared Foggle has zero to do with SubWay but when the charges came down SubWay immediately disowned him because you have to set that line down or else people will see you differently.

An issue? Calling out bad behavior isn't creating an issue, it's called doing the right thing. Like, look at this thread (first page): https://www.neogaf.com/threads/how-legit-is-modern-feminism.1462723/#post-253278280

Look at the posts, look at these:



HMMMMMMM


HMMMMMMMMM

Like, the trend is there.

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/a-shooting-that-you-will-likely-not-see-on-cnn.1462630/

HMMM

Like, these are the threads you see on the communities that wanted to destroy NeoGAF. It's really fucking hard to say they didn't succeed.

You either accept that or you don't, but a lot accepted that and moved on because it's been shown time and time again those types of "civil discussions" and what not don't lead anywhere except people being purposely mean to one another.


Like, Voat's biggest NeoGAF targeted is EvilOre, and maybe once in a month you get a NeoGAF mention. That's the reality of your current situation: they're here already so they don't need to gossip about it elsewhere. Their target is ResetEra because they actively remove them so it becomes a game to them all. They got no beef with people here because the people they have beef with have left, and it's no fun spreading misery to a place that doesn't seem to care about it anymore.

HMMM.. you already did this last page. You brought up the Black Tranny comment last page. How those things are allowed.

I just checked the comment, there is a mod warning to it.

What is your problem again since it was already handled?

 

[bitbydeath]

It would have to be well-argued that I am being toxic. You guys aren't doing that, though, so not much to stand on. Like, if I am called toxic by people who let casual bigotry slide then I am 100% OK with that. It just shows on entrenched you are.

Your definition of racism is different to others. You shouldn’t attack others because you have different views. That doesn’t lead to a nice discussion.

It’s like religion, you might think yours is correct but others exist, you shouldn’t go attack others for having different beliefs.

Remaining civil is key.

 

[Subpar Spatula]

Your definition of racism is different to others. You shouldn’t attack others because you have different views. That doesn’t lead to a nice discussion.

It’s like religion, you might think yours is correct but others exist, you shouldn’t go attack others for having different beliefs.

Remaining civil is key.

You can't remain civil when someone is dropping casual racism. Once that happens then they broke the civility rule y'all so love so very much.

HMMM.. you already did this last page. You brought up the Black Tranny comment last page. How those things are allowed.

I just checked the comment, there is a mod warning to it.

What is your problem again since it was already handled?

It deserves a ban. Like, that's pretty obvious. Like, he's not even warned for the bigotry in the statement. Lol.

 

[Musky_Cheese]

It deserves a ban. Like, that's pretty obvious. Like, he's not even warned for the bigotry in the statement. Lol.

So basically you don't agree with the staff so you are going to cause issues since you are unhappy. Very Old Gaf... retro af. They were warned. It's in the mod note.

You seem to think you are judge and jury. Not the staff. Not the community as a whole. You determine whats what. But you don't. Not here or anywhere on this planet. You are wrong.

 

[Corrik]

I for one am super surprised by that ban. lol

Anyways!

 

[Cybrwzrd]

Well that was one of the more interesting ban baits.

 

[JORMBO]

There's a thread on ERA about Samantha Bee calling Ivanka Trump a "feckless cunt" during her show. The only warning/ban is for someone posting:

"Samantha Bee is a stupid bitch. Why is this even news?"
User Banned (3 Days): Sexist drive-by post.

Meanwhile most of the posters think Bee's statement is acceptable for TV. Posts such as "Ivanka is a cunt" do not get warned. Too bad I can't ask Spatula if this is what it means to "be better".

 

[Corrik]

There's a thread on ERA about Samantha Bee calling Ivanka Trump a "feckless cunt" during her show. The only warning/ban is for someone posting:

"Samantha Bee is a stupid bitch. Why is this even news?"
User Banned (3 Days): Sexist drive-by post.

Meanwhile most of the posters think Bee's statement is acceptable for TV. Posts such as "Ivanka is a cunt" do not get warned. Too bad I can't ask Spatula if this is what it means to "be better".

Why did you need to ask him? He would died on the cross to profess Resetera's perfection.

 

[JDB]

I mean Ivanka is a bit of a cunt.

 

[nicoga3000]

I haven't posted here in a while. I moved with the exodus, but never stopped visiting GAF. The reason I use Reset more is simply due to how active it is versus GAF these days. The situation that unfolded here was one of the most fascinating things I've ever witnessed in an online community. Here's the thing...

I found most of those "ban me posts" to be absolutely childish and quite telling of a certain chunk of folks who moved from one site to another.

