上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 235

[–]sailortitanThomas Paine 160 ポイント161 ポイント  (15子コメント)

Regardless of where you stand on how the ableism policy is enforced, we can all agree that fascists* can gtfo.

(*edited for spelling, lol)

[–]RedEagle12/r/farleft 107 ポイント108 ポイント  (50子コメント)

but context and content of the post will weigh heavily as well

I really hope you mean this, because it's one of the main issues people have. From what I've heard people were getting banned for saying, for example, that Trump supporters blindly followed him. Obviously in this context, the word "blind" is not a slight against blind people. Similarly, when someone says than an argument is stupid, they are not using the word to belittle people with mental illnesses.

I guess I just want to know to what extent context will be taken into consideration.

Edit: Just wanted to add another point. This issue has brought to light a concern about transparency in the sub. Any attempt to discuss the policy was almost immediately shut down. You have to realize that while you may blame "brigading," a lot of leftists who use this sub have serious concerns, and silencing us was a horrible move.

[–]SemiHollowCarrotFreedom for the Pike is death for the Minnow 40 ポイント41 ポイント  (11子コメント)

From what I've heard people were getting banned for saying, for example, that Trump supporters blindly followed him.

I was the mod who went through all of our banned accounts earlier this morning and I did not find a single account who was banned for doing that.

I did find several accounts who were banned for other, more obvious things, but were claiming that is what they were banned for.

[–]SikletrynetLibertarian Socialist 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (2子コメント)

No, no one was banned for it, but some posters get warned and asked to change it

[–]Chicomoztoc¡La historia nos absolverá! 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (1子コメント)

but some posters get warned and asked to change it

The horror..

[–]NotAPoetButACriminalMarxism-Alcoholism 49 ポイント50 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The horror...

I mean you could say the same about the word blindly being used in that context. Absolutely no one would ever get offended or feel excluded on the count of that.

[–]jonpaladin 34 ポイント35 ポイント  (7子コメント)

about that

I recieved a 3 day suspension on this sub for calling trump followers blind to the pitfalls of his ideology. The mod thought I was calling them physically blind and said I'm "ableist" and suspended me for asking why. Mods like that shouldn't be mods, other users also called the mod out and he deleted their comments too. How can you have a conversation about blind faith ideologues in the context of socialism if some mods here haven't an idea about non-literal meaning of certain words?

in my inbox:

Hey, in the thread where you're talking about me being banned.

I actually was banned, and now I'm banned again because the mods said I'm lying when I'm not.

Original 3 day ban from 12 days ago on /r/socialism: http://imgur.com/Gagg9qx Now I'm perma-banned because mods would rather turn a blind eye: http://imgur.com/0EtKNW4

I can't edit the thread to show evidence, 1) because I'm now banned, 2) because that thread was locked as far as I know.

Maybe you can throw this evidence in your comments since I can't post anything now.

[–]SemiHollowCarrotFreedom for the Pike is death for the Minnow -5 ポイント-4 ポイント  (6子コメント)

ed

They sent over what happened. Temp bans and the automatic unbanning by the automod are things that are logged in the moderation log and this was not in there when I went and looked. No idea what's up with that. Very strange. My mistake.

[–]jonpaladin 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (4子コメント)

I just got this message:

Hey, in the thread where you're talking about me being banned.

I actually was banned, and now I'm banned again because the mods said I'm lying when I'm not.

Original 3 day ban from 12 days ago on /r/socialism: http://imgur.com/Gagg9qx Now I'm perma-banned because mods would rather turn a blind eye: http://imgur.com/0EtKNW4

I can't edit the thread to show evidence, 1) because I'm now banned, 2) because that thread was locked as far as I know.

Maybe you can throw this evidence in your comments since I can't post anything now.

[–]CommunizerCritical Theory/Post-Structuralism 15 ポイント16 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The policy is not specifically concerned with only the specific language used, but context and content of the post will weigh heavily as well. We are also going to be prompting subscribers to contact us via modmail if they feel that there has been an error.

Seems to speak for itself tbh. I'd like to give Judith Butler a shameless plug here in the case of how free speech/hate speech relates heavily to context, and how we can decipher between what is or isn't actually hate speech:

How might we account for the injurious word within such a framework, the word that not only names a social subject, but constructs that subject in the naming, and constructs that subject through a violating interpellation? Is it the power of a “one” to effect such an injury through the wielding of the injurious name, or is that a power accrued through time which is concealed at the moment that a single subject utters its injurious terms? Does the “one” who speaks the term cite the term, thereby establishing him or herself as the author while at the same time establishing the derivative status of that authorship? Is a community and history of such speakers not magically invoked at the moment in which that utterance is spoken? And if and when that utterance brings injury, is it the utterance or the utterer who is the cause of the injury, or does that utterance perform its injury through a transitivity that cannot be reduced to a causal or intentional process originating in a singular subject?

This seems to me to be a similar sentiment to the one expressed in this OP, which is understandable and one which I think is absolutely rooted in a rational approach to countering oppressive speech while not outright devolving into, what some here have called "authoritarian" or "draconian" speech regulations.

[–]doeslikecheesecakeTrotsky 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'm also very curious about the actual meaning of that sentence.

