BARBELITH underground
 

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


Dealing with aggressive attempts to lower the quality of what is left of Barbelith.

 
  

Page: 123(4)56789... 11

 
 
Automatic
09:03 / 01.08.08
Haus, it's fucking depressing to see someone who is clearly intelligent and writes so well get mired in this kind of petty message board bollocks.

Can't just drop this and find something better to do with your time?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
09:18 / 01.08.08
I certainly can, but while I have some responsibility for Barbelith - and more on that later - it is not ethical for me to do so. That's the problem.
 
 
Evil Scientist
09:20 / 01.08.08
maybe it helps Tom, i hope it does, if he's still who hosts Barbelith. by the way, is he OK with that kind of moderation, if that can be called this?

If he wasn't I'm sure we'd be told. He's still doing the necessary behind-the-scenes stuff like banning.

At this point, what I want to do is suggest banning some people for the good of the board and the rights of people to post half-decent content unmolested, and see how Randy and, eventually, Tom feel about it. It's a significant change to how we ban, but, you know, end times and all that.

As long as we're falling we may as well flap our arms and try to fly. Give it a shot and see how it goes.
 
 
Automatic
09:32 / 01.08.08
Is the solution really to ban people though? Surely (assuming that there really are issues with the way some people post) it would be far better to educate than eliminate.
 
 
Evil Scientist
09:47 / 01.08.08
The problem with that Flunchy is that it hasn't worked all that well in the past. People tend to be quite resistant to changing the way they present themselves online. The people who are being percieved as damaging the quality of the site would have to want to change and would have to obviously be making an effort to improve.

It's often being pointed out that it isn't our job to be constantly educating people on things like that anyway.
 
 
Automatic
10:10 / 01.08.08
Whose job is it then? I'm not surprised Hector and MFreitas are frustrated and angry, I can accept that they can be seen to have acted out of order and in a manner damaging to the board as a whole, but when they did so what was the response?

A polite private message explaining why certain parties are annoyed? An attempt to avoid direct confrontation and try and steer discussion back to standards you're happy with?

No.

They got crudely insulted. Who wouldn't be infuriated to be called a 'droolcock' and then having this useless level of playground discourse seem to be tacitly endorsed by the board at large?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:28 / 01.08.08
Actually, vocally endorsed in a fair few cases. I direct my learned friend once again here. Question my methods if you will, but never question my simple good-heartedness.
 
 
Evil Scientist
10:42 / 01.08.08
Whose job is it then? I'm not surprised Hector and MFreitas are frustrated and angry, I can accept that they can be seen to have acted out of order and in a manner damaging to the board as a whole, but when they did so what was the response?

Well currently it's whosever job decides to take it. But it tends to get left to a few people to try and clear these things up and can be pretty draining for them to do (also it means they've less time to devote to contributing to threads because they're on permanent patrol).
 
 
All Acting Regiment
11:48 / 01.08.08
At this point, what I want to do is suggest banning some people for the good of the board and the rights of people to post half-decent content unmolested

Is there some way of banning people quickly - to avoid these draining and often pointless discussions - and then, if it is later decided that it was wrong to do so, lifting the ban?
 
 
Fist Fun
12:52 / 01.08.08
To be honest I think you guys are getting all angry about nothing. It's the internet and people are going to post all sorts of nonsense.

Just set a good example yourself, never get in to stupid personal arguments although always be willing to argue your point while respecting and being open to other points of view.

What I see a lot now on Barbelith are people throwing personal insults when someone holds a point of view they disagree rather than respecting others viewpoints and discussing it.

But it's just the internet and I don't expect any better. The only thing you can control is what you do.
 
 
HCE
13:18 / 01.08.08
A polite private message explaining why certain parties are annoyed? An attempt to avoid direct confrontation and try and steer discussion back to standards you're happy with?

No.

They got crudely insulted. Who wouldn't be infuriated to be called a 'droolcock' and then having this useless level of playground discourse seem to be tacitly endorsed by the board at large?


