EPTHarassment/Abuse in StarCraft 2 - Page 51
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
We understand that this topic evokes strong feelings. In the interest of maintaining a necessary and productive discussion, we will be taking a strong stance against posters that clearly do not contribute to this aim. Dishonest and bad faith arguments, victim blaming, and attacks on other users, will be strictly moderated. A post which only serves to muddy the waters and dishonestly portray the nature of assault and harassment (and corresponding accusations) is also unwelcome. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
mcgormack
51 Posts
On June 28 2020 00:09 JimmiC wrote: Opinions are formed by interpreting facts . People are bound to interpret them differently. That you think the bar has not been met is not a fact. It is a fact how she felt. I think interpreting her truth as my opinion when we gave other supporting facts is completely reasonable. So it is my opinion that you dont actually not think it should be discussed, because if this was true you wouldn't continue to discuss and have the discussion make up 80% of your total post. I don't have a position on your true position, other than you are getting something out of it. What facts do we have about what Rapid did in this story? Other than the dick pic, I didn't see any. Opinions are formed by interpreting facts. How can we, as a community, form any opinion at all based on this story? We can't. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
lepape
Canada557 Posts
On June 28 2020 00:20 JimmiC wrote: The other 4 stories you seem to be unable or unwilling to see as related, even though they are near identical. How are they nearly identical? User was banned for this post. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
linestein
United States210 Posts
Basically, I see RAPiD as such a high profile figure that any allegations against him are shocking. It's not necessarily that I doubt the veracity of the allegations, or that I doubt the credibility of the accusers. Obviously, this is the internet, and unusual things are possible. However, it has more to do with the quality of the community (which is high) and stature that RAPiD possessed, which was fairly considerable. I think people experience a mix of emotions in replying to such an unexpected and relatively horrifying event. Now it is is obvious that the evidence against RAPiD is truly considerable. The similarity of the statements, and the quantity of accusers seem sufficient to establish the case. Hopefully I can speak for many people by expressing my surprise and dismay. More than anything, there is the wish that the allegations and concerns were untrue for the sake of the community. It is certainly not a desire to discredit any victim, but rather a more general sense of sadness. How could this happen in our small and tight-knit community? Perhaps I can speak for many of the people who are worried about the situation when I say that we are taken by surprise and wish that the situation could be absolved. That is all I have to say on the issue. | ||
|
dbRic1203
Germany2655 Posts
On June 28 2020 02:07 linestein wrote: I want to apologize for my comments earlier in the thread. Hopefully I can win some collective leniency from the mods in my explanation. Basically, I see RAPiD as such a high profile figure that any allegations against him are shocking. It's not necessarily that I doubt the veracity of the allegations, or that I doubt the credibility of the accusers. Obviously, this is the internet, and unusual things are possible. However, it has more to do with the quality of the community (which is high) and stature that RAPiD possessed, which was fairly considerable. I think people experience a mix of emotions in replying to such an unexpected and relatively horrifying event. Now it is is obvious that the evidence against RAPiD is truly considerable. The similarity of the statements, and the quantity of accusers seem sufficient to establish the case. Hopefully I can speak for many people by expressing my surprise and dismay. More than anything, there is the wish that the allegations and concerns were untrue for the sake of the community. It is certainly not a desire to discredit any victim, but rather a more general sense of sadness. How could this happen in our small and tight-knit community? Perhaps I can speak for many of the people who are worried about the situation when I say that we are taken by surprise and wish that the situation could be absolved. That is all I have to say on the issue. A lot of us share your sadness and suprise about what happend. I like Grubbys Mindset about it, trying to see the positive of this, that we have the chance to improve as a community and prevent further incidents | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5217 Posts
On June 27 2020 17:43 EsportsJohn wrote: The moderation team has already had a discussion with me. This thread is not really a debate between two equally valid stances but rather an attempt by a handful to help educate and untangle the ignorant gaslighting posts by others. The overall opinion is in favor of supporting the people speaking out, and a small handful of people are trying to distract or dilute the message with nonsensical theoretical arguments that are designed to just make the other side give up rather than prove anything meaningful. The moderation team is unfortunately bound by strictures to try and keep an open, civil discourse so that TL.net doesn't go the way of censorship. While I (again) greatly appreciate the people who are engaging the troll posts in a level-headed manner, I also think it's important to single out those who do not contribute to the discussion in any meaningful or valid way with the most blunt and straightforward language. This can be done without an ad hominem attack. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem Because what you're doing here is engaging them at their level, and now they'll invariably use an argument of false equivalency that will win support. In fact, it clearly already has. By calling people names, you're drawing attention away from the topic at hand and muddying the waters. The point should always be the ideas at hand, not the individuals currently stating them, because anyone can repeat that argument in the future, and you'll be stuck in assassinating their character if you respond with ad hominem attacks. But by exposing the ideas as wrong, you expose the all people who trumpet them. Every single one of them. And that is far more damning than ever calling any individual a name, could be. | ||
