|
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. |
I feel that almost everyone here actually have the same concern in common - systemic oppression against vulnerable minorities. It's just that the different problems manifest in different places. In some parts of the world, minorities are being silenced and have no avenue to voice their complaints (liberal democracies). In other parts of the world, minorities are constantly living in terror under a police state that can build up false or trivial charges against them (semi-totalitarian regime: 'Show me the man, I'll show you the crime'). In some parts of the world, both problems exist.
It's ironic and sad that so many of us here are divided simply because we're too caught up with one side of the same coin. It's not a matter of heads or tails, damnit. We need to change to a new coin! The world is bigger than US, Russia and China. We're more alike than we realise. We all have our hearts in the right place. We're in this together now.
|
On July 13 2020 11:14 Jealous wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2020 07:56 Nebuchad wrote:
Pretty impressive to start from harassment in video games and end up talking about equity vs equality, people are really good at escaping the conversations they don't want US Pol is spilling and while there doesn't seem to be any new developments with the main topic, I think it best if we try to stick to the pressing issues and not lofty philosophical debate. Reddit Smash was similarly getting derailed into the discussion of age of consent ethics and all this other stuff; I think these derailments actually detract from the topic at hand.
Agreed. When victims/survivors are coming forward with their stories about how they *didn't consent* to harassment/assault, it really misses the point to have a discussion on what the ideal age of consent should be.
|
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On July 11 2020 12:33 tskarzyn wrote:Show nested quote +On July 11 2020 10:27 Wombat_NI wrote:
If you want a world where you’re free to send women dick pics just be up front about it, stop dancing around it with this transparent bollocks you’re throwing out Hate to disappoint, but I've been with my wife for 15 years, have never sent a DP, and keep work relationships professional. I understand the goal from people ITT, and it is a lofty one, but it's impossible to come close to *eliminating* sexism, racism, or any other ism that causes offense without extraordinary authoritarian measures. I just hope there is some line you wouldn't cross in the pursuit of your goal. The EU wanted to end hate speech, and now they're arresting teenagers for tasteless jokes. In one survey on speech, only 18% of Germans said they felt comfortable expressing personal beliefs in public. Shoot me if I have to live in some mind numbing society where people have to falsify their beliefs and the government uses force to make citizens "nicer" to each other.
I'm curious what you think what the appropriate structures are that we could immediately build as a society in order to assuage the concerns of people that feel or have felt threatened, demeaned, harassed, assaulted or otherwise made to feel unsafe, given that there is a very widespread notion that the existing authorities cannot fulfill their designated function here. You're talking about how many Germans say they feel comfortable expressing personal beliefs in public. How many Germans feel comfortable going to the police, their university staff, their immediate workplace superior, and so forth, to report sexual harassment? I likewise feel it's a problem if people don't feel comfortable expressing their private views in public, but not all private views need to be expressed in public, especially not if they are to the detriment of others. But whatever the percentage is, actual violence/harassment seems like the larger issue of the two. Rape and other sexual crimes are infamously underreported and, perhaps in even greater extent, typically do not result in a satisfactory resolution for the victim. What could possibly create such a system of silence except a feeling of powerlessness over your circumstances?
The state and the judicial system (and authorities generally in this case and in the arguments you have been making) exist to serve and protect individuals. If people (read: usually women) feel they are not seen/heard and that their legitimate grievances are not respected by authorities (read: the authorities have failed), and the only place where they have real power to institute change is by making their stories public, what do you suggest they do? Because, since I'm sure we both agree sexual assault is far too widespread, something obviously needs to change, and there is no large-scale or structural change underway.
|
On July 13 2020 19:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2020 11:14 Jealous wrote:On July 13 2020 07:56 Nebuchad wrote:
Pretty impressive to start from harassment in video games and end up talking about equity vs equality, people are really good at escaping the conversations they don't want US Pol is spilling and while there doesn't seem to be any new developments with the main topic, I think it best if we try to stick to the pressing issues and not lofty philosophical debate. Reddit Smash was similarly getting derailed into the discussion of age of consent ethics and all this other stuff; I think these derailments actually detract from the topic at hand. Agreed. When victims/survivors are coming forward with their stories about how they *didn't consent* to harassment/assault, it really misses the point to have a discussion on what the ideal age of consent should be.
