InsaneJournal

Tweak says, "WHERE ARE THE CHEETOS??"

schmevil (schmevil) wrote in scans_daily,
@ 2009-05-30 01:56:00

Entry tags:

admin: mod post

Anti-Racism and the Golden Rule
x-posted to NSD

Dear members of Scans_Daily and NoScans_Daily,

One of the things that we love about scans_daily is that we don't shy away from controversial subjects. This is a good thing, and one of the many things that make our community great. Subjects like race, gender, sexuality, or even your favourite comic or character, can spark passionate discussion and debate.

But in order to maintain our community as a place where people feel comfortable having these discussions, we all must adhere to our community ethos: Criticize arguments, art, writing, but do not make insulting, offensive or passive aggressive remarks to or about people. This includes people both inside and outside of the community.

To quote from our userinfo:

ETHOS.

1. The golden rule, also known as the Thumper's Dad rule: All posts and comments are to maintain a respectful tone towards fellow Homo sapiens. Posts or comments making rude remarks about other members of this community, their expressions of fannish enthusiasm, comics creators, or even people not remotely associated with comics will not be tolerated. It's perfectly fine to disagree with others and to express your own opinions, but if you can't do so without making it personal, then that's probably a sign that you should take a step back from that conversation. We don't accept passive aggressive or even just aggressive comments with a smiley after them. We don't accept being insulting to fans or to creators personally. You should all be able to separate the artist from the art.

Note: if you see someone making insulting comments, do not respond in kind. Contact a moderator to let them know about it.

2. Scans Daily was founded by girl geeks, and members of slash fandom. The moderating team strives to maintain the community as a LGBT-friendly, anti-racist, anti-ableist and woman-friendly space. As such, hate speech, discrimination and harassment will not be tolerated. Democratic dialog and friendly debate however, are more than welcome.

3. SD respects our members' rights to privacy and control over their online identities. As far as we're concerned you are your pseud. Trolling and attempts to dismiss other posters on the basis of their 'hiding behind a fake name' will not be tolerated. Unauthorized public release of a fellow member's contact information will result in immediate banning.

The mod team hopes to maintain SD and NSD as spaces where anti-racist conversations can take place, but this requires finding a balance between the golden rule and the imperatives of activism. It is absolutely okay to call out comics creators, or your fellow members on racist actions or statements. However, we would ask that you do so in a manner that conforms to the golden rule.

We recognize that in discussions of racism, asking people to adhere to a certain form of discourse can be interpreted as asking them to "watch their tone." We also recognize that "tone" is a loaded term with a loaded history. We are not seeking to silence people of colour and allies. Nor are we asking people of colour and allies to stop being angry about racism. If a member is showing their privilege, or exhibiting unconsciously racist attitudes, it is not only okay, but good and healthy for the community, for you to call them on it. However, we are asking you to refrain from using someone else's behavior as an excuse to engage in trolling, flaming and pointless flamebaiting.

Some examples of acceptable criticism:

"This art is racist."
"Your words are verging on racist territory..."
"You should take a step back and examine your privilege..."
"This story is drawing on racist stereotypes."

We realize that opinions differ on whether saying "you're racist/being racist" is merely a statement of fact or a personal attack. This is one issue on which we would welcome your feedback.

The mod team has not, and will not always get things right. We would ask that you join us in striving to get up when we've fallen down, and striving to do better. Anti-racist (and for that matter, anti-sexist, and anti-ablelist) modding is something that the mod team has been struggling with since before the TOSing.

We would very much like to hear from members on this, particularly fans of colour. How can we do better by you? And how can we do better as a community?

As always, if you encounter someone making insulting comments toward fellow human beings, please contact a moderator.

(Post a new comment)

suzene
2009-05-30 02:48 am UTC (link)

This doesn't have to do directly with the racism topic, but it is about a change in community policy here that spun out of the racism discussion over on no_scans.

I understand that there is an significant overlap between the membership and moderation of the two comms, but the idea of treating S_D 2.0 and no_scans as a single entity when it comes to bannings seems a bit odd, given that stubbleupdate has mentioned preferring to remain uninvolved with S_D 2.0 and that the two newest mods here don't seem to have mod power over on no_scans. The policy of a ban on one community applying to both seems as if it could allow a mod on one comm to be able to exercise a measure of authority over the another, even if she/he doesn't actually hold a mod title on the other comm. Could we please get clarification on how the new policy works?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	schmevil 2009-05-30 03:03 am UTC (link)
	All suspensions and bans have been, and will continue to be consensus decisions. Because SD and NSD are closely linked sister comms, that means that skalja, angelophile, parsimonia, stubbleupdate and myself all work together on these issues. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

kali921
2009-05-30 01:15 pm UTC (link)

With all due respect, that doesn't really answer

suzene's question about why a ban on one community should auto-extend to another community on another journal service entirely.