[–]sailortitanThomas Paine 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Welcome to Judith Butler, god I hated reading her in English Lit

[–]notyoho 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (22子コメント)

They are also banning neurodivergent people for not using their language. They are censoring us to help us from ourselves. Thumbs down.

[–]Lain0nleft of the left 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hi, I am also ND. I've spoken very openly about it here and in the Discord chat without problem. I do not know your specific circumstances though. What language are you referring to? I can't imagine many situations where what you said would happen.

[–]SocialismMods[S] 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (19子コメント)

They are censoring us

No such thing as censorship on a message board. You remain free to use whatever language you like around people that actually care to listen to it.

[–]Seed_EaterSyndicalist | IWW 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (0子コメント)

There's this big thing in most of the internet where they call censorship whenever someone decides they can't speak mean words or be hateful and abusive, but saying it's not censorship is and always will be incorrect. It is. Censorship is where people with power intentionally make it so certain things are not said. That's what we have is censorship. But rather than debating whether it's censorship or not, we ought to be debating the merit of such censorship. Pretending it's not is just being petty and silly. There's censorship in private enterprises and in the state. Just because it's practiced for a better reason or a worse reason and by hierarchy A versus hierarchy B doesn't mean anything.

[–]notyoho 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (15子コメント)

Well most do. But the leaders don't. Alas all repressive systems on speech. Otherwise upvotes/ downvotes would work, or any democratic alternative to just banning what you personally don't like, and making new rules up as you go along to silence voices that make you uncomfortable.

[–]VoteAnimal2012Sankara 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (14子コメント)

Its unfortunate that the mods here forgot it costs millions of dollars to start a sub and people that want to use abusive language cannot just go elsewhere.

[–]notyoho 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (13子コメント)

Language you think is abusive to me that I dont think is abusive is not empirically abusive because you say so... BUT r/socialism is more of a public space than a private space. If it was r/pcliberalsocialism maybe I would agree with you but to have very specific rules for a very small minority of users who have a very specific and small worldview setting the rules for everyone interested in socialism on reddit is a shame. having such a system be completely undemocratic and completely unpopular (until they banned all the dissenters and then lied about who they banned) shows the world that contemporary socialists are more inline with Mao, Stalin, and Antia Sakeezian than anything most contemporary socialists are about.

[–]gaidzSlavoj Zizek 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (4子コメント)

contemporary socialists are more inline with Mao, Stalin, and Antia Sakeezian

Now this is just silly

[–]notyoho 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (3子コメント)

So you get to censor words of disabled people to protect us from ourselves and then dismiss our valid concerns as silly. Way to gaslight Zizek.

[–]gaidzSlavoj Zizek 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I don't agree with the policy and I'm also not a mod lol

I more or less think that you putting Anita Sarkisian in the same light as Mao and Stalin is just really funny

[–]notyoho 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I dont mean to put them in the same light but the I do think the mods have mixed the ideas of worst of communist authoritarians (based on harassing PM's sent by the mods) and the absolute most surface level liberal activism and calling it socialism... a bizarre socialism that only exists on reddit.

[–]jonpaladin 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

i thought you guys were trying to start understanding context

[–]Herman999999999Debate is Democracy 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

In essence, don't be a jerk.

[–]SikletrynetLibertarian Socialist 44 ポイント45 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The policy is not specifically concerned with only the specific language used, but context and content of the post will weigh heavily as well. We are also going to be prompting subscribers to contact us via modmail if they feel that there has been an error.

I think that's all everyone has been asking for. The problem was not the ban on ableism, it's whether it was okay to blanket ban people for using words like "blind" or "dumb", especially when not used about a person. But since that seems to be the policy that is taken, and i agree wholeheartedly, there's really not much to add.

[–]bigblindmaxAll you fascists bound to lose. 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Good to see there will be some context taken into account and the bans of legitimate dissenters are being undone.

[–]SemiHollowCarrotFreedom for the Pike is death for the Minnow 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Honestly it's always been the case. The take from this OP is that the inclusivity policy going to be enforced like it has been for the vast majority of cases over the past 8 months.

A few outliers are not the policy.

[–]s0ngsforthedeaf 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Sounds like alot of work for you, mods. Why dont you restrict posts for any accounts under 24 hours/a week old? If you want to be part of this sub, you can lurk for a bit before posting.

[–]Handsomejack94John Brown 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

We already do, I think.

[–]Lain0nleft of the left 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Is this a thing that can be done? If so, I wholeheartedly agree that it would be for the best and would help mitigate the effects of a drama cycle like this one.

[–]vanityobsceneMarxist 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

As always, I think the central thing to note here is that the mods understood, above all, the need of those facing marginalisation and oppression in broad strokes. There was never going to be an answer to the fiasco that resulted in shafting them. And the mods showed, in the face of some pretty stark adversity, that they were not going to buckle and betray those needs.

Furthermore, as a socialist sub explicitly for socialists it is all of our responsibility to always mitigate how we speak to be as inclusive as possible. It is our responsibility to oppose bourgeois ideology, whether it manifests in actions or words. We do this because we must provide the foundations for the oppressed to self-empower. We must not alienate or disparage them and pretend we represent their interests - that would be talking out of both sides of our mouths.

We can hold a high standard among ourselves for how we behave. This is socialist discipline 101.

