RPGnet's decay (TBP madness)

[Stephen Tannhauser]

I could see a mod creating a bogus account just so they could infract it to earn points. Especially posts like the one we're discussing here. The posts seemed innocent enough, but the mods decided to go after this new guy with a permaban because he had specific questions, and in his mind he wasn't looking to have a comparatively unfocused thread on magic in Ars Magica as a general subject.

I'm disinclined to attribute that much deliberate effort to it. I have to admit I suspect that particular account was permabanned not just for the scattershot posting style but for the poor, for lack of a better word, articulacy in it.

Reading those posts really did remind me of the English used in spam or phishing messages, composed either by a bot or by someone really young or with non-native speaking skills; if it was combined with a suspicious origin IP, the mods might just have decided to err on the side of security and given a superficial excuse to forestall questions.

[wmarshal]

I could see a mod creating a bogus account just so they could infract it to earn points. Especially posts like the one we're discussing here. The posts seemed innocent enough, but the mods decided to go after this new guy with a permaban because he had specific questions, and in his mind he wasn't looking to have a comparatively unfocused thread on magic in Ars Magica as a general subject.

I'm disinclined to attribute that much deliberate effort to it. I have to admit I suspect that particular account was permabanned not just for the scattershot posting style but for the poor, for lack of a better word, articulacy in it.

Reading those posts really did remind me of the English used in spam or phishing messages, composed either by a bot or by someone really young or with non-native speaking skills; if it was combined with a suspicious origin IP, the mods might just have decided to err on the side of security and given a superficial excuse to forestall questions.

You're could be right. However, in other forums I've seen users post regularly in a similar manner, and they weren't spammers. They just had difficulty articulating themselves whether it be because they were "on the spectrum" or some other difficulty the poster had.

If it's due to TBP mods trying to develop a brand, as Armchair Gamer suggested, then I find it sad that TBP is trying to be elitist in how it treats its audience members who may have issues communicating. TBP going "Ew, we don't want your kind here" to a nerd with poor communication abilities would be the exact opposite of how a geek/nerd community should act.

[Tubesock Army]

From the 30 day ban of Atrox:

If there's a Nazi at the table and 10 other people sitting there talking to him, you got a table with 11 Nazis.

I remember when Russell Brand interviewed a white power guy on his TV show, with the intent to hear him out and try and persuade him to change his mind about some topics. His attempt seemed genuine, and I thought he did a good job at it.

According to TBP, Russell Brand is himself a Nazi for talking to the Nazi.

Daryl Davis is living proof that civil discussion with bigots can work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis

By excluding them you only serve to justify their beliefs and push them towards environments that support their repugnant beliefs creating a positive feedback loop.

White people love Daryl Davis, because he puts the onus on people of color to ending racism , rather than putting the onus on literal nazis to fuck off into the heart of the sun, where they belong.

If people like Davis want to go out and talk to nazis, that's their prerogative. But there's no reason why that should be the expectation. Hatemongers aren't owed respect or tolerance. Not when they deny it to others.

[wmarshal]

From the 30 day ban of Atrox:

If there's a Nazi at the table and 10 other people sitting there talking to him, you got a table with 11 Nazis.

I remember when Russell Brand interviewed a white power guy on his TV show, with the intent to hear him out and try and persuade him to change his mind about some topics. His attempt seemed genuine, and I thought he did a good job at it.

According to TBP, Russell Brand is himself a Nazi for talking to the Nazi.

Daryl Davis is living proof that civil discussion with bigots can work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis

By excluding them you only serve to justify their beliefs and push them towards environments that support their repugnant beliefs creating a positive feedback loop.

White people love Daryl Davis, because he puts the onus on people of color to ending racism , rather than putting the onus on literal nazis to fuck off into the heart of the sun, where they belong.

If people like Davis want to go out and talk to nazis, that's their prerogative. But there's no reason why that should be the expectation. Hatemongers aren't owed respect or tolerance. Not when they deny it to others.

When has Daryl Davis put the onus on minorities to talk with bigots?

When you talk about white people loving Daryl Davis it seems you're implying that Xanadu is white. Has Xanadu declared his race? If so, I'm not aware of it. If not, are you able to somehow make this determination?

I think the point that Xanadu was making, was the stupidity of using guilt by association TBP was making, and using Daryl Davis, who is clearly not a Nazi, as an example.