Reset is fine for the gaming communities that I take part in. But I won't get involved in discussions on modern happenings, news, or politics. There is a CLEAR hate and disdain for non-liberals over there. I'm sure the mod team would try and tell me I'm wrong, but just go through virtually any political thread and you'll see that you can't post anything against the grain without being called terrible things (with no repercussions). There's also a disturbing number of, "Fuck all Republicans/non-Democrats" with audible support from the masses...That's a strange thing to see on a forum that was built upon the idea of "acceptance and tolerance".

Hope this post was OK - just needed a spot to talk out loud where some folks might actually know what I'm talking about!

 

[Corrik]

I haven't posted here in a while. I moved with the exodus, but never stopped visiting GAF. The reason I use Reset more is simply due to how active it is versus GAF these days. The situation that unfolded here was one of the most fascinating things I've ever witnessed in an online community. Here's the thing...

I found most of those "ban me posts" to be absolutely childish and quite telling of a certain chunk of folks who moved from one site to another.

Reset is fine for the gaming communities that I take part in. But I won't get involved in discussions on modern happenings, news, or politics. There is a CLEAR hate and disdain for non-liberals over there. I'm sure the mod team would try and tell me I'm wrong, but just go through virtually any political thread and you'll see that you can't post anything against the grain without being called terrible things (with no repercussions). There's also a disturbing number of, "Fuck all Republicans/non-Democrats" with audible support from the masses...That's a strange thing to see on a forum that was built upon the idea of "acceptance and tolerance".

Hope this post was OK - just needed a spot to talk out loud where some folks might actually know what I'm talking about!

I was quite pissed off when they said in a thread everyone who voted for Trump was a racist. I said that my fiancee voted for Trump purely because she is anti-abortion. How does that make her a racist? They responded that she enabled a racist and thus is a racist by association and she deserves anything that comes to her for being a racist.

Like... What? They do not know a single thing about her...

 

[Claus Grimhildyr]

I was quite pissed off when they said in a thread everyone who voted for Trump was a racist. I said that my fiancee voted for Trump purely because she is anti-abortion. How does that make her a racist? They responded that she enabled a racist and thus is a racist by association and she deserves anything that comes to her for being a racist.

Like... What? They do not know a single thing about her...

It is a strange mindset that I seem to find those types of people. You cannot have any thoughts or opinions that is shared by President Trump or general republicans. It is almost as if you have to be a "true-blooded liberal", only ever having the opinion of strictly liberal policies or side with Democrats on all things (I believe this is referred to as Tribalism, but please correct me if I am wrong).

This happens in Polygon, Waypoint, and Kotaku (though to a lesser extent). The funny thing is that I keep hearing mention of the "rise of the alt-right" with Trump taking office and, while I dislike him and disagree him on the vast majority of his points, I don't really see these alt-right or how he facilitated its supposed "rise". If anything, I have seen a rise of the authoritarian left that make large claims of racism, sexism, transphobia, and calling people "alt-right" when they disagree with them (as could have been seen by the previous conversation in this thread).

I truly hope this is only a phase and that it becomes far less of a hassle within the next ten years.

I haven't posted here in a while. I moved with the exodus, but never stopped visiting GAF. The reason I use Reset more is simply due to how active it is versus GAF these days. The situation that unfolded here was one of the most fascinating things I've ever witnessed in an online community. Here's the thing...

I found most of those "ban me posts" to be absolutely childish and quite telling of a certain chunk of folks who moved from one site to another.

Reset is fine for the gaming communities that I take part in. But I won't get involved in discussions on modern happenings, news, or politics. There is a CLEAR hate and disdain for non-liberals over there. I'm sure the mod team would try and tell me I'm wrong, but just go through virtually any political thread and you'll see that you can't post anything against the grain without being called terrible things (with no repercussions). There's also a disturbing number of, "Fuck all Republicans/non-Democrats" with audible support from the masses...That's a strange thing to see on a forum that was built upon the idea of "acceptance and tolerance".

Hope this post was OK - just needed a spot to talk out loud where some folks might actually know what I'm talking about!

Your post is fine! It is always good to see a well reasoned post from the other side that doesn't devolve into petty insults/generalizations. I do hope you continue to post here when you can. Would be good to have differing opinions in various topics to facilitate good discussions.

 

[zumphry]

I was quite pissed off when they said in a thread everyone who voted for Trump was a racist. I said that my fiancee voted for Trump purely because she is anti-abortion. How does that make her a racist? They responded that she enabled a racist and thus is a racist by association and she deserves anything that comes to her for being a racist.

Like... What? They do not know a single thing about her...

Well, that’s how voting works so, while a little hyperbolic, it’s not totally off the mark.

 

[TrainedRage]

I have come to the conclusion that I will never understand the irony and hypocrisy of the Era community.

Like, it's fine to call the daughter of the sitting president a Cunt, it's fine to make conspiracy theories about the first lady having plastic surgery or being abused by the president. Because "she hasn't been seen for weeks."

