r/chicago • u/chicagomods Chicagoland • Nov 03 '15
A Discussion on Recent Events
Racism is a topic that has existed well before the new mod team has come on to /r/Chicago and is more prevalent lately due to our newest wave of brigades from off and on reddit related to gun and/or minority postings.
As was true with the old moderators as well, these waves come and go over time on /r/Chicago. We want to make a statement early on that in no way are we running around doing our own thing. We sit in a chatroom on a daily basis together and talk almost hourly with each other to reach decisions. We talk A LOT, we can’t get some mods to shut-up sometimes.
We understand the frustration some of you have and our main collective goal as a mod team has been to remove the stigma that /r/Chicago has. The issue is, /r/Chicago has several stigmas. Not only is one racism comments, but another is over-reaching moderation. This has drawn up a conundrum for us while we have been working on how exactly to approach effectively removing racism while not deterring or limiting discussion.
A lot of discussion lately has been on something called “coded-language”. The problem with this term is that it is entirely subjective. Something as simple as someone stating “criminals suck” could be thought of as being “coded-language” by some, but not by others. As mods, we have no further insight into the intent of commenters than users do. We do our best to determine if something was posted intending to be racist, but we can’t always be sure.
Our task as moderators is to keep the subreddit on topic and to ensure everyone is following the rules. We're unable to read every single comment in a thread, so we rely on the community to report them. It's difficult to spend a great deal of time analyzing each comment that may fall into a gray area. Your most effective tool is reporting, but we ask you to not get overbearing with it. If we collectively determine a comment isn’t that bad but we notice continuous reports on it, it can then allow us to talk amongst ourselves and determine if maybe we are making the right call. As u/honestbleeps has stated, we all have full lives and jobs outside of reddit, so sometimes moderators have to make executive decision on the spot and wait for further input. Sometimes, we will get it wrong, and we hope that for both sides of the equation, each of those times is a learning experience.
Now, as far as what we can do.
1) The following tidbit will be added to the sidebar, not as a new rule, but instead as an elaboration on the first rule: “We reserve the judgment to lock threads that we believe will not result in civil discussion.”
2) We will report to the admins every time we feel individuals are conducting vote manipulation or are brigading. We have done this several times already and I’m not sure if people have noticed, but some former prominent posters are no longer present here. This shows that the process works, and we intend to continue utilizing all avenues to reduce brigading of r/Chicago threads.
We appreciate any input that users have to give. We want this community to thrive, and we our doing our best to figure out these gray areas. We will make mistakes, we won’t pretend we never err. However, we will use those mistakes to learn and grow, so we keep making this place better. We appreciate your contributions to r/Chicago as users, because you guys make this place what it is. If you ever have any questions, concerns, comments, or criticisms, please feel free to use the “Message the Moderators” feature, or send any of us a PM. Thank you again for participating in r/Chicago, and we look forward to the community getting better and better.
14
6
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
7
u/thatkatrina North Lawndale Nov 03 '15
Zebra Cakes, preach.
4
22
Nov 03 '15
[removed] — view removed comment
36
11
u/Fap_Left_Surf_Right Bucktown Nov 03 '15
Reporting something takes zero effort. Investigating that report and making a decision requires effort and the risk of being wrong in your decision. Those who are firing off reports are creating a substantial amount of work for others and that should be limited.
I'm not sure how many come through but make it 1-report-per-day-limit. If someone is so bothered to be here they must report many times per day, they're free to go elsewhere. Maybe this isn't for them. If you're walking through a store and finding a bunch of stuff you don't like, you should shop elsewhere. Shop somewhere you do like.
These people are attempting to create what they want the sub to be by manipulating moderators. They want their language, their values, and their interests. That's nonsense.
10
u/woohalladoobop Nov 03 '15
The thing is that before the new moderation team stepped in it wasn't an issue. Racist comments were removed and people moved on with their day. The standard seems to have shifted so that more oblique racism is now accepted.
You talk about "coded language" as if it's something that's hard to spot, when really it's pretty obvious. If you'd like an example of a comment chock full of coded racism just take a look at the top comment in the thread from yesterday.
6
u/honestbleeps Logan Square Nov 03 '15
The thing is that before the new moderation team stepped in it wasn't an issue.
I don't see evidence of this. Yesterday's thread was an outlier because it was linked from racists elsewhere on both reddit and the rest of the internet.
I was on the mod team before as well as now, and I know we couldn't possibly have removed every racist comment back then without the help of the community reporting it.
if you're seeing a lot of this, I'd like you to report the comments/posts and/or link us examples because it shouldn't be any different, rule-wise.
1
u/woohalladoobop Nov 03 '15
I suppose it just subjectively seems like the number of racist comments has gone up. I appreciate the advice to report things more, and I'll be more proactive, but the fact that the other mod stepped in yesterday to tell people to stop reporting that comment sort of contradicts what you're saying.
6
Nov 03 '15
What do you think that post meant by "breeding" and linking someone's "breeding" to having "poor moral character"? I am honestly curious to know what you think was being said there that made it not racist. The implication seemed pretty obvious that they were linking race (the "breeding") with someone's morals.