It's incredibly frustrating to hear you say this, as though the past several years never happened, as though people like Seth and alas and id_entity and Illmatic never existed and didn't do exactly that -- try to reach out, to understand people, to speak gently and from an assumption of good intentions on both sides.

I only wish the 'droolcock' comment weren't a lampoon of MFreitas' completely unprovoked insult to everybody in that thread who was trying to talk about the actual, written-by-George-Morrison content of the comic. I only wish that somebody would cut loose on these turd-laying jerks for real, not because I think it would be constructive, but just because it would be fair. Why do only some of us have to play by the rules?
 
 
dark horse
13:32 / 01.08.08
wow HCE that last comment really makes me think of the dark knight.., but maybe that's cos i saw it for the second time last night..... anyway yeah i can see why some of what jenna elfman haus says makes people get mad but i gotta be honest, i lol at some of it too... and also haus actually stuck up for me in the spirit thread when jack fear and others were saying my idea for a thread wasn't "good enough" for barbelith... so i don't think he's all bad despite the things they say about him...
 
 
MFreitas
14:45 / 01.08.08
I only wish that somebody would cut loose on these turd-laying jerks for real, not because I think it would be constructive, but just because it would be fair.

Of course, calling someone a "turd-laying jerk" is:

1 - Very constructive
2 - Very polite
3 - Very respectful
4 - Very fair
5 - Very mature

Will the insults keep popping up this regularly? And do you want me to believe everyobody gets the same treatement?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
14:57 / 01.08.08
Buk telling us to respect others' viewpoints. That's beautiful.

You've made my day, Buk. Thanks for that.

AAR - honestly, the process for banning people is pretty nebulous at present. What you're describing is essentially scrambling someone's email and password, then at a later date unscrambling their email and sending them a password alert. It's a faff, essentially, and something that we can't do ourselves - Tom would have to do both. Broken system is broken, basically.
 
 
HCE
14:57 / 01.08.08
Oh, I have no interest in being polite to you. There was a perfectly polite and very interesting conversation happening; you, being a jerk, came in and laid a turd in it, and the thread never recovered. The sooner you fuck off the happier I'll be.

Edit: Interpost, obvs.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:05 / 01.08.08
MFreitas, I think there are two points here:

1) If one is rude to people, one sacrifices one's right to expect others not to be rude to you.

2) Nobody is really suggesting that everybody should be treated equally, in the sense of "in the same way" - rather that they should be treated in a manner commensurate with their actions.

Edit: Interpost.
 
 
H3ct0r L1m4
15:05 / 01.08.08
and here I go again, voluntaringly stepping in the trap. watch me go.

Haus, i did not lie. i was not maliciously misrepresenting him to cover him up. i said in my previous post here MFreitas wasn't misrepresenting you in my interpretation. yeah, his choice of words could have been better and you in your attempt to educate him, or whatever that was, made a fool of yourself by trying to show how sarcastic you were, while only showing bling rage. if you and your close friends here think that was pedagogical then i believe you're failing to see what a shot to your own foot you took there.

i shot my own foot too, when i pulled the blackface act to what i believed was a patronizing tone in yours and Natural Way's attitude torwards my so called inability to understand what you guys were writing. that was what i saw in my interpretation as the 'almost racist' way you talked down on me.

i recognized i was reinforcing racial stereotypes while trying to criticize this and apologized for that. i didn't see you apologizing for MFreitas for your enraged outburst and the subsequent "nit-picky posts full of poisonous irony". i'm not the only one in this very same thread that pointed that you pile irony over irony to make your point. that alienates people a lot and make you look like a troll, not the best way to make your point or educate anybody. but that's the way yo work: you push until people snap, so you look better in comparison.

see your remark torwards Portuguese-speaking people. pure sarcasm. the LULs is more than welcomed, but in this discussion - when we're trying to set the record straight, it doesn't work. the 'looking down upon' thing i mentioned is torwards Latins, the way you said i feel better prepared to discuss this for having been born in Brazil.

