BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Is something wrong with Barbelith?

 
  

Page: 1(2)34567... 24

 
 
Tryphena Absent
16:13 / 18.10.05
R&R's been PMing you? What's he been saying?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
16:14 / 18.10.05
I wouldn't quote without his permission. Nothing harassing.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
16:16 / 18.10.05
Ok, guys, change of plan. Can we not provide examples? It's getting really confusing. Maybe we should just go for abstract statements and questions, like:

Is it official Barbelith policy that hate speech should be dealt with using any means needed? Scorched earth if necessary? Should it be?

No, no and maybe, depending on what you mean by "scorched Earth". Removing people who post racially hateful material, say, and deleting their posts doesn't strike me as scorched earth so much as weeded garden.

Unfortunately, Barbelith does not have a clear policy on hate speech, which is one of the things we are working out here. Anti-semitism, certainly as expressed by Holocaust denial, claims of a worldwide conspiracy or citation of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a banning offence, as long as it is noticed and Tom's attention is drawn to it. This means that the Temple is a bit of a problem area at times. Other forms of racial, religious or sexual orientation-based hatred are less clear, which is a regular source of confusion, but the general idea is that Barbelith is not a place where hate speech is permissible. Unfortunately, as we have established, the mechanisms for dealing with it are limited and, in the absence of a clear steer, the potential for endless challenges and obstructions almost limitless. Remember, Barbelith is averse to banning - to say that Tom is a "mechanism for banning", while denying him the status of mechanism for recall rather demonstrates that. In the modern age we have basically banned three people, occupying a number of suits, I think - one for harrassment and infringement of the rules of Barbelith, one for anti-Semitism and one because it was made impossible for us not to. If anyone has any others, please jog my memory - that might be useful. Did we ban innercircle, or just take the piss a lot until he left? That's not very many people, and the endless fights about what might justify banning somebody - on current form, racist behaviour in itself is not enough to get you banned, only told off, so if you are impervious to criticism (qv Vladimir) that is pretty useless. Any moderator going further risks being identified as rogue and stripped of his or her powers and/or booted off the board.

So, scorched earth? I don't really understand what that means in this context. Deleting all their posts? Doesn't happpen, really - at least one moderator has vetoed the deletion of posts by one of our banned people without repercussions. Bannning them? Also doesn't happen. Punishment by a council of elders? There is no council of elders. Being told off? At present I would say that we are desperately short of a clear policy and an unambiguous mandate to enforce it.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
16:39 / 18.10.05
Banning. That'd do quite nicely. Unrepentantly racist? Boot the fucker. As you say, Vladimir was asked to qualify his 'joke' and managed to come out with an apology that amounted to "I'm sorry - sorry that you haven't got a sense of humour."

You can't ban straight away, so there should be a system of warnings in place. Three strikes and you're out, or something along those lines.

Alternatively, we have to make it so that anti-semitism is no longer a banning offence. Whatever, there has to be consistency. The half-arsed policy that we have in place currently is stupid.

What we most desperately need is an administrator who spends more time here. Having to email Tom to let him know that a troll has resurfaced, because he's not even here regularly enough to read his PMs before said troll can do real damage, is a joke. I'm sorry, but it is.
 
 
rising and revolving
17:01 / 18.10.05
Right now, R&R, you seem to be far more interested in getting a rise out of me than in the topic under discussion - given your recent PMs, this is a bit disturbing.

Genuinely sorry you feel that way, although I do find it strange you went directly from "fair point" to "you're trying to get me" without even a post from me in between. Frankly, I feel much the same regarding the way you've responded, but hey. Feel more than free to quote PM's - my usual policy is that I reserve the right to quote replies or context if things are quoted out of such, but I don't much mind. This is hardly the thread to do it in, though.

