|
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. |
Osaka27097 Posts
On June 28 2020 06:00 AttackZerg wrote:
Zatic
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.
If you have a specific concern, write a thread about it in website feedback and you will get a response from the moderation team.
I know you are upset, but you don't characterize the moderation process as "still just a bunch of dudes, lounging
in the secret forums." when you know that isn't the case. It is disingenuous.
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On June 28 2020 06:00 AttackZerg wrote:
Zatic
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.
We are doing our level best to make sure this thread:
A) is a place where those who have experienced abuse/harassment themselves do not feel like their experiences are discredited or like they are being blamed - which is a very real problem that many survivors struggle with.
B) does not discourage users who perhaps have not thought critically or been challenged on their views on this topic before from continuing to participate. If we cannot provide a forum for discussion where our users can come away with something of use, that's a huge failing in my eyes.
C) balance the fact that emotions naturally boil up on this topic against our rules regarding treating other users with some modicum of respect
D) ideally making sure no one feels like they are being unfairly targeted, especially not if they are making arguments or observations they genuinely feel are valid, by the moderators
E) measure the strong feelings many of the moderators (myself included) have on this topic against our own moderation rules to make sure moderation remains as fair as we can make it.
I have been trying to personally engage privately with many of the frequent posters in this thread in the interest of the above. You can be unhappy with how that work is going or with the state of this thread, but I think you're being a little unfair here. And as Manifesto said, if you have specific concerns you are welcome to bring them to the attention of a moderator privately or in Website Feedback. I assure you we take it seriously.
|
On June 28 2020 05:48 mcgorrmack wrote:
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.
This is a good point, it's hard to push back on such a broad accusation. However, they CAN push back on this by responding to details with details, and broad strokes with broad strokes.
Show nested quote +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.
You have walked past so many arguments against your points without acknowledging, while responding to the same repeated point around them that I don't believe you're arguing in good faith.
I know our POVs are not far apart. That's what I'm getting at. We believe the same thing(other than that stupid "it needs to be illegal to talk about it in public" opinion), yet I still believe this forum is better off without you. It's not your point of view itself that is that bad - I believe that can be informed and changed. It's your method of engagement.
Also,
1. Reddit is a huge hive mind-vulnerable place, so I would not put stock into what a subreddit is saying at one time. They often swing back and forth quickly during volatile times, like the Dota2 one has over this.
2. An opinion is not correct because it's popular. That includes, on this forum, the believe the victim mentality. I believe that mentality is correct, but not simply because it's the popular one here.
3. Reddit is being brigaded like crazy: https://twitter.com/LDeeep/status/1276602764143890433?s=19
|
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?
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.
Take a chill pill. I have nothing invested in defending mcgormack or their opinions but you are definitely not making this "discussion" any better.
But yes, apart from the ad hominem, I agree to the extent that the problem doesn't seem to be mcgormack's intentions or opinions (those seem fairly reasonable or at least understandable at the core), but 1) the inability of them to communicate these opinions in a good way and 2) the people responding being equally bad at communicating, saying stuff like "you are a bad person" which might be true but which in itself is besides the point.
|
I am calm, and have been since I got involved around page 20. After 30 pages it gets irritating, yet I remain calm.
I am being impolite, and that's a good thing in this case. We don't need to tolerate people like that in our communities. We are better off by being impolite and losing them than we are being polite and having them stick around and like a cancer grow.
I agree saying "you are a bad person" is besides the point of the main discussion. It wasn't an ad hominem, since I wasn't using it to make any argument related to the main discussion. Instead, it was related to the meta discussion, that we don't need to tolerate this sort of sealioning in our conversations.
|
In times like this Incontrol would be a hero =/
|
On June 28 2020 06:11 Zealously wrote:
We are doing our level best to make sure this thread:
A) is a place where those who have experienced abuse/harassment themselves do not feel like their experiences are discredited or like they are being blamed - which is a very real problem that many survivors struggle with.
B) does not discourage users who perhaps have not thought critically or been challenged on their views on this topic before from continuing to participate. If we cannot provide a forum for discussion where our users can come away with something of use, that's a huge failing in my eyes.
