You must log in or register to comment.


Tequila_Wolf wrote

All shitty white behaviour is. It generally goes without saying, and I don't think that we need to make an explicit rule for something obvious.

That said, I've got a lot on my plate and can't get to doing much of the moderation that needs doing. Right now I'm hardly able to stop by the site to delete spam once a day.

Which is part of why I'd like more people to mod. Nobody has to be perfect, you just have to be able to take criticism and be willing to learn.


ziq wrote (edited )

I'll mod f/memer and f/whiteness I guess, but with this account: /u/BigGeorge

You say it's obvious, but the whole point of white fragility is that the people engaging in it aren't aware of it. It's literally a complete lack of self awareness.

If it says in the sidebar "No white fragility", it's easy to point them to it to shut them down instead of having to argue with them for hours.


Tequila_Wolf wrote

If it came as a link to a decent article explaining what white fragility was, I would be ok with it. Otherwise I suspect it'll just cause more argumentation. If the purpose of it is just to ban people from the forum, I don't think a rule is necessary for that. Temporary bans are great for this, and directing people to reading and places where they can make their dumbass argument if they want to seems ideal? These are just my preferences obviously, feel free to do what makes sense to you.

I've added BigGeorge as moderator for those forums.


ziq wrote (edited )

I wouldn't use it to ban them, just to shut them up. I'll look for an article.

I never look at rules as reasoning to ban people, just as an instrument to cause people to tread carefully and engage in self analysis before opening their mouths.