Some people have said that "many" subscribers have taken issue lately. Those people are not wrong. But to suggest that "many" are in any way a majority, or in any way more entitled than the literal tens of thousands of other subscribers is ludicrous. And the mouth-frothing shouting about the issue did not aid those people in any fashion. Rather it only exposed them.

I've said it before elsewhere: The conversation was most disappointing because with those who took issue, there was not one iota of discussion about how to address ableism, and how to ensure that we, as a community, change for the better. There was only ever a rabid "me, me, me, don't tell me what to do" going on. And it was disgusting. Even the more placating and palatable threads and comments oozed that utterly disgraceful lack of concern for anything other than their "free speech."

I've also said it before, recently, principled "free speech" is both hypocritical and impossible when you are also fighting oppression. That is simply the exploitative, devastating and barbaric world we live in. Free speech achieves nought but victories for reactionaries and others who do not intend on challenging capitalism. If you have any illusions about whether socialists would allow capitalists the floor, or fascists the floor, or racists the floor, or any of the others on the list, to speak freely, it's best that you squash them now. Socialists are not, and never have been, about that. We do not, across most tendencies, mar our politics with that nonsense. We are in the business of hard truths, not playing at intellectual supremacy.

It can be a hard reality to face up to, that the way you speak can affect people in a way that propagates their isolation, marginalisation, and the social aspects of their oppression. No one wants to be told that they have done that. But when you are, it is not the time to dig heels in and defend your honour. It's a time to be humble, patient, and if you are so bothered, discuss it with enthusiasm to both understand and improve. This is not the first time we on the left have had these hard lessons. It happened with sexism, racism, homophobia, transphobia, and more. Ableism is as important to recognise and as serious as any other.

As for those people who have migrated away, I'm going to say good riddance.

[–]AprilMariafellow rural comrades! pm me we have much to discuss 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Now thats how you do a policy.

Way better than the last few announcements. Well done

[–]ErikTheRedMarxistAngela Davis 27 ポイント28 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I've supported the policy for a while now and was only ever ticked off at the mods, and some of the other community, due to a "I don't care, fuck off you reactionary" attitude. There was very little attempt to even change minds, imo, but this post shows promise and I hope that what I disagreed with will change.

[–]bdubchile 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (1子コメント)

supported the policy for a while now

What is the policy?

[–]ErikTheRedMarxistAngela Davis 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The policy that caused quite a stir was the anti-ableism policy. It includes a banning of phrases such as st---d, id--t, du-b. I think it's not hard to change such language and it could help elevate the level of conversation while also getting rid of words that may offend some. I did, and still do, have opposition to the banning of the word bl--d bur perhaps with this added idea of looking at context it may no longer be a problem. I'm not sure how they'll enforce it though, but it's only one problem with the policy.

[–]fortnightsEjército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional 55 ポイント56 ポイント  (38子コメント)

I fully support the tenet of inclusivity here, but the recent crackdown with its incessant nannying has brought this sub to its most liberal state yet and ultimately weakens the socialist cause. This has become just another shameful point of division on the left when all that is needed is a healthy dose of anti-ableist education in lieu of tyrannical censorship. Downvote me. Ban me. Prove my fucking point.

[–]SocialismMods[S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (18子コメント)

liberal state yet and ultimately weakens the socialist cause.

Cracking down on reactionary speech and being more inclusive is neither of these things.

Complaining about your "free speech" OTOH...

[–]SocialismeOfBarbarij"Love is the minimal form of communism" - Alain Badiou 46 ポイント47 ポイント  (12子コメント)

The question was never: "should reactionary speech be allowed?", but "what makes certain forms of speech reactionary?"

You're once again deflecting from what the whole issue was about.

[–]SocialismMods[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (11子コメント)

The question was never: "should reactionary speech be allowed?", but "what makes certain forms of speech reactionary?"

There was a significant amount of people who were against the policy 100%. You're free to view the many posts at /r/anarchism for yourself.

Even worse, some people advocated that we should have a 100% free speech policy, citing Chomsky and Chomsky's support for allowing Holocaust Denial a speech platform.

Just because you are not aware of it doesn't mean it wasn't occurring.

ed

Here, it took me all of five seconds to find a thread with a long discussion on it. Feel free to do your own looking into it further.

[–]LivinglifeformDid nothing wrong 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (9子コメント)

But holocaust deniers should have free speech, how else are we going to find and kill them?

[–]logfish111Libertarian Socialism 26 ポイント27 ポイント  (8子コメント)

People with Stalin Flair's don't deserve free speech either imo.

[–]SocialismMods[S] 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Someone with a Stalin flair (or not) who says junk like "Kulaks deserve it" and actually deny the very existence of famines under Stalin probably aren't going to last long here either.

[–]AmateurArtist22 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

But here's my issue with your policy now - if someone with a Stalin flair says "Kulaks deserve it" or denies the existence of the famines, you won't ban them. But if they say "there were no famines, and you're d-mb if you think there were," that's a ban. What?

Essentially what that does is imply that the mod team here thinks advocating for the mass murder of those who don't support an authoritarian regime is a "better" thing to do than calling someone a mean name.

[–]SocialismMods[S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

But if they say "you're d-mb" that's a ban.

No it's not.

what that does is imply

You responded to me literally saying that people who say that will end up banned, and then go on to say that this some how implies a bunch of other things.