But calling out Lena Dunham will get you a ban.
Calling out some of these crazy BLM women or 'feminists' will earn you a ban.
Is it just that they are so entrenched on their side they literally can't see any of the hypocrisy?
It's making my blood pressure go up. And at the same time I enjoy seeing just how socially retarded these people are.

 

[JORMBO]

I have come to the conclusion that I will never understand the irony and hypocrisy of the Era community.

Like, it's fine to call the daughter of the sitting president a Cunt, it's fine to make conspiracy theories about the first lady having plastic surgery or being abused by the president. Because "she hasn't been seen for weeks."

But calling out Lena Dunham will get you a ban.
Calling out some of these crazy BLM women or 'feminists' will earn you a ban.
Is it just that they are so entrenched on their side they literally can't see any of the hypocrisy?
It's making my blood pressure go up. And at the same time I enjoy seeing just how socially retarded these people are.

They boil everything down to...
Democrats = force of good
Republicans = force of pure evil

Everything is rationalized by saying anything the Democrats (good) do is ok because they are "fighting" Republicans (evil). There is no inbetween or room for any other type of thought.

 

[Corrik]

Well, that’s how voting works so, while a little hyperbolic, it’s not totally off the mark.

Yeah, sure it is. That is like calling everyone who voted for Hillary a gender confused race baiter. It is 100% ridiculous.

 

[NickFire]

Well, that’s how voting works so, while a little hyperbolic, it’s not totally off the mark.

It completely misses the mark and reflects a lack of intellectual maturity / capacity.

 

[Future]

I was quite pissed off when they said in a thread everyone who voted for Trump was a racist. I said that my fiancee voted for Trump purely because she is anti-abortion. How does that make her a racist? They responded that she enabled a racist and thus is a racist by association and she deserves anything that comes to her for being a racist.

Like... What? They do not know a single thing about her...

People hate trump. A lot. So anyone that even partially supports him is lumped into a group assumed to not give a shit about the harm he can cause. Of course reality is more nuanced and many people vote without directly supporting many of the things they appear to be supporting.

I should get a resetera account. I don’t do it simply cuz I don’t want to register with my work email. The discussions are more varied and active.

I lean more left so I don’t get all the anger directed to that forum. Sure they can get banhappy sometimes, but I have no intention in participating in some of the discussion that gets the bans anyway. They are extremely inclusive, so anything that edges into the opposite discussion they don’t tolerate. The negative is that some people will think their voices are silenced. The positive is that a wider group of people may be inclined to post, which means more topics more discussion and more variety. Currently, as much hate as the forum seems to get, it does achieve a larger discussion pool that is a bit more appealing than GAF right now

 

[zumphry]

Yeah, sure it is. That is like calling everyone who voted for Hillary a gender confused race baiter. It is 100% ridiculous.

what's this in reference to?

It completely misses the mark and reflects a lack of intellectual maturity / capacity.

It's a little simplistic, but not off the mark at all, really. If you have a candidate who has X/Y/Z policies, but you don't support Y and Z, only X, you're in effect still supporting Y/Z by casting your vote for them. That's just how politics in the US works. We take the bad with the good, just like how I'm sure people who voted for Obama didn't support his drone striking of innocent people in the Middle East. However, they are the ones who voted for him and put him in a position to be able to do that, so in a way, that's what they voted for, and they have to own that.

It's all about taking responsibility for your actions.

 

[TrainedRage]

They boil everything down to...
Democrats = force of good
Republicans = force of pure evil

Everything is rationalized by saying anything the Democrats (good) do is ok because they are "fighting" Republicans (evil). There is no inbetween or room for any other type of thought.

I mostly agree but feel like some people must know how asinine that is and either say nothing or do nothing. It's just sad.

 

[Future]

what's this in reference to?



It's a little simplistic, but not off the mark at all, really. If you have a candidate who has X/Y/Z policies, but you don't support Y and Z, only X, you're in effect still supporting Y/Z by casting your vote for them. That's just how politics in the US works. We take the bad with the good, just like how I'm sure people who voted for Obama didn't support his drone striking of innocent people in the Middle East. However, they are the ones who voted for him and put him in a position to be able to do that, so in a way, that's what they voted for, and they have to own that.

It's all about taking responsibility for your actions.

Yup. And for people that lean harder left, valuing inclusivity trumps everything because it feels like you are coming from a place that is morally good. Even you still indirectly support dispicable things (like drone strikes).

On the flip side, this inclusivity can ignore some members of the white community. This isn’t understood, since left leaning people believe the white community is default included. In fact, complaining about not being included is seen as abrasive and ignoring the plights of everyone else. So their voices aren’t heard or valued, which can cause a backlash effect that helped result in trump getting elected. Because clearly their voices also matter

 

[NickFire]

what's this in reference to?



