[Discussion] How to Navigate Value Clashes

This is a thread for navigating value clashes in communities

garion333 wrote:
TheHarpoMarxist wrote:

I'm sorry, garion, but I'm going to believe what my friends and family say about their safety in this atmosphere.

And you should, though I'd like to think I haven't said anything otherwise.

You have been telling me that my friends and family (and self) have fears that are overblown and overstated.

garion333 wrote:
TheHarpoMarxist wrote:

And if people support the Trump Administration, they are directly supporting policy and action that impacts the safety, autonomy, and well being of my community. I have a ton of space for how they might have gotten there, but I am under no obligation to assume that there is a good, warm-hearted person who means well underneath their support for an administration that locks children in cages and openly supports white supremacists. Even if "most" people didn't have something to fear, I'd say there is an issue if anyone has something to fear, and that is worthy of address and it matters.

Well, when you're only reading and watching right wing news then you don't think anyone is locking children in cages and openly supporting white supremacists. I do think there's a huge difference between the guy screaming at taxi drivers and, say, my father-in-law.

Man, your last sentence makes me want to make a comment about how some folks are afraid of Mexicans coming to rape them. Does that matter? Or only when you deem it a real fear? A worthy fear? Something. That's part of the problem to me. People are living in such different realities, which I'll get to later from a more personal angle.

Here's the thing - not all fears, thoughts, and ideas are created equal. Fear of immigrants is rooted in xenophobia and racism. And regardless of whether someone was manipulated into that fear or came by it naturally, the end result is they are still propping up a situation where their fear can be used as an excuse to harm people. Meanwhile, I will refer you again to SPLC to see that there are some fears that are quite founded. It is nice that you and I have the option of opting out of having to engage with this stuff. Others don't have that option.

garion333 wrote:

And I truly appreciate you detailing that. It helps to understand your position, especially when you say something like "there are people who want my communities dead" and then mention your theater or film community. On its face that sounds absurd, especially when someone who keeps hearing about how liberals are soft and snowflakes.

Clearly, your day-to-day is a bit different from mine, and from many others.

I think it sounds absurd to you, but I don't think it sounds absurd. I also don't think that my day-to-day is particularly unusual. I have some unusual jobs that do require close contact with these worlds, sure, but a HUGE part of the problem is that plenty of well-meaning rational people are quicker to dismiss anyone who is calling attention to a real problem. Because problems suck. Nobody wants to deal with problems, especially if they aren't knocking on your door yet.

When I read your comments here I wonder why you are interrogating me on my lived experience and not arguing with your father or the people in your local community who you describe as racist.

HarpoMarxist - First I hope you get the good conversation you asked for and deserve.

SallyNasty wrote:

You weren't participating in a discussion, you were asking everyone to move to a different forum so you didn't have to see our conversation. I was actually really interested in the discussion and it basically dies in the other thread. Time and again it seems that the moderate voices just want the politics left out of their reality, but there are literally f*cking children in cages right now in America due to racism and bigotry. Sorry that we can't keep that dark section of reality off in its own portion of the forums.

SallyNasty:
First of all I did participate in the context that I encouraged the discussion but just asked it be moved to the discussion and debate section.
Second, since you don't know a single thing about me, don't presume it's because I don't want to address the issues. In fact it's quite the contrary. A lot of the issues in America actually are affecting me pretty f*ing directly.
So not because you deserve a real response just for being rude but because HarpoMarxist does, here's some more detail.

I don't want to read about it in a random thread on a gaming site because honestly I shouldn't have to. My real life is intense enough.
I'm white, my wife is not. My biological son lives split between both worlds. My daughter is adopted and following Trump's election we were advised to spend the additional $1500 to get additional paperwork to make sure we could always prove our daughter was a US citizen even though other laws already were supposed to protect adoptees.
My wife travels a lot and is routinely subjected to 'random' searches while I have literally never been once.
My wife doesn't sleep well for fear someone might try and strip our daughter's rights from her or from her parents who have been citizens since the 60s. And we live increasingly in a world were I can't say no one is trying to do those things.

So maybe I considered GWJ a safer space to drop in during my work day and rather than not say anything might occasionally ask you to take a thread to the debates and discussion area.

That's horrible and I empathize. Truly, no snark and no motivation other than one human having concern for another. That said, you could easily have just not clicked on that thread, once you noticed that a conversation you didn't like was going on, instead of telling everyone else to take their ball home and disperse. I think everyone had a couple options today for different ways this could have been handled.