The cult mindset of TBP is clear by the example they used where if even a single person is profane (a Nazi in this case) everyone in that group is also polluted and profane. It's not an accident TBP didn't use an argument along the lines of "If you have a table where most are identifiable Nazis, you probably have a table where they're all Nazis." That's also not necessarily true - though I'd grant it'd be very, very likely - but the point is to enforce a cult mindset.

TSA, you're talking to people here that TBP would probably consider profane. If you use other identities at TBP you better hope they don't connect them. Or do you think you're playing the role of a Daryl Davis?

[DM_Curt]

How do they get enough new posters to replace the banned ones?
Are the mods making enough sock puppet accounts to make it look like people would see that madhouse and want to join?

[Xanadu]

From the 30 day ban of Atrox:

If there's a Nazi at the table and 10 other people sitting there talking to him, you got a table with 11 Nazis.

I remember when Russell Brand interviewed a white power guy on his TV show, with the intent to hear him out and try and persuade him to change his mind about some topics. His attempt seemed genuine, and I thought he did a good job at it.

According to TBP, Russell Brand is himself a Nazi for talking to the Nazi.

Daryl Davis is living proof that civil discussion with bigots can work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis

By excluding them you only serve to justify their beliefs and push them towards environments that support their repugnant beliefs creating a positive feedback loop.

White people love Daryl Davis, because he puts the onus on people of color to ending racism , rather than putting the onus on literal nazis to fuck off into the heart of the sun, where they belong.

If people like Davis want to go out and talk to nazis, that's their prerogative. But there's no reason why that should be the expectation. Hatemongers aren't owed respect or tolerance. Not when they deny it to others.

When has Daryl Davis put the onus on minorities to talk with bigots?

When you talk about white people loving Daryl Davis it seems you're implying that Xanadu is white. Has Xanadu declared his race? If so, I'm not aware of it. If not, are you able to somehow make this determination?

I think the point that Xanadu was making, was the stupidity of using guilt by association TBP was making, and using Daryl Davis, who is clearly not a Nazi, as an example.

The cult mindset of TBP is clear by the example they used where if even a single person is profane (a Nazi in this case) everyone in that group is also polluted and profane. It's not an accident TBP didn't use an argument along the lines of "If you have a table where most are identifiable Nazis, you probably have a table where they're all Nazis." That's also not necessarily true - though I'd grant it'd be very, very likely - but the point is to enforce a cult mindset.

TSA, you're talking to people here that TBP would probably consider profane. If you use other identities at TBP you better hope they don't connect them. Or do you think you're playing the role of a Daryl Davis?

That's exactly the point I was making, not that the extreme example should be the norm. It is arguably the most extreme example of bigotry and xenophobia being diminished by positive interactions.

Unfortunately, in-group bias and stereotyping is inherent to humanity in one form or another (there are several issues like Dunbar's number) and while in excess it is a flaw that  should be moderated it isn't equivalent to uncleanseable original sin.

People can change and to a reasonable degree dissidents should be tolerated and given chances to improve rather than being outcast as moral scapegoats.  Excessive ostracization and purity tests only reenforces the problems and creates mirrored cult like groups.

I'm not saying bad behavior should be entirely tolerated, but guilt by association is fundamentally flawed, and permabans should be a last resort after multiple lesser measures.

[Xanadu]

From the 30 day ban of Atrox:

If there's a Nazi at the table and 10 other people sitting there talking to him, you got a table with 11 Nazis.

I remember when Russell Brand interviewed a white power guy on his TV show, with the intent to hear him out and try and persuade him to change his mind about some topics. His attempt seemed genuine, and I thought he did a good job at it.

According to TBP, Russell Brand is himself a Nazi for talking to the Nazi.

Daryl Davis is living proof that civil discussion with bigots can work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis

By excluding them you only serve to justify their beliefs and push them towards environments that support their repugnant beliefs creating a positive feedback loop.

White people love Daryl Davis, because he puts the onus on people of color to ending racism , rather than putting the onus on literal nazis to fuck off into the heart of the sun, where they belong.

If people like Davis want to go out and talk to nazis, that's their prerogative. But there's no reason why that should be the expectation. Hatemongers aren't owed respect or tolerance. Not when they deny it to others.

"rather than putting the onus on literal nazis to fuck off into the heart of the sun, where they belong."