[–]SocialismeOfBarbarij"Love is the minimal form of communism" - Alain Badiou 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (4子コメント)

The question was never: "should reactionary speech be allowed?", but "what makes certain forms of speech reactionary?"

You're just deflecting from what the whole issue was about.

[–]SocialismMods[S] -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (3子コメント)

The question was never: "should reactionary speech be allowed?", but "what makes certain forms of speech reactionary?"

There was a significant amount of people who were against the policy 100%. You're free to view the many posts at /r/anarchism for yourself.

Even worse, some people advocated that we should have a 100% free speech policy, citing Chomsky and Chomsky's support for allowing Holocaust Denial a speech platform.

Just because you are not aware of it doesn't mean it wasn't occurring.

ed

Here, it took me all of five seconds to find a thread with a long discussion on it. Feel free to do your own looking into it further.

[–]SocialismeOfBarbarij"Love is the minimal form of communism" - Alain Badiou 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (2子コメント)

There were people who were against the entire policy, and there were people who were against a part of it. Most of them belonged to the second group, since most people recognised that while they didn't considered stp_d and _d_t to be ableist, r_t_rd and __t_st definitely are. You're attempting to make it seem like most people here were defending the use of ableist slurs, whilst agreeing with you that they are ableist, is a sign how disconnected the mods are with the community.

Note: I agree that certain slurs, like st_p_d and d_mb, shouldn't be used. What I disagree with is the crackdown on dissent. Instead of creating understanding for the new policy, so that people didn't just follow the rules, but understand them, the mods just decided to enforce it, and demanded that we follow the rules like a bunch of mindless sheep.

[–]Reinmar_von_BielauLaika 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

And then, there are words like "bli-d" and "de-f", which are purely descriptive and devoid of any negative connotations, and yet are still subjected to the policy.

[–]SocialismMods[S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

the mods just decided to enforce it

The policy has been in place for the better part of a year. Extenuating circumstances over the past week brought it up to an unreasonable boiling point for all involved.

There was practically 0 push back against the policy until it was forced upon us this past week.

[–]MeshlethNewton -4 ポイント-3 ポイント  (18子コメント)

when all that is needed is a healthy dose of anti-ableist education in lieu of tyrannical censorship

You cant educate fascists.

[–]excitedllamaAnarcho-communist and rabble rouser 29 ポイント30 ポイント  (17子コメント)

But you can educate comrades that don't know better. Not everyone who can't recite kapital by heart is a fascist

[–]Lain0nleft of the left 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (16子コメント)

Hence the option to warn and educate minor offenders of the policy. Hell, even the bans are temporary for people willing to engage in some reflection and self-criticism.

[–]excitedllamaAnarcho-communist and rabble rouser 24 ポイント25 ポイント  (15子コメント)

And thats very reasonable, but people really need to stop conflating the uneducated with fascists. It's almost stereotypical

[–]SocialismMods[S] 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (14子コメント)

really need to stop conflating the uneducated with fascists.

On the flip side, people need to stop conflating with suppressing reactionary speech as "red fascism".

[–]excitedllamaAnarcho-communist and rabble rouser 27 ポイント28 ポイント  (6子コメント)

That "red fascism" accusation is going to be thrown around anytime the modteam engages in severe, opaque action against legitimate comrades. There were two posts (that I know of) taken down despite the generally positive discussion going on within. My primary criticism has not been about the policy itself but rather the wholesale rejection of discussion, even when its supportive. Not to mention the utter lack of transparency. It was only a few hours ago I realized we were being brigaded, but even so such important threads did not need removal. A simple locking with a "We're being brigaded" sticky would've been a lot better. That's not just draconian, it's bad form.

[–]SocialismMods[S] 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (5子コメント)

My primary criticism has not been about the policy itself but rather the wholesale rejection of discussion

There was no complete/wholesale rejection of discussion. We have a period where we cracked down on it, pro or con, due to extreme problems. It's difficult monitoring threads when the same threads are constantly being posted/reposted. There was also active discussion going on in Discord and several mods from some of the other Left subs messaged us to ask what was going on. There was a stark difference between those subs and the opportunistic and reactionary likes of /r/Anarchism, /r/Socialism2, /r/FarLeft which kept attempting, in the name of Free Speech and "Democracy", to get CometParty to completely destroy the sub and install them as mods. To the point where they were openly collaborating with 8chan and LeftyPol.

Reddit and the Internet are platforms of instant gratification and results. There's no harm in taking some time to get a grip on a problem and prepare a proper response, and some times people need to remember that there will be space between when they want to know something and when they do know it.

ed

Here, it took me all of five seconds to find a thread with a long discussion on it. Feel free to do your own looking into it further.

[–]excitedllamaAnarcho-communist and rabble rouser 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (1子コメント)

First off, I took no part in the call for demodding. Handling things poorly is not neccessarilly an abuse of power. The criticsisms of heavy handedness are based purely on the fact that there was no clarification or rectification for the mod's actions.

If you're going to play vanguard then the people need to know why the vanguard is doing it's doing. A few well placed stickies was all that was needed to keep most people from going apeshit. The On Ableism post was the perfect time and place for that, but it was locked. The threads with over 100 comments were removed. If anything, that thread should have been locked and On Ableism left open.

That was a full day and a half of people stewing on other subs with the r/anarchism sticky generating a lot more subscriber/mod dialogue than on r/socialism. Of course its all very negative simply because folk felt like the socialism modteam didn't care enough or were too tight-fisted to allow it. More people are upset than there rightly should be.