As for the racism point (is it worth moving this stuff into a new thread? It's worthy of it's own topic, I'd think)

I'd 100% agree clear policy needs definition, and that hate speech should result in (to propose policy)-

a) In the thread containing hate speech a link would be provided a new policy thread where the person is warned and apology (along with promise not to do it again) is requested. This would be basically your chance to either argue the point or recieve your warning and move on.

b) Banning of people who either repeat offend, or refuse to say "I understand that's inappropriate for Barbelith"

All that's needed beyond that is a definition of what hate speech is.

To clarify 'Scorched Earth' - to me that's where we end up when the discussion happens outside of context. The Vlad case, where he's posted innocuous material in other threads only to have people bring up the racism comment and try and start a fight, is a good example. It ruins threads that should have nothing to do with the original issue - I think that harms the board. Banning Vlad or having him apologise or putting up with him are three ideal solutions in my opinion. Following his every post with some reference to his poor comment would be bad, I think.

However, with clear policy, there's no need for such things. Unclear policy (which Barbelith thrives on, due to it's inability to create technology to support policy, among other reasons[1]} creates the context for these sorts of problems.

[1] Not least of which how many policy discussions go nowhere because no-one knows what constitutes a mandate for change on Barbelith. Well, except for Tom. Defining that would help an awful lot of policy discussions to really go places.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
17:22 / 18.10.05
To clarify 'Scorched Earth' - to me that's where we end up when the discussion happens outside of context.

That's not scorched earth, though. It's status q. And, right now, it's not rotting anything, as far as I know. Personally, I don't like doing it, but in the absence of any other means of making it clear that I personally am and the board I moderate is meant to be anti-racism (which counts out "putting up with it"), it's the only tool in the toolbox. If there's a new tool - say, banning, then that's fine, but right now there isn't.

(Incidentally, "fair point" addressed your main point on the potential inaccuracy of memory, although you have yet to find any time that a comment was moderated to change its meaning, which should be reasonably simple from the disparity between it and what follows) the second post addressed your rudeness and apparent desire to misrepresent matters by pulling in quotes from entirely different situations and claiming that they were relevant here. I'm not sure what you're aiming for here, but it feels a bit trolly and is certainly the introduction of a personal issue into a thread where there is no place for it, especially as it seems to be picking up a thread from your PMs, where you made highly contentious or just plain wrong assertions, and then refused to provide any substantiation for them, which I don't want too become a recurring motif.)
 
 
rising and revolving
17:48 / 18.10.05
but in the absence of any other means of making it clear that I personally and the board I moderate are meant to be anti-racism

I still disagree that this is unclear. I don't think Vlad necessarily needs to be banned for this to be clear.

It's entirely possible Vlad needs to be banned. It's entirely possible that Barbelith and you are anti-racism. Making one depend on the other isn't healthy for the board, though.

The rest of the post really isn't necessary to respond to here, taken to PM.
 
 
Harrison Ford, in a battle suit, wheels for feet, knives and guns
18:37 / 18.10.05
More traffic could be encouraged by smashing the current registration system with a hammer. As an anti-troll system it doesn't seem to have made much difference, but as a way to pile up unnecessary work and keep good potential members away it's brilliant.
As posted by Quantum.

I have to say i totally agree with this sentiment. Although this may bring up potential bandwidth issues, i feel that to re-open "Barbelith" would be a fantastic thing.
The potential for trolls may increase, but i'm sure that older posters & moderators can spot them a mile off & deal with them swiftly where neccesary.

Open the gates? You have my vote.

What would be the major objections to this, if any?
 
 
Our Lady Has Left the Building
18:59 / 18.10.05
Despite being the guy that was initially against the current system, I wouldn't want the gates flung open without Tom either promising to spend a lot more time on the board or devolving some power to those that are. Some clarification from him why anti-Semitic abuse seems to be worse than, say, homophobia, or an acceptance from him that we need to have a lower toleration of hate speech would be nice too. I agree with most of what E. Randy has said, though I don't think we can program some three strikes into Barbelith, who chooses what qualifies as a strike? I think we'd just have to say "I've seen poster x say this, I challenged hir and got this/no response" and we decide what to do.

