Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Reducing Moderation Load for MN (continuation of Dealing with Inflammatory Posts)

366 replies

womanformallyknownaswoman · 12/04/2018 05:47

I'm starting another thread - which is really a continuation of the previous post re dealing with inflammatory posts and comments. On Site Stuff, MNHQ have revealed more about their issues with FWR - i.e. the moderation workload. They need that reducing.

Please do also take on board the fact that the combative tone isn’t just in relation to goady posts or trolls - the majority of deletions take place in discussions where there isn’t a debate or conflict. It’s a root and branch problem.

What's the nature of the root and branch problem - is there a pattern to the deletions? Are they from certain OPs? Without fully understanding the problem, I am unsure what solutions to focus on - ie. will self policing the tone work as that assumes it's our comments that are the problem? Or is it, as I suspect, trolling that is increasing the mod workload?

I personally don't report much as I am conscious of their workload. Am I alone in this? Thus, I have asked them if they have analysed which accounts are doing the reporting (to see if Sealion and troll accounts are swamping them). Or is it the mods trawling through comments policing the tone??? Or is it us?

BTW @Datun has suggested pinning a post emphasising self policing. Great idea if it is us - but if so, what phrasing is OK and not? Would I be right in thinking saying "self id doesn't take sufficient account of concerns about women and children is fine"? But what is off limits? I still come back to what is that the root cause of the mod workload increase?

Secondly, I keep pointing out that Sealions/concern trolls use covert bullying so the pattern of someone's comments is important, not just a one off remark. As with coercive control in DV, each individual incident can seem inconsequential, but over time the drip, drip cumulative effect leaves women alternating between enraged and cowering. And with Sealions it's not just the comment reported but a pattern of covert bullying remarks consisting of dismissing others concerns, falsely accusing others(Transphobia), criticism that is based on distortion, misrepresentation or fabrication.

Where I think we may need to be smarter is in dealing with Sealions. I have heard it argued that the debate is needed. But if one is wasting one's time on Sealions, it just gives them more ammunition to report and complain about. It feeds them. Hence more mod workload. The only way I have found effective is not to engage with known Sealions. I just ignore them. I don't engage personally with them. So we potentially have a conflict between those who want to have the debate and yet at the same time needing to call time and IGNORE Sealions, after they have demonstrated an unwillingness to engage healthily. For example on the Inflammatory post - I would have preferred to call time on certain Sealions much earlier - there's no point in being nice if it defeats the object ie having debate with someone who wants to engage plus not increasing the mod workload.
Would love some of your thoughts…..

OP posts:
AngryAttackKittens · 14/04/2018 00:29

Mine's a martini!

(Does not exist in smiley list. Prejudice against vodka drinkers!)

flowersonthepiano · 14/04/2018 00:27

Tea's for me - you have whatever's your poison Grin

AngryAttackKittens · 14/04/2018 00:09

Tea on a cold day is always welcome!

flowersonthepiano · 13/04/2018 23:52

I'll drink to that Angry (but with Brew, 101 days today since my last 'proper' drink, but I usually chat about that elsewhere Smile).

I do remember that tiff - water under the bridge Smile

AngryAttackKittens · 13/04/2018 23:31

In all seriousness flowers, I know we had a bit of a tiff on the first thread we encountered each other on, but I think there's a lot more common ground than disagreement there. My first priority is always protecting women and girls. Sometimes that may result in my being less than patient with those who're trying to weasel their way around that principle, especially when they're trying to use women's socialization against them, but when push comes to shove I will always have the backs of other women who's boundaries are being encroached upon, regardless of any disagreement on other issues.

LangCleg · 13/04/2018 23:23

No is a complete sentence.

End of!

TallulahWaitingInTheRain · 13/04/2018 23:20

In a way it's a sign of our backfootedness here that we're the ones arguing for a debate

AngryAttackKittens · 13/04/2018 23:16

I suspect that's one of the reasons for #nodebate. It's easier to control women individually when we're unable to look to each other for support and backup.

flowersonthepiano · 13/04/2018 23:08

The female socialisation is strong with many of us Angry. Especially if we haven't spent much time around feminists.

I was raised by born again christians who truly believed that women were created to serve men.

I feel myself caving when I hear arguments like those of Gasping.

Thank fuck for the rest of you reminding me that we should just me able to say no!

AngryAttackKittens · 13/04/2018 22:58

It's bizarre to me to watch women replicate that behavior, given that almost all of us will have been on the receiving end at some point.