Clearly, further discussion was still needed seeing as how people were still making posts about it. The sudden removal of subsequent posts, without clarification, only led people to believe that no discussion was allowed at all. The On Ableism post, with its obvious defense for heavy handedness, only compounded the problem. Quite frankly, this particular post is a little too late despite being exactly what was needed two days ago.

[–]SocialismMods[S] 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you're going to play vanguard then the people need to know why the vanguard is doing it's doing. A few well placed stickies was all that was needed to keep most people from going apeshit. The On Ableism post was the perfect time and place for that, but it was locked. The threads with over 100 comments were removed. If anything, that thread should have been locked and On Ableism left open.

That On Ableism post was the third time we posted that. The previous times it was posted we had to delete it due to massive amounts of spam.

That was a full day and a half of people stewing on other subs with the r/anarchism sticky generating a lot more subscriber/mod dialogue than on r/socialism. Of course its all very negative simply because folk felt like the socialism modteam didn't care enough or were too tight-fisted to allow it. More people are upset than there rightly should be.

This is essentially it. People were upset that they wanted to fully know everything that was going on immediately, when the mod team didn't even have a good idea as to what was going on. People ended up needing to wait a while before we could talk about it. There's really nothing wrong with that and people need to realize that sometimes you need space and time before things are understood and able to be discussed.

In some instances people just need to have some patience come back to the sub at a later time. We're talking about it now after a brief reprieve. There is 0 controversy in this.

only led people to believe that no discussion was allowed at all.

There wasn't, pro or con, because we were getting bombarded with overlapping posts and threads constantly. There wasn't anything to discuss because the situation wasn't completely understood. If we had engaged and given incorrect/wrong/etc information, people would have been holding out feet to the fire over that as well.

Ultimately there was very little "problem". The policy isn't being enforced any differently than it was over the past year, the less than a dozen examples of it being enforced differently do not change policy. The board was being linked to altright blogs and other subs, and alot of opportunist "Leftists" were taking advantage of the situation to try and get themselves modded at this sub, or try and create "alternatives". The majority of it was an altright brigade, followed by a portion of "Leftists" making a petty power grab for their own benefit or outright collaborating with LeftyPol (we saw the head mod of /r/anarchism at 8chan trying to brew up support), and a small amount of people who were treated unfairly and quickly rectified.

[–]RedEagle12/r/farleft 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

the opportunistic and reactionary likes of /r/Anarchism, /r/Socialism2, /r/FarLeft which kept attempting, in the name of Free Speech and "Democracy", to get CometParty to completely destroy the sub and install them as mods. To the point where they were openly collaborating with 8chan and LeftyPol.

Do you have anything at all to back up that claim? I can't speak for the moderators of any other subs but I absolutely had no intention of "destroying" this sub and becoming a moderator. I have never spoken with anyone from 8chan or Leftypol nor do I know anyone who has. Forgive me for being pissed, but don't fucking slander me with bullshit and lies.

[–]Rayman8001Democratic Socialism/Syndicalism 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Isn't this a bit backwards? It was the policy that caused the attention, and was never stated as a result of the brigading.

[–]SocialismMods[S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (2子コメント)

It was the policy that caused the attention

The attention began when one of the sub mods was linked to in an altright blog.

[–]Rayman8001Democratic Socialism/Syndicalism 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I was under the impression that the alt-right got involved through a blog post about the policy. At very least the ableism policy was a massive conduit for said attention.

[–]SocialismMods[S] -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (0子コメント)

A blog posted and they brigaded /r/Anarchism who were happy to take advantage of the drama for their own opportunistic needs.

[–]mrKaasaThe People Will Lead 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

the policy has been here for almost a year

[–]NudelburkWe Are All Mao 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hopefully the fucking drama will be over now.

[–]Eugene_V_ChomskyI'll figure those adjectives out eventually... 41 ポイント42 ポイント  (23子コメント)

I understand that we were brigaded, but don't you think it's a little disingenuous to imply that the criticism of the policy was only coming from outside the sub?

[–]SocialismMods[S] 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Where was that implied?

[–]tehallie 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I got that implication as well.

First Paragraph:

However, the last few days links to alt right blogs and 8chan caused an influx of users (over 2x our daily visitors) to "test the limits" of our policy and for the sake of the sub we eventually decided to shut down conversation all together until a sense of normalcy returned to the sub.

Third Paragraph:

Over the past 48 hours we've banned approximately 165 accounts that violated/tested the limits of/forced the discussion in favor or against our policy/brigaded or trolled the sub. Nearly 150 of those accounts were one day old or otherwise recently registered, with zero account feedback or had history on altright and similar subs, or a large portion of those accounts were also simply drive by troll accounts linked to /r/Socialism from other subs.

Fifth Paragraph:

Hindsight is always beneficial and the sub mods have discussed ways we can better handle such a massive brigade in the future. Regardless, less than 0.5% of our subscribers even noticed a problem or were affected.

I realize I'm a lurker, but I read those phrases as dismissing criticism of the policy as coming all-but-exclusively from brigading trolls.

[–]SocialismMods[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

You left out

We then went through the remaining twenty or so accounts and removed the bans for a large portion of them.