It's a little simplistic, but not off the mark at all, really. If you have a candidate who has X/Y/Z policies, but you don't support Y and Z, only X, you're in effect still supporting Y/Z by casting your vote for them. That's just how politics in the US works. We take the bad with the good, just like how I'm sure people who voted for Obama didn't support his drone striking of innocent people in the Middle East. However, they are the ones who voted for him and put him in a position to be able to do that, so in a way, that's what they voted for, and they have to own that.

It's all about taking responsibility for your actions.

Your extrapolation is not off the mark at all. But this remains completely off the mark: "They responded that she enabled a racist and thus is a racist by association and she deserves anything that comes to her for being a racist."

Huge difference between your nuanced acceptance of owning some responsibility, and their version of you voted Trump, so you are in fact racist and deserve anything that happens to you. Anyone with intellectual capacity / maturity understands that you are not racist simply because of a vote they disagreed with. You are racist (with respect to voting) if your vote was cast due to racial animosity. Voting in line with religious beliefs on abortion does not make you racist.

 

[Claus Grimhildyr]

People hate trump. A lot. So anyone that even partially supports him is lumped into a group assumed to not give a shit about the harm he can cause. Of course reality is more nuanced and many people vote without directly supporting many of the things they appear to be supporting.

I should get a resetera account. I don’t do it simply cuz I don’t want to register with my work email. The discussions are more varied and active.

I lean more left so I don’t get all the anger directed to that forum. Sure they can get banhappy sometimes, but I have no intention in participating in some of the discussion that gets the bans anyway. They are extremely inclusive, so anything that edges into the opposite discussion they don’t tolerate. The negative is that some people will think their voices are silenced. The positive is that a wider group of people may be inclined to post, which means more topics more discussion and more variety. Currently, as much hate as the forum seems to get, it does achieve a larger discussion pool that is a bit more appealing than GAF right now

I have to disagree with you here.

Era has a larger number of topics, but they are hardly more varied. It is the same talking points ad nauseum with very little in way of discussion, as has been shown and seen countless times in this thread and others. They ban and silence specific talking points that they even get a "hint" of something they disagree with. Daniel Vavre? He is racist and you can't say anything against that, or you will be banned (hell, you can't even say he was a good game developer). Colin Moriarty - sexist and transphobic, you can't mention him unless it is to insult him, otherwise you will be banned. Want to talk about Senran Kagura? You can't because it is sexist and you are a pedophile, also you will be banned. Did someone say or agree with points on GamerGate? Banned, also they are evil, terrible people.

(Note, some exaggeration for effect - but you get the gist of what I am saying).

How about those Trump, police, or [x person people don't like] threads? Que 20 pages of "[x] sucks/should go to jail/should be removed/etc".

As for "inclusivity", that really isn't the case. It is an echo chamber of the same overly sensitive members who will silence anyone who even remotely "offends" their delicate selves. As we can see with the myriad of "promotes sexist/transphobic/racist rhetoric" bans instead of actual discussion. Looking on Twitter, Reddit, and other social forums - there is a rather large sample size of people from the typical minority populations (LGBTQIA+/Black/Asian/Female/etc) that see the actions of this "inclusive" community as deplorable and pushing back years of progression.

Your extrapolation is not off the mark at all. But this remains completely off the mark: "They responded that she enabled a racist and thus is a racist by association and she deserves anything that comes to her for being a racist."

Huge difference between your nuanced acceptance of owning some responsibility, and their version of you voted Trump, so you are in fact racist and deserve anything that happens to you. Anyone with intellectual capacity / maturity understands that you are not racist simply because of a vote they disagreed with. You are racist (with respect to voting) if your vote was cast due to racial animosity. Voting in line with religious beliefs on abortion does not make you racist.

Agreed. I have colleagues were are staunch democrats that had voted for Trump, because they thought that he was the "lesser of the two evils" as well as supported certain key points that they wanted to see changed or improved on within the country. They genuinely believed that either candidate (Trump/Hillary) would promote discord within the country, but does that make them racists because they voted for Trump? Not at all.

 

[JORMBO]

I mostly agree but feel like some people must know how asinine that is and either say nothing or do nothing. It's just sad.

That's why a lot of political and social issue threads are just the same people posting the same stuff each time. The same issue oldGAF had. People who realize it is absurd just avoid those threads.

 

[nicoga3000]

I have to disagree with you here.

Era has a larger number of topics, but they are hardly more varied. It is the same talking points ad nauseum with very little in way of discussion, as has been shown and seen countless times in this thread and others. They ban and silence specific talking points that they even get a "hint" of something they disagree with. Daniel Vavre? He is racist and you can't say anything against that, or you will be banned (hell, you can't even say he was a good game developer). Colin Moriarty - sexist and transphobic, you can't mention him unless it is to insult him, otherwise you will be banned. Want to talk about Senran Kagura? You can't because it is sexist and you are a pedophile, also you will be banned. Did someone say or agree with points on GamerGate? Banned, also they are evil, terrible people.