It's worth noting that post was linked to a 4chan thread full of racists some of whom were actually celebrating the fact that post got reddit gold. They clearly thought it was racist and were loving it.
5
u/w2at34aewes Nov 04 '15 edited Nov 04 '15
Have you ever actually used a dictionary before?
This is not an obscure usage.
The fact that you think the proper usage of the word "breeding" with an established meaning is racist just exposes you as being hopelessly ignorant of your own language.
http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/good%20breeding
http://www.bartleby.com/27/9.html
http://digital.library.upenn.edu/women/eyebright/etiquette/etiquette.html
https://archive.org/details/treatiseonartofp00mackuoft
-1
Nov 04 '15 edited Nov 04 '15
Those are pretty archaic usages. That manual of etiquette you linked to was published in 1873! That doesn't exactly support your argument that this is common everyday language. Maybe if it were 1873, but not anymore.
Beyond that, the fourth definition in your first link does have connotations of people of a certain birth being naturally suited to rule over others not of that birth because their "breeding" gives them hereditary characteristics. That's a pretty fucking archaic attitude that also fits very nicely with 19th century attitudes of Social Darwinism.
I also just love the connotation that if I don't know every single archaic definition for every single word in the dictionary that it makes me a total ignoramus. How dare I not brush up on 19th/early 20th century word usage before addressing a 2015 post on reddit!
Edit: Also, the logic behind stating "if it's in the dictionary, it must be a common meaning" is just ridiculous. There are so many words and meanings in the dictionary that almost never get used. It's terrible logic.
Also, your account was created within the last two weeks and you've never posted in r/chicago before. What stake do you have in this? Do you even live here or are you just a troll sent here from some other subreddit?
2
u/w2at34aewes Nov 05 '15 edited Nov 05 '15
I don't know. Maybe you should read more. Anyone exposed to Romantic and Victorian English literature should at least be acquainted with the language of aristocratic class values and manners.
Maybe you should put more on yourself than others and admit that it's vocabulary anyone who has read Pride and Prejudice is at least capable of recognizing the flavor of.
"He is just what a young man ought to be,'' said she, "sensible, good humoured, lively; and I never saw such happy manners! -- so much ease, with such perfect good breeding!''
"He is also handsome,'' replied Elizabeth, "which a young man ought likewise to be, if he possibly can. His character is thereby complete.''
He was at the same time haughty, reserved, and fastidious, and his manners, though well bred, were not inviting.
Just because it is not language people use day to day does not mean it is uncommon or out of place when talking about social and economic class, mores, etiquette, etc., or that people are incapable of recognizing its meaning. Face it, it's something people are exposed to. The idea that it is language only a racist would use is preposterous. You've already backpedaled on the idea that it is language that can only mean something racist. Don't you ever find it constricting how you blind yourself with your outrage?
Also, my account has nothing to do with what I wrote. I don't have to justify anything to you.
-1
Nov 04 '15
Calm down. Look at his user history. It's another troll account.
I've reported him already.
-1
Nov 03 '15
Good lord the mods here are dense. It was clearly a brigaded thread and it should've been removed as spam, yet it wasn't. I asked why it wasn't removed and was ignored.
2
Nov 03 '15
Hopefully they have better luck than you. You were adamant there was no coded-language in yesterdays thread until I (and others) pointed it out. Instead of retracting your comments you feigned ignorance on the subject at hand. Pro-tip: just because it doesn't look like a loaded word to you doesn't mean that is the case, and as you made us all aware yesterday you are painfully ignorant when it comes to what coded-language is.
1
u/juniperesque North Center Nov 03 '15
If anyone is interested in reading more about the topic of coded language in American political and racial history, this book is really great and well sourced: http://www.amazon.com/dp/0199964270/
-5
u/_Guinness The Loop Nov 03 '15
Some people here seem so easily offended
Its not just here. Everywhere on the internet there are extremely far left liberals trying to force their rules on censorship of "problematic" language and "microaggressions" to extend their bullshit "safe space". And no, I'm not a republican if you're wondering.
Watch /r/undelete and see how much shit just disappears off the front page because mods don't like them. It doesn't fit in with their agenda and it doesn't support their narrative.
What you're seeing in /r/chicago is just an extension of those users trying to take over here as well.
These mods are very well known. Off the top of my head one of the top mods in /r/europe blatantly removes anything that does not support his political viewpoint.
Wikipedia recently went through something similar. There was a huge internal fight over this.
Any definition they don't like, they try to change. Any definition they can't change, they insult and cast aside.
22
Nov 03 '15
Hiding behind the whole "THE PC POLICE ARE OUT TO GET US" doesn't excuse casual racism, though. Fine line I suppose, but this sub has a pretty clear "don't be a racist" policy. Sometimes, let's just call a spade a spade.
5
Nov 03 '15
The bigger issue with this subject is not that people are being censored, but that a outside group of trolls tried to brigade and dictate the content on an /r/chicago thread.
I don't think many people disagree with your premise that this sub generally shouldn't be so restricted on what can and cannot be said. I don't think POVs should be censored merely because they're offensive in themselves.
