Arch Dornan
Oh, lovely. They've sent me a mo-ron.
You could use ch*ggot but that would imply a gay Chinese so there's a problem. Can't do much about it the word had been appropriated. Use a different insult.
- Status
I'll be completely honest with you...Those people are usually not moderates, they're deconstructionists in sheeps clothing and from the circles I run in outside of the Sietch..the biggest obstacle I've seen to this place gaining a thousand new members and several hundred new subscribers is...
Well frankly, people like you.
So, there needs to be a middle ground between it all and what you want which is a total purge of people like us (And admit it, you'd dox us if you had the chance..you'd totally wage a deplatforming campaign on our asses if you could), isn't going to help this place flourish..if anything, it will make it a pariah.
You guys need to stop using the Far Right or Nazi pejorative, you do no favors to anyone and you cheapen the meaning of the word. Zoe, myself and @Guy of Z and @sir_fire are the closest things to genuine far right people you have here..and even we regularly excoriate the "alt right" and the other imagined boogey men..and we do it more often than you do and with more knowledge on how.
Any way....Asking for civility is kind of a must to have a community with more than say 20 people without it degenerating into a gigantic free for all..Demanding the culling and expulsion of people you dislike..well....then.
Bigking321
Well-known member
I really think some people are way overreacting to this.
That’s really fucking gay and I refuse to avoid it. It doesn’t attack the group because you said it to one person. There isn’t a faggot signal in the brain of every lgbt set off whenever it’s ever said or written by anyone and they are immediately hurt by it. Slurs are fun. Use them whenever you feel like it.
Duke Nukem
Hail to the king baby
Most of the so called "Far right" on here are actually just a different brand of leftists.
Bacle, seems to have a deep abiding need to continue to flagellate himself and bear his stripped back to Whitehall while sobbingly asking "IS THIS ENOUGH? WILL YOU TAKE ME BACK"
And I really don't mean to be a dick when I say this but the language used by a lot of these people who are now gleefully and openly calling for our heads...is the language of a battered spouse seeking to justify why she's going back to the guy who knocked her teeth out.
These people hate you, they will never accept you, this is your new home and burning it down as a demented form of a child's prayer asking, begging for said abusers to take you back. It's not just selfish and mean, but its especially unfair towards us and most of all..vile.
Can't go home again..the least you can do is stand with your fellow users on the Sietch and help your new home strong and diverse...including those whose values you think you hate.
ShieldWife
Marchioness
There is something about the right that has absolutely infuriated me for years. We are all too quick to adopt left wing standards for extremism and frequently seem more interested in proving ourselves to our most dire enemies than supporting allies who might be to our own right.
What do I mean by this? Well, let’s imagine that political affiliation could be boiled down to a single linear scale where -10 is the most extreme left, 0 is moderate, and 10 is extreme right. I know this isn’t reality, but maybe it models some people’s perception of reality.
You have a group of leftists who average -3 but they are completely tolerant and fully embrace and support basically anybody down to -10. If you’re a 1 or higher you’re a Nazi to them who is subhuman and cannot be tolerated. Then you have some “right wingers” who average maybe 0 on the scale and like the leftists, they tolerate (with a bit of derision) people all the way down to -10 but someone who is a 3 or higher on the scale is rejected, called a Nazi, a right wing extremist, someone who must be shunned from polite society. A 2 conservative has a more positive opinion of a -10 leftist than they do of a 4 conservative, and in fact use much of the same terminology created by those <-7 leftists to describe people only slightly further right than themselves.
So I reject this mythical idea of a “far right” or that it’s somehow dangerous and that we must thoroughly reject it or be tarnished - while the left fully embraces, and even we tolerate, left wing extremists. So, as I think I mentioned in the past, I will not “punch right” as the saying goes. My enemy is on the left and I won’t villainize my ideological compatriots for having a different vision of the right than I do, even if that vision is commonly perceived to be further to the right.
There is a saying: insanity is repeating the same action expecting different results. Applying that kind of idea to this, I would also say that it is insanity for people to attack their allies in order to appease their enemies. So I completely refuse to play along with the leftist game of denouncing some ”far right” activist movement.