if some one comes forward with a story, i don't think age of consent is a factor. i have many objections to your post. for instance, what the hell does age of consent have to do with some one feeling uncomfortable with a sexual advance?
edit: my bad, see below
|
On July 14 2020 01:40 Alejandrisha wrote:Show nested quote +On July 13 2020 19:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 13 2020 11:14 Jealous wrote:On July 13 2020 07:56 Nebuchad wrote:
Pretty impressive to start from harassment in video games and end up talking about equity vs equality, people are really good at escaping the conversations they don't want US Pol is spilling and while there doesn't seem to be any new developments with the main topic, I think it best if we try to stick to the pressing issues and not lofty philosophical debate. Reddit Smash was similarly getting derailed into the discussion of age of consent ethics and all this other stuff; I think these derailments actually detract from the topic at hand. Agreed. When victims/survivors are coming forward with their stories about how they *didn't consent* to harassment/assault, it really misses the point to have a discussion on what the ideal age of consent should be. if some one comes forward with a story, i don't think age of consent is a factor. i have many objections to your post. for instance, what the hell does age of consent have to do with some one feeling uncomfortable with a sexual advance?
Are you asking me those questions, or did you mean to quote someone else?
|
On July 14 2020 02:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2020 01:40 Alejandrisha wrote:On July 13 2020 19:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 13 2020 11:14 Jealous wrote:On July 13 2020 07:56 Nebuchad wrote:
Pretty impressive to start from harassment in video games and end up talking about equity vs equality, people are really good at escaping the conversations they don't want US Pol is spilling and while there doesn't seem to be any new developments with the main topic, I think it best if we try to stick to the pressing issues and not lofty philosophical debate. Reddit Smash was similarly getting derailed into the discussion of age of consent ethics and all this other stuff; I think these derailments actually detract from the topic at hand. Agreed. When victims/survivors are coming forward with their stories about how they *didn't consent* to harassment/assault, it really misses the point to have a discussion on what the ideal age of consent should be. if some one comes forward with a story, i don't think age of consent is a factor. i have many objections to your post. for instance, what the hell does age of consent have to do with some one feeling uncomfortable with a sexual advance? Are you asking me those questions, or did you mean to quote someone else?
i am asking you a single question: if some one makes an inappropriate advance, where does the age of consent come into play if the recipient is uncomfortable
she could be 16 or 37. both could be subject to sexual advances with career ambissions on the line. what does age matter in these cases and why does the age of consent need to be brought in to question
edit: my bad; see below
|
On July 14 2020 04:52 Alejandrisha wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2020 02:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 14 2020 01:40 Alejandrisha wrote:On July 13 2020 19:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 13 2020 11:14 Jealous wrote:On July 13 2020 07:56 Nebuchad wrote:
Pretty impressive to start from harassment in video games and end up talking about equity vs equality, people are really good at escaping the conversations they don't want US Pol is spilling and while there doesn't seem to be any new developments with the main topic, I think it best if we try to stick to the pressing issues and not lofty philosophical debate. Reddit Smash was similarly getting derailed into the discussion of age of consent ethics and all this other stuff; I think these derailments actually detract from the topic at hand. Agreed. When victims/survivors are coming forward with their stories about how they *didn't consent* to harassment/assault, it really misses the point to have a discussion on what the ideal age of consent should be. if some one comes forward with a story, i don't think age of consent is a factor. i have many objections to your post. for instance, what the hell does age of consent have to do with some one feeling uncomfortable with a sexual advance? Are you asking me those questions, or did you mean to quote someone else? i am asking you a single question: if some one makes an inappropriate advance, where does the age of consent come into play if the recipient is uncomfortable she could be 16 or 37. both could be subject to sexual advances with career ambissions on the line. what does age matter in these cases and why does the age of consent need to be brought in to question
It doesn't. At all. That's what I was saying and agreeing with. That's why the words "derailment" and "detract" were used. I think you misread my post.