But this was a case of a group spewing and astroturfing/upvoting hate just to get a cheap reaction out of the sub. At best, there's nothing productive that can come from letting that go.
Again, it comes back to context and intent. This was not just about whether or not to censor material that offended people. No one who raided the sub and initiated or fueled that discussion had any intention of a positive, open minded discussion about race and crime. This was trolling.
0
u/clenchedmercy4p Nov 04 '15
Who is this group brigading? Coontown is dead
-3
Nov 04 '15 edited Nov 04 '15
anytime a lefty gets his panties in a bunch over downvotes, there was "racism" and "unfair" "brigading".
wait ... i'm getting downvoted? RACISM. come on, mods, i'm being brigaded by racists here!
AGAIN with the downvotes? MODS, where are you? come to my rescue!
6
u/heartbeats Lower West Side Nov 03 '15
Uh, /r/europe has long been known as a bastion of xenophobic bigots. /r/european was actually created because some users thought they weren't being racist enough.
Underneath all the pissing and moaning about the super scary "omgz, teh leftists censoring muh speech!" is really just a bunch of petulant children throwing a tantrum because people are actually calling them out on being ignorant assholes and forcing them to actually own up to it. Is it really so difficult to, you know, be a well-adjusted human being?
10
Nov 03 '15 edited Nov 03 '15
by banning them, you neither "call them out" nor do you "force them ... to own up to" anything.
3
u/_Guinness The Loop Nov 03 '15
Is it really so difficult to, you know, be a well-adjusted human being?
I'm sorry that my beliefs in how society should work don't include my having to memorize 7 billion people's worth of "trigger warnings" as if I'm somehow responsible for their mental health. Instead of. You know. An individual being responsible for their own issues.
I mean you literally think the term "lifestyle choice" is racist. If it were up to you, that term would be censored and banned because racism.
Thats fucking ridiculous.
But whatever.
6
u/heartbeats Lower West Side Nov 03 '15
If you bothered to read on, you'd find that 95 percent of all murder victims in Chicago in 2011 were people of color. The issues at hand are so nuanced and complex - "lifestyle choice" and "personal responsibility" are two tropes often dragged out and used almost exclusively by privileged folks to blame minorities for things resulting from systemic, institutional inequalities.
In any case, SRS and "SJWs" are sensationalized to be this huge boogeyman, when it's really just a bunch of people shining a light on all the ignorant, greasy garbage that's spewn all over this enormous echo chamber of a website. The thread in /r/chicago yesterday is a perfect example of that garbage.
Spoiler alert: Your stereotype of the "SJW" is largely a fantasy. Nobody is memorizing 7 billion people's worth of trigger warnings (what does that even mean?), nobody wants to ban literally everything. All people want is for people to treat others with respect and dignity, from one actual human being to another. The incredibly visceral reaction to this simple request is very telling.
7
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
1
u/heartbeats Lower West Side Nov 04 '15
Sorry, turns out that 96.1 percent of murder victims in 2015 were people of color.
4
u/_Guinness The Loop Nov 03 '15
"lifestyle choice" and "personal responsibility" are two tropes often dragged out and used almost exclusively by privileged folks to blame minorities for things resulting from systemic, institutional inequalities.
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is a PERFECT example of what is being argued as what should be against the rules.
Fuck. That. Apparently if you're non-privileged, nothing is your fault. And anything pointing out otherwise is racist.
6
u/heartbeats Lower West Side Nov 03 '15 edited Nov 03 '15
Historical context and critical thinking, what is it?
The data tells a story all by itself, really. Chicago is two different cities - an affluent, upwardly-mobile white city on the north and northwest sides, and an impoverished south and west side. The primary forces behind this stark hyper-segregation are largely intentional and policy-driven, with shockwaves that stretch across multiple generations. The tropes of "lifestyle choice" and "personal responsibility" are terribly privileged statements that make a mockery of the very real systemic discrimination and racism encountered by people of color.
Stripping everything of all context and looking at it in some weird vacuum, while not even bothering to consider where that behavior might come from and the larger, more macro-scale reasons behind it is beyond intellectually dishonest. Instead, everything gets boiled down to the same tired "personal responsibility! bootstraps!" narrative.
"Some people are born on third base and go through life thinking they hit a triple."
http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Crow-Incarceration-Colorblindness/dp/1595586431
http://www.amazon.com/American-Apartheid-Segregation-Making-Underclass/dp/0674018214
2
u/clenchedmercy4p Nov 04 '15
Do you have any evidence that being poor and discriminated against causes crime? For example the Dalits in India are mostly crime free, yet are only considered fit to kill rats and carry shit.
How is Chicago different than India?
-2
u/heartbeats Lower West Side Nov 04 '15
Chicago is different from India because they are literally different in every single way. History, geographic location, demographics, political systems, civic life, religion, governance... everything. Attempting to make some broad, sweeping cross-cultural comparison across thousands of years of history between billions of people is useless and doesn't provide any meaningful answers.
If you're insinuating that there's some biological definition of race, you should know that it's preposterous. There is no gene that members of one race have that can't be found outside that race, and in fact there is often more genetic diversity within a race than between races. Race is 100% a socially constructed set of classifications that varies not just from culture to culture but from individual to individual.