C) balance the fact that emotions naturally boil up on this topic against our rules regarding treating other users with some modicum of respect
D) ideally making sure no one feels like they are being unfairly targeted, especially not if they are making arguments or observations they genuinely feel are valid, by the moderators
E) measure the strong feelings many of the moderators (myself included) have on this topic against our own moderation rules to make sure moderation remains as fair as we can make it.
I have been trying to personally engage privately with many of the frequent posters in this thread in the interest of the above. You can be unhappy with how that work is going or with the state of this thread, but I think you're being a little unfair here. And as Manifesto said, if you have specific concerns you are welcome to bring them to the attention of a moderator privately or in Website Feedback. I assure you we take it seriously.
Thank you
|
It looks like bad times are coming for Redeye
Banks even said he has more stuff prepared for tomorrow..
|
Link not opening for me. Is it somewhere else
|
On June 28 2020 09:26 TentativePanda wrote:Link not opening for me. Is it somewhere else
It's in first page of both Dota and CSGO reddit
|
Northern Ireland23251 Posts
On June 28 2020 06:11 Zealously wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2020 06:00 AttackZerg wrote:
Zatic
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.
We are doing our level best to make sure this thread: A) is a place where those who have experienced abuse/harassment themselves do not feel like their experiences are discredited or like they are being blamed - which is a very real problem that many survivors struggle with. B) does not discourage users who perhaps have not thought critically or been challenged on their views on this topic before from continuing to participate. If we cannot provide a forum for discussion where our users can come away with something of use, that's a huge failing in my eyes. C) balance the fact that emotions naturally boil up on this topic against our rules regarding treating other users with some modicum of respect D) ideally making sure no one feels like they are being unfairly targeted, especially not if they are making arguments or observations they genuinely feel are valid, by the moderators E) measure the strong feelings many of the moderators (myself included) have on this topic against our own moderation rules to make sure moderation remains as fair as we can make it. I have been trying to personally engage privately with many of the frequent posters in this thread in the interest of the above. You can be unhappy with how that work is going or with the state of this thread, but I think you're being a little unfair here. And as Manifesto said, if you have specific concerns you are welcome to bring them to the attention of a moderator privately or in Website Feedback. I assure you we take it seriously.
A very tough balancing act, I feel that has largely been managed with some alacrity from you guys.
Thanks for keeping TL a rare corner of the internet I can actually stomach discussions on.
|
Why was the word sexual removed from the title? Are we trying to obfuscate or minimize what happened, or are there legitimately lots of non-sexual stories being added to the thread?
|
On June 28 2020 09:37 nath wrote:
Why was the word sexual removed from the title? Are we trying to obfuscate or minimize what happened, or are there legitimately lots of non-sexual stories being added to the thread?
There are legitimately non-sexual stories being added to the thread and having even one is enough to make "Sexual harassment/abuse" an inaccurate thread title.
Let's focus on the actual stories and not dwell in the meta-meta-meta level, shall we?
|
Kind of a side note (but a very important one), but I hope everyone does a little critical thinking when they see the common theme of those being accused threatening some sort of backlash, usually legal, if stories are released.
What I cannot ignore is if it’s *this* hard to come forward both emotionally and legally to accuse (usually rightly so) a damn esports professional about sexual abuse or just abuse in general, imagine how borderline impossible it is to come out when it’s someone with substantial legal and financial power.
Why do you think Trump, Bloomberg, Epstein etc don’t have countless public cases/accusations out right now? Why are private industry companies not being openly accused and punished for employment related and business related crimes daily? Why are top athletes, politicians, business men and the like the last people accused of the assaults they committed?
Power is a terrible thing and it directly prohibits justice and veils wrongdoings. These legal threats and whatnot coming from those accused in the esports world are a horrible sign as to what goes on when people with significantly more power are accused. I hope people catch onto this.
EDIT: Not minimizing the actions of the accused in the esports world, just pondering the extent of how much more awful shit goes on behind more powerful closed doors, and if one day we can disrupt that power.
|
On June 28 2020 10:09 TentativePanda wrote:
Kind of a side note (but a very important one), but I hope everyone does a little critical thinking when they see the common theme of those being accused threatening some sort of backlash, usually legal, if stories are released.