We start a thread for each case. Having had someone go for me through the guise of Luke Cage I have no problem if someone who wants to complain about me starting a thread with my name in the title, it also gives that person a place in which to defend themselves. Will think a bit more on this and come back again later.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
19:08 / 18.10.05
One objection is, as stated above, that we can't deal with trolls swiftly. Spotting them isn't generally a problem, but doing anything practical about them is. There has to be some mechanism in place to allow us to get rid of trollsuits before we return to an open door policy.

Another would be that the last time we were totally open to new members, the board was overrun with spammers. I remember having to delete a number of threads that had been started in Music by people who'd joined up purely to use the place as free ad space.

Open door is great, but requires one of two things to happen alongside it for it to work to the board's advantage and not just make things worse: either Tom has more of a presence here, or he gives more powers to trusted moderators. If it's the latter, then I can think of a number of current mods who are trusted by pretty much everybody here and who don't tend to get themselves involved in the more public arguments - they'd be perfect. Whether they'd want that responsibility or not is, of course, another matter.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
19:49 / 18.10.05
It might be worth noting that this was Tom's last comment on the Vladimir situation. To me it would appear to suggest that Tom's lack of time to spend reading the board really is a problem, in that he doesn't seem aware of the history of the situation...
 
 
Char Aina
20:58 / 18.10.05
you just replied, and you have said nothing of use yet.
so far you have made what appears to be a thinly veiled accusation.

perhaps you could, in terms not emotive, tell us what you think.

based upon what you say, we can judge the worth of your observations and then get back to the issue of the rules you would seem to have broken in using this, another of your multiple suits.

i am, you may have guessed, assuming you are the knowledge we know from times gone by. feel free to correct this assumption.

go for it, dude.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
20:59 / 18.10.05
You're taking the fucking piss. He's banned for a fucking good reason, toksik. That post is up for deletion and Tom has been emailed about his return.

Beyond angry.
 
 
Char Aina
21:07 / 18.10.05
oh, well, when you put it like that...

i figure his suit will get banned again and his posts excised if they are arse, but i also dont see the harm in his being allowed ot make an observation that may or may not have truth in it.

he may say something offensive, i guess.
he might abuse someone.
he might even get a few people thinking he is reasonable and level headed and once again have a few people defending him through ignorance.

he is unlikely to drop some kinda text virus that will make any lasting impact, though.

will he be banned soon?
or will he have posting ability for a while anyway?
it seems to me that apeasement, while normally a bad idea, might be appropriate.
better to have him trying to contribute while he is a presence than trying to get him to go all 'hammer time' while we get him thrown the fuck off.
(this is what i meant when i mentioned his suit abuse. i wasnt expecting him to be allowed to stay on the merits of what he said. it seems to me he has already burned his bridges as much as anyone can.)

i dont assume to speak for all, of course.
 
 
Char Aina
21:10 / 18.10.05
Beyond angry.

i dont really know what to make of this bit, dude.
are you asking me to be aware so i tread lightly?
i dont like to make you angry.
i apologise if i have made you feel i dont care about you or anyone else on the board with my comments.
 
 
w1rebaby
21:11 / 18.10.05
Just ignore him until he's banned again. Troll. Feed. Don't.
 
 
rising and revolving
21:13 / 18.10.05
Does kind of prove the point that the system we have ain't working, though.

Not sure of what the solution is - without technology, there's no real way to open the gates properly. We need to be able to block by IP and ban more easily, and neither of those are things we can do right now.

Honestly, the current system (where people press the register button and are told exactly what to do in order to get access) doesn't seem terminally broken to me EXCEPT it's an incredible amount of work that Nina isn't well poised to handle any longer, and which no-one seems to want to take on.

