I'm posting here not necessarily to ask for them to unblock me but rather just to indirectly convey to them that I am sorry about how I replied, I edited my comment after I woke up to fix it. I'm not sure if it would be considered rude to have some other user here convey that apology since maybe they just want to be left alone and never hear of my existence again (as mentioned in the sidebar, no one can force them to engage with me), but I don't think my comment was that hurtful, so giving them a chance to decide whether to forgive seems fine...
Why do I even care about this? Well re-reading the whole thread now, it seems we are mostly advocating for the same thing since they didn't argue against anything particular I said in OP, but rather think that indie online multiplayer game developers would have a hard time without some of Steam's features. While I do not really agree that this justifies using Steam, I do somewhat understand why they have that opinion. At the moment I wrote my reply, I perceived it as advocating for Steam while not addressing any it's problems I mentioned originally. But reading it now, it can also be seen as just an general observation/grievance/statement without necessarily endorsing Steam.
As for the other part of the title of this post: while it does not affect me negatively (more than a general insult) I would prefer if they edited their comment and in the future refrain from using ableist language like "deranged" and "unhinged" since it can be hurtful to some people and more importantly is against ToS from what I understand.
]]>https://raddle.me/f/AsterismOvershares/149795/-/comment/265177
Thought this isn't the first case. The comment bloodrose deleted was basically telling asterisms that his abusive wife was valid and had good reasons to not let him have friends with women. Though she has made a serious of comments that we let slide. And yeah, this is a community project. If people can go around defending abuse and no one speaks up its on everyone for not keeping raddle a safe space to talk about abuse.
Because like I told bloodrose, plenty of people just watch and don't interact and I know there is at least one and probably more who watched it all go down and see that raddle doesn't give a fuck and won't speak up. So we need to make it up and show some guarantee that in the future people talking about abuse won't be invalidated.
And bloodrose is a well liked and important person on raddle. Its important people spend some emotional energy with her so she cant work through it and think of how to respond. I can't do both. And also I'm not the dictator so people who use raddle should speak up and talk about if they think I"m being fair or out of line. And what will make it right.
If you want to have big talk about consensus you need to actually engage. If you just let me do everything you are nothing more than sheep who follow whatever figurehead is most convincing. And it seems to me no one would have said anything if I didn't.
Edit: if you are genuinely swamped or spend lots of energy in the past you are fine sitting this one out. Yes ziq its cool for you not to take the brunt of the emotional labor for once. Its your site but mediation isn't your sole responsibility and you have spent lots of time in the past.
Here is an achive link https://web.archive.org/web/20221123202118/https://raddle.me/f/AsterismOvershares/149795/-/comment/265177
I'm gonna go sleep lol
]]>I'm asking u/tequila_wolf and u/mofongo to mediate and keep it constructive.
]]>I want to become better at mediating and having discussions/arguments with people face to face.
I am beginning with learning about fallacies. If I am going to debate someone I read as much as I can about their position. I read about people and policies that are opposite to my view points. I also picked up a book called Crucial Conversations.
Are there any books, blogs, or videos you would recommend?
]]>Caught this piece of shit posting this misinfo and called them on it. Look at this fucking stupid reply they gave...
assumptions about anarcho-primitivists
yeah I know, how are they alive past 20?
Looks like another garbage anti-primitvist shit poster attempting to spread damaging lies and start fights.
]]>re queerphobia, and completely missing the point and repeating the queerphobia in their apology
re racism
dellitsni, you don't get it, you need to go fix your shit.
There are few circumstances under which this wouldn't automatically result in a global ban; this seems to be one. Users invested in this user need to step up and do work with them right away.
Edit: Changed the title to reflect a a less threatening position after u/selver accurately pointed it out in the comments.
]]>If you see someone else is engaging to teach/mediate, please stay out of it. I hope implementing this socially will work, but there are other ways to limit it.
Feel free to veto this policy if you have a reason why.
]]>I was misunderstood a whole lot, and i see why. Before explaining what i meant, I want to say sorry for my admittedly narrow-sighted comment. With that out of the way, here's what went through my mind:
I saw the linked post talking shit about heterosexuals in general, calling them boring and bland. I'm tired to the bone of seeing people discriminate against any sexuality, and i see no justification for calling heterosexuals in general boring and bland.
My comment was not (!!) in any way trying to compare the suffering and oppression of LGBTQ people with that of heterosexuals, and i am whole-heartedly sorry that some of you felt that was what i was trying to say. I am simply against all unjustified discrimination (which i think is obviously existent in the linked article), and was trying to express that (and that only).
My comment was also not about the flag badge, or anything else in that article. I thought it was pretty clear when i posted it, but i see now how it can be misinterpreted.
Again, i'm sorry if i upset anyone. I hope you see that my comment was never intended to be what it was understood as.
]]>As a note, I'm no anprim.
]]>This is entirely unacceptable.
I raised the point in the spam chatroom after the kretek thread went up that we, as a community (not just Raddle) are far too tolerant of transphobic bigotry when compared to other forms of bigotry in our communities.
we allow them to stay, we try to educate them, well beyond the point at which they have indicated they cannot or will not accept any change to their worldview.
After a repeated pattern of abuse from the user about to be banned, /u/Hal is still arguing that they should be "allowed" to stay because
I think they've been rather civil and have been contributing to discussions
Frankly, that doesn't matter and the fact that he thinks it does suggests some serious level of either sincerely believed bullshit or (more likely) internalized bullshit.
I am not suggesting a user ban (nor would I support it at this juncture) nor am I suggesting he should be removed as mod from all of his forums (though I wouldn't object if others did) but he is saying he doesn't believe espousing terfisms makes a person inherently dangerous and that isn't someone I feel safe representing /f/trans.
additionally
Just to clarify, I wouldn't have allowed that rhetoric on f/trans.
leaves open the interpretation you would allow it elsewhere. I'm kinda pissed, but this does not bode well.
]]>