|
I don't know who I need to speak to about this, but I'd appreciate if my name wasn't included in this considering the post made on reddit was full of straight up lies with zero proof to back up the false allegations against me (Rifkin)
It's not a secret, but it's also not something heavily publicized by me, but I'm asexual, so the idea that they accused me of asking them back to my hotel room is just absurd. Furthered made ridiculous by the fact that every time I've ever attended an event it's been sharing a room with zombiegrub, or feardragon, or panicswitched, or allaryce etc.
|
Bisutopia19139 Posts
On July 14 2020 07:43 BasetradeTV wrote:
I don't know who I need to speak to about this, but I'd appreciate if my name wasn't included in this considering the post made on reddit was full of straight up lies with zero proof to back up the false allegations against me (Rifkin)
It's not a secret, but it's also not something heavily publicized by me, but I'm asexual, so the idea that they accused me of asking them back to my hotel room is just absurd. Furthered made ridiculous by the fact that every time I've ever attended an event it's been sharing a room with zombiegrub, or feardragon, or panicswitched, or allaryce etc.
I removed it for you. You deserve an equal opportunity to stand up for yourself. If something new comes to light that is substantiated then we will make sure to be thorough about whether it should be in the OP or not.
However, I must call some BS on your statement. I'm not sure there is a man or woman of any orientation out there who can resist feardragon.
|
On July 14 2020 05:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2020 04:52 Alejandrisha wrote:On July 14 2020 02:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 14 2020 01:40 Alejandrisha wrote:On July 13 2020 19:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 13 2020 11:14 Jealous wrote:On July 13 2020 07:56 Nebuchad wrote:
Pretty impressive to start from harassment in video games and end up talking about equity vs equality, people are really good at escaping the conversations they don't want US Pol is spilling and while there doesn't seem to be any new developments with the main topic, I think it best if we try to stick to the pressing issues and not lofty philosophical debate. Reddit Smash was similarly getting derailed into the discussion of age of consent ethics and all this other stuff; I think these derailments actually detract from the topic at hand. Agreed. When victims/survivors are coming forward with their stories about how they *didn't consent* to harassment/assault, it really misses the point to have a discussion on what the ideal age of consent should be. if some one comes forward with a story, i don't think age of consent is a factor. i have many objections to your post. for instance, what the hell does age of consent have to do with some one feeling uncomfortable with a sexual advance? Are you asking me those questions, or did you mean to quote someone else? i am asking you a single question: if some one makes an inappropriate advance, where does the age of consent come into play if the recipient is uncomfortable she could be 16 or 37. both could be subject to sexual advances with career ambissions on the line. what does age matter in these cases and why does the age of consent need to be brought in to question It doesn't. At all. That's what I was saying and agreeing with. That's why the words "derailment" and "detract" were used. I think you misread my post.
didn't quite peruse your quoted post to the fullest extent. i see you were only going off of his post. so, i won't direct the question at you, but i will ask, what does the age of consent have to do with abuse?? (once again, sorry plasma)
|
|
|
On July 14 2020 08:53 Alejandrisha wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2020 05:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 14 2020 04:52 Alejandrisha wrote:On July 14 2020 02:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 14 2020 01:40 Alejandrisha wrote:On July 13 2020 19:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 13 2020 11:14 Jealous wrote:On July 13 2020 07:56 Nebuchad wrote:
Pretty impressive to start from harassment in video games and end up talking about equity vs equality, people are really good at escaping the conversations they don't want US Pol is spilling and while there doesn't seem to be any new developments with the main topic, I think it best if we try to stick to the pressing issues and not lofty philosophical debate. Reddit Smash was similarly getting derailed into the discussion of age of consent ethics and all this other stuff; I think these derailments actually detract from the topic at hand. Agreed. When victims/survivors are coming forward with their stories about how they *didn't consent* to harassment/assault, it really misses the point to have a discussion on what the ideal age of consent should be. if some one comes forward with a story, i don't think age of consent is a factor. i have many objections to your post. for instance, what the hell does age of consent have to do with some one feeling uncomfortable with a sexual advance? Are you asking me those questions, or did you mean to quote someone else? i am asking you a single question: if some one makes an inappropriate advance, where does the age of consent come into play if the recipient is uncomfortable she could be 16 or 37. both could be subject to sexual advances with career ambissions on the line. what does age matter in these cases and why does the age of consent need to be brought in to question It doesn't. At all. That's what I was saying and agreeing with. That's why the words "derailment" and "detract" were used. I think you misread my post. didn't quite peruse your quoted post to the fullest extent. i see you were only going off of his post. so, i won't direct the question at you, but i will ask, what does the age of consent have to do with abuse?? (once again, sorry plasma)
Read again, it's not hard to understand.
