Support NeoGAF

[Breakage]

Flicked through the recent Sam Harris thread. Saw "alt-right" and "Nazi" mentioned quite a few times.
If you don't share our views, then you're as bad as Hitler – it's business as usual with these people.

 

[Musky_Cheese]

 

[WinterIsComing]

Oh wow people here defending that you can be fired from your job just for LOOKING at a female coworker??

5 seconds rule.

 

[Typhares]

Wrong thread maybe

 

[Musky_Cheese]

Wrong thread maybe

Watching the episode right now. Had to share it.

 

[Typhares]

Watching the episode right now. Had to share it.

Weird hobby but I don't judge If only people only stomped when they can't get what they want!

 

[royox]

5 seconds rule.

But I need at least 5 for each buttock :_

 

[tkscz]

5 seconds rule.

Does the time increase with the weight?

 

[WinterIsComing]

Does the time increase with the weight?

I certainly hope so

 

[Yoshi]

Does the time increase with the weight?

A lifetime!

 

[Acerac]

Unless you are in the process of responding to that, in which case you can disregard this post and ill await your answer

Any minute now...

 

[Redneckerz]

Any minute now...

Gotta keep the faith.

Anyway, new page, new reminder for this post for Nobody_Important It is awaiting your answer.

 

[Nobody_Important]

Edit: Actually nevermind.

 

[Redneckerz]

Edit: Actually nevermind.

Well now i am curious since you quoted me. What was it?

 

[Nobody_Important]

Well now i am curious since you quoted me. What was it?

I'll get to the post and answer it properly when I have more time and more patience. Right now I have neither to be perfectly honest.

 

[Redneckerz]

I'll get to the post and answer it properly when I have more time and more patience. Right now I have neither to be perfectly honest.

Then ill give it some more days of waiting.

 

[Nobody_Important]

Then ill give it some more days of waiting.

More likely the weekend. It's gonna be a long ass week for me.

 

[Redneckerz]

More likely the weekend. It's gonna be a long ass week for me.

Consider it a date with the county line then for this weekend.

 

[CatLady]

Um I would consider sexually harassing people in the workplace a "severe problem" myself.



Not sure about you.

I'm late catching up on this tread, but this is hilarious. This is SOOOn not sexual harassment.

When I as young and hot I got a lot of attention from men. If they were hot I might just stare right back at them, if they were butt ugly it would be an annoyance, but certainly not something to run to HR about.

If this happened as described, what a weak whiney loser this woman is. It's no wonder men want to totally avoid women in the workplace these days. Thankfully the men I work with know I'm not this kind of an asshole.

 

[Athena~]

I'll get to the post and answer it properly when I have more time and more patience. Right now I have neither to be perfectly honest.

How about my post? You ignored my question as well.

If HR classified it as sexual harassment, why is the guy not fired immediately?

Do you understand what sexual harassment is?

We don’t even know what the guy was reported to the HR for. He could be reported for being unprofessional for all we know. That would be a big difference and explain why he’s not fired.

 

[Yoshi]

How about my post? You ignored my question as well.

If HR classified it as sexual harassment, why is the guy not fired immediately?

Do you understand what sexual harassment is?

We don’t even know what the guy was reported to the HR for. He could be reported for being unprofessional for all we know. That would be a big difference and explain why he’s not fired.

Or sexual harassment is a term that can be used for making people inconvenient about a sexually charged behaviour even if the border of legality is not crossed. Pointing and staring in a single incident is certainly not illegal and no one claimed the opposite. But it can be perceived as harassment nevertheless. For mild enough cases such as this, a warning is much more appropriate than a firing.

 

[Athena~]

Or sexual harassment is a term that can be used for making people inconvenient about a sexually charged behaviour even if the border of legality is not crossed. Pointing and staring in a single incident is certainly not illegal and no one claimed the opposite. But it can be perceived as harassment nevertheless. For mild enough cases such as this, a warning is much more appropriate than a firing.

Sexual harassment is illegal. Check the laws. Don’t downplay the crime.

That’s why workplace has zero tolerance for this.

 

[Shmunter]

I imagine linking this gif about now would be appropriate. Agree or disagree, it sums up part of the human condition...

 

[CatLady]

I imagine linking this gif about now would be appropriate. Agree or disagree, it sums up part of the human condition...

Okay, it's pretty unfair to be like that, but I'll admit it's mostly true for me. Unless a guy is really obnoxious, I probably wouldn't think he's creepy, but I be like eh, don't bother me, not interested.

 

[Papa]

I imagine linking this gif about now would be appropriate. Agree or disagree, it sums up part of the human condition...

Dat fish mouth syndrome.

 

[Yoshi]

Sexual harassment is illegal. Check the laws. Don’t downplay the crime.

That’s why workplace has zero tolerance for this.