Truth of the matter is, the majority of it was from people outside of the sub, non regulars, or people who simply wanted to capitalize on the drama for their own gain, be it begging to be forcibly installed as a mod of this sub without oversight (while also complaining about the lack of democracy), or attempting to gain subscribers for their own subs. Those with legitimate complaints or who were unfairly considered is roughly a dozen+ of 75000 subscribers.

So at that point it's almost just picking nits.

[–]tehallie 6 ポイント7 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh, I'm not debating that the vast majority of accounts banned were people behaving badly. Just pointing out that the language used (to me) employs blame shifting and minimizing to create a percieved consensus about a policy that generated a lot of controversy, to put it lightly.

[–]Loves_His_BongNO WORK! FREE MOVIES! 37 ポイント38 ポイント  (36子コメント)

The absolutely reactionary kneejerk response outside of this sub is really telling how people refuse to just think about the words they use. They act like they could never think of a more apt description for ideas than those words. I really can't think of a single time I've ever had to use any of those words in the made up scenarios they provide justifying their use. Moreso, I could think of at least one word that could be substituted.

[–]notyoho 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (9子コメント)

Because people respond to ideas when you show them respect, engage and discuss.

[–]Loves_His_BongNO WORK! FREE MOVIES! 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (8子コメント)

We all insulted the intelligence of Trump supporters. Look where that got us. It only galvanized them and painted us as effete snobs.

[–]notyoho 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Right, and now you are doing that to socialists. And everyone hates everyone. Except the right seem to at least tolerate each other enough to not have ban sprees in their forums.

[–]Loves_His_BongNO WORK! FREE MOVIES! 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (6子コメント)

There was a little tension initially. But it's far from everyone hating each other. The far right is easily coalesced because they have no actual ethos beyond racism. They'll support anything to that end.

[–]AmateurArtist22 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

It's really telling how shut off from the world you are if you think every member of the right is racist, and that literally half of the country have "no actual ethos beyond racism." What you're doing is just as reductive and stereotyping as saying that "the black community is easily coalesced because they have no ethos beyond hating white people." That's so obviously untrue and offensive, and reduces a large, diverse group to only the views of their loudest and angriest members. If I did that to /r/socialism I'd probably assume every socialist was just as closed-minded as yourself.

[–]Loves_His_BongNO WORK! FREE MOVIES! 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The far right is fascism. Their only ethos is politics for expedience.

[–]SemiHollowCarrotFreedom for the Pike is death for the Minnow 19 ポイント20 ポイント  (24子コメント)

I've basically been telling people that if a post is truly "d_mb" then it doesn't warrant a response, or they can just report it. And if it is something that does warrant a response, then consider something other than "this post is d_mb". If you can't think of a better response then it's better to not respond at all.

[–]zellfireUphold Comrade Pupper Thought 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (19子コメント)

I try not to use that language in a debate, it doesn't really contribute to discussion. Nonetheless, banning it serves to alienate a shitton of people, especially working class people.

[–]ARealSkeleton 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Exactly. You want to win interest in socialism but the people that are checking out the sub are probably getting turned off from the ridiculous enforcement of this rule.

[–]SemiHollowCarrotFreedom for the Pike is death for the Minnow 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (10子コメント)

We crunched the numbers. Even including obvious troll accounts, which were the majority, the number of people who were vocal about the issue (pro or con) was something like .2% of our subscriber base.

The "shittons" of people didn't seem to care either way, and in the past 2 days we've gained more subscribers than accounts who were affected by the problem.

[–]NapalmSnake 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (9子コメント)

Well, how much of the community usually comments on a single post? Sometimes people just don't comment.

[–]WickedDeparted 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Yeah, there's that 99/9/1 thing, 99% don't participate, 9% vote, 1% post/comment.

[–]zellfireUphold Comrade Pupper Thought 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (6子コメント)

...90/9/1 maybe?

(Also, is your username a BoJack Horseman reference?)

[–]WickedDeparted 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Good catch, 90/9/1 is definitely what I was going for, and yes it is! You're the first person to have noticed/commented on it. BoJack Horseman is my favorite show and I was watching that episode when I created the account. I think it's a pretty subtle reference, it's dope that you noticed :D

[–]zellfireUphold Comrade Pupper Thought 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (4子コメント)

It is my favorite show as well <3 Have seen seasons 1 and 2 like 10 times, 3 maybe 5. There seems to be a pretty strong correlation between socialism and BoJack Horseman fandom.

[–]WickedDeparted 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Oh wow I don't think I'm quite there yet, maybe 5 times for 1 and 2 and I think I've watched Season 3 about 3 times, but some of it has been skipping around. There do seem to be more BoJack fans in left leaning subs, not sure why exactly.

[–]SemiHollowCarrotFreedom for the Pike is death for the Minnow -2 ポイント-1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

We take it as "ambivalence".

[–]SocialismeOfBarbarij"Love is the minimal form of communism" - Alain Badiou 32 ポイント33 ポイント  (1子コメント)

So what exactly is the problem? Civility, or ableism? If it is the first, than I think that is none of the business of the mods, and if it is the second, than I don't see how your comment supports a ban on ableism.

[–]SocialismMods[S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

So what exactly is the problem? Civility, or ableism?

It's both, and it is 100% our prerogative to curate this sub.

