Forum - View topic

New Forum Rules 06/29/2018

It's clear that you have no idea what Count Dankula is all about (the guy is a former communist for crying out loud)

Towards these ends, we do not allow hateful speech that denigrates an individual, or group of individuals based on their identity. This includes, but is not limited to, any speech that suggests that any person or group is in any way inferior due to their age, religion, race, ethnicity, nationality, culture, gender, sexual identity and sexual orientation, and physical and mental ability. We also consider hate speech to include any suggestion the rights of an individual should be limited due to the above mentioned identifiers or that their personhood is in some way unethical.

A good change. I can already see the predictable conservative whining that not being allowed to engage in casual bigotry is an intolerable burden upon them, ignoring completely the burden being subjected to said bigotry inflicts upon others. Ignore these people.

Would it be possible to add political affiliation to this list? Because everyone should be welcome here regardless of political affiliation, as long as, of course, you meet the rules of respect for another individiual.

That or you can have it say "Leave Politics at Home!" that would be good too!

1. If you've been banned, please read this. Don't create aliases or get your mates to cry foul in this thread.

2. This thread is not an opportunity for people to hang shit on ANN staff. If you do, expect your posts to be moderated.

We would like people to leave their politics at home. Maybe we should add that to the rules.

1. If you've been banned, please read this. Don't create aliases or get your mates to cry foul in this thread.

2. This thread is not an opportunity for people to hang shit on ANN staff. If you do, expect your posts to be moderated.

For the record - i haven't been banned or warned. I made fair points according to your own rules.

Errinundra wasn't referring to you.

Errinundra wasn't referring to you.

Given the rest of my post i can't accept that as an appropriate response.

Why were my comments deleted without notice?

As CEO how do you justify ignoring your users concerns about new rules within the forum thread for discussing the same?

The topic of hate speech has come up in this thread, including specific terms deemed unsuitable for use here, do you intend to publish a list of banned terms?

How do you plan on dealing with the ongoing issue of ambiguous words that change in meaning (for example the term "eurocentric" might be construed as being a barely masked term for "white" by certain groups, ethnic/urban/thug being used as similar dogwhistle for PoC)?

Frankly I won't waste my or your time by restating my initial comment. I will however state that i am concerned by your site's lack of transparency on this issue, moreso now than i was before your moderators chose to unilaterally ignore and delete my comments from the public record.
In more stark terms: when confronted with concerns about the misuse of these new rules, your staff could not endure the first forum thread concerning them before abusing them outright.

Tempest wrote:

Errinundra wasn't referring to you.

Given the rest of my post i can't accept that as an appropriate response.

Tempest wrote:

We would like people to leave their politics at home. Maybe we should add that to the rules.

My only problem with that is that one's political views are an intrinsic part of how one reads the world, much like religious, or cultural views. They influence every idea we form. I don't see how it's possible to discuss media with political topics (like Kino's Journey, or the Roses of Versailles or My lesbian experience with loneliness or -very obviously in recent events- Franxx) without acknowledging that we interpret these things through the lens of believes we already hold. It's not an accessory one can just not carry.

I don't think I was ever outright talking about my political views here before, but I'm sure they shine through when I voice my opinions, whether that was the intent or not.

Velshtein wrote:

You might want to consider taking off your progressive and Eurocentric lenses and recognize that there are far more cultures on earth than your own. Western progressivism is nowhere near a global phenomenon. That's why these new rules are too narrow, are a slippery slope, and fail to adequately serve ANN's diverse community.

Of course there are far more cultures than just those found in the US and Europe. Like consider Pakistan, a country that does not exactly have a good history when it comes to LGBT rights. What if someone from Pakistan were to come on this forum, and then post in a thread that dealt with the issue of trans rights? They couldn't help but have a negative opinion of transgender people, is that what you're trying to say?

Except that's false. Pakistan in fact just recently passed a massive transgender rights bill, which outlines a whole host of rights and protections and is considered a major step forward for LGBT rights. Assuming it gets signed by the President, then Pakistan may soon become significantly more friendly towards trans people (at least from a purely legal/official perspective) than about half the US states. The idea that transgender people are human beings deserving of rights, dignity, and respect is [b]not some foreign idea completely alien to the people in Pakistan.

Earlier Tempest mentioned the idea of a "country where people don't yet know how not to be hateful", but this is in my opinion poorly worded. Because there does not exist a single country like that. The truth is always more complicated. Every country in the world has LGBT people, and people who fight for LGBT rights. Every country in the world has people who fight for the rights of women. And so forth. Every country in the world has people who understand that hate is wrong.

I get what Tempest was trying to say though. There are some countries that are especially oppressive, and so he's willing to allow some leniency in some cases.

But the idea that by banning hate speech, entire countries/cultures/etc outside Europe/USA will be barred from being able to participate in the ANN forums or expressing their views is in my opinion, quite frankly insulting to the many diverse cultures and peoples that exist outside the USA/Europe.

And to repeat something that Tempest said:

Quote:

Are you really concerned with our foreign readers? Somehow I suspect you're merely looking for an excuse to argue against progressivism.

Because to use another hypothetical example, it just seems like some people are really, really concerned about say, the people in Saudi Arabia who are probably pissed off that it's ban on women drivers has been lifted. They want to make sure that such folks don't maybe "accidentally" say something negative about women that would run afoul of ANN's hate speech policy, something that could be construed as hateful, but that they're sure wasn't meant with ill intent.

But at the same time, these people don't seem all that concerned about, say, the women activists responsible for the driving ban being lifted. Many of who went to jail in order to fight for their rights, people who deal with enough sexist and hateful crap in their offline lives already, and who would probably want to be able to indulge in their hobbies without dealing with more hate and sexism.

Like, I have no idea how many people, if any, from Saudi Arabia even participate on this board: it's an English language board after all. But I do know that in the case of Saudi Arabia or any other oppressive country, if you're really concerned about welcoming, for example, the people who believe women are inferior and don't deserve equal rights, but at the same time you're not all that concerned about creating a welcoming atmosphere for the women who suffer under that oppression, than you're not actually interested in allowing people from Saudi Arabia to participate in these forums.

You're interested in allowing certain people from Saudi Arabia to participate, specifically those who oppress, rather than those who are oppressed. Or maybe, like Tempest suggested, you actually don't really care about anyone from Saudi Arabia or any other foreign country, and are just looking for an excuse to argue against progressivism.

Ah, Count Dankula, a guy who got in trouble for, quite literally, teaching his dog to "heil Hitler", in a video where he (the person, not the dog) repetitively says to "gas the Jews", and calls his dog a "good wee Nazi!"

I mean I guess there's an argument to be made as to whether this guy should have been outright arrested for this, but ANN won't be arresting people. They'll just be banning people.

So... umn... are you saying that ANN shouldn't ban someone for repeatedly saying "gas the Jews?" because if you're saying that, well, I don't think you're gonna get a lot of agreement. And if you're not saying this, why bring up Count Dankula?

People need to be open to actually understanding where another person is coming from rather than just dismissing their view as "bigotry" and "offensive".

My concern is that perspectives and worldviews outside of European/American progressivism will be silenced and deliberately misframed as "hate speech".