The law only needs to concern itself with defining the form of sexual harassment that is illegal.

 

[Dr. Claus]

Or sexual harassment is a term that can be used for making people inconvenient about a sexually charged behaviour even if the border of legality is not crossed. Pointing and staring in a single incident is certainly not illegal and no one claimed the opposite. But it can be perceived as harassment nevertheless. For mild enough cases such as this, a warning is much more appropriate than a firing.

You continue to misconstrue a rude/annoying action as one that is actual sexual harassment. Fix that.

 

[tkscz]

A lifetime!

Hey now, you're from Germany, I hear the big women there are quiet lovely.

 

[Redneckerz]

Or sexual harassment is a term that can be used for making people inconvenient about a sexually charged behaviour even if the border of legality is not crossed. Pointing and staring in a single incident is certainly not illegal and no one claimed the opposite. But it can be perceived as harassment nevertheless. For mild enough cases such as this, a warning is much more appropriate than a firing.

Fact is you don't know the severity of it. Was it a quick glance, or a multi-second stare? And what happened after that?

Body language and interceding looks can be taken wildly, but if we are going to accept that the default response to such glances = harassment, then we create a living space where nobody dares interacting anymore.

Actually, this has merit to my personal story of today. I went outside to get a snack from the mall and one of the managers gave a quick glance when i went outside. Turned out she actually asked co-workers why i always went outside, safe for the fact i only do this on Tuesday and she has never spoken to me prior.

She never asked me later on aswell, so there you go how quick glances can be percieved as. It can vary wildly.

 

[Michele]

User got permanently banned in that thread: https://www.resetera.com/threads/pe...-rid-of-jews-more.86342/page-20#post-15969563

He was just curious, yet he got banned... Poor him.

This about sums up what Era is like.

 

[Wings 嫩翼翻せ]

Okay, it's pretty unfair to be like that, but I'll admit it's mostly true for me. Unless a guy is really obnoxious, I probably wouldn't think he's creepy, but I be like eh, don't bother me, not interested.

I like to think of this concept as one of those things you should never mention in the midst of an argument, but you know elsewhere has its applications.

 

[Musky_Cheese]

I'd like to throw my opinion in here.

I think this thread should be closed. The back and forth from our end should stop. We are approaching 2019. It's time imo even though I know wounds are still fresh, to move one.

The reality is that we have members here who are members there. Every time a Gaffer says "they are all a bunch of crazies" we our insulting our own members. Same as when someone posts a comment from over there insulting us as Nazi's. They are insulting Gaffers too.

We can't stop the Nazi and Alt Right insults. Even when one comes and says posts it here and we reply with "receipts please", it doesn't ever get proven but doesn't stop them from continuing to do it elsewhere. Yes it's a baseless insult. How cares.

NeoGAF isn't the alternative to any other site. We have always done our own thing in the past. We need to do that again.

That doesn't mean we should reject all criticism. But the crying over new fair moderation and standards is simply low effort and lacking in reality and brain function. Not allowing hate towards any group is a positive thing in NeoGAF. Don't argue with stupid... it only brings you down.

This site isn't for someone to come and complain about a ban else where. The community deserves better. Imo if that's all you are bringing to NeoGAF, you shouldn't be here. Not asking or seeking bans for those that do that. Just saying I don't think you should bother logging into NeoGAF.

We need to move on imo.

They said NeoGAF was dead and here we are undead af.

 

[Wings 嫩翼翻せ]

Right behind you, and it has been discussed as well. Just awaiting the lock, as many others are. Musky_Cheese (to let people know)

 

[The Elite]

Yeah, it's fun and all but it's time for this forum to move forward. I think it has long lived past its usefulness and it isn't even that busy a thread. If something comes up for meaningful discussion a new thread can be created.

 

[Musky_Cheese]

Yeah, it's fun and all but it's time for this forum to move forward. I think it has long lived past its usefulness and it isn't even that busy a thread. If something comes up for meaningful discussion a new thread can be created.

I don’t think a new thread needs to be created. What happens at another site like that isn’t news. We don’t do it for any other site.

And we wouldn’t allow every banned person on any other site to make a post complaining about it.

What happens over there isn’t relevant to NeoGAF. And we ain’t someone’s Ex to come and cry to when they are fighting with their current boy/girl friend.

Just my opinion

 

[Yoshi]

You continue to misconstrue a rude/annoying action as one that is actual sexual harassment. Fix that.

If she feels harassed and it is a sexually motivated action, it is sexual harassment. Both criteria are met, end of story.

Fact is you don't know the severity of it. Was it a quick glance, or a multi-second stare? And what happened after that?

Body language and interceding looks can be taken wildly, but if we are going to accept that the default response to such glances = harassment, then we create a living space where nobody dares interacting anymore.