[–]Lain0nleft of the left 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Honestly not sure why this is was being downvoted. It isn't really a solution in itself, but taking a moment to reflect before posting would at the very least increase the quality of posts here.

[–]SemiHollowCarrotFreedom for the Pike is death for the Minnow 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It is really only a solution to a specific post in a specific circumstance. There's more situations where it wouldn't apply, but still.

[–]ajaxia 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thank you! Being a little accommodating for someone else by using thoughtful language is how socialists should behave. The point is to unite, not alienate and ableist language is used specifically to drive people apart. People can't help their disabilities but you can easily watch what you say, which is why the burden is on people to change how they phrase things. We designate parking spaces for disabled people and most think that's a pretty reasonable accommodation even though it is a bigger "hassle" than choosing words carefully. If people are offended that they can't use divisive language, then maybe they will examine what their hang up is about it.

[–]AntiFa_ForeverMLM 40 ポイント41 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Good shit mods you have my full support through this. This has been one heck of a debacle, pretty much entirely based on strawmen.

[–]esse_SA 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I really appreciate the mods being transparent, and seeing as this whole concern-gate looks to have been fueled by fabricated claims, it is a relief. I recognize the value of this forum and the effort in maintaining such a large community, but it always be the people's duty to hold organizations and positions of power to be transparent and accountable.

[–]aperture413 13 ポイント14 ポイント  (10子コメント)

Thank you for having contextual understanding for language. /r/latestagecapitalism could learn a thing or two from this sub's team.

[–]zellfireUphold Comrade Pupper Thought 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (8子コメント)

What is going on over there? I was banned and unbanned within a few hours, and then there was that downvoted-to-hell Stalin sticky with tons of deleted comments

[–]nuggetinabuiscuitBolshevik-Leninist 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (7子コメント)

A lot of the LSC mods are devout tankies who ban anyone who doesn't like Stalin or Mao. The worst part is is that they are driving away many people who are either skeptical liberals or those who are just now looking at anti capitalist ideas. Especially with shit like that Stalin birthday thread

[–]SemiHollowCarrotFreedom for the Pike is death for the Minnow 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (5子コメント)

Not every sub has to bend over backwards to kowtow to petty liberals.

[–]nuggetinabuiscuitBolshevik-Leninist 22 ポイント23 ポイント  (4子コメント)

Because alienating and scaring away potential comrades is a great idea

[–]zellfireUphold Comrade Pupper Thought 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (0子コメント)

And people who are already Trotskyists, demsocs, or ancoms and probably don't absolutely love Stalin.

[–]SemiHollowCarrotFreedom for the Pike is death for the Minnow -1 ポイント0 ポイント  (2子コメント)

"Socialism" as an idea already scares many of them. Are you willing to give that up as well, just to make them feel comfortable?

[–]NotAPoetButACriminalMarxism-Alcoholism 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (1子コメント)

  1. False equivalence. There's a world of difference between "giving up" and having paitence with people.

  2. There's places where you can go to circlejerk over stalin and not have to pander to liberals, but LSC proved to be a great tool for agitation on reddit and you should see more value in that. If there was ever a sub for being patient and trying to educate liberals, its LSC.

  3. LSC wasnt even designed to be a ML place anyway right? Because you were not only banning liberals but also anyone who doesnt circlejerk about loving Stalin, which includes most leftists.

[–]Dennis-MooreMake it So-cialism, number one 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If it means they spend less time banning people for criticizing their idols, I'd be all for it.

[–]bdubchile 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (9子コメント)

/r/Socialism's policy towards inclusive language remains the same as it always has

What is the policy?

[–]SocialismMods[S] 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (8子コメント)

Look at our side bar.

No:

* Racism
* Sexism
* Ableism
* Homophobia
* Transphobia
* Religious Bigotry
* Fascists
* Rape Apology
* Reactionaries
* Police Apology
* Trump or Clinton Supporters
* Supporting the EU
* Third Worldists

Furthermore, do not make:

* Gulag jokes
* Kronstadt jokes
* Icepick jokes

[–]LadifourDemocratic Socialism, Humanism and so on and so on... 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (3子コメント)

I would like some of these explained, please.

  1. Is religious criticism in the form of "[Insert religion] is stu... bad because of these reasons." considered bigotry?

  2. What is meant by "EU", the idea and/or the institution?

  3. "Third Worldists"?

[–]Handsomejack94John Brown[M] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (1子コメント)

We look very closely at criticisms of, say, Islam and Judiasm because both of those faiths are commonly targeted by racists and Nazis. It's not strictly against the rules to be critical of religion but stray into Nazi talking points and you'll be banned on the spot.

The EU refers specifically to the institution as it exists, not the notion of pan-European unity.

[–]LadifourDemocratic Socialism, Humanism and so on and so on... 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thanks for the quick response. I first had Islam in there, but decided against it because of those reasons. I will certainly keep that in mind.

What are Third Worldists though?

[–]SocialismMods[S] 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

1> Find a better way to criticize, but we also don't appreciate pointless "New Atheist" critiques either.

2> European Union, a globalist Capitalist/Neo Liberal conglomerate.

3> Third Worldists - short hand for those who believe the First World can never experience Revolution.