BettyFloop · 13/04/2018 22:29

LangCleg - I wish there was an applause smiley because I agree entirely and wholeheartedly with your post at 22.21.
But there isn't (or at least I can't see one) so I shall just say cheers Wine Wine

Ereshkigal · 13/04/2018 22:25

Absolutely, Angry.

UpstartCrow · 13/04/2018 22:23

AngryAttackKittens Fri 13-Apr-18 22:15:29
The reason these conversations give me hives is that they're so reminiscent of conversations I've had with men who, when I've indicated that no I'd really rather not have sex with them, have viewed that as the beginning of a negotiation, or a debate about whether my saying no is unfair to them in some way. I wonder how many other women reading these threads are having the same mental associations crop up.

A woman's right to say no is not something that should be up for debate.

Yes, this, a hundred times over.

LangCleg · 13/04/2018 22:22

(Night Gasping. Thanks for sticking at it!)

LangCleg · 13/04/2018 22:21

I also think men should be doing the self-reflection, behaviour changes and budging up. However, trans people stand as much chance of them doing that as women do - that is, no chance.

I feel that born males - GRC or not - should not be participating in affirmative action programmes designed to reduce sex-based inequity (eg AWS). I think if trans people want to campaign for their own affirmative action programmes they should have at it. I wouldn't dream of standing in their way.

I feel that born males - GRC or not - should not be in women's prisons or DV refuges or closed mental health wards or anywhere traumatised women are. Nor should they be working in such places. I think if trans people (and gay men for that matter) need their own DV refuges, such refuges should be set up and properly funded. I wouldn't dream of standing in the way of that.

I don't think penis belongs in women's changing rooms and toilets. I do, however, accept that post-SRS transsexuals occupy a different category and feel the old honour system of mutual trust and respect worked pretty well. Would like to think that aggressive transactivism hasn't shattered that for good. But I think the best solution now is effective, secure third spaces.

AngryAttackKittens · 13/04/2018 22:15

The reason these conversations give me hives is that they're so reminiscent of conversations I've had with men who, when I've indicated that no I'd really rather not have sex with them, have viewed that as the beginning of a negotiation, or a debate about whether my saying no is unfair to them in some way. I wonder how many other women reading these threads are having the same mental associations crop up.

A woman's right to say no is not something that should be up for debate.

Ereshkigal · 13/04/2018 22:04

Night Gasping.

AngryAttackKittens · 13/04/2018 21:59

Activate female socialization! Or attempt to, anyway.

It's fascinating to watch in a grim sort of way.

GaspingShark · 13/04/2018 21:58

I disagree with your assessment of my position, Gasping. My boundaries around privacy and dignity in the presence of male people are not something I feel I'm prepared to negotiate. You seem to think my consent or lack of consent shouldn't matter. I think it should. You may persuade me otherwise. I doubt it, but it's possible.

Yeah, I can't disagree with that.
Night all.

GaspingShark · 13/04/2018 21:57

Sorry I didn't word that very well. I am happy to argue my position. Not to make concessions on women's rights to female sex protected spaces. And I don't think it's fair to paint me as an extremist for this line in the sand.
No, I'll have to go away and think about it but that seems fair enough to me. And I do appreciate that you've tried to be conciliatory in this thread.

Ereshkigal · 13/04/2018 21:55

I disagree with your assessment of my position, Gasping. My boundaries around privacy and dignity in the presence of male people are not something I feel I'm prepared to negotiate. You seem to think my consent or lack of consent shouldn't matter. I think it should. You may persuade me otherwise. I doubt it, but it's possible.

TallulahWaitingInTheRain · 13/04/2018 21:51

too much is being expected of women imo. And underlying it is an attitude that women just don't matter that much

Yes, this.

GaspingShark · 13/04/2018 21:45

Just to be a pedant for a moment - debate doesn't require either side to make concessions, it's simply an attempt to convince others of your position. A negotiation requires concession. Ahem. As you were. Interesting thread.

No indeed. I was referring to my earlier post saying that you can't call it a debate if the only outcome you will accept is everybody agreeing that you're right. If Ereshkigal hasn't actually called for debate then she's golden.

AngryAttackKittens · 13/04/2018 21:43

Sometimes "no" is a complete answer. Many people have trouble accepting this when the person saying "no" is a woman. It is not the woman who's saying no who's being unreasonable in that situation.

Ereshkigal · 13/04/2018 21:40

Sorry I didn't word that very well. I am happy to argue my position. Not to make concessions on women's rights to female sex protected spaces. And I don't think it's fair to paint me as an extremist for this line in the sand.

Swipe left for the next trending thread