Actually, this has merit to my personal story of today. I went outside to get a snack from the mall and one of the managers gave a quick glance when i went outside. Turned out she actually asked co-workers why i always went outside, safe for the fact i only do this on Tuesday and she has never spoken to me prior.

She never asked me later on aswell, so there you go how quick glances can be percieved as. It can vary wildly.

Yes, I do not know the severity of it, but it is not just staring, it is also motioning for others to join in on it.

 

[The Elite]

I don’t think a new thread needs to be created. What happens at another site like that isn’t news. We don’t do it for any other site.

And we wouldn’t allow every banned person on any other site to make a post complaining about it.

What happens over there isn’t relevant to NeoGAF. And we ain’t someone’s Ex to come and cry to when they are fighting with their current boy/girl friend.

Just my opinion

Yeah, I see your point.

The only reason I would consider a new thread is if something happens on another site that would have wider interests beyond that site. So, actual news. I don't think we need another jilted ex-user thread.

I still post on both although I have started posting here a lot more lately.

 

[Musky_Cheese]

Yeah, I see your point.

The only reason I would consider a new thread is if something happens on another site that would have wider interests beyond that site. So, actual news. I don't think we need another jilted ex-user thread.

I still post on both although I have started posting here a lot more lately.

Understood

 

[Dr. Claus]

If she feels harassed and it is a sexually motivated action, it is sexual harassment. Both criteria are met, end of story.

Yes, I do not know the severity of it, but it is not just staring, it is also motioning for others to join in on it.

Not end of story. Nothing about what had transpired was sexual harassment. Rude? Sure. Annoying? 'Course. Sexual harassment? Not a chance in hell. There was no unwelcome sexual advances (pointing and looking is not a sexual advance), requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.

 

[Dr. Claus]

I'd like to throw my opinion in here.

I think this thread should be closed. The back and forth from our end should stop. We are approaching 2019. It's time imo even though I know wounds are still fresh, to move one.

The reality is that we have members here who are members there. Every time a Gaffer says "they are all a bunch of crazies" we our insulting our own members. Same as when someone posts a comment from over there insulting us as Nazi's. They are insulting Gaffers too.

We can't stop the Nazi and Alt Right insults. Even when one comes and says posts it here and we reply with "receipts please", it doesn't ever get proven but doesn't stop them from continuing to do it elsewhere. Yes it's a baseless insult. How cares.

NeoGAF isn't the alternative to any other site. We have always done our own thing in the past. We need to do that again.

That doesn't mean we should reject all criticism. But the crying over new fair moderation and standards is simply low effort and lacking in reality and brain function. Not allowing hate towards any group is a positive thing in NeoGAF. Don't argue with stupid... it only brings you down.

This site isn't for someone to come and complain about a ban else where. The community deserves better. Imo if that's all you are bringing to NeoGAF, you shouldn't be here. Not asking or seeking bans for those that do that. Just saying I don't think you should bother logging into NeoGAF.

We need to move on imo.

They said NeoGAF was dead and here we are undead af.

I disagree. The thread should stay and continue focus on other community discussions. This wasn't just made for ResetEra, but all conversations as a go-to place to relieve stress and laugh at the crazies across the internet (even though Era is one of the most popular targets). If anything, conversations about Era and its denizens should be more strictly moderated on other threads. It is easy enough to ignore a single thread if you don't like the conversations in it, less so when it appears constantly in other threads.

Plus, those kind of folks who make baseless accusations of alt-right/nazi insults will find new reasons to claim such and appear in other threads as has already been apparent. Those won't stop.

 

[Acerac]

I don’t think a new thread needs to be created. What happens at another site like that isn’t news. We don’t do it for any other site.

And we wouldn’t allow every banned person on any other site to make a post complaining about it.

What happens over there isn’t relevant to NeoGAF. And we ain’t someone’s Ex to come and cry to when they are fighting with their current boy/girl friend.

Just my opinion

A lot of stuff ain't relevant to GAF but we have threads on them anyways. Seems silly to close this if people still wish to use it because of current year argument. >_<

Not everyone wants an account on kiwifarms.

 

[Redneckerz]

Yes, I do not know the severity of it, but it is not just staring, it is also motioning for others to join in on it.

''Hey check this girl out man''.

Basically that's the gist of the text version of this. To that i say: SO? How often don't you see this or is it portrayed in movies? And if we are talking about that, is Gesturing others to check someone out sexual harrasment? Doubtful.

Also since when is staring harrassment? Come on.

I feel like you are unable to visualize what is going on so you retort to a onesided definition of the term, when in reality, there are a shitton of variables that frankly make it impossible to verify what actually truly happened.

As such a discussion about this can never be complete. For all we know the victim blinked. The perp blinked. There was a microgesture from either end. We don't know.

 

[Yoshi]

''Hey check this girl out man''.

