Sorry about the formatting. Suppose we organize our thoughts differently - I find it much easier to address one point at a time.
So, now the admins are in the fight. They have limited choices for those in their camp. They either fight for a core right: to be recognized and respected, or they refuse to fight for that right and abandon those for whom the language is most hurtful for.
But pronouns and neopronouns and even personalized neopronouns weren’t what caused this whole fiasco. The first ban (to me, the minor one) was over me explicitly saying that I respected neopronouns, including personalized ones, but did not think that a human being could be a dragon.
The bans of the trans individual were over first asking a question about neopronouns, and then, after that, for saying that a human being could not be a possum.
This is, again, a dangerous tactic. It is one that risks internal rebellion and increased external attacks. But, it is an effective tactic. If done right, not only will those individuals no longer be let in, but others will have to consider whether or not they want in as well. They become aware, via posts like this one, that it is a war, and that they will fight. And, that they don’t care where you are, if you fuck with their people even indirectly, you aren’t welcome.
That’s a powerful thing. Looking at it from the outside, it’s brilliant, if they intended even part of that. I don’t know their intent, it could be pure spite, but it looks looks like someone not fucking around.
I don’t think that’s correct. I think it’s much more of an internal tool than you’re seeing. Few people are going to be sitting here, casual Blahaj users, and suddenly be cowed by the prospect of a ban. Much more likely is that Blahaj users become much more reticent about discussing matters outside of Blahaj, in case they run afoul of the Groupthink and catch a ban from their primary place of participation.
Managing all of that? Making that fight, nobody is going to get it right every time. But it’s a fight worth having. If it turns and rots into a form of fascism, then blahaj falls, and that will be a bad thing. But I believe that, so far, it’s being done for the right reasons, and in scale with the incidence of incursions.
See, I have two problems with this here:
That, as you note, I don’t believe that it is proportionate or done for the right reasons.
But also that rot does not cause communities to fall. Man, I spent years of my youth on some toxic fucking online communities, and the only thing binding those communities together was our place of conversation. That’s a weak tie, and still, abuse and bad culture did not even collapse it; in many cases it didn’t even stop growth.
The ties of a community that claim to stand for trans rights, when many trans folk look to the internet for their primary communities where they can be themselves, and one in which behavior even outside of that community can lead to a total removal from that community? That’s not going to collapse because of some power tripping or bad internal culture. That’s going to persist as long as it is allowed to. If you’re judging whether Blahaj has turned the wrong corner over whether it’s still a cohesive community, you’ll be there for the whole ride, possibly down to the heat death of the universe.
If Ada or another admin asked my opinion, I’d tell them to reverse the ban and try engaging with you instead. And tell them they were being assholes if they don’t at least consider it
Man, legit, the ban doesn’t affect me. I haven’t posted on Blahaj in months. Even before I got pissed on the subject, when I was understanding (before moderator action was taken for the crime of saying I was leaving), my intention was to wish them the best and sail off. At the end of the day, the ban was an irritant at most, just something to vent about. I don’t care if it’s reversed.
Far more aggravating is the context of it all. Hunting comments in other instances to ban people over, playing dogpile games against people who disagree. And I don’t think that Ada or the rest of the admins really give a shit about it happening. Considering that they’re involved in the hunt for banning folk, I’m much more inclined to see an unstated permissiveness towards the behavior. I’m also fucking pissed right now over the fact that they harassed a trans user out of the Fediverse entirely, on another instance, so you could say that I’m not inclined to be charitable at the moment.
I appreciate that you don’t think I’m transphobic considering what’s been thrown around recently.
No worries, I’ve just got old eyes and dyslexia, I could fuck up reading kindergarten level books lol
I do see your point, and I may be off in my evaluation of the preemptive bans. Wouldn’t be the first thing I’ve been off on.
And I am worried that it’s going to end up ruining a great thing. The fact that they’ve made several mistakes, targeting people that are discussing rather than attacking, it’s a problem. If it isn’t reined in, the possibility of it turning utterly toxic is real, and with blahaj being the only significant, broadly federated trans space, I really, really hope ada and any other admins can self regulate and turn it around. I know they mean well, they’re coming from a place of strong conviction. But strong conviction can turn to zealotry fast.