It's very troubling in light of the fact that no matter how many warnings an individual has received prior to a discussion about race/bigotry/privilege, no matter how poor their behavior has been previously in other posts, when that individual is calling someone out on their privilege in a community where anti-racism is explicitly stated as part of the community ethos and then gets banned, it can easily be interpreted as a grudge!ban. It also kinds of cheapens the debate if the mods use an admittedly heated discussion about privilege, cultural appropriation, and racism as an excuse to ban someone that they've wanted to ban for a while. Hopefully you can see how what the mods said and did sends that as a powerful message and that said message is downright quelling and frightening? In light of Racefail 1.0, 1.0.1, 2.0, etc., it's an extra helping of "wow, are these comms even a safe place to discuss these issues?" You state that they are, but recent mod actions seem to counteract that assertion. It's an inconsistency that I've increasingly noticed.

That being said, I think that the mod team has kind of hamstrung themselves with wanting to brand NS_D and S_D 2.0 as anti-racist, anti-ablist, anti-sexist, anti-homophobia and anti-transphobia but then focusing so much more on the Golden Rule rather than curbing sexism, privilege, and racism when they manifest on the comms. I can kind of sympathize with the difficult position that you're in because of this, but you're essentially saying in this post "we get what Racefail was about, but watch your tone, it's all about tone."

This in particular is ambiguous:

The mod team hopes to maintain SD and NSD as spaces where anti-racist conversations can take place, but this requires finding a balance between the golden rule and the imperatives of activism. It is absolutely okay to call out comics creators, or your fellow members on racist actions or statements. However, we would ask that you do so in a manner that conforms to the golden rule.

What does that even mean? You've provided some examples, but hopefully you can see how the above can easily read as contradictory? It lends itself to arbitrariness, and after yesterday, the level of trust in the mods' ability to actually be consistent with how they choose to interpret what's acceptable and what isn't seems to be diminishing amongst more than a few people, and I frankly think with good reason.

That being said, I absolutely appreciate your effort to address this with the comm, but the way this post is worded is problematic. I do sympathize with your position on not wanting endless flaming and personal insults on the comm, but the grey areas in your post above are still looming and massive.

I'd appreciate overall if the modding was more consistent all around vis a vis the Golden Rule, which people get away with bashing creators and which don't, and discussions where sexism, gender discrimination, bigotry, etc. come up.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

parsimonia
2009-05-30 03:40 pm UTC (link)

why a ban on one community should auto-extend to another community on another journal service entirely.

The communities overlap in membership and moderators. They are sister communities. If one cannot adhere to the rules in one, it's unlikely one will adhere to them in the other.

I understand how some could interpret what happened in a way that makes us look like we were silencing Box's arguments. And that is very unfortunate for everyone involved. I must emphasize that it was the accumulated result of his repeated unwillingness to obey the golden rule, and the same goes for Cissie.

but you're essentially saying in this post "we get what Racefail was about, but watch your tone, it's all about tone."

That is precisely what we don't want to do, which is why we are asking for your help, your constructive criticism or any feedback you may have to offer in how we can make our ethos one that encourages anti-racist discussion and one that discourages personal attacks.

What does that even mean?

It means SD and NSD will always be a place where you can point out and discuss racism and sexism and other problems in comics. We want people to point out racist, sexist or homophobic writing and art (or whatever the case may be) and discuss it to their hearts' content. What we don't want is ad hominem attacks toward anyone. It's as simple as that.

What's not simple, now that we are looking at this issue in greater depth, is what different people view as attacks. This is where you and every other member of this community comes in, and why we are asking for help and input.

I'd appreciate overall if the modding was more consistent all around vis a vis the Golden Rule, which people get away with bashing creators and which don't, and discussions where sexism, gender discrimination, bigotry, etc. come up.

We are striving for that as well, but it's something with which we will always need help from members. We do our best to read over as many comments as possible, but due to the volume of posting in SD and NSD, it's difficult if not impossible for us to read every comment. We have a dailyscans e-mail address for a reason, so that people can report to us instances of rule-breaking and so that we can address them, and it is checked on a regular basis.