[–]darktwiget 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (3子コメント)

What's an ice pick joke?????????? (Serious)

[–]Seed_EaterSyndicalist | IWW[M] 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Jokes referring to the assassination of communist Leon Trotsky by an agent of Joseph Stalin. The weapon used to kill him was an ice pick/axe. It's a common joke in pro-Stalin subreddits.

[–]BasqueInGlory 23 ポイント24 ポイント  (3子コメント)

The policy continues to have, as it always had, my full support.

[–]AntiFa_ForeverMLM 25 ポイント26 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Really it just takes 5 minutes of introspection and one second of saying, "well, if it allows other people to use this space as comfortably as I can, so be it".

[–]CummiesForCommiesThe great appear great because we are on our knees. Let us rise! 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The average person knows up to 20,000 words on average. I'm pretty sure people can cut back on a few if it's for the sake of allowing people to feel welcome.

[–]Chicomoztoc¡La historia nos absolverá! 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I assume these people are somewhat decent people and already "censor" themselves regarding racist slurs and sexist slurs, why is suddenly a problem to add ableist slurs to that list? It shouldn't be a problem.

[–]VoteAnimal2012Sankara 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Good shit mods. Fuck the Nazi scum whining about not being able to use reactionary language. Ban em all.

[–]CabosemBest commie beard 14 ポイント15 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm glad that the mods have stayed up to kick out the flooding reactionaries and have stayed strong on keeping the ableism policy up. Good work y'all, thanks for making the community that much better of a place.

[–]therabidfanboy 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thank you, mods. You are fighting the good fight for the sake of all of us, and your efforts are appreciated.

[–]XuarAzntdInternational Marxist Tendency 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (3子コメント)

we engaged with the more active members of our community for feedback and their opinions on how to best maintain and enforce our inclusivity policies going forward.

Can a single person actually confirm this? Does anyone feel satisfied by the mod accountability here? I tried to debate the mods' policies and all I have received is shitty flame wars in return.

The mod team here is, on the whole, of a very poor quality (politically and personally). This just gets worse when shitty mods pick shitty posters to be new mods.

Its shitty.

[–]SocialismMods[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Can a single person actually confirm this? Does anyone feel satisfied by the mod accountability here?

....

Do you not see the overwhelming support in this thread?

[–]let-them-trembleThose who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

All mods' Marxism should obviously be as dogmatic and as inward-looking as yours :)

[–]creeperintruderSocialist-Feminist 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

You did a great job handling the flood if reactionaries! I fully support the inclusivity policies and I hope they make the sub a friendlier and more inclusive environment.

[–]O_KavLiberation is a praxis 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Thank you Mods, for not giving in to the pressure Reactionaries and Brocialists created in their recent brigading.

Not one step back. I stand for the Anti-Ableist policy. Socialism and Intersectionality will ALWAYS walk along each other.

[–]VarangianRedGuard 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Thank you mods for staying strong in this somewhat hard time. Gods know i couldn't do it

[–]Hippicac 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

It looks like a handful of people are inconvenienced is that really worth all of this uproar?

[–]innistradi 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

thank you so much for this stance, honestly.

[–]Deathcon_5PSL-Trekism 7 ポイント8 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Excellent, I fully support this policy. I hope critics take a moment to reflect and self criticize. We're radicals, we can't presume that what exists currently is right or will exist in the future.

[–]redditor3000 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (9子コメント)

What precisely is the policy?

[–]SocialismMods[S] 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Making an inviting and inclusive space for all people to enjoy without having to worry about dealing with low brow, insulting, dismissive language, be it sexist, ableist, or racist.

[–]komunistoMarxism 10 ポイント11 ポイント  (7子コメント)

Banning ableist slurs.

[–]vidurnaktis/r/Luxemburgism | Marxist 12 ポイント13 ポイント  (6子コメント)

It is more than that, it is the banning of all slurs with a special emphasis on ableism because of how common it is despite this being a socialist space with a goal of inclusivity for anyone regardless of the circumstances of their birth, so long as they are a Socialist/Anarchist.

[–]komunistoMarxism 11 ポイント12 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I said ableist slurs in particular because I thought it was a given that racist/sexist slurs would be banned, whereas unfortunately many people don't think much about using ableist language.

[–]vidurnaktis/r/Luxemburgism | Marxist 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

A sadly too true statement. Hell even I have to catch myself from time to time.

[–]Reinmar_von_BielauLaika 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (3子コメント)

Anarchists are socialists, why the distinction?

[–]vidurnaktis/r/Luxemburgism | Marxist 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (2子コメント)

I don't personally make that distinction but if I just said Socialist some might think I was excluding Anarchists.

[–]Reinmar_von_BielauLaika 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (1子コメント)

fair enough, thanks

[–]vidurnaktis/r/Luxemburgism | Marxist 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

No problem.

[–]ByzantineWinnebagoSocialist 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (0子コメント)

My thanks to the mod team for sticking with the ableism policy.

[–]komunistoMarxism 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I fully support the ableism policy. A Socialist community should try and be as inclusive and accepting as possible, and the reaction that these alt right and "leftist" groups had to the policy really shows what they're all about: oppressing and hating others.

[–]Ryuutorak 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (7子コメント)

They'll keep scraping the angry bottom of the barrel bc most of them are White and can act like that all time without dying or losing money.

The answer isn't to accommodate their manipulative entitlement.

[–]Hippicac 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you can not speak eloquently it is best to not speak