Basically that's the gist of the text version of this. To that i say: SO? How often don't you see this or is it portrayed in movies? And if we are talking about that, is Gesturing others to check someone out sexual harrasment? Doubtful.

Also since when is staring harrassment? Come on.

I feel like you are unable to visualize what is going on so you retort to a onesided definition of the term, when in reality, there are a shitton of variables that frankly make it impossible to verify what actually truly happened.

As such a discussion about this can never be complete. For all we know the victim blinked. The perp blinked. There was a microgesture from either end. We don't know.

His friend acknowledged that is was not mere blinking. I use above definition for sexual harassments, the criteria are met, so I use the term. In fact, I have been the only one who has given a defintion and whose reasoning thus can be verified. But let me tell you a small story about the last university I worked at: The sociologist had posters on every door claiming "this is no room for sexual violence, e.g.: (...) starring". I do not subscribe to that definition, but you see, calling it harassment is even on the lower spectrum of what sociologists would call it.

 

[Musky_Cheese]

A lot of stuff ain't relevant to GAF but we have threads on them anyways. Seems silly to close this if people still wish to use it because of current year argument. >_<

Not everyone wants an account on kiwifarms.

Well... I don’t think we give spotlight to other single dumb comments made around the internet.

But your opinion is valid too. Just sharing mine

 

[Dr. Claus]

His friend acknowledged that is was not mere blinking. I use above definition for sexual harassments, the criteria are met, so I use the term. In fact, I have been the only one who has given a defintion and whose reasoning thus can be verified. But let me tell you a small story about the last university I worked at: The sociologist had posters on every door claiming "this is no room for sexual violence, e.g.: (...) starring". I do not subscribe to that definition, but you see, calling it harassment is even on the lower spectrum of what sociologists would call it.

Your use of highly vague definitions to prove your use of the term does not make your use of the term correct. Also your sociologist was a nutter. There are some sociologists that try to push the Prejudice + Power = Racism, doesn't mean that they are intelligent or correct. Plus, there are plenty of universities whose degrees are nearly worthless in the greater scientific community.

 

[Papa]

I guess I’m violently sexually assaulting my TV any time I watch a movie then.

 

[Redneckerz]

His friend acknowledged that is was not mere blinking.

I am talking about the things that weren''t reported''. All we can go on is what the news says.

Even so if it was not just mere blinking: So the heck what? Is a stare instant harassment? People could have an illness that renders them in a staring state. With your logic, those people would be sexual harrassers, because you can't see the handicap.

Its far too simplistic to judge people like that and its miscommunication like that that has resulted in this weird... movement, i would say, where everything is weighed in on a petri dish of micro-aggressions. We are just third parties reading the news. If there was a geniune and intended act of harrassment, then the victim would be correct. The thing is, we don't know and we aren't supposed to know since its not our time and place to judge either side here.

In fact, I have been the only one who has given a defintion and whose reasoning thus can be verified.

Descriptors of definitions don't trump common sense reasoning though. Are you able to look at this situation from both ends?

But let me tell you a small story about the last university I worked at: The sociologist had posters on every door claiming "this is no room for sexual violence, e.g.: (...) starring". I do not subscribe to that definition, but you see, calling it harassment is even on the lower spectrum of what sociologists would call it.

I would find your sociologist creepy without the context. The context is (Probably) that there is a history of incidents at that place.

In which case we could ask what the actual problem is:

• The sociologist having to create and spread these creepy messages,
• or the fact that the university you worked at either is not aware of the situation or simply didn't give a shit?
• 

Moreover, since you worked there, what did you do to improve the situation?

I guess I’m violently sexually assaulting my TV any time I watch a movie then.

I heard that [vis_name][/vis_name] does that frequently. Why this user has an account here is beyond me.

 

[bigedole]

I guess I’m violently sexually assaulting my TV any time I watch a movie then.

Damnit, I just sexually harassed 2001 Jennifer Connelly again

 

[JordanN]

Resetera's administration continues to protect Israel for some reason.

https://www.resetera.com/threads/te...ry-pro-israel-oath.87749/page-2#post-16069904

So how does the oppression olympics work? Israel is a Jewish state but they illegally occupy territory belonging to brown muslim people (a.k.a Palestinians).

A broken clock is right twice a day. Even Crazy lefties know something is wrong with Israel's influence, but Cerium's forum is ready to call it "anti-semitism". Hmm....

 

[Yoshi]

I would find your sociologist creepy without the context. The context is (Probably) that there is a history of incidents at that place.

To my best knowledge no. It is part of their general awareness campaign, which also includes information about right pronouns and gender roles.

Descriptors of definitions don't trump common sense reasoning though. Are you able to look at this situation from both ends?

Words are nothing but agreed upon symbols for a specific meaning. Whether a word is applicable solely depends on the definitions of their semantics.