What I cannot ignore is if it’s *this* hard to come forward both emotionally and legally to accuse (usually rightly so) a damn esports professional about sexual abuse or just abuse in general, imagine how borderline impossible it is to come out when it’s someone with substantial legal and financial power.
Why do you think Trump, Bloomberg, Epstein etc don’t have countless public cases/accusations out right now? Why are private industry companies not being openly accused and punished for employment related and business related crimes daily? Why are top athletes, politicians, business men and the like the last people accused of the assaults they committed?
Power is a terrible thing and it directly prohibits justice and veils wrongdoings. These legal threats and whatnot coming from those accused in the esports world are a horrible sign as to what goes on when people with significantly more power are accused. I hope people catch onto this.
EDIT: Not minimizing the actions of the accused in the esports world, just pondering the extent of how much more awful shit goes on behind more powerful closed doors, and if one day we can disrupt that power.
What would be the appropriate response if no abuse happened at all, but the person still had their reputation tarnished by the accusation (and possibly lost their source of income)?
|
Yeah, there's a ton of corroboration on Redeye apparently being seriously exploitative and abusive towards multiple people, even physically assaulting at least one individual. Seriously, seriously shitty behavior, and it's been going on for a long time.
|
On June 28 2020 10:15 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2020 10:09 TentativePanda wrote:
Kind of a side note (but a very important one), but I hope everyone does a little critical thinking when they see the common theme of those being accused threatening some sort of backlash, usually legal, if stories are released.
What I cannot ignore is if it’s *this* hard to come forward both emotionally and legally to accuse (usually rightly so) a damn esports professional about sexual abuse or just abuse in general, imagine how borderline impossible it is to come out when it’s someone with substantial legal and financial power.
Why do you think Trump, Bloomberg, Epstein etc don’t have countless public cases/accusations out right now? Why are private industry companies not being openly accused and punished for employment related and business related crimes daily? Why are top athletes, politicians, business men and the like the last people accused of the assaults they committed?
Power is a terrible thing and it directly prohibits justice and veils wrongdoings. These legal threats and whatnot coming from those accused in the esports world are a horrible sign as to what goes on when people with significantly more power are accused. I hope people catch onto this.
EDIT: Not minimizing the actions of the accused in the esports world, just pondering the extent of how much more awful shit goes on behind more powerful closed doors, and if one day we can disrupt that power. What would be the appropriate response if no abuse happened at all, but the person still had their reputation tarnished by the accusation (and possibly lost their source of income)?
Not the topic of my post whatsoever. It’s a conversation to have, but clearly not the one I was bringing up. Nice bait
|
Actually, he has a point. Not every word, not semantically. But the distinction that he made (to a certain extent, but not the way he classified as 'facts' versus 'feelings').
Fact 1: X hit Y last night, and Y died
Fact 2: X murdered Y
Now, both are 'facts', semantically. But in law, the second fact is known as 'fact in issue' which only a court can make a 'finding of fact' whether such is true or false, given the evidence (unless, of course, X pleads guilty).
It is not really appropriate for people to make statements alleging the second fact. You could be sued for defamation. Even the media is careful in choosing their words in such reports (e.g. "X charged with murder" or "Y died, X main suspect"). Basically, no-one can suggest (explicitly or implicitly) the second fact until proven in court.
That's just some basics of criminal law that most liberal democracies adhere to (whether common law like UK, or civil law like Germany).
Please, don't get my intentions wrong. I am in no way supporting his opinions, nor trying to deflect the issue. But as someone who has some legal training, I feel it's important to clarify and educate.
On June 28 2020 04:53 mcgormackk wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2020 04:47 neptunusfisk wrote:On June 28 2020 00:16 mcgormack wrote: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. 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.
|
This isn't criminal law we're talking about, and it's probably best to leave the fifty different versions of mcgormack and their posts out of this.
|
Paul was a massive tool the few times I had the displeasure of working with him, nothing physical or abusive but just generally not co-operative. Sad to hear about the stuff that happened to James and many others and I hope Paul gets his comeuppance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