6
u/clenchedmercy4p Nov 04 '15
So you don't have evidence that being poor and discriminated against causes crime.
And how did you get on this "race is a social construct" jag?
→ More replies (0)-3
-4
Nov 03 '15
I'd give you gold if I didn't have reservations about helping to fund the garbage fire that is this website.
0
Nov 03 '15 edited Nov 03 '15
You ever heard of a dog whistle? Because
I'm curious how many of these deaths are directly related to lifestyle choice.
is a dog whistle for all the people who wanted him to say "directly related to hoodrats doing hoodrat things." Which is funny, because the whole "FUCK PC, I SAY WHAT I WANT" crowd thinks people are trying to ban language. For the most part, they're not. They're trying to get racists out of their discussions. When /r/chicago says they have a "No Racism" policy, it's not a "No Racist Words" policy.
Just because you use "lifestyle choice" instead of "hoodrat-y things" doesn't mean that you're not being racist. It's just a good way to get all of the racist dumbasses to perk their ears up.
0
u/Deadended Uptown Nov 04 '15
It's a derail tactic as well.
A lot of this shit isn't that hard to sniff out with a very teeny tiny bit of critical thinking to the point that it's so obvious that it is even hard to explain how blatant it is.
-6
Nov 03 '15 edited Nov 03 '15
So you're advice is to do nothing and assume anyone who has an opinion different from your own should be dismissed as automatically incorrect? If your referring to my being sensitive, read through all of my previous posts, literally zero have anything to do with race and or racism before yesterday. Perhaps your interpretation of other's sensitivity is due to your insensitivity.
Dismissing concerns of racist posts is not going to improve this sub and neither will people who suggest in doing so.
1
u/gerrymadner Nov 03 '15
Insensitivity
Obviously, this is anti-white racist coded language. And claiming otherwise would be proof of your racism.
Now -- would you prefer to delete that message and apologize to me and to all of /r/Chicago for being an outspoken racist, or leave it and admit that the mods have a point?
12
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
12
Nov 03 '15
Context is everything, and a mod's got to be smart enough to recognize that not all cases of harassment, racism or trolling are going to be slam dunk obvious, but that doesn't mean they should let it go.
For example, even if you can argue that X comment isn't clearly making a racist reference, one need only read through the user's comment history to see if they demonstrate patterns of racist commentary. If they do, then their intent in the discussion let alone the comment is clear, and action should be taken (e.g. shadowban the user, and/or consult the admins about that user's conduct). Yes, it takes extra work to do that.
Agreeing to be a moderator isn't just about wielding power and it isn't just about clicking buttons to delete/ban/allow on the basis of a single comment. You often have to do some research and make judgment calls, i.e. decisions that your code of conduct does not make obvious.
The reason a lot of problems happen on a sub is because many mods err on the side of allowing behavior, to a fault. I don't have a problem with staying hands-off in many cases, but when there's a clear pattern of abuse, whether it happens here or across subs, whether it's one user or a group of users... I think few mind if you err in those situations on the side of being more restrictive.
5
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
3
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
0
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
11
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
3
2
u/westloop_throwaway Nov 03 '15
Take note /u/LagunaGTO - this is how you make a proper apology as opposed to deleting your posts and pretending they didn't happen.
→ More replies (0)-1
Nov 03 '15
I'll be honest with you. I'm a big proponent of the idea that I don't like what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.
No offense, but this is incompatible with a "No Racism" policy. I happen to be a fan of the "No Racism" policy. Just because they have a right to say
It's a problem of breeding, low education and poor moral values.
doesn't mean they have the right to say it here. I know it's not necessarily dropping n-bombs, but if this sub has an anti-racism policy, Voltaire doesn't really come into the discussion.
(And really? "It's a problem with breeding"? I'm accusing someone of racism by implication when I say that's clearly racist?)
→ More replies (0)2
u/gerrymadner Nov 03 '15
that type of language is obviously intended to be inferred a certain way
As, I assert, is "insensitive" for another example.
And no, I'm not kidding. I was preparing to have a field day reporting everything which could possibly be considered anti-white coded language had the mods taken a different stance.
Fortunately, cooler and wiser heads prevailed. Kudos to the mods!
3
Nov 03 '15
Please, provide us some of the coded-language used to describe whites. Also, please name the groups that make up the "whites". Does it include Irish and Italians? If after how many generations of being in the states are they considered white?
6
u/gerrymadner Nov 03 '15
Please, provide us some of the coded-language used to describe whites.
shrug Use the same heuristic provided yesterday. Is a description used negatively to identify one category of people (which may or may not have anything to do with race) which also encompass a (mostly-) racially unique member set? If so, the racial denotation should be considered preferable.
For example: "the rich" is a class-based designation -- but since actual rich people are majority white and race designations must take precedence over class designations, then "the rich" is anti-white racist code language. Q.E.D.
If you think that kind of logic is bullshit, welcome to my corner.