Which is a major problem, and should be dealt with.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
21:13 / 18.10.05
He will be banned when Tom reads the email I sent, rather proving my point that there only being one person in the entire world with the power to kill suits is utterly ridiculous.

I've sent you a PM about this, but no - Cunto does not get the opportunity to post here. He is banned. That means he's not allowed to post, see? It doesn't matter if he steals another suit in order to try and get around that, he's still banned.

There is the one area of Barbelith policy that, as far as I'm aware, is not up for debate.
 
 
Ganesh
21:14 / 18.10.05
I know this is a really wide topic, Toksik, but it's still possible to rot it. I'd really rather you didn't. Please.
 
 
Tom Coates
21:15 / 18.10.05
I want to make it VERY clear to the user in question that his repeated breaking into other user's accounts by using expired Hotmail accounts is illegal and that it will get him into a hell of a lot of trouble. We've been doing this for five years now, and I've said before that I cannot and will not let it continue indefinitely. At a certain point, something will have to give, and that will either be this site being closed down, a formal complaint to Kingston University with IP addresses and times and the like, or a visit to the police. You are not welcome on this site, and your apparent obsession with harrassing this board and the people on it can, in the end, only end in damage for you in the future. This is the last time I will address this issue in public.
 
 
w1rebaby
21:16 / 18.10.05
Anyway. I've seen one guy posting something about wanting to slap Germaine Greer, and another guy posting some potentially very dodgy shit about black and gay people. Both of whom clearly need to justify what the hell they were on about.

This is some sort of appalling problem with Barbelith?

This is a fucking joke, right?
 
 
Ganesh
21:19 / 18.10.05
Well, presumably the problem would be Barbelith tolerating such comments, Fridgemagnet? Expaaand, please.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
21:20 / 18.10.05
Which'd be great, but that's not the only issue to have been raised in this thread.
 
 
Tom Coates
21:20 / 18.10.05
And toksik, there will be no appeasement. The user in question is BREAKING INTO PEOPLE'S USER NAMES, and using them to continue his campaign of harrassment against the site. This is the same individual who wrote about feeding lesbians to alsatians, and teaching black people their place by beating them with tire irons. This is the person who is so chronically obsessed with this site that he has been systematically harrassing people on it for FIVE YEARS, directly threatening people with legal attack or with visits to their employers if they dare to say anything about him in public.

Every time he reappears I feel physically sick and want to shut the whole thing down, and I will shut it down - I'll BURN it down, before I'll let him corrupt it.
 
 
w1rebaby
21:29 / 18.10.05
I don't really see what needs to be expanded upon. Clearly "Barbelith" does not tolerate such comments, otherwise this thread wouldn't exist at all, and nobody would have made reference to them on the threads concerned. So I do not see what the problem with "Barbelith" is. "Barbelith" is not encouraging or condoning any of this.

There are things that could be improved. What are they? Should there be a quicker banning process? Yes, I've said that for ages. Stop new entrants? I'm sure we have enough bigots already signed up to last us a while, and we lose more people than we gain that way, so we just end up with what is basically a chatroom. Screen people on entry? This has been a matter of debate amongst those dealing with applications (the archives are not public but anyone can apply to join and, if they also PM me their email address of joining they can then see the whole load of discussion); the general conclusion has been "we're not here to pass judgement, we're here to see if people are real or not".
 
 
Ganesh
21:37 / 18.10.05
Well, you have expanded on your original point, Fridge, and brought up some other points - so no, this thread isn't a "joke".

I've been thinking more about the changes I've seen in Barbelith over the years, which I reckon are for the worse, and why. Will post something more considered shortly. I really didn't want this merely to be a rant thread, or a passive-aggressive thread or a thread dominated by discussion of individual trolls - so I'll try to take a step back from some of that stuff.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
22:06 / 18.10.05
So, this raises two issues, I think - first, that moderators don't have powers to stop persistent trolls, and as we have just discovered some very lonely people will work very hard to troll Barbelith, and second that some more recent moderators are sufficiently uncertain about how to moderate that they might severely impact the ability of moderators to do that anyway. Hopefully this will no longer be an issue now that Tom has stated policy, but this is not the first time Tom has stated policy. Maybe we need a moderator induction pack, along with Terms and Conditions upon joining.