I think, for me, the key to it is how they’re finding comments and posts that lead to the decision. If they’re literally out looking for opportunities to do it, your concerns are likely to come to pass. But if it’s passive, then chances are higher that it will end up okay. I don’t know if any of them will see this thread, or if they’d consider responding to it, but it would really be of benefit if they switch to passive only if they’re actively looking. As a strategy, going off and looking is just too risky, too severe.
Ideally, a preemptive ban would only happen after a thorough review of the user, not off of a single comment, even if that comment seems a problem on the surface. Nor off of a single aspect of ideology when just leaving them alone means they’re not a problem at all.
Sorry about the formatting. Suppose we organize our thoughts differently - I find it much easier to address one point at a time.
But pronouns and neopronouns and even personalized neopronouns weren’t what caused this whole fiasco. The first ban (to me, the minor one) was over me explicitly saying that I respected neopronouns, including personalized ones, but did not think that a human being could be a dragon.
The bans of the trans individual were over first asking a question about neopronouns, and then, after that, for saying that a human being could not be a possum.
I don’t think that’s correct. I think it’s much more of an internal tool than you’re seeing. Few people are going to be sitting here, casual Blahaj users, and suddenly be cowed by the prospect of a ban. Much more likely is that Blahaj users become much more reticent about discussing matters outside of Blahaj, in case they run afoul of the Groupthink and catch a ban from their primary place of participation.
See, I have two problems with this here:
That, as you note, I don’t believe that it is proportionate or done for the right reasons.
But also that rot does not cause communities to fall. Man, I spent years of my youth on some toxic fucking online communities, and the only thing binding those communities together was our place of conversation. That’s a weak tie, and still, abuse and bad culture did not even collapse it; in many cases it didn’t even stop growth.
The ties of a community that claim to stand for trans rights, when many trans folk look to the internet for their primary communities where they can be themselves, and one in which behavior even outside of that community can lead to a total removal from that community? That’s not going to collapse because of some power tripping or bad internal culture. That’s going to persist as long as it is allowed to. If you’re judging whether Blahaj has turned the wrong corner over whether it’s still a cohesive community, you’ll be there for the whole ride, possibly down to the heat death of the universe.
Man, legit, the ban doesn’t affect me. I haven’t posted on Blahaj in months. Even before I got pissed on the subject, when I was understanding (before moderator action was taken for the crime of saying I was leaving), my intention was to wish them the best and sail off. At the end of the day, the ban was an irritant at most, just something to vent about. I don’t care if it’s reversed.
Far more aggravating is the context of it all. Hunting comments in other instances to ban people over, playing dogpile games against people who disagree. And I don’t think that Ada or the rest of the admins really give a shit about it happening. Considering that they’re involved in the hunt for banning folk, I’m much more inclined to see an unstated permissiveness towards the behavior. I’m also fucking pissed right now over the fact that they harassed a trans user out of the Fediverse entirely, on another instance, so you could say that I’m not inclined to be charitable at the moment.
I appreciate that you don’t think I’m transphobic considering what’s been thrown around recently.
No worries, I’ve just got old eyes and dyslexia, I could fuck up reading kindergarten level books lol
I do see your point, and I may be off in my evaluation of the preemptive bans. Wouldn’t be the first thing I’ve been off on.
And I am worried that it’s going to end up ruining a great thing. The fact that they’ve made several mistakes, targeting people that are discussing rather than attacking, it’s a problem. If it isn’t reined in, the possibility of it turning utterly toxic is real, and with blahaj being the only significant, broadly federated trans space, I really, really hope ada and any other admins can self regulate and turn it around. I know they mean well, they’re coming from a place of strong conviction. But strong conviction can turn to zealotry fast.
I think, for me, the key to it is how they’re finding comments and posts that lead to the decision. If they’re literally out looking for opportunities to do it, your concerns are likely to come to pass. But if it’s passive, then chances are higher that it will end up okay. I don’t know if any of them will see this thread, or if they’d consider responding to it, but it would really be of benefit if they switch to passive only if they’re actively looking. As a strategy, going off and looking is just too risky, too severe.
Ideally, a preemptive ban would only happen after a thorough review of the user, not off of a single comment, even if that comment seems a problem on the surface. Nor off of a single aspect of ideology when just leaving them alone means they’re not a problem at all.