For a long time it is a pretty regular thing on GWJ to have conversations that lean political be shut down hard by A) white B) heterosexual C) upper-middle class D) Males, who don't want politics mixed in with their daily dork around time at work. Mods have played ball for years in order to keep the peace, at the expense of the comfort of female, minority and LGBTQ members and I am sick of it(it has gotten markedly better with the additional mods, to be fair). It is a privileged position to be able to ask people to move along as you didn't want to have to deal with it today. Doesn't make you a bad guy, and sorry if I was a sh*t to you.

SallyNasty wrote:

That's horrible and I empathize. Truly, no snark and no motivation other than one human having concern for another. That said, you could easily have just not clicked on that thread, once you noticed that a conversation you didn't like was going on, instead of telling everyone else to take their ball home and disperse. I think everyone had a couple options today for different ways this could have been handled.

For a long time it is a pretty regular thing on GWJ to have conversations that lean political be shut down hard by A) white B) heterosexual C) upper-middle class D) Males, who don't want politics mixed in with their daily dork around time at work. Mods have played ball for years in order to keep the peace, at the expense of the comfort of female, minority and LGBTQ members and I am sick of it(it has gotten markedly better with the additional mods, to be fair). It is a privileged position to be able to ask people to move along as you didn't want to have to deal with it today. Doesn't make you a bad guy, and sorry if I was a sh*t to you.

I don't see it as taking your ball and going home. I see it as trying to get people to stop playing baseball on the basketball court. There is perfectly good baseball court to play baseball on. I have no idea why people think moving a topic to the proper forum will shutdown the conversation. That would only happen if the topic got beaten to a dead horse.

...but if no one is shooting hoops on the basketball court why can't people play some slow pitch? To be clear, we neither interrupted another conversation nor was there any poster that tried to start another topic that was overlooked.

SallyNasty wrote:

For a long time it is a pretty regular thing on GWJ to have conversations that lean political be shut down hard by A) white B) heterosexual C) upper-middle class D) Males, who don't want politics mixed in with their daily dork around time at work. Mods have played ball for years in order to keep the peace, at the expense of the comfort of female, minority and LGBTQ members and I am sick of it(it has gotten markedly better with the additional mods, to be fair). It is a privileged position to be able to ask people to move along as you didn't want to have to deal with it today.

This is all true, but is P&C 'comfortable' for anyone but A/B/C/Ds? How much progress has been made in P&C when it comes to representation? If anything, it feels even *more* like the same bunch people who have shown no hesitation to make their opinions known for *years*.

Maybe before P&C goes all Souls invasions on the rest of the forums, it should fix itself? It's done a really good job of kicking out debates over peoples' humanity. That's only the first step in making people 'comfortable', though. Maybe when P&C can figure out how to make people 'comfortable' and not just deliver a lecture, maybe that's when it should break containment.

SallyNasty wrote:

For a long time it is a pretty regular thing on GWJ to have conversations that lean political be shut down hard by A) white B) heterosexual C) upper-middle class D) Males, who don't want politics mixed in with their daily dork around time at work. Mods have played ball for years in order to keep the peace, at the expense of the comfort of female, minority and LGBTQ members and I am sick of it(it has gotten markedly better with the additional mods, to be fair). It is a privileged position to be able to ask people to move along as you didn't want to have to deal with it today

I would argue it's that very blanket characterization that is also chasing people away from this site. For many people, video games are an escape from the sh*ttiness that is our day-to-day lives. The internet has devolved into a cesspool of negativity and is quite literally soul crushing. This site is far and away one of the better communities around. Is it really too much to ask to have some respite from that once in a while?

I've learned so much from people, and about people on this site, mostly from lurking in D&D. Just because people aren't engaging doesn't necessarily mean they're not reading. But if I'm being honest, sometimes I just want to chat about Elder Scrolls. There's nothing wrong with that considering all that I (and everyone else) has going on in our real lives.

SallyNasty wrote:

...but if no one is shooting hoops on the basketball court why can't people play some slow pitch? To be clear, we neither interrupted another conversation nor was there any poster that tried to start another topic that was overlooked.

