• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NeoGAF Ban Review/Justice Project (Off-Topic Edition)

MetalAlien

Member
Mar 6, 2005
9,046
959
1,435
I mean, it might be easy to surmise that since everyone who was banned was white, but that would be a logically unsound conclusion to make. I'm not defending his stealth bans, but my understanding is that those who were included in his sweeping expulsion of users were people who had a history of bad faith argumentation, dog whistling, and diet racism. The fact they all happened to be white doesn't mean that his stealth bans were racially motivated.
 

Bstamp

Banned
May 23, 2019
48
29
85
You're welcome to look at my notes on some of the stealth bans of his I reviewed at the beginning of this thread.
So, I went through your list, read the notes, looked at the posts - contextualizing them with respect to the topic of Trump, the implications of his victory, and what it meant for people like bish - and can't see why there was a problem with the bans. It's very clear, if you step back and critically examine the posts and their intent, that the people he banned were not arguing in good faith. I haven't gone through them all, but with the exception of the rare ban for console warring, his actions seem merited. You overturned them, which is well within your right as owner of the site, but I don't think that his actions were an impulsive and unwarranted response to Trump's win. When you're a minority and someone who's subject to microaggressions on a near daily basis, it is not difficult to develop a keen ability to detect arguments that aren't made with sincerity. Almost all of the bans I reviewed, after visiting threads in which they were made, were levied on people who passive aggressively taunted members of the community who were justly distressed by the outcome of the election. I mean, if you want to have a community where either open or tacit supporters of a known racist and aspiring fascist are welcome, cool. It certainly makes for lively debate and removes any chance of the forum becoming an echo chamber, assuming those who disagree with them aren't turned away by the tolerance of those views - as some clearly were. In bish's defense, I think he saw bad faith actors taking advantage of Trump's win and exercised his authority as a mod to put a kibosh on it. Obviously, from your notes, you feel differently.
 
Last edited:

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
May 30, 2004
21,905
13,987
2,060
In bish's defense, I think he saw bad faith actors taking advantage of Trump's win and exercised his authority as a mod to put a kibosh on it. Obviously, from your notes, you feel differently.
He abused his power and never recorded these particular bans, knowing that they were unacceptable. Most of the unrecorded bans gave no reason or a few snarky words to the person on the other end. When you can justify your actions to the rest of the team, and me, and the person you're taking action against, you do so. For these bans, he couldn't, because he knew he was in the wrong and abusing his authority.

While I was investigating what was going on, and asking the mod team about the mysterious ciricumstances, he played dumb, all the way until he was caught.

This isn't a matter of feeling one way or another.
 

matt404au

Gold Member
Apr 25, 2009
11,861
17,254
1,250
Australia
So, I went through your list, read the notes, looked at the posts - contextualizing them with respect to the topic of Trump, the implications of his victory, and what it meant for people like bish - and can't see why there was a problem with the bans. It's very clear, if you step back and critically examine the posts and their intent, that the people he banned were not arguing in good faith. I haven't gone through them all, but with the exception of the rare ban for console warring, his actions seem merited. You overturned them, which is well within your right as owner of the site, but I don't think that his actions were an impulsive and unwarranted response to Trump's win. When you're a minority and someone who's subject to microaggressions on a near daily basis, it is not difficult to develop a keen ability to detect arguments that aren't made with sincerity. Almost all of the bans I reviewed, after visiting threads in which they were made, were levied on people who passive aggressively taunted members of the community who were justly distressed by the outcome of the election. I mean, if you want to have a community where either open or tacit supporters of a known racist and aspiring fascist are welcome, cool. It certainly makes for lively debate and removes any chance of the forum becoming an echo chamber, assuming those who disagree with them aren't turned away by the tolerance of those views - as some clearly were. In bish's defense, I think he saw bad faith actors taking advantage of Trump's win and exercised his authority as a mod to put a kibosh on it. Obviously, from your notes, you feel differently.
"with respect to the topic of Trump, the implications of his victory, and what it meant for people like bish"

bish is Canadian you dropkick
 

Bstamp

Banned
May 23, 2019
48
29
85
"with respect to the topic of Trump, the implications of his victory, and what it meant for people like bish"

bish is Canadian you dropkick
And Trump is a white supremacist who was elected President of the most powerful country on the planet, an office with all manner of influence that would impact the lives of him and every other person of color. Look at Canada right now, where on the heels of Trump's win, you have gains being made by white supremacists and the possibility of one being elected in the upcoming election. To act as if Trump's win hasn't set a template that emboldened copycats can follow is to be naive or worse.
 
