As the smack Jeeves thread had started to get derailed I thought I'd make this thread.
To be honest, although I understand why Amelius got upset with the direction the thread took, no conversation stays on topic, it grows and goes off in tangents and you can't control it and it's even worse the more people who get involved, hence this thread.

That derailment was interesting and the reactions said a lot about how online communities tend to work, or is it fail to work? What I've generally found here on DD is that it's generally pretty good at maintaining a decent level, sure there are arguments on occasion, or used to be considering how quiet it is nowadays, but rarely have I seen things get nasty.

Comic fury, back when DD was suffering I went to comic fury for a bit and got involved in the forums there, it was alright for a bit aside from the a few people but it did get very nasty, two ex DD users in particular were very abusive towards people and got away with it for ages because the moderators liked them. There was a definite clique there, and if you didn't agree with that you were pretty much bullied. I saw one user, who I believe had been posting happily from long before I visited managed to get picked on because someone didn't like the content of his comic. I can't remember the comic in question but it involved a far bit of soft porn I think. Also I seem to remember the user did have some views I didn't agree with but that's not the point. Anyway, someone took a dislike to his work and got abusive and a few others joined in, any attempt the guy made to defend himself made it worse. They even posted what I assume we're faked images of a zoophile website with his profile name and picture on it. I assume faked because it used the exact picture and name he used of comic fury. The ones who did that didn't get permanently banned, I'm not even sure they got a ban at all. The user who was bullied, I don't know if they left or were banned or maybe just went quiet.
I remember I got a warning because I replied to an obviously Spam thread with a Monty python joke about spam. I kid you not.
Anyway comic fury is a decent site, don't get me wrong, and I'm sure most of the users are nice people but forums were far too badly moderated and there wasn't room for anything key users don't like, people who agreed could be as abusive as they liked but disagree it's a different matter. I have no idea if it's the same now. Kyo made a great site but sadly struggled with the moderation and tolerance.

As for cancel culture, that's just another form of extremism. You don't agree with me you should not have a voice or a job or anything you're disgusting and everyone should hate you.

Genejoke wrote:

Comic fury, back when DD was suffering I went to comic fury for a bit and got involved in the forums there, it was alright for a bit aside from the a few people but it did get very nasty, two ex DD users in particular were very abusive towards people and got away with it for ages because the moderators liked them.

And it's worth pointing out these two were already banned from this site before they went over there. The suggestion that we were all a bunch of outlaws deserving of summary execution is a slight distortion of events in my opinion!

I don't know what the regime is there now and we certainly had no problems to begin with. It was only after a sudden badly managed change in policy that the bans started. Prior to that I've seen and experienced the most extraordinary abuse over there and the users concerned were not banned. I don't want to be too hard on the guy; he was young at the time and clearly not experienced in managing a community.

Sounds awful :(

Managing communities can be really hard.
Back in the day I was asked several times to come over and help moderate…
But I didn't want to. I liked it here and splitting energy across sites and learning new systems and people didn't appeal.

I've been a bad moderator at times. I like to think I learned better…

I prefer it now where we're all pretty much equal and it's not a hierarchy. I hated being seen as and treated as the mod instead of just another normal member of the site. I considered resigning many many times, but my passion for keeping things going was too great.

Definitely inexperienced. I mean look at El cids example, I mean sure I get that some might not like his analogy but better to call him up on it or just say not cool and explain why, but to threaten with the ban hammer straight away is a bit extreme. It also made me laugh that they said to use theft of murder instead, I'd say murder is a bit more serious, even if victims are far less likely to be reading. Also I'd say it's important for people to be able to cope with comments like that, insensitivity happens. What isn't hurtful or confrontational to one person can be to another and even trying not to offend you'll probably upset someone. I'd much rather someone say something that is sensationalist and insensitive rather than malicious and mean spirited, and that is where I think a lot of people go wrong.

ozoneocean wrote:
Managing communities can be really hard.
Back in the day I was asked several times to come over and help moderate…
But I didn't want to. I liked it here and splitting energy across sites and learning new systems and people didn't appeal.

I've been a bad moderator at times. I like to think I learned better…

I prefer it now where we're all pretty much equal and it's not a hierarchy. I hated being seen as and treated as the mod instead of just another normal member of the site. I considered resigning many many times, but my passion for keeping things going was too great.

I think you did alright at it, so kudos to you. I think a lot of it comes down to not taking sides too much.

The funny thing is, no one in the thread where I made that comment (which was dead-on, and awesome) really took issue with it. I mean, the other guy wanted to disagree with me, obviously, but that's fine; that's the whole point of it. It generated discussion and an examination of thought.