i don't, i just feel a lot of Latin countries have a better integration of blacks and whites, helping shape our perception of race in a different way than most Anglophile countries, where segregation is made much more clear [i.e: at the risk of generalizing, it always baffled me how "inter-racial" in North America is a porn sub-genre at all].

it's curious that all this happened because of different perpsectives of a racial discussion, in the end. because that's what it's all about: how you perceive other races, how do you treat people, how do you look at them. from WHERE do you look at them.

the Batman comic thread incorporates all kinds of discussions; MFreitas didn't think the racial stereotypes in the comic were strongly portraited enough to justify the discussion; me neither. he could have chosen better words to go back to the Black Glove discussion of the comic; you, specially as a moderator, could have chosen other much better ones to helping him see his faux pas. and that was that, to me.

ban me if you will, i don't care anymore. rule Barbelith with an iron hand, cast inside a Black Glove. i enjoyed the part you played, Haus, you made me think about all that. you were the infection my system needed to develop antibodies. you've been a crazy semantic adversary, and in a twisted twisted way, in the end you educated me. thank you, you won.

 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:11 / 01.08.08

Haus, i did not lie. i was not maliciously misrepresenting him to cover him up. i said in my previous post here MFreitas wasn't misrepresenting you in my interpretation. yeah, his choice of words could have been better and you in your attempt to educate him, or whatever that was, made a fool of yourself by trying to show how sarcastic you were, while only showing bling rage.


I'm asking you a simple question, which you keep failing to answer. I have asked you, repeatedly, why you are telling lies about what MFreitas said to kick this all off. You have yet to answer.

One more time. Why did you represent MFreitas as having said something like 'we have been on this racial thing for a while, let me change the subject a bit', when in fact he said:

We've wasted way too much time discussing magical negroes and tragic mulatas and over-intellectualised mumbo-jumbo whatsoever.

Why do you lie about this? What do you seek to gain?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:30 / 01.08.08
For the record, of course, the frivolous accusations of racism constitute deeply objectionable behaviour in themselves. I have never taken from the fact that a number of unpleasant and stupid comments and behaviours on Barbelith have come from people who, regardless of nationality, happen to speak Portuguese as a first language anything more than that at some point Imperator de Jade probably shared the URL with his Orkut friendslist.
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
15:36 / 01.08.08
This is meaningless. I have asked you, repeatedly, why you are telling lies about what MFreitas said to kick this all off. You have yet to answer.

Does it matter, really? Mfreitas obviously did not say what Hector claims he did, this can be proven simply by going back to the thread in question. Asking Hector why he misrepresented what Mfreitas wrote is not a particularly good use of anyone's time, I feel, in that it will not lead to anything useful or even fun to watch.

I'd like to hear from more members of the community re: cleaning house.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
15:41 / 01.08.08
Fair enough, TG. You're right that it this point there is no chance of getting a straight answer, and trying to delve into the mind of Lima is not going to be hugely useful. Caught in a falsehood, he appears to be taking his ball away. I would like to go back to Randy's point about he likelihood of me going anywhere, but it would take a while, so poss. later.
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
15:59 / 01.08.08
I doubt anyone who has ever had a...um... "frank exchange of ideas" with Haus, or even watched while an exchange took place, has any doubts regarding his tenacity and very heavy presence on the board.

Surely (assuming that there really are issues with the way some people post) it would be far better to educate than eliminate.

I have always felt that way and still do. A lot of people here agree with the simple ideal behind this, but to be frank there isn't enough time or will on Barbelith to do it (currently). Also a lot of posters ask why education should be Barbelith's responsibility. To me, it's everybody's responsibility if you want the internet to be less full of jerks, but no one has the right to demand that Barbelith provides, along with fun and informed debate, a path towards not being a better person (or at least not a complete tool).
 
 
Anna de Logardiere
16:00 / 01.08.08
Why do only some of us have to play by the rules?

If you're bright enough break them... let's face it, a lot of people who are going for it aren't exactly the custom gaming computers of the human world.
 
 
Dead Megatron
16:27 / 01.08.08
Caught in a falsehood, he appears to be taking his ball away.