Unfortunately when excluded these kind of people don't disappear into oblivion or the heart of the sun. More often they rally to the loudest most impassioned leader or community that justifies and perpetuates  their world view. This creates a feedback loop where more dominant memes and beliefs are amplified. Eventually these groups gain enough momentum that they begin to push their beliefs on others crating a far larger problem.

By spreading these people out and including them to a point, exposure dilutes the extremes.

[Tubesock Army]

From the 30 day ban of Atrox:

If there's a Nazi at the table and 10 other people sitting there talking to him, you got a table with 11 Nazis.

I remember when Russell Brand interviewed a white power guy on his TV show, with the intent to hear him out and try and persuade him to change his mind about some topics. His attempt seemed genuine, and I thought he did a good job at it.

According to TBP, Russell Brand is himself a Nazi for talking to the Nazi.

Daryl Davis is living proof that civil discussion with bigots can work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis

By excluding them you only serve to justify their beliefs and push them towards environments that support their repugnant beliefs creating a positive feedback loop.

White people love Daryl Davis, because he puts the onus on people of color to ending racism , rather than putting the onus on literal nazis to fuck off into the heart of the sun, where they belong.

If people like Davis want to go out and talk to nazis, that's their prerogative. But there's no reason why that should be the expectation. Hatemongers aren't owed respect or tolerance. Not when they deny it to others.

"rather than putting the onus on literal nazis to fuck off into the heart of the sun, where they belong."

Unfortunately when excluded these kind of people don't disappear into oblivion or the heart of the sun. More often they rally to the loudest most impassioned leader or community that justifies and perpetuates  their world view. This creates a feedback loop where more dominant memes and beliefs are amplified. Eventually these groups gain enough momentum that they begin to push their beliefs on others crating a far larger problem.

By spreading these people out and including them to a point, exposure dilutes the extremes.

Given the rise in anti-semitic rhetoric and nazi-adjacent talking points in CURRENT YEAR, "mainstream" political discourse (not to mention the rise in hate crimes), I think it's safe to say that this is absolutely not true. "Dialoguing" with extremists lends legitimacy to their views, whether it's done intentionally or not. Their views are abhorrent and irrational, and engaging with them as though they are legitimate is a mistake. Exposure has not diluted the extremes in today's America. Rather, it has diluted the commonplace with the extreme, the latter of which has started to metastasize.

[jhkim]

Unfortunately when excluded these kind of people don't disappear into oblivion or the heart of the sun. More often they rally to the loudest most impassioned leader or community that justifies and perpetuates  their world view. This creates a feedback loop where more dominant memes and beliefs are amplified. Eventually these groups gain enough momentum that they begin to push their beliefs on others crating a far larger problem.

By spreading these people out and including them to a point, exposure dilutes the extremes.

Given the rise in anti-semitic rhetoric and nazi-adjacent talking points in CURRENT YEAR, "mainstream" political discourse (not to mention the rise in hate crimes), I think it's safe to say that this is absolutely not true. "Dialoguing" with extremists lends legitimacy to their views, whether it's done intentionally or not. Their views are abhorrent and irrational, and engaging with them as though they are legitimate is a mistake. Exposure has not diluted the extremes in today's America. Rather, it has diluted the commonplace with the extreme, the latter of which has started to metastasize.

Neither talking to them nor banning them causes them to disappear. We've had years of most social media platforms banning people for extremist views like open anti-semitism, and yet those views have continued to grow. In Germany, many expressions of anti-semitism can be prosecuted for jail time, and yet still, those views continue to grow.

Here on theRPGsite, there have been users like PSIandCO and GriswaldTerrastone who were banned for antisemitic talk. I think letting them speak showed people just how real and pernicious anti-semitism is. Earlier banned users like 5 Stone Games and alathon had spoken up for ethno-nationalism. If anything, them speaking up in support of stuff served to de-legitimize those views.

Like cockroaches, showing these people in the light doesn't make them seem cool or legitimate. They are an embarrassment to those who hold similar views but aren't as open about it.

[Fheredin]

From the 30 day ban of Atrox:

If there's a Nazi at the table and 10 other people sitting there talking to him, you got a table with 11 Nazis.

I remember when Russell Brand interviewed a white power guy on his TV show, with the intent to hear him out and try and persuade him to change his mind about some topics. His attempt seemed genuine, and I thought he did a good job at it.

According to TBP, Russell Brand is himself a Nazi for talking to the Nazi.

Daryl Davis is living proof that civil discussion with bigots can work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Davis

By excluding them you only serve to justify their beliefs and push them towards environments that support their repugnant beliefs creating a positive feedback loop.