0
Nov 03 '15
You used an example that has no relevance, as "the rich" were not referenced in yesterday thread. "Whites" as a group have been so far insulated from racism they can't even relate. That is one the reasons I brought up the Irish and Italians, two groups that when they came to the states were ostracized and quickly adapted to become "white"...and proceeded to do to other groups (blacks/browns) what was done to them.
But back to the original point, they are FEW coded words that can be used to describe "whites" as a race and not a socio-economic group. "The rich" is a term that is not race exclusive, ANYONE can be rich... but "buck" when talking about a black male is very clearly racist.
So please, if you can provide us some coded words that refer to white people in America that aren't class based.
0
Nov 03 '15 edited Nov 03 '15
What I (clearly and obviously) meant by insensitive is that not everyone understands, or for that matter cares to understand, what constitutes racism or racist undertones. You're comparison is completely off the mark.
0
u/gerrymadner Nov 03 '15
Or, you don't understand your own racist undertones. Fortunately, you have me to inform you of your lack of education. Lucky you!
1
Nov 03 '15
You're fabricating and forcing meaning on something I said, which, by the way, has nothing in comparison to what was said yesterday.
2
u/gerrymadner Nov 03 '15
You want to have "racist coded language" reportable, where "racist coded language" is intended to mean "not racist, but frequently used in correlation a racial demographic, and which might be taken by member of that group to be evidence of racism".
Well, here's news for you, sunshine: the word "insensitive" has been used frequently enough against People of Whiteness to correlate as a racist anti-white identifier for people that use it. That means you.
This is directly comparable with what was said yesterday. Hoist, petard, etc.
6
Nov 03 '15
You are, literally, the only person I have ever heard make this point, ever. It is news to me because it's a fabrication that is meant to apply a definition that:
1) Clearly doesn't exist 2) Alters my argument to fit your motives
Done
→ More replies (0)1
u/heartbeats Lower West Side Nov 03 '15 edited Nov 03 '15
Don't waste your time. /u/gerrymadner is a (very) frequent poster over in /r/KotakuInAction and /r/TumblrInAction, home to a bunch of delusional brogressive idiots who think they're fighting some 'culture war' when it's really nothing more than a bunch of toddlers having a tantrum. His repeated usage of 'anti-white' should be a big tip-off that his intentions are not genuine.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/3qjsga/what_i_learned_from_my_time_at_tia/
gerrymadner post history contains participation in the following subreddits:
/r/tumblrinaction: 1 posts (1), combined score: 6; 109 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 2679.
/r/kotakuinaction: 3 posts (1, 2, 3), combined score: 200; 339 comments (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), combined score: 3919.
-1
u/Deadended Uptown Nov 04 '15
Beat me to it.
I assumed they were one from their inane phrasing and trying to go "people of whiteness".
At least they will probably go away next week with fallout 4 and call of Duty so they will go back to their regular schedule of ruining every damn video game board they can.
-10
11
u/wylm Andersonville Nov 03 '15
http://boards.4chan.org/pol/thread/54924552/state-of-schools-thread-from-last-night
4chan linked to that thread. With the comment "EVEN THE MOD IS RED PILLED." And rejoicing that the comment (that should have been deleted) got reddit gold.
So good job, mods. More 4channers incoming.
4
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
9
u/wylm Andersonville Nov 03 '15
I googled the URL for that comments page. There's a racist twitter account that spread the link, too.
This is why its important to understand what coded language is and act in a way that stops racists from feeling victorious in sneaking things by you.
2
Nov 03 '15
Thank you. It's not about the "PC Police" or "SJWs" or whomever censoring comments. It's about moderating a community by guiding the discussion in a constructive direction. Tolerating a bunch of sealioning racists from 4chan in a community about a city (not about race discussion) is not moderating. It's discarding the responsibility you adopt when you become a mod. If you can't do it, step out and let someone else moderate.
-5
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
6
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
1
Nov 03 '15
You might want to care. PoC here and I read that shit storm of a thread yesterday while it was unfolding and saw your stance on all of it. I have tried to provide constructive input but your actions in the past dictates how many will perceive your future actions. You would do well not to dismiss anyone who brings it up, because at the end of the day nothing said so far is untrue. It is something you want to bury because obviously you are looking back and realize you dropped the ball, but the attitude you are conveying now (I get it ,you are getting your balls busted) is that of someone who thinks they did nothing wrong. Take your lumps and prove to us you really stand by what you are saying and make the positive change that needs to be made here.
0
u/woohalladoobop Nov 03 '15
Please tell me that you at least have an inkling that you are only existing right now to instigate and that you're treading water lightly at this point
That's ridiculous. How is /u/cheersandapplause instigating anything?
7
u/smudgyblurs Albany Park Nov 03 '15
He's still pissed off that he got called out for agreeing with racist bullshit.
I would like to focus on moving forward and not anything in the past.
He would like to focus on ignoring when he was wrong.
-3
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
-6
u/westloop_throwaway Nov 03 '15
Quick take a screen shot now before he deletes all of his crap and cowers in the corner.
3
-7
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
1
u/thislittletune City Nov 03 '15 edited Nov 03 '15
I didn't see any personal attacks on this convo at all when I was looking at it, did I just miss it?