|
On July 14 2020 08:53 Alejandrisha wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2020 05:33 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 14 2020 04:52 Alejandrisha wrote:On July 14 2020 02:19 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 14 2020 01:40 Alejandrisha wrote:On July 13 2020 19:20 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 13 2020 11:14 Jealous wrote:On July 13 2020 07:56 Nebuchad wrote:
Pretty impressive to start from harassment in video games and end up talking about equity vs equality, people are really good at escaping the conversations they don't want US Pol is spilling and while there doesn't seem to be any new developments with the main topic, I think it best if we try to stick to the pressing issues and not lofty philosophical debate. Reddit Smash was similarly getting derailed into the discussion of age of consent ethics and all this other stuff; I think these derailments actually detract from the topic at hand. Agreed. When victims/survivors are coming forward with their stories about how they *didn't consent* to harassment/assault, it really misses the point to have a discussion on what the ideal age of consent should be. if some one comes forward with a story, i don't think age of consent is a factor. i have many objections to your post. for instance, what the hell does age of consent have to do with some one feeling uncomfortable with a sexual advance? Are you asking me those questions, or did you mean to quote someone else? i am asking you a single question: if some one makes an inappropriate advance, where does the age of consent come into play if the recipient is uncomfortable she could be 16 or 37. both could be subject to sexual advances with career ambissions on the line. what does age matter in these cases and why does the age of consent need to be brought in to question It doesn't. At all. That's what I was saying and agreeing with. That's why the words "derailment" and "detract" were used. I think you misread my post. didn't quite peruse your quoted post to the fullest extent. i see you were only going off of his post. so, i won't direct the question at you, but i will ask, what does the age of consent have to do with abuse?? (once again, sorry plasma)
In these specific instances, where people are stepping forward and saying they did not consent at all, the age of consent doesn't matter. The age of consent would really only matter in a statutory situation where both parties were interested in the action but technically one person was slightly too young (legally) and therefore didn't consent on an age-related technicality, which is a very different conversation than a survivor saying that they didn't want the abuse/advances/harassment/assault at all. And changing this discussion to what the ideal age of consent is, rather than actually addressing the actual allegations and stories that the survivors didn't want at all, is a derailment that shouldn't be happening. I think you're agreeing with Jealous and me, but just misunderstood what our posts said.
|
Northern Ireland23248 Posts
On July 14 2020 08:24 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2020 07:43 BasetradeTV wrote:
I don't know who I need to speak to about this, but I'd appreciate if my name wasn't included in this considering the post made on reddit was full of straight up lies with zero proof to back up the false allegations against me (Rifkin)
It's not a secret, but it's also not something heavily publicized by me, but I'm asexual, so the idea that they accused me of asking them back to my hotel room is just absurd. Furthered made ridiculous by the fact that every time I've ever attended an event it's been sharing a room with zombiegrub, or feardragon, or panicswitched, or allaryce etc. I removed it for you. You deserve an equal opportunity to stand up for yourself. If something new comes to light that is substantiated then we will make sure to be thorough about whether it should be in the OP or not. However, I must call some BS on your statement. I'm not sure there is a man or woman of any orientation out there who can resist feardragon.
Agreed, especially the Feardragon part.