Has it not been considered extremely rude to go off topic in a thread? No one would care about a few side tangent posts but once it goes into multiple pages it becomes a problem. People that would have posted something might I have felt they couldn't, I know I felt that way.

I also disagree that other conversations weren't going on but even if they weren't I don't see why that makes it ok to takeover the thread. It would still be rude to people that click on the newly risen thread that expected something to do with the stated topic.

Baron Of Hell wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

...but if no one is shooting hoops on the basketball court why can't people play some slow pitch? To be clear, we neither interrupted another conversation nor was there any poster that tried to start another topic that was overlooked.

Has it not been considered extremely rude to go off topic in a thread? No one would care about a few side tangent posts but once it goes into multiple pages it becomes a problem. People that would have posted something might I have felt they couldn't, I know I felt that way.

I also disagree that other conversations weren't going on but even if they weren't I don't see why that makes it ok to takeover the thread. It would still be rude to people that click on the newly risen thread that expected something to do with the stated topic.

If it were a thread with a specific topic, you'd have a point. However, it was the "Questions you want answered" thread. A deliberately topic-less thread made specifically to be nothing but tangents (in part to prevent them from derailing threads that did have specific topics). The conversation being held was as germane to the thread as any other conversation that's been in it.

I'm of the mind that having a D&D section is a structural mistake and a throwback to when games weren't recognized as cultural objects that have inherent political value. Asking people to move pertinent political discussions to sidebar threads shouldn't be a normal, easily accepted action. That's a heavy ask and should be treated as such.

I do understand not wanting to have serious discussions all of the time, but I don't think the desire to goof off and not think about the world at times is incompatible with being a responsible and aware human being who can make space for people to navigate the messy realities of existing in this particular moment of human history. This requires people making decisions about which conversations they want to engage in and making some peace with the idea that sometimes people will be engaging with heavier stuff and that it is okay to give them space to do so.

Elder Scrolls is a great example, actually. It has some hilarious, bonkers lore and quirks that are fun to joke about and discuss. It also has some loaded political statements that are super interesting and worth delving into. There's a great discussion to be had about how that series has engaged with race historically and that conversation - though more cerebral - deserves to exist right next to the "chickens just reported me to the authorities for stealing vegetables LOL" conversation. They are both about Elder Scrolls.

Additionally, we already have tools on this forum that allow people to create topics and define scope. If you need light fare but one thread you are following is having a heavier discussion than you can currently engage with, you are going to have other threads that won't be in the midst of something deeper. And if somehow every single thread you want to peek into is delving into territory you aren't in the mood to delve into but you absolutely need a forum fix, you can always start a new thread.

TheHarpoMarxist wrote:

I'm of the mind that having a D&D section is a structural mistake and a throwback to when games weren't recognized as cultural objects that have inherent political value. Asking people to move pertinent political discussions to sidebar threads shouldn't be a normal, easily accepted action. That's a heavy ask and should be treated as such.

...

Additionally, we already have tools on this forum that allow people to create topics and define scope. If you need light fare but one thread you are following is having a heavier discussion than you can currently engage with, you are going to have other threads that won't be in the midst of something deeper. And if somehow every single thread you want to peek into is delving into territory you aren't in the mood to delve into but you absolutely need a forum fix, you can always start a new thread.

That's still telling people which threads they can post "heavy fare" in, just you're making the "heavy fare" threads the main threads, and calling the "light fare" threads the sidebar threads.

Which, hey--maybe that's enough of a change to satisfy everyone!

No.

It is making thread pertinent discussions, regardless of how "heavy" or "light" they are, generally permissible.

So it's just "if the thread is too heavy for you, make another thread and enjoy the lightness of it until the heavy conversation follows you into your new thread; rinse, repeat."

No.

That's not what it is.

Respectfully disagree TheHarpoMarxist. D&D has it's own section for a reason. Those types of discussions are usually very uncomfortable and emotionally charged and I don't think it's fair to have them in the same thread about what a lot of people come here to discuss what is a leisure activity for them to escape the very heavy issues that we are all living with daily. I think it would (and likely already has) chased away people from site.

TheHarpoMarxist wrote:

No.

That's not what it is.

Yes. That's the consequence of what you're proposing. Maybe you don't like that it's the consequence, but it is. If you don't think that's the consequence, you can always explain why it isn't.

On the other side you have all the non-binary members who have been chased away because posters consider their very existence political and shut down any conversation to which they add their context.