Speaking of which, I'm still waiting on clarifications regarding your accusations of me trying to "aggressively rot" your %precious% Batman and Robin thread.
 
 
HCE
16:29 / 01.08.08
Tuna Ghost, I will address to you the same comment, re: education, that I made earlier:

It's incredibly frustrating to hear you say this, as though the past several years never happened, as though people like Seth and alas and id_entity and Illmatic never existed and didn't do exactly that -- try to reach out, to understand people, to speak gently and from an assumption of good intentions on both sides

If you feel strongly that Buk, Hector, Dead Megatron, and MFreitas have value to add, by all means, get in there and start talking. I'm going to try not to go totally feral, thinking about how Bengali in Platforms, Persephone, and Deva no longer post here.
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
16:39 / 01.08.08
It's not a question of if they have value to add, it's a question of whether that value comes close to equaling the grief they give others on the board. As someone earlier put it, it's a dross-to-gold ratio. Improving that ratio takes willing and time for those on either side, something that is not present on Barbelith presently.

I remember the posters you mention, I remember their efforts. At no time did I imply that they or their attempts as you've described them didn't happen.
 
 
Neon Snake
18:13 / 01.08.08
MFreitas didn't think the racial stereotypes in the comic were strongly portraited enough to justify the discussion; me neither.

Look, though; I started the discussion by actually asking if people felt they were strongly portrayed, if there was evidence of stereotyping. What you've just said is what the discussion was about, and was certainly justifiable.

MFreitas didn't say that he didn't think they were strong enough to justify the discussion - he dismissed the entire discussion, and all who took who part in it, as a waste of time, like so:

On with the show. We've wasted way too much time discussing magical negroes and tragic mulatas and over-intellectualised mumbo-jumbo whatsoever.

I'm struggling to see how a discussion on race is over-intellectualising, but even so, the snooty dismissal of it was just fucking obnoxious.

Haus may have been harsh in his response, but it was entirely justified as an exercise in smacking someone down who had just done the same to an entire group of people.

Had MFreitas said something more along these lines:

We have been on this racial thing for a while, let me change the subject a bit.,

then I'm pretty confident that Haus would not have responded at all, let alone in the manner he did, since that hypothetical response is quite polite, and does not dismiss the previous discussion as a waste of time.

To compound it later with his I'm starting to miss Magical Negro... crack, which he made because the standard of "Black Glove speculation" wasn't currently up to his standard of "Black Glove speculation" is incredible, when he's acting the injured party over the very same "standards" issue.

I joined this board because, according to the FAQ, "The aim of Barbelith is to create an online space where the standard of conversation, discussion and debate is higher than anywhere else online."

Rude and out of hand dismissal of posts and conversation does not seem to fit within that aim, and I'm slightly incredulous that Haus is being made out to be the bad guy for trying to discourage such behaviour.
 
 
Neon Snake
18:32 / 01.08.08
Oh, you can take that as not-so-tacit endorsement, if you like.


Further:

It's the internet and people are going to post all sorts of nonsense.

It's a big old internet, with plenty of other sites for people to post all sorts of shite. As far as I can tell, this is a site run by an individual, Tom Coates, who has every right to decide what he wants posted on here and what he doesn't.

If I'm understanding the current state of affairs correctly (and I welcome correction), he is currently trusting Haus and Randy E. Dupre (and others?) with his site, and the contents of it.

Strikes me that it is well within their remit to make decisions accordingly.

If we don't like that...well, it's still a big old internet.
 
 
Tsuga
18:33 / 01.08.08
Haus:

I certainly can, but while I have some responsibility for Barbelith - and more on that later - it is not ethical for me to do so.

...

I would like to go back to Randy's point about he likelihood of me going anywhere, but it would take a while, so poss. later.


I'll bite, color my curiosity piqued. I'm waiting for later.
 