But in seriousness I think that’s the right mod call, the reddit OP was deleted for whatever reason so at least to someone who didn’t see it initially there is little I can glean from it/it appears to have been retracted in some form or another.
|
On July 14 2020 13:12 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2020 08:24 BisuDagger wrote:On July 14 2020 07:43 BasetradeTV wrote:
I don't know who I need to speak to about this, but I'd appreciate if my name wasn't included in this considering the post made on reddit was full of straight up lies with zero proof to back up the false allegations against me (Rifkin)
It's not a secret, but it's also not something heavily publicized by me, but I'm asexual, so the idea that they accused me of asking them back to my hotel room is just absurd. Furthered made ridiculous by the fact that every time I've ever attended an event it's been sharing a room with zombiegrub, or feardragon, or panicswitched, or allaryce etc. I removed it for you. You deserve an equal opportunity to stand up for yourself. If something new comes to light that is substantiated then we will make sure to be thorough about whether it should be in the OP or not. However, I must call some BS on your statement. I'm not sure there is a man or woman of any orientation out there who can resist feardragon. Agreed, especially the Feardragon part. But in seriousness I think that’s the right mod call, the reddit OP was deleted for whatever reason so at least to someone who didn’t see it initially there is little I can glean from it/it appears to have been retracted in some form or another.
Help me understand why this doesn't conform to the 'always believe the accuser' rule?
I thought that rule was a matter of principle.
I'm not trying to use a gotcha argument or argue in bad faith, i'm genuinely curious.
|
Northern Ireland23248 Posts
On July 14 2020 13:16 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2020 13:12 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 14 2020 08:24 BisuDagger wrote:On July 14 2020 07:43 BasetradeTV wrote:
I don't know who I need to speak to about this, but I'd appreciate if my name wasn't included in this considering the post made on reddit was full of straight up lies with zero proof to back up the false allegations against me (Rifkin)
It's not a secret, but it's also not something heavily publicized by me, but I'm asexual, so the idea that they accused me of asking them back to my hotel room is just absurd. Furthered made ridiculous by the fact that every time I've ever attended an event it's been sharing a room with zombiegrub, or feardragon, or panicswitched, or allaryce etc. I removed it for you. You deserve an equal opportunity to stand up for yourself. If something new comes to light that is substantiated then we will make sure to be thorough about whether it should be in the OP or not. However, I must call some BS on your statement. I'm not sure there is a man or woman of any orientation out there who can resist feardragon. Agreed, especially the Feardragon part. But in seriousness I think that’s the right mod call, the reddit OP was deleted for whatever reason so at least to someone who didn’t see it initially there is little I can glean from it/it appears to have been retracted in some form or another. Help me understand why this doesn't conform to the 'always believe the accuser' rule? I thought that rule was a matter of principle. I'm not trying to use a gotcha argument or argue in bad faith, i'm genuinely curious.
There’s nothing to believe, or disbelieve. The reddit post OP doesn’t contain anything now.
So if you’re like me and didn’t see it until relatively recently and you go in there’s nothing there in terms of allegations, just a ‘this post has been deleted’.
With the other posts there are allegations with details of said allegations, with Rifkin being in the OP there is... nothing. Bar responses to the allegations.
I feel it’s unfair to lump in Rifkin with other allegations that have tons of detail behind their allegations, corroboration etc when the allegations against him don’t even have an existing post.
I really am a complete Reddit noob though, just use it to steal Starcraft builds, I’m unsure if the person who made the post deleted it, or mods deleted it.
I assumed the former but then again, Reddit noob. TL lets you know if a mod has nuked a post or a user has edited it or w/e.
It’s not that I want to not believe an accusation, I just don’t even know what is being alleged in this particular incident so to have it lumped in with the other accusations outlined in this thread seems a bit off to me.