TheHarpoMarxist wrote:

I'm of the mind that having a D&D section is a structural mistake and a throwback to when games weren't recognized as cultural objects that have inherent political value. Asking people to move pertinent political discussions to sidebar threads shouldn't be a normal, easily accepted action. That's a heavy ask and should be treated as such.

I do understand not wanting to have serious discussions all of the time, but I don't think the desire to goof off and not think about the world at times is incompatible with being a responsible and aware human being who can make space for people to navigate the messy realities of existing in this particular moment of human history. This requires people making decisions about which conversations they want to engage in and making some peace with the idea that sometimes people will be engaging with heavier stuff and that it is okay to give them space to do so.

Elder Scrolls is a great example, actually. It has some hilarious, bonkers lore and quirks that are fun to joke about and discuss. It also has some loaded political statements that are super interesting and worth delving into. There's a great discussion to be had about how that series has engaged with race historically and that conversation - though more cerebral - deserves to exist right next to the "chickens just reported me to the authorities for stealing vegetables LOL" conversation. They are both about Elder Scrolls.

Additionally, we already have tools on this forum that allow people to create topics and define scope. If you need light fare but one thread you are following is having a heavier discussion than you can currently engage with, you are going to have other threads that won't be in the midst of something deeper. And if somehow every single thread you want to peek into is delving into territory you aren't in the mood to delve into but you absolutely need a forum fix, you can always start a new thread.

Honestly, a lot of other gaming forums I frequent will straight up shut down any political talk nowadays. The fact we have a well-moderated D&D section is amazing.

I also wanted to briefly talk about understanding where different people are at regarding the current political climate. I have no doubt that immigrants and other marginalized groups are really suffering. For someone with serious mental health issues, it scares me to death that I might one day lose my great state govt coverage because if Obamacare is rolled back I'm well and truly f'ed. That being said, most of my middle class friends and neighbors think things are going pretty well. And my family back in poor rural Kentucky are finally starting to see some gains and find some hope. Even some of my Black friends who work in the defense and law enforcement industries hate Trump as a person but feel he's helping them financially so they don't want to bite the hand that feeds them. In other words, depending on your job and socioeconomic class, Trump may just come off as an a-hole who at least is delivering a better economy. I'm not saying I believe that - only that's the mindset of millions of Americans who are too busy putting food on the table to care about the troubling storm clouds. And most of these people BTW don't like Trump but they like that he's giving them results.

There's also the problem that if you're center-right or moderate (raises hand), there doesn't feel like there's a home for you. Obviously, you don't want to throw your lot in with the Trumpites and you feel the current Republican party is beyond saving. On the other hand, you have real problems with how far and fast the Democratic leadership is swinging. Worst yet, you need to be all in or you're labeled as one of the enemy.

Thank you for the respectful disagreement PT, and I have a lot of respect for your position. I guess I'm coming at it from a place of people are going to get chased away regardless and whose comfort gets prioritized? For my money, I would rather prioritize the comfort of people who have less spaces available to them and who are frequently marginalized in the games discussion space.

Elder Scrolls has inherent political commentary. It is possible to discuss that intellectually or emotionally or both, or it is possible to not discuss it all. There is a time and place for all of those possibilities. I would think a topic about Elder Scrolls should be open to that kind of discussion, because there are players for whom that discussion matters a great deal and want to participate in it. Do we chase people away for who that conversation matters or do we chase people away who don't want to engage with that side of cultural disccusion to the point where they can't even brook seeing it in the periphery?

Personally, when I don't have the spoons for a heavier discussion I just don't engage with it or start a side conversation. I think it is a tall ask - particularly if the conversation is relevant - to ask people in a space of a given topic to refrain from certain discussion threads within that topic.

cheeze_pavilion wrote:
TheHarpoMarxist wrote:

No.

That's not what it is.

Yes. That's the consequence of what you're proposing. Maybe you don't like that it's the consequence, but it is. If you don't think that's the consequence, you can always explain why it isn't.

This is already explained. I'm not interested in playing a semantics game with you. If you'd like to willfully misinterpret what I said then that's your choice. Have fun arguing with the straw man. I'll be over here.

SallyNasty wrote:

On the other side you have all the non-binary members who have been chased away because posters consider their very existence political and shut down any conversation to which they add their context.

