Yes just take all of his statements and reverse the partisanship and it’s clearly unacceptable.
1 Like
I don’t find your reading of his post persuasive. I do not share your reading. I say that as someone with a substantial history of mental illness and a role as an advocate and activist for better treatment of those with mental illness.
3 Likes
For the fourth or fifth time, it’s a temp ban. 24 hours. A slap on the wrist. And I suggested that I should need a two-thirds super majority to stay on as a mod, how precious of me. I even suggested that if people felt that number should be higher, they could try to get the community to support a higher threshold. I’ll even vote yay for the higher threshold if it comes to a poll, okay?
So start a poll to demod me. I don’t know what to tell you. I’ve made it very easy for me to be removed, I’m encouraging those who want me removed to take action against me, and I’m leaving it up to the community. I’m not going to resign as a mod because a handful of outspoken people think I should. I’m going to do it if > 34% of voters want me to, or if the community decides that it should be even easier to demod somebody then >10% or 20% or whatever number the community wants.
It’ll be pretty fucking easy to get rid of me if you have even a small, cohesive group that wants me gone. So go for it if you want. I don’t really care whether I’m a mod tomorrow, I do care that I stand on my convictions while I am one.
Fwiw I kind of read it this way too. There’s no reason for mental illness to be part of the discussion or calculus any more than if he owns a ukulele.
1 Like
I’m specifically talking about the actual content of the posts which were quoted in the thread early on and the context they were made in. Most, maybe all of them did not condone violence. They were off color or whatever, but did not condone violence. Yet they were posted as an example of him repeatedly condoning violence. I’m not arguing at all that none of his posts condone violence. Although I haven’t seen many that fit my definition of unacceptable.
You do realize that is not really what “community modding” means, right?
No, my assertion is that people who are using violent rhetoric, wishing for violence, condoning it, etc, who also disclose that they have a mental illness should be taken seriously. It doesn’t mean they’re more likely to be violent than not, and it doesn’t mean they should be stigmatized. But there is enough of a risk, and the consequences are serious enough, that they should be taken seriously.
Like, are you against removing gun ownership rights from the mentally ill? Are you against having the authorities try to prevent school shooting by acting on tips about violent postings and mental illness?
Doing those things does not mean one is acting on a stigma. It’s being a responsible member of society. Then you also try to make sure there’s not a stigma, treat people kindly, do the right things, etc.
I think there’s a big difference between someone disclosing mental illness and saying they believe what they’re posting and someone edgelording. It’s unfortunate that recognizing that difference can contribute in any way to stigmatizing mental illness, but we still have to act responsibly and then do the best to make sure we try to fight against stigmas.
Once you admit that he has posts that are condoning violence, and accept that he has said he believes what he says, that should color your interpretation of all of his posts that are anywhere near a gray area.
It would be trivially easy for the community to remove me as a mod. While I’m a mod, I’m going to use the powers that have been given to me by the community to take a stand on my convictions.
It’s unfortunate that NotBruceZ has put me in this position by making no effort whatsoever to tone it down, but it is what it is.
I’ve got to do what I see as the right thing here. The community can act accordingly. If you think I’m being a fascist trying to seize power, start a poll to demod me and remove my admin privileges.
Well I think nazis should be punched in the face and then kicked in the crotch for good measure. And I truly believe this. Not sure what this post now means for future interpretation of everything I write, but there it is.
You’re right, and for my part I got distracted by the posts I didn’t consider bad to the point that I overlooked the worse ones.
1 Like
I think his posting is a danger to society. I’ve spent time thinking about whether or not he’s a danger to society himself, and I think it’s a tough call and right on the line. I keep going back to what he said about not thinking that he would do anything violent, rather than knowing that he wouldn’t… And I think about how he said that he makes no guarantees if Trump is re-elected, or something along those lines.
I mean, if someone posted that same thing and swapped Trump for AOC, we’d have banned them already and the debate would be whether or not we should call the feds - and I’m guessing a big chunk of users here would support alerting the FBI.
The difference is that a level of anger and frustration with the Trump administration is warranted, and as such we all think it’s more likely that people are just blowing off steam rather than actually going to do something. But given how he’s pointed out that he genuinely believes what he says, I think that means we should take it more seriously.
I don’t know, JT, it’s hard for me to answer. I think my answer would be different if I owned the site than if I was a mod. As a mod it’s right on the line.
1 Like
“I’m thinking it will take multiple successful assassination attempts against Democratic politicians to move the needle. Obviously, I kinda don’t advocate that, but I know it’s the direction my mind will go if I ever lose loved ones to gun violence.”
(referring to the shooting of the DNC softball game) “Not enough casualties, unfortunately.”
“Unthinking liberals are part of the problem. The lack of thought on their part could be taken as an argument they lack sentience and deserve to be crushed like vermin.”
“I’m rooting for ISIS to do things that make Obama look bad.”
“So, here’s where my head is at. I don’t think I’m a threat to commit any real world mayhem, but I make no promises if Obama is re-elected.”
“That’s inefficient. The country would be better off if mass shooters targeted minorities instead of rich people.”
“A part of me wants another 9/11 just so I can say it wouldn’t have happened if Trump was president.”
Are we not banning this hypothetical poster?
1 Like
That’s far less severe than what NBZ has posted, and it doesn’t bother me.
Asked and answered
A lot of those posts look a lot worse when not read in the context of the thread. We’ve already been over this.
1 Like
I’ll tell you this, I would much rather be spending time today reading the Trump thread and staying informed on the world than arguing about this shit.
3 Likes
Well, unfortunately we suck as a community at making rules, so we don’t have clear standards. I’ve been as transparent as I can about what I think the process should be. I’ve mentioned at least once, I think a few times, that people making an occasional remark out of frustration should just get the post flagged, be asked to change it or tone it down, and that’ll be that. I think people continually causing problems should be given a series of escalating bans and then perma-banned if they don’t knock it off.
People in the past have tried to create an equivalence between me snapping on Trump after he mocked Greta Thunberg for being autistic or whatever it was that he said, and suggesting that we tie him to a ship at harbor when the next big hurricane hits, or something along those lines. I said I went too far with the post, but it’s obviously out of character, not a serious call for violence, and pretty much a one off for me. It’s in no way equivalent to what NotBruceZ is doing.
Right now we have no firm rule on this as a community, I’ve been entrusted as a mod, so I’m empowered to make judgement calls and I’m doing so as transparently as I can. I previously made a couple attempts to get the community to either condemn NotBruceZ’s posting or make some rules, and nothing has really happened. So that’s where we are.
IMO the rules should apply to everyone in all situations, but should recognize the difference in an occasional post and a pattern of behavior. They should also recognize the difference in some fantasy post about tying Trump to a ship so he gets pelted with wind and rain and using ethnic cleansing language.
There needs to be some logic used in the process, obviously, but for starters we need rules and a process. Until then I’m just going to keep making judgment calls and being transparent, which I think the community has empowered me to do. If the community doesn’t like the way I’m using that power, they can remove me.
1 Like
This really isn’t true for a lot of those posts. Like, “I hope there’s another 9/11” is offensive and stupid in any context.
4 Likes
I didn’t know we were banning for offensive and stupid posts. It may be offensive and stupid, but it’s pretty silly to consider that post as a call for violence.
1 Like