I know this particular incident is very recent, but if you or anyone else sees something that is offensive, hurtful or otherwise rule-breaking, then please let us know.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Online, no one knows you're a dog

qob
2009-05-30 11:25 am UTC (link)

I have always found the idea of psuedo-anonymous folks indulging in racism, sexism, homophobia, etc, to be strange at least. If there is anywhere you should be judged by the content of your character rather than sex,race,orientation, or whatever, it's the internet where you simply cannot see anything more than the other person's ideas. I applaud this statement on one hand and find it quite sad that it has to be made on the other hand.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

	parsimonia 2009-06-01 04:32 pm UTC (link)
	I think the biggest part of what we're dealing with right now has to do with how we as moderators have been handling incidents of racism, and how we need to be more supportive of members identifying or combating racism. As such, we are currently revising the rules. (Reply to this) (Parent)

rotty0079
2009-05-30 05:13 pm UTC (link)

"Posts or comments making rude remarks about other members of this community, their expressions of fannish enthusiasm, comics creators, or even people not remotely associated with comics will not be tolerated."

It's a well-known fact that "you're racist!" is the second-nastiest insult in the English language. For non-rational, historically contingent reasons, it's more hurtful than "you're a totalitarian!" or "You're a Communist!" If you choose to make it a policy to let users drop an insult that vicious on each other, the idea that "rude remarks will not be tolerated" becomes absurd.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

parsimonia
2009-06-01 04:03 pm UTC (link)

I think you'll find there's a lot of opposition to that view. I realize that it can be hurtful to be told that you're racist, but if the point is to combat racism, then people should be able to say it. And, as mods and as a community, we should be supportive of people who are trying to combat racism first, and worrying about niceties second.

We are currently revising our rules.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

	arbre_rieur 2009-05-30 07:13 pm UTC (link)
	There seem to be a few folks questioning your decision to ban people from both communities for offenses committed in only one, so I'll chime in that I find it a fine and perfectly sound policy. Douchebags are douchebags. Then again, I never understand why it was considered gauche online to bring baggage you have with someone from one website to another. (Reply to this) (Thread)

	parsimonia 2009-06-01 04:53 pm UTC (link)
	Contrary to my earlier comment above, and in response to what we've heard from members, we are revising and clarifying our rules so that a banning on one community will not automatically mean a ban on the other. (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	suzene 2009-06-04 04:03 pm UTC (link)
	Is it too early to ask what effect this will have on Box and cissie_king's bans? (Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	parsimonia 2009-06-04 04:09 pm UTC (link)
	We'll talk about that in a post which should be up this week. (Reply to this) (Parent)

goodfellow_puck
2009-05-31 12:25 am UTC (link)

Saying someone's line of thought could be considered racist seems less inflammatory than labeling them directly. "What you're saying sounds racist because..." instead of "You're a racist!" It gives a person who considers themselves not racist, but who may be ignorant of offensive thoughts/words/stereotypes, time and tact to listen.

If someone is being racist and knows it, well...that goes to the rule about being respectful to members and I'm sure they'll get the boot.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

parsimonia
2009-06-01 04:20 pm UTC (link)

The problem with forbidding saying "you're racist" is that it would effectively shut down the opposition to racism. If we want to support combating racism, we have to be more accommodating to the person who is identifying/combating racism than we are to the person who is being racist (even if unknowingly).

As moderators, it should be our responsibility to provide those who "may be ignorant of offensive thoughts/words/stereotypes" with information and/or resources as to why what they've said/done is problematic, and take the appropriate disciplinary measures if necessary.

(We are currently revising our rules.)

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

	goodfellow_puck 2009-06-01 05:13 pm UTC (link)
	Ha, I'm the first one to call racism and sexism when I see it and get in trouble for it ("That's MEAN." "Yes, well that doesn't change the fact it's TRUE."). But I'm just a member, I don't have to deal with modding it. Good luck finding the right balance. (Reply to this) (Parent)

	foxhack 2009-05-31 01:23 am UTC (link)
	Errrrrrrrrr. What the frag? For some reason, I can't see this post if I browse the main community page. But I can reach it if I follow the link from noscans. What the hell's going on? o_O (Reply to this) (Thread)

	parsimonia 2009-05-31 01:26 am UTC (link)
	Skip back 20 entries. We posted it about 24 hours ago, so there's already been twenty posts since then. Also, admin: mod post tag for easy-finding. =) (Reply to this) (Parent)