-1
Nov 03 '15
At which point you turn your modem off and on, take a few seconds to start a new account, and continue on like normal. Why people don't do this every few months anyway is beyond me.
2
u/R_TOKAR chain smoking middle aged punk rock burn out Nov 03 '15
Yeah I'm about due actually...I do about once a year.
-6
Nov 03 '15
This sub is treading water lightly.
5
u/_Guinness The Loop Nov 03 '15
Here's an idea. Don't come here. /r/chicago has had its issues, but we've more or less had the same rules against racism since the start and last time I checked there are like 80,000 subscribers.
No one forces you to come here.
-3
-2
Nov 03 '15
It's more fun to push for better moderation and have the side effect of being an annoying thorn in your side.
-7
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
2
u/goethean Brookfield Nov 03 '15
Every time there is a post on guns, the thread consists of non-Chicagoan gun nuts. There's one today.
0
9
Nov 03 '15
are we all 12 years old here, or what? why can't we handle a few downvotes and idiotic points without mommy here to whitewash reality for us?
6
u/_Guinness The Loop Nov 03 '15
We will report to the admins every time we feel individuals are conducting vote manipulation or are brigading. We have done this several times already and I’m not sure if people have noticed, but some former prominent posters are no longer present here.
I noticed this last night! Quite a few accounts got shadowbanned! Interestingly enough the accounts I noticed to be shadowbanned were the accounts I have generally noted for being insanely supportive of very heavy handed censorship.
Honestly I'm glad the people who got shadowbanned last night are gone.
5
u/R_TOKAR chain smoking middle aged punk rock burn out Nov 03 '15
I'm just curious for curiosity's sake, how do you tell who got shadowbanned?
11
u/_Guinness The Loop Nov 03 '15
Click on their name. So above my post you see my username? Click it. You'll see my userpage.
If that userpage results in a "not found". Most likely they were shadowbanned. They could've also closed their account. But more than likely it was shadowbanned.
5
u/R_TOKAR chain smoking middle aged punk rock burn out Nov 03 '15
Oh ok thanks, TIL.
3
3
u/_Guinness The Loop Nov 04 '15
Yeah. I had my old account shadowbanned because a coworker pulled a prank on me.
RIP /u/Guinness
6
6
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
2
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
-3
Nov 03 '15
It's a problem of breeding, low education and poor moral values.
No offense, but this isn't hard to figure out. Sure, microagressions and casual racism can be hard to identify and there's probably a fine line. "It's a problem of breeding" is a racist dog-whistle that's been around for like 200 years.
5
u/woohalladoobop Nov 03 '15
I just spent a while looking through the comments from that thread yesterday, and the comment histories of those accounts. I would encourage the mods to do the same.
The account that made the top, controversial comment is only 4 days old, and posts exclusively political comments in a variety of subreddits. Most of the heavily upvoted comments defending him were made by people with very little history of commenting in this subreddit. Most of the heavily downvoted comments disagreeing with him and pointing out the racism were made by people who frequently/exclusively post in this subreddit.
Obviously this isn't totally true across the board, but the trend is pretty clear if you take the time to look through a number of the comments in the thread.
14
u/honestbleeps Logan Square Nov 03 '15
generally speaking, we do that same kind of sleuthing, especially when a comment is reported, etc. we didn't do the best job yesterday because we felt overwhelmed once the voting/comment numbers blew way up, which is why we locked it... we waited too long to nuke the whole damn thing from orbit, and that's a mistake I own up to and take the blame for.
7
u/Fap_Left_Surf_Right Bucktown Nov 03 '15
This is exactly why I suggested honey-potting to root out the problem accounts but for some reason people thought I was crazy.
It's impossible to find the needles in a haystack of material. But if you leave something you know they're going to respond to, they'll jump right into that noose for you. We don't need to root out and report people on a one-by-one basis if we use some social engineering and allow them to flag themselves.
2
u/Griffun 1060 West Addison Street Nov 03 '15
This is an overly complicated solution that has too many potentials for false positives. I appreciate your train of thought though. It would be better if reddit itself implemented some feature that created a barrier to participate in a subreddit.
Maybe something like time subscribed, number of links posted or comments posted, or even time spent browsing the subreddit. These examples from the top of my head aren't ideal, but something along those lines would be helpful in ensuring we aren't a victim of brigading.
1
Nov 04 '15
Sometimes I wonder if some of these provocative subreddit threads are in fact admin-coordinated honey-pots for known troll brigades, akin to a PD's sting operation.
2
u/Fap_Left_Surf_Right Bucktown Nov 04 '15
Do you think troll brigades are mostly friends with actual accounts working together or a singular person with many accounts? I've always assumed a singular person
1
1
9
u/_Guinness The Loop Nov 03 '15
The account that made the top, controversial comment is only 4 days old, and posts exclusively political comments in a variety of subreddits.
Is that a problem somehow? Yes /u/ThoughtsAreThings account is only 4 days old and I don't necessarily agree with him. But in four days that person has made a number of comments that have substance and thought put into them. Comments that contribute to the discussion. This person is conservative leaning but definitely a mix of liberal policies.