Quick half-time orange. Leaving aside the smoking boots on the floor, couple of issues coming out here are those old favourites Freedom to use Hateful Language and Shoudl we Reopen the Board? After Ganesh has shared his thoughts, maybe we shoudl split off into some issue-driven threads?
 
 
Ganesh
23:28 / 18.10.05
This is all going to sound a bit An Elder Remembers now, but I was trying to think longitudinally, if that makes sense. I've been around since the early days of the Nexus, and I've been trying to cut through my own veils of nostalgia in order to address the question of whether, as a message board, we had a Golden Age (as is not uncommonly suggested) - and, if we did, why that time is viewed more positively than the present.

When posters have linked, occasionally, to archived Nexus threads, I'm generally struck by how off-topic they are, in the sense of conversations meandering from one subject to another. I'm a particular culprit, with my stupid-clever Dick Emeryesque one-liners. In terms of its structure, the old Nexus reminds me of nothing so much as The Moon Online: a small group of intelligent, articulate posters, little or no strict moderation of topics, and lots of in-jokes. All of which is funny, endearing and, at times, conversationally quite meaty, with the downside that it's hard to remember exactly which thread one was talking about X in, when none of the titles or abstracts (abstracts?!) refer to X in any way.

As the board progressed through several templates, I remember we went through a phase of playing around with different fiction suits. One of the formats had a 'visitors' section' at the foot of the board, in which people could post without logging in or registering. This engendered silly but amusing clowning ('Julie Burchill' contributed quite a lot), and I rather missed it when the board changed again.

I'm not sure whether the board's move toward 'seriousness' was a gradual, organic shaping up of common politics/philosophy (initially with the common uniting factor of 'invisibleness', although this inevitably declined over time), a conscious decision on Tom's part (the 'manifesto') or a bit of both. I remember the use of multiple fiction suits and off-topic meandering became less acceptable. The moderation system, as I recall, sprang up as response to the first wave of trolling - Eloi Tsabaoth and Technoccult - and evolved with successive invaders. Several of those trolls forced us to consider where we drew the line regarding racism, sexism, homophobia, etc.

I'm not sure that there was a Golden Age as such, but I think I got more out of the board back then, at the point where we'd developed beyond merely being a place to chat about Georgie M and started trying to direct our discussions in a slightly more structured way. Even that first bout of trolling was novel enough to be exciting rather than simply irritating or repetitive. I still lived Oop North, and my contact with Barbelith was relatively 'pure', not then influenced by meeting Barbeloids in Real Life. I was comparitively new to online communication, and had found a community in which people talked about things I'd never had a chance to talk about before.

So has the board changed or have I changed? Both, obviously, and it's difficult to see which was more instrumental in the slow fading of my own, personal Golden Age. After my own move to London (and, specifically, after Xoc moved down to join me) and meeting some of the Barbeloids in the flesh, I think I became increasingly detached from the board, using it in a less confessional way (of course, making us Googleable further shredded the comforting illusion of privacy...). Perhaps this is partly why I then perceived it to have changed: maybe my subjective sense of the place having 'dumbed down' was more a reflection of my no longer getting the in-jokes...

Haus has occasionally expressed frustration that the older posters don't contribute like they used to, and I can see that. Myself, I'm no longer in a position to devote as much time and energy but, more than that, there's a feeling that everything's been said, that I'd just be covering old ground. Intellectually, I know this isn't the case, but it's hard sometimes to shake an oddly deadening deja vu.