That seems to be the case more often than not: when people want to shut you down on behalf of someone else, because you're going to offend them or something, usually the people in question aren't actually offended at all and are perfectly open to examining ideas like rational adults. They're just used as cover by people who don't want the conversation to happen, or at least don't want your voice being a part of it.

There's a definite aspect of wanting to shut people down in cases like that, the faux moral outrage thing can be a useful tool.

Confirmation bias. The mind is made up and nothing that is said can change it. Everything is judged based on a preexisting belief system and only things fitting and confirming that belief system are accepted. Only things confirming the preexisting belief system are ever consulted. The echo chamber effect. So only what a human desires to hear, that confirms what is already believed is accepted as proof for the preexisting belief. One always only finds what one wants to.

Happens in science as has been demonstrated in a few journals recently. Peer reviewers were duped by total bullshit papers because of technical jargon and a desire to believe in what was proven (or not) in the paper.

It's a nature of any belief system. Gew people actively test reality as opposed to blindly following their feelings and perceptions. Let alone constantly questioning their beliefs.

Cognitive dissonance. Whatever doesn't agree with what is already believed is ignored, dismissed or disregarded often on the flimsiest, irrational and illogical reasons. If not indeed resorting to actual fantasy.

This is more real than feelings and perceptions.

Cancel culture is exhausting. It's impossible to have an argument, let alone reach any sort of conclusion, even when there would be a good chance of that. It's often Ad Hominem Land too.

I'm not aware of the thread/occurence in Comic Fury. Somehow I could never get into the forums over there, so I was never within range, so to speak, of any nastiness. Even now I mostly use CF as a mirror/backup, and nothing more. Doesn't speak too well of the community there, to be sure, at least of that point in time.

However, banning should definitely be kept only for extremes and very clear cut pre-determined rules in the TOS even. I've been in heated arguments before on various forums but it never occurred to me to ask for a ban because the other user(s) were making me feel really bad (and on occasion, some have). That's part of life, to learn from and grow from.

Abuse should have very specific definitions or the term will end up losing its impact and significance.

I’m another Comic Fury ban and have to agree that Kyo is a bit obsessive compulsive, but also a very active and conscientious moderator. Comic Fury has a lot of great features that I don’t see anywhere else and that comes down to someone who is really “on top” of his web site. Plus, he respects the viewers to observe the Adult flags and doesn’t restrict non-members from viewing those pages.

I hate to say this, but I really miss a lot of the features that are on CF. I wasn’t very active on their forums, so I can’t speak to those issues.

My biggest problem was trying to promote my comix to existing subscribers. Most of my comic series are short stories about 25 pages each rather than 1,000s of pages with different chapters being added. So when I changed to another story, I needed a way to tell my existing subscribers that I started posting another story. I broke the rules and did this by using Private Messaging. Thus my banning.

The Duck has been a very good alternative and I’ve been very happy here. I’ll try to work within the rules here.

— Rick Rudge

Maybe instead of doing a bunch of separate comics, you could just do an ongoing anthology series?

El Cid wrote:
Maybe instead of doing a bunch of separate comics, you could just do an ongoing anthology series?

THIS is a very good idea!
When it doubt make them part of the same work. Readers are lazy, once they're onto something they like to stick with it.
I speak from my own experience as a reader!

Again, a warning rather than a ban would have been in order. But maybe he was getting cranky from dealing with bits? Meh!

Hey man, I know it's a rare thing for people to admit they're wrong on the internet, but here's an apology: it sounds like SOME bans weren't really justified, and I'm sorry that some people felt lumped in with some of the nasty X-DD'rs that stirred up crap over at CF. It seems there are some people that seem to get away with murder over there and it ain't cool. I don't believe in attacking people for their creative works they pour their heart into, no matter if it's my cup of tea or not (within reason of course because there is a line when it comes to kids) That's something they should definitely work on. Of course I've only been a lurker and not a member so who knows, maybe my experience will be different if I make an account to follow all the refujeeves.

However….

The funny thing is, no one in the thread where I made that comment (which was dead-on, and awesome) really took issue with it.

Absolutely despicable. I shouldn't dignify such an obvious troll…

Having an ounce of empathy is not a bad thing. Nobody is asking you to walk on eggshells. Do some people get offended over stupid crap? Some idiots tell people to tag pomegranates because it looks like gore to them, that doesn't mean you are free to say whatever horrible thing you want without consequence because you can't anticipate everyone's weird hangups. Nobody should just throw their hands up and say “guess I shouldn't even try not to be a bigot” and then act scandalized when people call them a bigot.

And I am NOT taking offense on other people's behalf, I explained to you why people get uncomfortable because you seemed incredulous that someone would be upset by your tasteless, nonsensical analogy. You realize there's a report option in the CF forums that people use to report comments? If you got warned that means someone DID take offense but didn't tell you to your face.