(Note, some exaggeration for effect - but you get the gist of what I am saying).

How about those Trump, police, or [x person people don't like] threads? Que 20 pages of "[x] sucks/should go to jail/should be removed/etc".

As for "inclusivity", that really isn't the case. It is an echo chamber of the same overly sensitive members who will silence anyone who even remotely "offends" their delicate selves. As we can see with the myriad of "promotes sexist/transphobic/racist rhetoric" bans instead of actual discussion. Looking on Twitter, Reddit, and other social forums - there is a rather large sample size of people from the typical minority populations (LGBTQIA+/Black/Asian/Female/etc) that see the actions of this "inclusive" community as deplorable and pushing back years of progression.



Agreed. I have colleagues were are staunch democrats that had voted for Trump, because they thought that he was the "lesser of the two evils" as well as supported certain key points that they wanted to see changed or improved on within the country. They genuinely believed that either candidate (Trump/Hillary) would promote discord within the country, but does that make them racists because they voted for Trump? Not at all.

Pretty much this.

All of this.

 

[Fox Mulder]

They boil everything down to...
Democrats = force of good
Republicans = force of pure evil

Everything is rationalized by saying anything the Democrats (good) do is ok because they are "fighting" Republicans (evil). There is no inbetween or room for any other type of thought.

And republicans did the same shit with every single thing Obama did for 8 years.

It's just US politics where people pick a team and surround themselves in a like minded bubble.

 

[Future]

I have to disagree with you here.

Era has a larger number of topics, but they are hardly more varied. It is the same talking points ad nauseum with very little in way of discussion, as has been shown and seen countless times in this thread and others. They ban and silence specific talking points that they even get a "hint" of something they disagree with. Daniel Vavre? He is racist and you can't say anything against that, or you will be banned (hell, you can't even say he was a good game developer). Colin Moriarty - sexist and transphobic, you can't mention him unless it is to insult him, otherwise you will be banned. Want to talk about Senran Kagura? You can't because it is sexist and you are a pedophile, also you will be banned. Did someone say or agree with points on GamerGate? Banned, also they are evil, terrible people.

(Note, some exaggeration for effect - but you get the gist of what I am saying).

How about those Trump, police, or [x person people don't like] threads? Que 20 pages of "[x] sucks/should go to jail/should be removed/etc".

As for "inclusivity", that really isn't the case. It is an echo chamber of the same overly sensitive members who will silence anyone who even remotely "offends" their delicate selves. As we can see with the myriad of "promotes sexist/transphobic/racist rhetoric" bans instead of actual discussion. Looking on Twitter, Reddit, and other social forums - there is a rather large sample size of people from the typical minority populations (LGBTQIA+/Black/Asian/Female/etc) that see the actions of this "inclusive" community as deplorable and pushing back years of progression.



Agreed. I have colleagues were are staunch democrats that had voted for Trump, because they thought that he was the "lesser of the two evils" as well as supported certain key points that they wanted to see changed or improved on within the country. They genuinely believed that either candidate (Trump/Hillary) would promote discord within the country, but does that make them racists because they voted for Trump? Not at all.

Yeah I don't know. I feel that's a very disgruntled way of looking at things. Sure, controversial discussions will always be on the front page. You'll see anti trump shit and maybe a couple of gaming threads discussing gender or some crap. The addition of added diversity also means you'll get topics that affect a wider variety of crowds from a left leaning point of view. And if you are sensitive to this maybe it's unbearable

But look at resetera right now. The topics you describe make up a tiny percentage of the overall discussions. Whether it's a specific game, genre, tech, movie topic whatever you will find way more posts and points of view. They aren't all riddled with any of the things you say. Although if I go to a topic titled "Jordan Peterson - The "Intellectual" We Deserve", I probably know what I'm in for yeah? What "same talking points" are being discussed in the Apple thread? Or the MLB OT?

If you are looking for a place to discuss politics or the inner workings of race in America, well yeah you gotta deal their style of policing sure. But if I want some opinions on Westworld, the conversation is lively and active over there without any of the additional bullshit you mention. Out thread here is a ghost town.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

We understand you may want to discuss some goings-on over there or your history with them after changing home bases. I have no interest in NeoGAF being bogged down with Reset talk around our forum, and our regulars want to move on as well. So, we're asking that if you'd like to discuss anything related to Reset, or some other community that you feel compelled to discuss, that you do so in this thread exclusively.

FBGaf has come out of the closet and hang out on actual GAF to complain about Post-Neo-Gaf.

Xzibit would be proud.

Telling other members explicitly they are racist based on a difference of opinion is an attack, yes.