Tt. And, like a doddering oldster, I've forgotten where I was going with this train of thought. Will think more about the current state.
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
02:39 / 19.10.05
I wish I had more to add, seeing as I've been a member here for almost five years now...

...but as it is, whenever I hear people ask about the quality of Barbelith Now v.s. Barbelith Back in the Day, I get kinda confused. To me it just feels like it's gotten bigger; some of that mass is unwanted, sure, but it's still the same shape and there's still gold all over the place.

I'm starting to think that the board must mean a lot more to a lot of you than it does to me, even though I really dig this place and haven't as of yet found one like it anywhere else. Nobody likes casual racism or homophobia, but then I deal with that all the time outside barbelith and I'm always prepared to dig through shit to get the good stuff. I'm all for throwing the doors open and letting everybody in. In my mind, it just means more people get to enjoy the place. But as someone who doesn't mind muddy footprints on the rug or broken furniture or hurt feelings, maybe I'm not the best person to decide how clean Barbelith ought to be.

But whatever. Just sayin' Barbelith seems fine to me, and has never been anything but a fun place to learn, discuss, and have one's blunt ignorance pounded into a fine edge.
 
 
Sax
06:20 / 19.10.05
Ganesh, you almost made me cry then.
 
 
Ganesh
07:10 / 19.10.05
You big poof.

Will gather thoughts and post more later.
 
 
babazuf
07:50 / 19.10.05
Women: don't expect any help from riding astride on hiccups, who tells us here that he would like to like to kick the shit out of Germaine Greer and meet short girls in pretty skirts, or something. (Before any one starts, the latter wouldn't really be worthy of note without the former, or "Aren't feminists funny?")

I wasn't aware that suppressing political incorrectness was conducive to the free exchange of ideas. Thank you kindly for correcting me!
 
 
*
08:00 / 19.10.05
Here you go, RAOH. Any further discussion about political correctness/PC-gone-mad/unPC-gone-mad accusations can either go there or to PMs, or at least you could read that thread first. That's my suggestion, anyway.
 
 
Regrettable Juvenilia
08:31 / 19.10.05
Or, y'know, you could just read the Wiki:

Our rule of thumb is that other members shouldn't feel harrassed, and aggressive statements about types of people who might be represented on the board may be considered direct harrassment of the individuals concerned. We genuinely do not care if you think this is 'political correctness gone mad' - if you feel that someone has misinterpreted something you've said to be homophobic or racist or whatever, the best thing you can do is apologise quickly for your poor choice of words, apologise to anyone you might have offended and try and restate the question again in clearer language.

I'm genuinely curious, riding astride on hiccups - why did you apply for Barbelith membership? Were you unable to find other message boards which seemed like they might be more receptive to "political incorrectness"? Or did you think "My winning ways will soon convince them that a bit of the old Nuts magazine mentality never did anybody any harm, and those stuffy feminist types will loosen up and come round to me"?
 
 
Unconditional Love
08:34 / 19.10.05
you need a policy page, and an agreement that users sign too, with definate rules around unacceptable behaviour on the board. and it should be one strike and then a banning with a 3-6 month gap period before that IP address, user can reapproach the board. Hard and fast rules with the power to implement them, with the compassion and tolerence of those sitting in judgement to make group based decisions.

So the mods of each respective forum should be required to log in once each day, including weekends, to attend to the board.

You need rules and laws just like any other society, define them according to your politics, define yourself as a group of moderators and a community, and you will find once the stage is set like minds are attracted.

Keep an open door policy and expect gate crashers and arseholes from all over the place, define what you are and people will either be attracted or repulsed.

SO what is Barbelith, what does it represent? As mods you need to get together and define that and start building a more tangible identity based on yourselves and what you want to see.

To begin with you could create 5-10 points of policy, and a policy page, give barbelith a solid identity, especially if you think its suffering from an identity crisis.
 
  

Page: 1(2)34567... 24

 
  
Add Your Reply