Likely because I'm in a privileged position, but can you give some examples because I haven't actively seen that.? It always confuses me when I see someone post that people have been "chased away" or people are being sh*tty to each other without any examples or context.

TheHarpoMarxist wrote:
cheeze_pavilion wrote:
TheHarpoMarxist wrote:

No.

That's not what it is.

Yes. That's the consequence of what you're proposing. Maybe you don't like that it's the consequence, but it is. If you don't think that's the consequence, you can always explain why it isn't.

This is already explained. I'm not interested in playing a semantics game with you. If you'd like to willfully misinterpret what I said then that's your choice. Have fun arguing with the straw man. I'll be over here.

*that's_bait.gif*

jdzappa wrote:

There's also the problem that if you're center-right or moderate (raises hand), there doesn't feel like there's a home for you. Obviously, you don't want to throw your lot in with the Trumpites and you feel the current Republican party is beyond saving. On the other hand, you have real problems with how far and fast the Democratic leadership is swinging. Worst yet, you need to be all in or you're labeled as one of the enemy.

I think there's a lot that newly politically homeless former self described moderate Republicans could get out of connecting with the long term politically homeless Left. As someone who has always had to carve out a space in a political landscape that doesn't have institutional room for my POV, I have a lot of space for how this new reality must be affecting you. If you ever want to talk through feelings about that without policy baggage, my PM's are open.

PaladinTom wrote:
SallyNasty wrote:

On the other side you have all the non-binary members who have been chased away because posters consider their very existence political and shut down any conversation to which they add their context.

Likely because I'm in a privileged position, but can you give some examples because I haven't actively seen that.? It always confuses me when I see someone post that people have been "chased away" or people are being sh*tty to each other without any examples or context.

Plenty of women in this forum have stated they either don't post anymore or post less because of the way their comments, etc get ignored & pushed to D&D instead when problematic things get brought up in game threads.

PaladinTom wrote:

Likely because I'm in a privileged position, but can you give some examples because I haven't actively seen that.? It always confuses me when I see someone post that people have been "chased away" or people are being sh*tty to each other without any examples or context.

Even though I left in early 2017, I can't help but peek in every rare once in a while just to see how things are going over in GWJ-land, so allow me to speak to your "being sh*tty to each other" remark (Karmajay already noted the larger and more important issue of women in the community being pushed away).

I left because it was exhausting having to put up with a small number of very vocal community members who -- at least back then -- were unreasonably and unrelentingly judgemental and incapable of empathy towards those with whom they disagreed.

I found that it's much less frustrating to just browse and occasionally post on Reddit -- Reddit, FFS -- because at least there it's such a giant faceless mass of people that you don't have to face the same sh*t from the same people in every godsdamned discussion. So while it's a loss of any real sense of community and actually results in a higher noise-to-signal ratio, it's actually less stressful and upsetting overall. I certainly have more peace of mind.

I'm sure I'm not alone.

Apologies for the disruption, but as I was skimming a few conversations this thread -- and this post in particular -- felt like something I could speak to.

Kind regards to all,

Fars

Farscry wrote:
PaladinTom wrote:

Likely because I'm in a privileged position, but can you give some examples because I haven't actively seen that.? It always confuses me when I see someone post that people have been "chased away" or people are being sh*tty to each other without any examples or context.

Even though I left in early 2017, I can't help but peek in every rare once in a while just to see how things are going over in GWJ-land, so allow me to speak to your "being sh*tty to each other" remark (Karmajay already noted the larger and more important issue of women in the community being pushed away).

I left because it was exhausting having to put up with a small number of very vocal community members who -- at least back then -- were unreasonably and unrelentingly judgemental and incapable of empathy towards those with whom they disagreed.

I found that it's much less frustrating to just browse and occasionally post on Reddit -- Reddit, FFS -- because at least there it's such a giant faceless mass of people that you don't have to face the same sh*t from the same people in every godsdamned discussion. So while it's a loss of any real sense of community and actually results in a higher noise-to-signal ratio, it's actually less stressful and upsetting overall. I certainly have more peace of mind.

I'm sure I'm not alone.

Apologies for the disruption, but as I was skimming a few conversations this thread -- and this post in particular -- felt like something I could speak to.

Kind regards to all,

Fars

Thanks for chiming in Farscry. It's not a disruption - it's helpful. I guess my position is that it sucks that people feel unwelcome (or worse) unsafe when posting or interacting here. I wish that weren't the case. I actively saw how women were effectively driven out of the Feminism thread, but I guess I really didn't see it elsewhere.