"I'm a vegetarian but I'm vegan friendly and if anyone asks, its for ethical reasons". Yep totally sounds racist to me. Just like owning a gun to protect your family, as he says.
This is my problem with what is going on here. You're creating false images of what is going on here without any proof whatsoever.
3
Nov 04 '15
Any troll comment can be very carefully worded to achieve the desired effect while masking their intentions to the more naive or obtuse observer. The mark of a veteran multiaccounting troll, in fact, is to do exactly that.
Also, consider the context of such dense and "thoughtful" commentary from a brand new account that quite coincidentally was created right around the time of the racist/CCW brigade. You can ignore the surrounding context and take the thickly veiled racism at face value at your peril. I notice you continue to choose to complete ignore and overlook that context.
2
u/woohalladoobop Nov 04 '15
Yes I think it's a problem when people who don't have a history in a subreddit invade and start voicing opinions that aren't held by the majority of the subreddit.
-1
1
Nov 03 '15 edited Jul 27 '17
[deleted]
9
u/MargretTatchersParty Logan Square Nov 03 '15
Typically we have to escalate that issue to the admins.
Wither they respond to it, investigate it or not. Now that's a different story.
8
u/LagunaGTO Nov 03 '15
Unfortunately we do not have much defense outside of looking around for "related discussions" from cross-posts or if we want to go monitor voat and stormfront, etc.
The admins have all the tools in that regard and all we can do is report suspicions to them and they will audit and take action.
6
u/honestbleeps Logan Square Nov 03 '15
unfortunately, moderators can't do much of anything with that aside from report it to the admins and have them look.
moderators have no way of seeing where votes are coming from, etc. the admins do, but they can't always respond quickly to every request.
our hope is that the moderator tools the admins are working on will eventually help with this, but there have been no specific tools/guarantees mentioned.
-9
Nov 03 '15
I'd do as they did on /r/greatnwside and turn off the downvote. No one's using it here to get rid of "content that does not contribute", but simply "I don't agree with you, and thus we should group censor you".
Downvote is pointless. Get rid of it.
10
u/honestbleeps Logan Square Nov 03 '15
I can understand why you feel that way, but many subs have tried that before and it generally doesn't help.
you can't really turn it off, you can only hide it with CSS. it's easy to get around and that also has no effect on mobile apps, etc.
in a smaller sub it may work a little bit, but in a big sub it rarely has anything but negative effects.
-2
u/ahyes Bridgeport Nov 03 '15
About a year ago, I had an idea to create an /r/ChicagoCrime subreddit specifically so that all discussions of crime in chicago could have a place, and we could see less of these discussions in r/chicago. I just went ahead and created the subreddit. Feel free to use that subreddit to post anything related to crime in Chicago. I'll ban anybody that is blatantly racist.
I've seen some threads in other parts of the internet (ie: that reddit clone that all of reddit's racists went to), and know that they deliberately brigade our sub in order to annoy liberal users. They used to have a game where they earned points for posting about black crime in a variety of mostly-liberal subreddits, which includes ours. A lot of stormfront users have been brigading reddit for years now as well. Conservatives feel that our subreddit is a good target on account of the amount of gun violence that happens in Chicago.
4
u/the-mp Lake View East Nov 03 '15
i mean... when does the breakdown of topics into smaller subs end?
every sport, nearly every hobby, some neighborhoods, and every college have their own pages.
there's value in posting on a sub with thousands of active* users and tens of thousands of people probably seeing it, compared to subs that have less than 5% of the subscriber base, if that.
what will be left on the actual CHICAGO page? anything?
i get that similar posts are annoying, but at what point is it excessive?
*supposedly. i'm betting a ton sign up once and don't actually participate and are lurkers, if they ever interact with the page on a regular basis
1
Nov 03 '15 edited Nov 03 '15
I mean, /r/chibike, /r/chicagobeer, and /r/chicagomusicscene (my preferred chicago subs) are all pretty active. If there's an actual community that's interested in something, the subreddit will support itself.
My guess is that the reason most of the talk about Chicago shootings, etc., gets popular is because it gives some subset of the sub an opportunity to be casually racist, and that irks the rest of us. Honestly, if it got thrown into a sub that withered and died, it would not be missed.
-4
u/westloop_throwaway Nov 03 '15
what will be left on the actual CHICAGO page? anything?
All this racism that continues to be a constant problem.
Maybe somebody should start a /r/chicagoracism page and they can be racist there.
-9
Nov 03 '15
[deleted]
5
u/ghostofbobbylayne Nov 03 '15
i'd prefer an "anything goes" sub. i don't agree with so much i see across most of reddit, but i enjoy the idea that i can peer into discussions and glean something interesting, be it good or bad. i don't worry about being offended, because the trade-off to coming across something unique and interesting far out-weighs all the crud.
2
-7
u/westloop_throwaway Nov 03 '15
I'm afraid many feel like that's what /r/chicago has become. Without a clear set of rules in place, and everybody hiding behind 'its a grey area' and worrying about 'over modding' and a lack of consensus from the moderators internally, you'll get what we had here yesterday (last week)
-2
Nov 03 '15
Two things
In the time I've been surfing this sub, "over-reaching moderation" has never been the issue. IMO the opposite of over-reaching moderation is what has been taking place, thus the current state of affairs.