The intent is absolutely relevant in determining what level of wrong occurred, again, both socially and legally. That is a fact everywhere, and not a matter of debate. Intent matters in legal definitions of racism and hate speech, the very thing being discussed along with their punishment. You obviously know this, otherwise you would be expecting to see a vast array of musicians in prison for hate speech when they appear on stage. Regardless, either take part in topics civilly or do not. I won't be debating the details of what that entails as I'm sure you can work it out.

This is why I cosign on bucyou 's post on the first page here, as well as everything subpar spatula said.

The "hard rule" is that you can't attack people directly. It (might be) illegal to say that black people are scum, but you have a people in the thread about Rosanne defending either her right to say what she said, or the notion that what she said "wasn't so bad."

So by metonymy, if you will, there are many instances where people are getting away with shady comments simply because they don't cross the line (and hot damn if that line doesn't have a wide berth!). So instead, there are micro-aggressive comments that garner equitable results to the blatant kind.

When you really scrutinize what's going on, you're granting a platform for people to defend the right for someone to be racist. Whether you like it or not, if you are providing an avenue to breed racism, then yes, you are culpable when racists act out. Because you allowed someone to say that it is permissible, but just not here. So yes, the foundation was built, then, on a slope at a 100-degree angle.

Intent matters legally, yes. But on the topic of racism and hate speech, aint no such thing as an accidental bigot. To wit, I, and many others are not interested in entertaining "discussions" with those people.

But then, to deploy "discretion is the better part of valor," we are told that if we don't want to participate in the "discussion," if we are disinterested in granting audience to armchair Richard Spencers, to not participate, not post. But then, evil would triumph, since good men are told to do nothing.

To be left with the choices between silence and violence is asphyxiating. That is why subpar spatula behaved the way that he did.

 

[Claus Grimhildyr]

Yeah I don't know. I feel that's a very disgruntled way of looking at things. Sure, controversial discussions will always be on the front page. You'll see anti trump shit and maybe a couple of gaming threads discussing gender or some crap. The addition of added diversity also means you'll get topics that affect a wider variety of crowds from a left leaning point of view. And if you are sensitive to this maybe it's unbearable

But look at resetera right now. The topics you describe make up a tiny percentage of the overall discussions. Whether it's a specific game, genre, tech, movie topic whatever you will find way more posts and points of view. They aren't all riddled with any of the things you say. Although if I go to a topic titled "Jordan Peterson - The "Intellectual" We Deserve", I probably know what I'm in for yeah? What "same talking points" are being discussed in the Apple thread? Or the MLB OT?

If you are looking for a place to discuss politics or the inner workings of race in America, well yeah you gotta deal their style of policing sure. But if I want some opinions on Westworld, the conversation is lively and active over there without any of the additional bullshit you mention. Out thread here is a ghost town.

I did as you suggested and looked at ResetEra over 3 separate times, with 1 hour divided between each. I looked to see the average amount of posts on the front page that were political (whether intended or derailed by). This is a rough data set and one that I would like to continue with better methods at a later date when I have the extra time.

• On the Video Game front page at the time of 4:30, there were 24 topics based on games that got derailed by politics or were based on politics in gaming, and 16 topics that were neither derailed or influenced by politics for a total of 40 (not counting the stickied threads).
  • At 5:30, the lowest rating of political posts at a grand total of 17 out of 40.
  • At 6:30, the highest amount of political posts were found for a total of 25 out of 40.
• On EtcetEra, we have a whopping 27 threads that are either directly involving politics, political ideologies, or were derailed by politics, 13 threads that do not.
  • At 5:30, it was roughly the same with 3 less threads based on politics or pushing political agendas.
  • At 6:30, it was at its lowest of political threads with 19 out of the 40 involving politics.
• Also an interesting note: Since the start of the day, 36 bans have been registered with 17 that could be argued were reasonable.

This is not a tiny amount by any means. You could suggest that these were just "poor times" or "coincidences", but the amount that I have seen today from this data set coincides with what I saw when I was a formal member of that site.

As for the "discussion" bit, I again have to disagree. You cannot have a valued discussion when you ban or silence anything that you disagree with or are remotely offended by - this can be seen by the bans today alone and the attitudes of those who don't use those threads because they *know* they would be banned.

This is why I cosign on bucyou 's post on the first page here, as well as everything subpar spatula said.

Bukyou also stated that Trump supporters deserved a myriad of horrible things happen to them and their families, or any families that did not cut them off from their lives. A moderator had to edit it due to its abhorrent claims and suggestions.

Edit: Apparently it was a quote from ResetEra. Pardon the confusion, Bukyou.

The "hard rule" is that you can't attack people directly. It (might be) illegal to say that black people are scum, but you have a people in the thread about Rosanne defending either her right to say what she said, or the notion that what she said "wasn't so bad."

So by metonymy, if you will, there are many instances where people are getting away with shady comments simply because they don't cross the line (and hot damn if that line doesn't have a wide berth!). So instead, there are micro-aggressive comments that garner equitable results to the blatant kind.