 
HCE
22:59 / 01.08.08
Had MFreitas said something more along these lines:

We have been on this racial thing for a while, let me change the subject a bit.,

then I'm pretty confident that Haus would not have responded at all, let alone in the manner he did


Or, as long as we're indulging ourselves with some what-ifs, what if MFreitas had simply talked about his other subject, and not addressed the parts of the conversation that were not relevant to it?

This is what is meant, in my opinion, by 'aggressive' -- including a totally unprovoked, unnecessary, and snotty comment. This is also what is meant by 'lowering the quality' -- being actually incapable not only of participating in a decent discussion, but even of tolerating other people having one. As far as what is meant by 'what is left of Barbelith' -- compare my list of people who no longer post to the list of people who are supposed to be educated.
 
 
This Sunday
05:00 / 02.08.08
Pulling a thread that seems woven deep into the fabric of this discussion, can we all just agree to spend more effort talking about the things we want to and avoiding the discussions we have no interest in? Can we all just post around the subtopics, around particular posters or specific elements, that we have no interest in? No one is making you read a thread or a post... let your eyes glaze over the bits you know you aren't into and move on. Please.

The threads can support simultaneous discussions of a central topic/focus, and I have every confidence the savvy reader can navigate them fine. We can tell for ourselves when someone is being an ass or laying out bait for a feud, so let's all pretend most of us are intelligent type folks and we can figure it out without six pages of explanatory defenses, namecalling, and each poster striving to take the higher ground than the last while you are in fact digging us deeper and deeper.

Unless someone can point to a place where attacks or insults have contributed positively to a thread for the bulk of the thread's readers, and not just for yourself or where a defense of your person has actually convinced anyone, in-thread, that you are in fact being wronged and not, I don't know, a douche or a louche, I may reconsider my own general stance, but so far, I have yet to be convinced. (Not that anyone need convince me of anything, I mean, who'm I?)

Actual actionable issues should be explained here in Policy, or maybe the Barbannoy thread. Defenses of a personal nature belong here, as well. Threads that are not about you or about another poster, are not about you or any other poster. They simply aren't. A thread on Batman is about things relating to Batman, not you. Unless you are teaming up with him next week to swing around Gotham, glassing cats or playing swingball for the good of humanity. I assure you that I, for one, will believe in your higher ground claim more if you are not staking the moral elevation in the middle of people trying to talk about global politics or Guitar Wolf.

I'm not saying we shouldn't have policing, but let's try and have it in the appropriate places on the board, maybe? Little bit? Just to try it?
 
 
Evil Scientist
07:06 / 02.08.08
I'll bite, color my curiosity piqued. I'm waiting for later.

Same here.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
10:18 / 02.08.08
The problem with that, Daytripper, as ever, is that it means people get no feedback on what is bad behaviour, or the aforementioned aggressive attempts to lower the etc. until it goes to Policy. Barbannoy is meaningless for these purposes. I think that having every minor annoyance bindweeding Policy might be a further and greater issue.
 
 
iamus
11:08 / 02.08.08
Same here.

Me too.
 
 
Hallo, Paper Spaceboy
15:41 / 02.08.08
The problem with that, Daytripper, as ever, is that it means people get no feedback on what is bad behaviour, or the aforementioned aggressive attempts to lower the etc. until it goes to Policy. Barbannoy is meaningless for these purposes.

That's what PMs are for, and while certainly a PM can be ignored or answered with abuse, the same can be said of responses in-thread. The difference being that responses in-thread have a greater opportunity to derail everybody's reading experience.

Barbannoy may be meaingless for those purposes, but it does have an (occasionally icky) purpose, simply allowing us to vent without it being necessarily "nuclear response level" -- it may not seem important to the issue of discouraging "aggressive attempts," but it's a good way of establishing what the group feels is appropriate in a more informal way. Hence it can become quite toxic, but it's almost a necessary toxicity.

PMs have their flaws -- they aren't public, so abuse can be tricky to deal with (as has been discussed in the past) -- but can be quite effective just the same as far as calling a poster's attention to hir difficulty in interacting with the board according to protocol.
 
  

Page: 123(4)56789... 11

 
  
Add Your Reply