White people love Daryl Davis, because he puts the onus on people of color to ending racism , rather than putting the onus on literal nazis to fuck off into the heart of the sun, where they belong.

If people like Davis want to go out and talk to nazis, that's their prerogative. But there's no reason why that should be the expectation. Hatemongers aren't owed respect or tolerance. Not when they deny it to others.

"rather than putting the onus on literal nazis to fuck off into the heart of the sun, where they belong."

Unfortunately when excluded these kind of people don't disappear into oblivion or the heart of the sun. More often they rally to the loudest most impassioned leader or community that justifies and perpetuates  their world view. This creates a feedback loop where more dominant memes and beliefs are amplified. Eventually these groups gain enough momentum that they begin to push their beliefs on others crating a far larger problem.

By spreading these people out and including them to a point, exposure dilutes the extremes.

Given the rise in anti-semitic rhetoric and nazi-adjacent talking points in CURRENT YEAR, "mainstream" political discourse (not to mention the rise in hate crimes), I think it's safe to say that this is absolutely not true. "Dialoguing" with extremists lends legitimacy to their views, whether it's done intentionally or not. Their views are abhorrent and irrational, and engaging with them as though they are legitimate is a mistake. Exposure has not diluted the extremes in today's America. Rather, it has diluted the commonplace with the extreme, the latter of which has started to metastasize.

I don't think you quite understand what's going on. A lot of this is intentional division or agitation. The Chinese and Russians both pushed disinformation campaigns on the vaccine to the effect of Bill Gates put in a microchip which makes you magnetic or the shot sterilizes you. This had some confounding effect on people who were relatively gullible, but the larger effect in my experience was that it made talking about vaccine safety protocol or just vaccine risk-benefit analysis at all impossible because the instant you disagree with "safe and effective," you get stigmatized as a conspiracy theorist.

There's also an element of the anatomy of the internet at play here, too. AgitProp disinformation programs have been a thing for decades, but they really took off during the Obama administration. Why? Because the internet from the late 90s to the mid 2000s was a bunch of small websites and a dozen agitprop agents cannot possibly influence 3000 websites effectively, so the primary tactic in this era of the internet was to post a laundry list of bullet points on some place like MoveOn.Org (yes, that was a form of AgitProp back in the day) and let kool-aid drinker members of these smaller communities post them. This was only marginally effective, not because there were a lack of brain-dead mules to carry the message, but because the microculture of most small websites is strong enough to immediately recognize hogwash. The structure of the internet made certain kinds of lies impossible.

However, after about 2010, the userbases centralized into only about a dozen major Silicon Valley platforms, which let the agitprop agents directly interact with millions of people with no microculture to protect them. It took the AgitProp agents a few years to realize they could get away with straight up lies, but they have.

FYI: This is why I think the highest and best use of the internet is a pseudoanonymous forum with between 100 and 10,000 active members. And RPG.Net exists as a reminder that just because you have the right website design does not mean you are guaranteed an improved microculture; you must start with solid members.

My point is that you're coming to this conclusion from the wrong angle. These aren't irredeemable evil morons. A few of them are evil, and most of the rest of them are morons, but that's not why arguing with them is pointless. It's pointless trying to talk to them in a venue which participates in brainwashing like Facebook, and Twitter. Remove Facebook and Twitter from the equation and this calculation starts to change.

[oggsmash]

  I have lived on a long enough time line to see Kanye become a Nazi. 

[Tubesock Army]

Anti-Semitism among rappers isn't exactly a new phenomenon. Public Enemy came under fire for it (more than once) back in the '80s. And Bill Clinton specifically condemned Sister Soulja for having a burning star of David on an album cover in the '90s.

[Tubesock Army]

oops double pizzost

[wmarshal]

  I have lived on a long enough time line to see Kanye become a Nazi.

I'm pretty sure he's been mentally ill for a while. For whatever reason antisemitism is something quite a few of the mentally ill get into. I'm not saying every antisemite is mentally ill—most are just hateful wrecks of humanity.

[Trond]

  I have lived on a long enough time line to see Kanye become a Nazi.

I'm pretty sure he's been mentally I'll for a while. For whatever reason antisemitism is something quite a few of the mentally I'll get into. I'm not saying every antisemite is mentally ill—most are just hateful wrecks of humanity.

But you see it's OK because he says he IS a jew.....
oh OK I see what you're saying.