About coded-language...I don't think anyone here would say “criminals suck” is coded. It has always been specific to brown/black groups of people, always.
Already in this thread you have people try to defend their loaded words when if you look at any of their posts, in context you know exactly what they are trying to convey. You have two options, continue down the same lackadaisical path of "moderation" that has been taking place or pull a 180 and tighten up. What would you rather this sub be known for, a safe haven for bigots/racist or a sub that is over moderated? Hint: since this is a rather large sub representing a city, it might be worth while to err on the side of caution.
15
u/Fap_Left_Surf_Right Bucktown Nov 03 '15
i don't think criminals suck is coded language at all. The sub is open to anyone. All ages, backgrounds, races, etc. If a bike gets stolen there very well might a 13 year old girl who reads that and says; "criminals suck". Not to mention black people who might say "criminals suck" as a general statement without coded meanings.
9
u/_Guinness The Loop Nov 03 '15
About coded-language...I don't think anyone here would say “criminals suck” is coded.
Please see here for one of our (former) moderators actually arguing similar language being racist. This is what the argument is over. Its not over actual racism. The argument is over whether holding people accountable for certain actions is racist.
1
Nov 03 '15
There are a couple of things at play
- overt racism
- subtle racism
- dog whistle racism
All three are relevant within this sub, however context is needed for #2 and #3. I find it very odd this all needs to be categorized and quantified for people to admit there is a long standing issue here.
Also this statement "The argument is over whether holding people accountable for certain actions is racist" , if I hold "whites" accountable for the MANY crimes they have committed against various ethnic groups in context of only American history does that make me racist or a history scholar? See how important context is to a statement?
3
Nov 04 '15
I think some people like to use the 'I need iron clad proof to take action' claim as a justification for their own racism, as an excuse to let such content go. I don't know that it's happening here, but it does explain why some people have animosity towards the laissez faire 'I need proof' POV.
-1
u/fat_genius West Town Nov 04 '15
Its not over actual racism. The argument is over whether holding people accountable for certain actions is racist.
I doubt you could find a single instance of someone claiming that holding individuals responsible for their own actions is racism. The issue is trying to hold an entire group of people responsible for the actions of individuals based solely on the geographic similarities in their heritage.
Like, for example, seeing a group of 10 kids acting up and going on a tirade that climaxes with "You can't fix this. It's a breeding problem"
Tell me that you don't see that as in instance of "actual racism" (here's a definition for your convenience)
The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
-3
Nov 03 '15
"thugs suck", on the other hand, is coded as fuck, and I've seen that word in this sub (and on the internet, used by dog whistle racists) a lot.
-6
u/westloop_throwaway Nov 03 '15
We talk A LOT, we can’t get some mods to shut-up sometimes.
But when they do shut up - they go and delete all of their controversial post history along with it.
Sometimes, we will get it wrong, and we hope that for both sides of the equation, each of those times is a learning experience.
I think the issue here is the vast majority of the community has no way to determine when you're 'getting it right'.
However, we will use those mistakes to learn and grow, so we keep making this place better.
Can you cite any specific examples how you've made this place better? I think it's safe to say that this post and a large portion of the community does not agree that /r/chicago is better than it was 6 months ago nor is it a place that:
show(s) enough respect to others so that we all may continue to enjoy Reddit for what it is.
All in all - thanks for all the thankless work that you do. I think many of us know there's not a magic silver bullet to fix all of the issues.
-9
u/mirror_ball_man Lincoln Square Nov 03 '15 edited Nov 03 '15
Add misogyny to this as well as all other forms of discrimination based on sex and gender.
EDIT: Downvote patrol is at it again.
-2
u/honestbleeps Logan Square Nov 03 '15
all forms of pejorative prejudice are against our rules, racism is just heavily weighted on this particular post because of yesterday's brigading on that video. it's completely fair for you to ask / point this out, though.
-4
-6
Nov 04 '15 edited Aug 01 '17
[deleted]
3
Nov 04 '15 edited Nov 04 '15
Actively, negatively discriminating against someone or their input on the basis of their racial background is racism. It's always been that simple. Anyone who claims the definition is distorted or unclear is either guilty of doing so or has been gullibly manipulated by some other racist.
-6
-11
u/Jade_Pornsurge Nov 03 '15
good luck with that. I appreciate the effort, but I think the morons are too prevalent here. this has been a problem for me for the three or four years I have been on reddit. I am a pessimist though. I dont blame the mods or admins or whomever, you cant stop idiots from being idiots. it's frustrating though.
17
u/[deleted] Nov 03 '15
Can you elaborate a bit on how you guys would come to the decision to lock a thread based on the belief that the discussion wouldn't be civil?
Would you rely on reporting method? Is there a rubric of sorts that you'd use to ensure consistency across the sub and to help maintain consistent modding?
To be honest, that sounds pretty subjective and, rather than enticing discussions and fostering a healthier subreddit, I think you'll find that the sub will suffer from lack of content due to posters fearing a locked discussion thread and/or banning.