It isn’t racist to suggest that Roseanne Barr should have every right to say what she did, nor is it racist if you disagree with the severity of what she said. These are discussion points that one can do well in entering and putting forth valued posts – but instead you just label them as racists, or people who promote racism. Put forth in a calm manner of why you disagree with them, make reasonable points and move on, don't call people "racist" (or suggesting such) because you disagree with their opinion. Racism is a very serious issue and constantly calling people racist when they aren't just lessens the meaning. Same thing with alt-right/transphobe/sexist/etc.

I also am going to assume you are referring to the "black tranny" message on the front page, if you were not than please forgive me. As has been discussed, "tranny" does not have the same connotation in certain other english speaking nations (just like "fag" or "cunt") when compared to America. Trying to push everything with an americanocentric viewpoint is silly. The comment can also be seen as a mockery of the ResetEra history of giving leniency to those of specific minority groups. Discussion can be had instead of getting up and arms and asking for someone to be banned.

When you really scrutinize what's going on, you're granting a platform for people to defend the right for someone to be racist. Whether you like it or not, if you are providing an avenue to breed racism, then yes, you are culpable when racists act out. Because you allowed someone to say that it is permissible, but just not here. So yes, the foundation was built, then, on a slope at a 100-degree angle.

Intent matters legally, yes. But on the topic of racism and hate speech, aint no such thing as an accidental bigot. To wit, I, and many others are not interested in entertaining "discussions" with those people.

But then, to deploy "discretion is the better part of valor," we are told that if we don't want to participate in the "discussion," if we are disinterested in granting audience to armchair Richard Spencers, to not participate, not post. But then, evil would triumph, since good men are told to do nothing.

To be left with the choices between silence and violence is asphyxiating. That is why subpar spatula behaved the way that he did.

You know full well that you can disagree and have a discussion in a calm, constructing manner – something that Spatula refused to do, even when given multiple opportunities to change. That last point is something I actually want to put emphasis on: "opportunities to change" as this (or variants of) is something that you and a few others seem keen on repeating when in reference to ResetEra, but when in the case of NeoGaf that seems to be an issue. People can say things out of ignorance or because of a difference in cultures (like the use of the term of cunt/fag/tranny that was illustrated earlier). By notifying them and helping them learn, we can allow better discussion and and general growth of character/people.

Instead, you are suggesting the old-style of moderation, where we ban anything that even remotely offends us all on the grounds of "fighting the good fight". At least, that is what I took from your message here.

 

[JordanN]

Whether you like it or not, if you are providing an avenue to breed racism, then yes, you are culpable when racists act out.

Take responsibility for your own actions.
I have zero to do with the actions of other individuals. In fact, I always encourage discussion/debate to put these views to the test. Otherwise, it feels like a big mistake that you can plug your ears and go "la-la-la can't hear you" and expect the world to turn perfect.

I asked spatula to explain to me how people with non-black skin are racist for uttering a word. His response? Nothing and just kept spouting "racist racist everyone is racist!". This is the logic used on kindergarten playgrounds.
When you grow up and be apart of the real world, adults quickly realize that type of banter disintegrates quickly.

It also unironically plays into the meme that the left is out of ideas and only want to force emotions on people.
Remember the George W. Bush years where we all laughed at how hilariously incompetent Bush was and Bush's responses would be "you're either with me or against me"? Now it's the playbook being adopted by leftist dogma. No smart arguments, just point your fingers and scream "racist" and hope the other side abides by it. I hated when the right did it, I hate it more now that the left is using bankrupt arguments.

 

[bucyou]

lol what? those arent my thoughts, I cut and pasted it from the other site as an example of the absolute lunacy of that train of thought.

 

[Claus Grimhildyr]

lol what? those arent my thoughts, I cut and pasted it from the other site as an example of the absolute lunacy of that train of thought.

Ah, that would explain the insanity. I did feel that it was very off-base from what you normally say. If you can, I suggest you put it in a quote box so we don't mistake it in the future. Pardon for the confusion, bucyou!

 

[Future]

On EtcetEra, we have a whopping 27 threads that are either directly involving politics, political ideologies, or were derailed by politics, 13 threads that do not.

• At 5:30, it was roughly the same with 3 less threads based on politics or pushing political agendas.
• At 6:30, it was at its lowest of political threads with 19 out of the 40 involving politics.

Dude, I count like 6 topics in off topic right now that are about politics. Maybe 7. Overall less than simply neogaf right now. If I wasn’t on a phone I’d list them out but whatever. Maybe I just don’t have an eye for this shit. Will agree to disagree

On reset I’ll hear claims that all threads here are now alt right as well and I never believe that either.

 

[Claus Grimhildyr]

Dude, I count like 6 topics in off topic right now that are about politics. Maybe 7. Overall less than simply neogaf right now. If I wasn’t on a phone I’d list them out but whatever. Maybe I just don’t have an eye for this shit. Will agree to disagree

On reset I’ll hear claims that all threads here are now alt right as well and I never believe that either.