|
mcgormackk
2 Posts
On June 28 2020 00:55 JimmiC wrote: Sent un-requested dick pics. The big difference is the other women didn't believe the BS. And really at this point, what is it day 5 with no statement. I think we can put this one to bed as it is a good thing to have him out of the scene and hope he gets help so he does not hurt anyone else. The part about dick pics is about 5% of the whole story. Let's not pretend that this story is nearly identical to the others just for this part, that would be dishonest. Whether you're willing to admit it or not, there are no facts in the other part of the story, only feelings, conclusions and subjectivity -- which are very important for the victims, let's not deny it or diminish it one bit. That's totally ok! However, without facts, we cannot form an opinion, you said it yourself. How can we, as observers, interpret anything from 95% of that testimony? That's really the ONLY point I'm trying to make here, which I think is very reasonable and fair to everyone involved. And no, I don't think I deserve to be trained in the mud for it, or treated as a mad rape apologist. User was banned for this post. | ||
|
puppykiller
United States3128 Posts
Anyway, anytime someone posts something about "due process" there's about four or five 7k+ posters who will swarm them, call them names, and bait them into a stupid argument in which they try to convince them that they are a "rape sympathizer" or something of the sort. This tactic is totally juvenile and tends to not do a lot of good from what I have seen. This raises several questions for me. Do the people who use this tactic actually believe that they can convince a stranger that they are a "rape sympathizer" over the internet? Are they doing it because it feels good and feels like progress? Are they doing it because they aren't confident that they are smart enough to co-opt someone into their line of reasoning, so they give up right away and instead just badger them? Are they just trying to mob bully them hoping to intimidate anyone else from posting a skeptical perspective? If this is the case they should consider that while it may look like they are making progress (since less people are championing a skepticism that they have prescribed as pernicious) they might instead just be feeding a massive contempt for progressive politics (what some often call the silent majority... though I don't know if it really is a majority or not), much of which is not an issue with desired progressive ends, but with some progressive's means. I apologize for diverting from the main issue. I think discussing the means in which we handle the topic is needed in order to make sure that the discussion of the topic itself runs smoother. I applaud those posting quality responses and engaging in a meaningful way, even when they have strong feelings about the issue. | ||
|
neptunusfisk
2286 Posts
On June 28 2020 00:16 mcgormack wrote: What facts do we have about what Rapid did in this story? Other than the dick pic, I didn't see any. Opinions are formed by interpreting facts. How can we, as a community, form any opinion at all based on this story? We can't. That's not how facts work Fact: a couple of people posted things about rapid You will have to process these statements, how they interplay and form an opinion about their credibility. Nothing will ever get a watertight "proof". You will only get more or less people finding something more or less plausible. | ||
|
mcgormackk
2 Posts
On June 28 2020 04:47 neptunusfisk wrote: That's not how facts work Fact: a couple of people posted things about rapid You will have to process these statements, how they interplay and form an opinion about their credibility. Nothing will ever get a watertight "proof". You will only get more or less people finding something more or less plausible. First, people posted FACTS about Rapid : 1. I was underage. 2. He sent me a dick pic. 3. He talked to me about his penis out of nowhere, I didn't even know him. Those are all facts. All very disgusting, creepy facts. Then, even more people corroborated those facts, giving them extra credibility. Now we have a testimony about FEELINGS and CONCLUSIONS. 1. He groomed me. 2. He exploited me. 3. He made me do things that made my skin crawl. 4. He abused me emotionally. There is not a single fact here. (And no, I did not invent that distinction. Not a single tribunal in the world will find someone guilty based on feelings and conclusions). However hurtful that these events were for the victims, please, we must at the very least distinguish between facts and feelings. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
neptunusfisk
2286 Posts
On June 28 2020 04:53 mcgormackk wrote: First, people posted FACTS about Rapid : 1. I was underage. 2. He sent me a dick pic. 3. He talked to me about his penis out of nowhere, I didn't even know him. Those are all facts. All very disgusting, creepy facts. Then, even more people corroborated those facts, giving them extra credibility. Now we have a testimony about FEELINGS and CONCLUSIONS. 1. He groomed me. 2. He exploited me. 3. He made me do things that made my skin crawl. 4. He abused me emotionally. There is not a single fact here. (And no, I did not invent that distinction. Not a single tribunal in the world considers feelings and conclusions when hearing a testimony). However hurtful that these events were for the victims, please, we must at the very least distinguish between facts and feelings. You clearly haven't read or taken in what I wrote. Those "facts" are claims which you and others (including me) find credible. Those "testimonies about feelings" are claims which you don't find credible. None of them are unquestionably factual. Edit: It seems like you are dismissing the second class of claims because they are less detailed or more abstract in nature. However, these types of claims can be detailed with lots of minor details outlining the larger theme in a way that would convince many people. Just because the summary is "he abused me emotionally" doesn't mean there can be hard and concrete claims in there. And yeah your statement that Not a single tribunal in the world considers feelings is ironically very untrue for someone claiming to only deal with FACTS | ||
|
mcgoormack
1 Post