Last edited:

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
21,549
18,608
995
And Trump is a white supremacist who was elected President of the most powerful country on the planet, an office with all manner of influence that would impact the lives of him and every other person of color. Look at Canada right now, where on the heels of Trump's win, you have gains being made by white supremacists and the possibility of one being elected in the upcoming election. To act as if Trump's win hasn't set a template that emboldened copycats can follow is to be naive or worse.
It’s cute. Can we keep it?
 

Scopa

The Tribe Has Spoken
Oct 27, 2017
4,395
6,121
750
your mind
And Trump is a white supremacist who was elected President of the most powerful country on the planet, an office with all manner of influence that would impact the lives of him and every other person of color. Look at Canada right now, where on the heels of Trump's win, you have gains being made by white supremacists and the possibility of one being elected in the upcoming election. To act as if Trump's win hasn't set a template that emboldened copycats can follow is to be naive or worse.
You are putting way too much time and effort into this trolling thing and failing. A good troll is subtle about it. Where’d you come from? Kiwi Farms?

You need to go to troll school.
 

slugbahr

Gold Member
Jan 4, 2019
918
1,187
490
The edge of a circle
So, I went through your list, read the notes, looked at the posts - contextualizing them with respect to the topic of Trump, the implications of his victory, and what it meant for people like bish - and can't see why there was a problem with the bans. It's very clear, if you step back and critically examine the posts and their intent, that the people he banned were not arguing in good faith. I haven't gone through them all, but with the exception of the rare ban for console warring, his actions seem merited. You overturned them, which is well within your right as owner of the site, but I don't think that his actions were an impulsive and unwarranted response to Trump's win. When you're a minority and someone who's subject to microaggressions on a near daily basis, it is not difficult to develop a keen ability to detect arguments that aren't made with sincerity. Almost all of the bans I reviewed, after visiting threads in which they were made, were levied on people who passive aggressively taunted members of the community who were justly distressed by the outcome of the election. I mean, if you want to have a community where either open or tacit supporters of a known racist and aspiring fascist are welcome, cool. It certainly makes for lively debate and removes any chance of the forum becoming an echo chamber, assuming those who disagree with them aren't turned away by the tolerance of those views - as some clearly were. In bish's defense, I think he saw bad faith actors taking advantage of Trump's win and exercised his authority as a mod to put a kibosh on it. Obviously, from your notes, you feel differently.
 

JORMBO

Darkness no more
Mar 5, 2009
6,229
3,156
1,400
Registers on gaming forum and only posts stuff about politics, criticizing the forum or defending Bish :messenger_dizzy:
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: slugbahr

plane.jpg

Member
Oct 25, 2017
241
222
265
When you're a minority and someone who's subject to microaggressions on a near daily basis, it is not difficult to develop a keen ability to detect arguments that aren't made with sincerity.
I know this dude is banned, but apparently when you're a minority in the Trump timeline, you have the ability of mind-reading and bullshit detection through the Internet. If anything, I think this "ability" is a paranoia or unwillingness to engage in discussion when clearly you're not in the mood to talk about these things without 100% agreement to your side. This is how echo-chambers happen. This is how discussion is stifled. If you as a discussion board member aren't willing to put up with the conversation any longer because you feel you've seen every permutation of it, then don't participate and stop shutting down discussion for others.
 
Last edited:

LegendOfKage

Member
Mar 6, 2018
2,336
3,206
660
I know this dude is banned, but apparently when you're a minority in the Trump timeline, you have the ability of mind-reading and bullshit detection through the Internet. If anything, I think this "ability" is a paranoia or unwillingness to engage in discussion when clearly you're not in the mood to talk about these things without 100% agreement to your side. This is how echo-chambers happen. This is how discussion is stifled. If you as a discussion board member aren't willing to put up with the conversation any longer because you feel you've seen every permutation of it, then don't participate and stop shutting down discussion for others.

the people he banned were not arguing in good faith.
Trump is a white supremacist who was elected President of the most powerful country on the planet
I just wanted to ask two questions: "What is your definition of not arguing in good faith" and "When Trump said 'I'm not talking about the Neo Nazi's and the white nationalists. Those people should be condemned, totally,' why do you think he said those things?