I would strongly oppose any attempt at defining incivility in terms of how “far right” a person or idea expressed is.
Duke Nukem
Hail to the king baby
Closest thing to actual "Far right" are probably Ancaps or Religious zealots like islamists.
Everybody lay off Bacle now, I ams sick and tired of your ceaseless dogpiling of him just to feel some twisted sense of self-righteous fufilment, it's time's like these that make me ashamed to even be conservative, lay off.
Unhappy Anchovy
Well-known member
This is very much the case.
I made a few posts, around when the Sietch started. I later chose to not post here - not because I was afraid of peer pressure, or being criticised by people on SB, but because I felt community norms and expectations here were radicalising in a way that made the site actively unpleasant to be on.
That's not about any other site. I post and have discussions on a number of other sites, not just the ones you're probably familiar with. It is to do with the Sietch itself not being a pleasant place for me to engage. I think courtesy and civility are important, and while in my opinion Zoe takes it too far, there is a minimum necessary standard of politeness for intellectual engagement. That minimum standard is, I would argue, well above the level where you call people 'f----t' or 'c--k'. I am for civility not as just superficial politeness, but civility as a democratic virtue.
I like engaging with diverse and controversial perspectives. I enjoy it and seek it out. But I am not willing to wade through garbage in the hopes of picking out a few gems.
I am encouraged that some staff here realise there was a problem, and that people like me chose to avoid engaging on the Sietch because of it. I hope that things improve.
There are some posters in the thread arguing that this is the thin end of the wedge. I would like to suggest to them that there is in fact room in between /pol/ or /b/, on the one hand, and a highly restrictive left-wing forum that bans any right-of-centre opinions. Conservatism or rightism do not require that you be the lowest common denominator, or that you hurl obscenities at each other. Would, say, Roger Scruton have put up with that sort of behaviour in his presence? No? Then it is clearly possible to be conservative and also well-mannered.
Just in case, a disclaimer: yes, I know I'm one of the dreaded SB staff, and thus officially one of the Bad Guys (tm). If anyone is entertaining any conspiracy theories, don't. I am friends with some of the Sietch staff, but we never discuss Sietch policy and I don't encourage anything behind-the-scenes. What I've said in this post is my personal opinion only.
I am talking to anybody in general.
Also Unhappy Anchovy says hello...
Also Unhappy Anchovy says hello...
The atmosphere at present...
You have a hilariously romantic take on our contempt of Bacles ideological duplicity
Bigking321
Well-known member
He was literally asking for it. And it was only a threadban.
Duke Nukem
Hail to the king baby
What a dumpster fire of a thread....
ShieldWife
Marchioness
Ironically in a thread about wanting more civility!
Actually, this thread isn’t so bad. A few heated exchanging, nothing worrisome in my opinion.
Terthna
Professional Lurker
Speaking as a leftist who does condemn regressive leftist extremism on a daily basis, I am under no obligation to tolerate similar extremism on the right (which isn't "mythical", and does exist). That said, I understand your concern about not wanting to cater to the left, or alienating people on their behalf that are more closely aligned with you politically; but that's not what this change in enforcement policy is about, as far as I can tell. It's about civility, and trying to keep jerks from treating people like garbage on this forum.
Although now that I think about it, I have a concern as to what constitutes a slur; does "trap" count? Or are the rules more referring to words meant to cause offense, rather than ones other people choose to take offense at?
No offense to anyone who went through that mess, but I can't help but agree that a lot of you have PTSD when it comes to staff of any type.
Let's face it, 1/3 of you think the site should remain loose and will deny Sane did anything wrong to the gates of hell if need be. Another 1/3 think that the staff interfering is bad just by knee jerk reaction alone, despite believing/agreeing that Sane/his pals still needed to be taken down a peg or two in some way, and finally we got the last 1/3, who are okay with some reform to the present system in the terms of mods being more proactive but still want more freedom than SB.
I dont think it was only a thread ban. Idk thiugh. That would be to ask him
The issue was is I am fine with the policy and everything. I just see an arising issue with how ine can take a joke and the like. That is what he was proving the point of. If someone doesn't like the joke,are you going to infract them because on person lacks a sense of humor?
- Status