This sounds silly, but I wish there were both more discussion of important topics where we could argue respectfully (while also kicking out the truly toxic people), but also have the option of choosing not to even see those arguments if I didn't have the spoons, or just wanted to kick back and chat about the fun side of games. I know that sounds incredibly selfish on my part, but there you go.

OH GREAT IN THE THREAD THAT STARTED THIS I SAID I'D STOP IF FARSCRY CAME BACK!

; D

TheHarpoMarxist wrote:
garion333 wrote:
TheHarpoMarxist wrote:

I'm sorry, garion, but I'm going to believe what my friends and family say about their safety in this atmosphere.

And you should, though I'd like to think I haven't said anything otherwise.

You have been telling me that my friends and family (and self) have fears that are overblown and overstated.

In this particular case I was saying speaking about you, yes.

I did not say that your family and friends have overstated and overblown fears:

I am absolutely not saying people have reasons to fear for their safety, especially marginalized individuals, but that's not most people.

My issue is that life has never been perfect in the US and while the Trump admin is absolutely making things worse, it's still a relatively safe place. sh*t was way worse in the 70's. We have different issues now, but violence is still way down.

So, yeah, for most people I think it's a bit extreme to discuss how you're walking around in fear of your life. I wasn't interrogating you, but context helps. What I do know of you, Harpo, didn't put you into a marginalized category that's being targeted right now. I believe you're a cis White guy living in NY. (Apologies if I'm incorrect on that.) That's why I wanted to better understand which communities you were referring to when you said that there were people who wanted you, and them, dead. I could already guess who you are referring to when you talk about people you love because I know some of those people.

Framing things as if your daily life is so fraught with danger that you fear you're going to be murdered at any moment seems extreme, especially when it lacks context because those who aren't aware of your situation and who don't have the same fear are likely to think you're exaggerating or (if they're especially uncharitable) lying.

Basically, I'm tone policing. Or I'm saying the generalized comments about stuff are perhaps painting with too broad of a stroke.

TheHarpoMarxist wrote:

I also don't think that my day-to-day is particularly unusual.

I do. Living in a large city is going to be a hugely different experience from people who aren't. And then there's the fact you're willing to step in to help people when you see something going down.

Do you have children? Because that right there makes for a way different experience, day-to-day, as you're barely able to do anything but work and take care of your family.

So, yeah, I do think your day-to-day is significantly different than a lot of people's lives. It's significantly different than mine is right now. It was more similar to mine when I still lived and worked in Baltimore and didn't have a family and kids.

I don't think my position on stuff is simply because I'm a privileged white dude who lives in a safe town, it's based on knowing the types of lives and experiences those who may (grudgingly) support Trump have a hard time seeing your point of view as someone who lives in a city and is connected to marginalized people. If the lesson on gay marriage was that going door-to-door and getting out there was an important piece on changing people's minds, then the same is true for other issues. What it isn't is raging and ranting. Not that it doesn't have its place, but in general you do have to police your tone and meet a person at their level before they "nah" out, like Mav did.

I feel like if you want to discuss changing people's values you have to start from a place of mutual respect enough to listen to their point of view. Completely misguided or otherwise. It's like when a child comes to you with a completely irrational fear. If you tell them that's wrong, that's stupid, don't feel that way, etc., they won't suddenly give up their fear. You have to accept their fear first, dumb as it might be, and then later address the underlying cause.

So when we say that we want more conservative members to feel comfortable to talk about things, but then immediately turn around and say "except on some topics like Fascism" it's already stopping more people from posting. Why? Because someone might have an idea of fascism that is misguided from the reality of what fascism is. And, of course, anti-global warming continues to have many adherents, but by saying you won't even broach that subject likely cuts out people who don't believe in global warming and, say, people who think global warming is a bit blown out of proportion. The latter group is the group who are willing to accept global warming's premise, but don't entirely think the projections are legit for a myriad of reasons.

You want to have discussions, except for certain discussions. Yeah, that's inviting for someone who already knows they're likely on the "other side" of your view.

The "casual arrogance" that Robear mentioned is especially true because it's something that is apparent to those outside a group but not necessarily to those inside the group. For instance, Harpo, your posts in the Questions thread were all well meaning and pleasant sounding, but have shades of condescension that some are already expecting to read.