As I stated, I looked at the front page at those specific times. I had also made a note that there was a difference of the average number of political posts at different times. It could be a coincidence and it could be bias, as (at least the former) I stated in my post. This is just what I saw. Experiences do vary, so (as you stated), agree to disagree.

 

[Foxbat]

I lurked here for a long time. Tried to join a couple of years ago, but apparently my business email wasn't good enough.

I switched jobs about a year ago, and got a different email provided by my new job. Joined Era first because they had a couple of threads I wanted to post in.

I knew from just browsing the gaming side, that they leaned pretty far to the left over there. Someone referenced a thread on the non gaming side, so I went over to have a look. Wow! I shouldn't have done that. The political side over there is downright scary. For a bit, I thought that most all gamers were like that, so I came over here to see if Gafs political side was as toxic as over there. I was warned that it was Alt-right all the time here, but I can see that it isn't. Either way... All it took was one post by me saying that just because I lean republican, doesn't make me a racist, and I was perma-banned. Never had a previous warning or ban.

It's all good. That place is an echo chamber. The posters here seem to be much more varied.

 

[Lionel Richie]

I mean Ivanka is a bit of a cunt.

Totally and I'd hit that hard.

 

[Corrik]

Totally and I'd hit that hard.

She is definitely extremely gorgeous.

 

[Lionel Richie]

She is definitely extremely gorgeous.

She is incredible, she projects a smart angry edge which is just irresistible. It's too bad the left mocks her like crazy, she could have been a well regarded and certainly different public figure.

 

[SavingAshley]

Here is a guide to Era language -

Toxic: Anything but being flattering of something I like.

Problematic: Features the slightest thing I don't like.

Arguing in bad faith: A reasonable voice who is only arguing to troll and not for an actual discussion.

People of colour: Criminal or terrorist.

Straight white male: Source of every problem ever.

Sexist: Saying anything slightly bad about any female.

Woman: Probably had a penis at some point or still does.

 

[RinsFury]

Here is a guide to Era language -

Toxic: Anything but being flattering of something I like.

Problematic: Features the slightest thing I don't like.

Arguing in bad faith: A reasonable voice who is only arguing to troll and not for an actual discussion.

People of colour: Criminal or terrorist.

Straight white male: Source of every problem ever.

Sexist: Saying anything slightly bad about any female.

Woman: Probably had a penis at some point or still does.

This place has become beyond disgusting.

 

[Claus Grimhildyr]

Here is a guide to Era language -

Toxic: Anything but being flattering of something I like.

Problematic: Features the slightest thing I don't like.

Arguing in bad faith: A reasonable voice who is only arguing to troll and not for an actual discussion.

People of colour: Criminal or terrorist.

Straight white male: Source of every problem ever.

Sexist: Saying anything slightly bad about any female.

Woman: Probably had a penis at some point or still does.

Mate, you can do better. This serves no point other than to add fuel to the fire. Especially the PoC/Woman comments. You know that is highly disingenuous.

This place has become beyond disgusting.

Hey, welcome back. Your first post in over seven months! Are you going to add anything or report the person for their actions, or are you just going to say your hot-take and leave it at that?

 

[Musky_Cheese]

Mate, you can do better. This serves no point other than to add fuel to the fire. Especially the PoC/Woman comments. You know that is highly disingenuous.



Hey, welcome back. Your first post in over seven months! Are you going to add anything or report the person for their actions, or are you just going to say your hot-take and leave it at that?

Of course not. They only came here to do exactly that.

 

[JordanN]

Hey, welcome back. Your first post in over seven months! Are you going to add anything or report the person for their actions, or are you just going to say your hot-take and leave it at that?

Actually, I'm kinda worried if a lot of Reset posters come back.

This place has been good now in that it has a proportional balance of left,centre, & right-wing users and no biased mods.
But if it starts getting brigaded by the hard-left users, then it's going to turn into the exact same shitshow of last year.

If the Reset users aren't going to contribute anything outside of the "fuck drumpf/racist/sexist/lol alt-right" posts then it needs to be brought to attention now before it's too late.

 

[Claus Grimhildyr]

Actually, I'm kinda worried if a lot of Reset posters come back.

This place has been good now in that it has a proportional balance of left,centre, & right-wing users and no biased mods.
But if it starts getting brigaded by the hard-left users, then it's going to turn into the exact same shitshow of last year.

If the Reset users aren't going to contribute anything outside of the "fuck drumpf/racist/sexist/lol alt-right" posts then it needs to be brought to attention now before it's too late.

I agree, which is why I sent in a complaint about the user in question. Hoping to talk with a moderator about this issue, maybe being a bit more tight on drive by posts from former/returning members who only return to insult the community.