So about that… rape analogy I saw you making was different from the one you describe in the other thread, so unless you fudged details a little, it seems like you use rape an awful lot to try and get your points across. I'm not “triggered” or “offended” but I do find that quite a distasteful fixation. The fact that you call it “awesome” is frankly disgusting, but that's just you trying to “trigger” me, because you're a bully. Everyone's on your side though, so who cares what I think?

That aside, I simply don't crack the same kind of crass jokes I make with meatspace friends in front of older family members or young children, or when I'm at the store, or even in front of my internet friends. Nobody is trying to “shut you down”, they are asking that you mind other people in the process of posting on a public forum.

Amelius wrote:

However….

The funny thing is, no one in the thread where I made that comment (which was dead-on, and awesome) really took issue with it.

Absolutely despicable. I shouldn't dignify such an obvious troll…

Having an ounce of empathy is not a bad thing. Nobody is asking you to walk on eggshells. Do some people get offended over stupid crap? Some idiots tell people to tag pomegranates because it looks like gore to them, that doesn't mean you are free to say whatever horrible thing you want without consequence because you can't anticipate everyone's weird hangups. Nobody should just throw their hands up and say “guess I shouldn't even try not to be a bigot” and then act scandalized when people call them a bigot.

And I am NOT taking offense on other people's behalf, I explained to you why people get uncomfortable because you seemed incredulous that someone would be upset by your tasteless, nonsensical analogy. You realize there's a report option in the CF forums that people use to report comments? If you got warned that means someone DID take offense but didn't tell you to your face.

So about that… rape analogy I saw you making was different from the one you describe in the other thread, so unless you fudged details a little, it seems like you use rape an awful lot to try and get your points across. I'm not “triggered” or “offended” but I do find that quite a distasteful fixation. The fact that you call it “awesome” is frankly disgusting, but that's just you trying to “trigger” me, because you're a bully. Everyone's on your side though, so who cares what I think?

I know I'm probably stepping on a few toes here but I honestly take huge issue with the horrible analogy too. That's something INCREDIBLY sensitive to many people, whether they're a victim of it OR NOT.

In my experience a lot of the time people will make ridiculous analogies that really aren't necessary if they don't have a better way of winning an argument. Using shock or even personal statements is normally a sign that the argument has been lost on their side.

A better analogy to use, that's actually related to the subject of “illegally downloading an art program because pricing issues,” etc would have been saying “that's like someone becoming an artist's patron on patreon and releasing their private content to others either for free or for a cheaper price because others don't want to pay whatever amount per month/per creation/etc.”
There is never a reason to go down such a nasty and disgusting route. That is absolutely distasteful and I take Amelius' side on this particular subject 100%
Maybe think about using an analogy that isn't so nasty and something actually related to the subject at hand before going in with a shock value statement??

Um, I do appreciate the suggestions, but if you're trying to help me re-argue a discussion that happened on another site, six years ago… you're a bit late, and at the wrong url. I related the incident in the other discussion because it was a similar story to the others that were posted, and I thought it was funny.

And yes, you are walking on eggshells if you can't even use the word “rape” in a neutral sense. It would be one thing if you were making jokes about it, or justifying it, or something along those lines. That's pretty dickish. But using it objectively to illustrate a point (even if you disagree with the efficacy in my example) is not in that territory. I'm certain there are people out there who are so fragile that they cannot even bear to hear that and other terms used in any context whatsoever, but that doesn't mean we should wrap the entire planet in bubble wrap to protect them. That's not healthy for anyone, and it doesn't solve anything.

El Cid wrote:
Um, I do appreciate the suggestions, but if you're trying to help me re-argue a discussion that happened on another site, six years ago… you're a bit late, and at the wrong url. I related the incident in the other discussion because it was a similar story to the others that were posted, and I thought it was funny.

And yes, you are walking on eggshells if you can't even use the word “rape” in a neutral sense. It would be one thing if you were making jokes about it, or justifying it, or something along those lines. That's pretty dickish. But using it objectively to illustrate a point (even if you disagree with the efficacy in my example) is not in that territory. I'm certain there are people out there who are so fragile that they cannot even bear to hear that and other terms used in any context whatsoever, but that doesn't mean we should wrap the entire planet in bubble wrap to protect them. That's not healthy for anyone, and it doesn't solve anything.

Mine probably sounded like a suggestion, but it's more like a suggestion for future arguments. I know a few people who use absolutely ridiculous analogies to get their point across and people step back because it's gross. You don't need to be gross to get your point across.

If a artist feels their work is a vital part of themselves, a piece of their soul perhaps, then a rape analogy begins to make sense.