"It seems as though something might have bothered you in the quoted text, or caused enough of a reaction to make you feel that you needed to say something. Is that accurate?"

Insert the "It's a trap!" gif.

But this all began with this:

"people who identify as political righties frankly tend to lack the emotional or intellectual fortitude to handle even the slightest iota of criticism"

Anyone who even slightly identifies as on the right will take offense to this. The fact you even thought it might be taken well by anyone on the right is insane to me.

Oh, but they missed your use of the the word "tend". .............

Problem is I've seen more than enough discourse, especially over the past few years, that no one takes criticism well, right, left and middle. No one. We're all too busy being siloed in our own little social media worlds.

But no one is going to take criticism well when they're effectively being told they're pieces of sh*t, stupid and weak. Sorry, they tend to be stupid and weak.

That's a level of disrespect that's going to end any possible discussion before it even begins. Hence, Mav's gif reply.

To bring this back to values, there is a tension between the value of keeping the peace and the values of inclusivity, diversity, and free expression. Keeping the peace is a perfectly legitimate value, as are the other three. But there are times where they are going to be incompatible with each other, and in those times it helps to understand what the community prioritizes. I know what *I* prioritize out of those values, and where I create space for exceptions, but I'm not always sure I understand what this community prioritizes. (Much of this is because we're all individuals who prioritize different things - for example, free expression is a value that I think is important, however I do believe fascists should be de-platformed and shown the door.)

This is where mods and community leaders can set the tone and implement structures that support what they feel are the most important values. Right now, as a community, we allow our most privileged members to boot even relevant discussions into a Hamsterdam-esque side area. Just because our mods there do a good job doesn't mean that this particular protocol is good or useful or appropriate at this specific moment in time. It also doesn't really matter what other communities do. Their mistake of completely banning all political discussion doesn't make our half-measure of soft-banning most political discussion something positive for our community.

As much as I get wanting to have space for people to have light discussion, I don't think allowing people to have heavier discussions inhibits that. If the value is to avoid discomfort and keep the peace and the cost of defending that value is further marginalizing some groups that are already marginalized in society writ large, that doesn't sit right with me. I think having a more diverse community that goes out of its way to be inclusive to marginalized groups is worth the discomfort some people of privilege might feel if some Elder Scrolls players want to unpack and talk through the thorny history the series has with race, or some Division 2 people want to chew on what the game says about institutions and authority.

edit: eh, this was too salty.

garion - From my perspective, Mav threw a snarky GIF at me (twice, actually.) I asked him for clarity. If you want to read condescension into that or anything else I did, then I can't help you. I suppose I could have snark GIF'd back, but that reads as more condescending to me. I gave him a chance to talk about what bothered him, I opened the door. He didn't meet me where I was. In fact, he continued to snipe at me even when I had moved over here. To me that behavior is bullying. Not mine. I don't feel I have anything to apologize for in regards to my tone. I provided further clarity when the discussion continued and I stand by all of that. Much of it addresses stuff you brought up here.

To reiterate some of it: I'm not going to go out of my way to be nice and accommodating to people who threaten my life, my community, and my loved ones on the daily. I have plenty of space for people who identify as conservative but full-throatedly reject fascism. Heck, you don't have to look many messages up this thread to see that. I struggle with you and Robear's comments because both of you are ascribing the best possible motivations to a fictional conservative on one hand and then the worst possible motivations to me - an actual person in the thread - on the other.

I can't really help that. If you would like to only see out of context fragments of what I'm saying and throw out evidence that suggests other things, that's a decision for you to make. I only have so much bandwidth, as do you. We both have agency to choose how and where we engage. As someone who writes about games and politics as a job and deals with internet trolls significantly more than the average person, I'm aware I have a pretty thick skin. I understand that can come off as dismissive. You think I'm condescending - great. I disagree. I went into detail in the original thread about where the comment came from, and I feel no need to further extrapolate here about any of that.

When I said my life was not unusual, I didn't mean to you specifically. Our lives are very different. But there are plenty of people who have a life that is similar in structure to mine. Just because we aren't living existences that society defines as a baseline doesn't make our existences abnormal. 80% of the people in this country live in urban areas. Yet it is the privilege of people who don't live in cities to claim the mantle of "normal" and all of the perks that come with that.