On June 28 2020 05:00 neptunusfisk wrote: You clearly haven't read or taken in what I wrote. Those "facts" are claims which you and others (including me) find credible. Those "testimonies about feelings" are claims which you don't find credible. None of them are unquestionably factual. Edit: It seems like you are dismissing the second class of claims because they are less detailed or more abstract in nature. However, these types of claims can be detailed with lots of minor details outlining the larger theme in a way that would convince many people. Just because the summary is "he abused me emotionally" doesn't mean there can be hard and concrete claims in there. And yeah your statement that is ironically very untrue for someone claiming to only deal with FACTS Yes, maybe it's a semantic problem here, ''fact'' might not be the right word in English, I apologize. I'm not sure what would be the right word... maybe ''statement''? I don't mean ''fact'' as something proven true, only as an information that indicates something concrete that someone did. I totally agree that those claims can be detailled, and we're absolutely on the same boat here. I'm only saying that without those details, we unfortunately cannot do much with that information. (And yes, that type of information needs to be detailled in front of a tribunal also). User was banned for this post. | ||
|
neptunusfisk
2286 Posts
On June 28 2020 05:11 mcgoormack wrote: Yes, maybe it's a semantic problem here, ''fact'' might not be the right word in English, I apologize. I'm not sure what would be the right word... maybe ''statement''? I don't mean ''fact'' as something proven true, only as an information that indicates something concrete that someone did. I totally agree that those claims can be detailled, and we're absolutely on the same boat here. I'm only saying that without those details, we unfortunately cannot do much with that information. (And yes, that type of information needs to be detailled in front of a tribunal also). User was banned for this post. So basically you are trying to say that you find statements with many coherent minor details more credible than vague statements. I don't think you're alone in holding such a view, because I would tend to agree. However there is a balance of how much detail you can and want to provide when the subject matter is complicated and unpleasant to talk about. I believe that when they are inside some context of other statements, or just put forward in a credible way, vague statements can be valuable as well. | ||
|
WarSame
Canada1950 Posts
You've been banned I think 3 times now. Do you not get the message? You are a bad person and a malicious arguer. A number of us who hold the opinion that people should generally be willing to support accusers, while holding back final judgement, have engaged with a number of people who don't hold that opinion in good faith and had generally productive discussions about it, though I admit not everyone who shares my general opinion has the same patience at page 40 of the same cyclical discussion. It's not your opinions themselves that are the issue. It's you. | ||
|
mcgorrmack
1 Post
On June 28 2020 05:29 neptunusfisk wrote: So basically you are trying to say that you find statements with many coherent minor details more credible than vague statements. I don't think you're alone in holding such a view, because I would tend to agree. However there is a balance of how much detail you can and want to provide when the subject matter is complicated and unpleasant to talk about. I believe that when they are inside some context of other statements, or just put forward in a credible way, vague statements can be valuable as well. It's just about being fair to everyone, that's all. A person can't fairly defend herself or himself if accused of broad ''emotional abuse'', 'sexual harassment''. And we cannot pass a judgement on broad statements like that. Details are important. It's certainly unpleasant to talk about it, and we should respect victims for not wanting to. On June 28 2020 05:33 WarSame wrote: Mcgormack, it's not your opinions themselves that make you a bad person. It's that you are engaging in a discussion about a serious topic by dodging around every counter argument, simply refusing to answer when you've been proven wrong, and then continuing on repeating the point that's been proven wrong. While doing this you are trying to hold others to certain positions which they don't believe, all in order for you to... what? Stop us from talking about Rapid's FIFTH accuser? You've been banned I think 3 times now. Do you not get the message? I received about five replies for every post. I'm acting in good faith, but I cannot reply to every single counter argument, especially when many are essentially stawmen. I assure you that our points of view are not as different as you think here. The only reason I'm insisting on this topic (I would argue that I insist just as much as everyone else) is because I am convinced that these thoughts are very reasonable and that they represent what the majority of the community thinks. But as soon as I said them, I was getting attacked by very vocal members who do not represent the majority, deforming my posts and insisting on minute details. Again, the reaction to the same topic on Reddit, where lurkers can actually vote, I believe is fairly representative of what the majority thinks. I really meant no harm or insult to anyone, and I really think that we're all on the same side, peace. https://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/hga77m/another_accusation_against_rapid/ User was banned for this post. | ||
|
AttackZerg
United States7454 Posts
You are wrong. Mods clearly needed to be called out for doing a very, very bad job. If that was all independent thinking ... then maybe you guys need to make sure it isn't still just a bunch of dudes, lounging in the secret forums. | ||
|
kaboombaby
United States90 Posts
In the subredditdrama sub there was a post recently pointing to direct manipulation of the accusation posts on gaming subs by groups from subs that are notorious for hateful brigading. Specifically mentioned was the dota2 sub but there has been an influx of these posters all over. https://www.reddit.com/r/SubredditDrama/comments/hgm2uy/dota2_drama_continues_now_featuring_apparent/ As such, I'm not sure reddit holds much value as a genuine gauge of the community. I think teamliquid can remain it's own contained microcosm of discussion without needing external references to justify opinions. | ||
| ||