Considering we live in a world where some consider every sexual act “rape ” is this analogy really that extreme or is it merely like the schtick of the shock jock? Imus, Howard Stern and Opie and Anthony would and have said far worse even when they were on public airwaves.

Looked at in that context the analogy is understandable. Acceptable? That's questionable. Appropriate? Not really. Personally today I'd err on the side of caution and word it very carefully. Such a violation as piracy can feel like a rape. But the reality of rape is much more than that and should be recognized in context. More carefully than El CID is known to do. His posts are pretty much like I'd imagine Howard Stern's being like, just as mine are often like Groucho, H.L. Mencken or Mark Twain. (The flavor, not in any way the genius or clarity of thought)

So I shrug it off as part of his personality. He's blunt. He says cruel things, but then sometimes they need to be said. Sometimes. With the proper context.

Take it or leave it, that's my view. I try to see all sides but then I have this notion of free speech deriving from all that history I've studied. There's hate and there's opinion and there's terse, blunt truth. Sometimes we have to hear what we find hard to swallow, even painful because it's true.

Don't believe the insensitive jerk? Ask a mental health care professional. Don't think I'm pulling this out of my ass. But there is a time and place and an internet forum is often not that place.

bravo1102 wrote:
Such a violation as piracy can feel like a rape.

Not even close.

If one were to ask a rape victim “soo…as he beat you and then held you down and violently forced himself into you over and over again while you felt excruciating pain, fear and humiliation, how did that make you feel?”
Do you honestly think that their answer would be - “Oh it was really gross, it felt like someone stealing my creativity” Come on man.

Look, I get what you're saying and I'm not proposing you shouldn't have the right to say it. I'm just disagreeing with you on this one statement. People (men) have a tendency to use rape as an analogy for the smallest things. Thus watering it down and making it not a big deal…to them. So I can see why others would be annoyed and/or disgusted by it. That's all.

Goopy wrote:

bravo1102 wrote:
Such a violation as piracy can feel like a rape.

Not even close.

If one were to ask a rape victim “soo…as he beat you and then held you down and violently forced himself into you over and over again while you felt excruciating pain, fear and humiliation, how did that make you feel?”
Do you honestly think that their answer would be - “Oh it was really gross, it felt like someone stealing my creativity” Come on man.

Look, I get what you're saying and I'm not proposing you shouldn't have the right to say it. I'm just disagreeing with you on this one statement. People (men) have a tendency to use rape as an analogy for the smallest things. Thus watering it down and making it not a big deal…to them. So I can see why others would be annoyed and/or disgusted by it. That's all.

Men can be raped. Even raped by women. Unwanted sex is rape. Certain things happen automatically because of human physiology. So men are raped. It's a horrible violation.

Here it's an analogy. Hyperbole, just like esteemed feminists throwing rape around as an analogy for any sexual contact or any violation of any kind to any repressed person anywhere. They're not male, but they still use the comparison incessantly. It lost its value before I showed up.

Talk to them for cheapening the horror. Not to me. I know a lot more about this than you can ever imagine.

The experience of being pirated and the experience of being raped have nothing in common, Bravo! That's a terrible analogy, and it's not even close to the one I was making. That's sort of what I was getting at when I said there's no point trying to revisit a discussion that happened in another time, in another place, in another context. We're not even talking about the same thing anymore. And no, for the record, I wasn't even “shock jocking” at the time!

Like, I guess if someone wanted to start a ‘Piracy is OK and They’re All Asking For It Anyway' thread, maybe I could work myself up enough to rehash what I was saying there… but honestly at the moment I don't think there's enough vodka in the entire city to make that interesting to me.

@bravo1102
I never said men weren't victims of rape. I'm well aware of that fact. I'm also against women claiming to be true feminists using rape for their hyperbolic purposes. So we both agree on that. Just saying I disagree with your analogy of rape for piracy.

And I would never tell you that I know more than you because I don't even know you. So please don't do the same to me.

@bravo1102

I misread the last sentence in your message and I realize you weren't saying you knew more than I. So I apologize for my last statement and misunderstanding.

I still stand by with everything else, though.

It's a word that's long been used as part of hyperbole and the original meaning IS actually “theft” ironically. The modern version of the meaning of word was historically just one of many. It's not used legally to describe the criminal act in Australia and many other countries.

But that doesn't change the modern cultural meaning (sexual assault) and all the baggage that comes with it which make it extremely loaded and dangerous. I really don't think it should be used for anything other than sexual assault now because the meanings are so strong that it derails discussions into taking about the word and the act and not the intended meaning of the person who used it. (which is exactly what I'm doing now… XD)

It's a bit like Goodwin's law in that way (where things devolve into comparing people to Nazis), a bit of a faux pas in any discussion.