|
On July 14 2020 13:29 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2020 13:16 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 14 2020 13:12 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 14 2020 08:24 BisuDagger wrote:On July 14 2020 07:43 BasetradeTV wrote:
I don't know who I need to speak to about this, but I'd appreciate if my name wasn't included in this considering the post made on reddit was full of straight up lies with zero proof to back up the false allegations against me (Rifkin)
It's not a secret, but it's also not something heavily publicized by me, but I'm asexual, so the idea that they accused me of asking them back to my hotel room is just absurd. Furthered made ridiculous by the fact that every time I've ever attended an event it's been sharing a room with zombiegrub, or feardragon, or panicswitched, or allaryce etc. I removed it for you. You deserve an equal opportunity to stand up for yourself. If something new comes to light that is substantiated then we will make sure to be thorough about whether it should be in the OP or not. However, I must call some BS on your statement. I'm not sure there is a man or woman of any orientation out there who can resist feardragon. Agreed, especially the Feardragon part. But in seriousness I think that’s the right mod call, the reddit OP was deleted for whatever reason so at least to someone who didn’t see it initially there is little I can glean from it/it appears to have been retracted in some form or another. Help me understand why this doesn't conform to the 'always believe the accuser' rule? I thought that rule was a matter of principle. I'm not trying to use a gotcha argument or argue in bad faith, i'm genuinely curious. There’s nothing to believe, or disbelieve. The reddit post OP doesn’t contain anything now. So if you’re like me and didn’t see it until relatively recently and you go in there’s nothing there in terms of allegations, just a ‘this post has been deleted’. With the other posts there are allegations with details of said allegations, with Rifkin being in the OP there is... nothing. Bar responses to the allegations. I feel it’s unfair to lump in Rifkin with other allegations that have tons of detail behind their allegations, corroboration etc when the allegations against him don’t even have an existing post. I really am a complete Reddit noob though, just use it to steal Starcraft builds, I’m unsure if the person who made the post deleted it, or mods deleted it. I assumed the former but then again, Reddit noob. TL lets you know if a mod has nuked a post or a user has edited it or w/e. It’s not that I want to not believe an accusation, I just don’t even know what is being alleged in this particular incident so to have it lumped in with the other accusations outlined in this thread seems a bit off to me.
The Starcraft 2 subreddit has a 'no accusations' rule i think and it was deleted by mods (as I understand it).
The accusation wasn't really one of sexual harrassment or anything. The user said that rifkin was generally sleazy and invited her and other women back to her flat and things like 'his only tweets are to women saying they have a nice bum' and stuff like that. I don't think they were trying to get him fired, just throwing a bunch of kinda vague accusations his way that he's a pretty sleazy guy.
I'll admit I don't know what to think of it.
|
Northern Ireland23248 Posts
On July 14 2020 13:34 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2020 13:29 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 14 2020 13:16 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 14 2020 13:12 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 14 2020 08:24 BisuDagger wrote:On July 14 2020 07:43 BasetradeTV wrote:
I don't know who I need to speak to about this, but I'd appreciate if my name wasn't included in this considering the post made on reddit was full of straight up lies with zero proof to back up the false allegations against me (Rifkin)
It's not a secret, but it's also not something heavily publicized by me, but I'm asexual, so the idea that they accused me of asking them back to my hotel room is just absurd. Furthered made ridiculous by the fact that every time I've ever attended an event it's been sharing a room with zombiegrub, or feardragon, or panicswitched, or allaryce etc. I removed it for you. You deserve an equal opportunity to stand up for yourself. If something new comes to light that is substantiated then we will make sure to be thorough about whether it should be in the OP or not. However, I must call some BS on your statement. I'm not sure there is a man or woman of any orientation out there who can resist feardragon. Agreed, especially the Feardragon part. But in seriousness I think that’s the right mod call, the reddit OP was deleted for whatever reason so at least to someone who didn’t see it initially there is little I can glean from it/it appears to have been retracted in some form or another. Help me understand why this doesn't conform to the 'always believe the accuser' rule? I thought that rule was a matter of principle. I'm not trying to use a gotcha argument or argue in bad faith, i'm genuinely curious. There’s nothing to believe, or disbelieve. The reddit post OP doesn’t contain anything now. So if you’re like me and didn’t see it until relatively recently and you go in there’s nothing there in terms of allegations, just a ‘this post has been deleted’. With the other posts there are allegations with details of said allegations, with Rifkin being in the OP there is... nothing. Bar responses to the allegations. I feel it’s unfair to lump in Rifkin with other allegations that have tons of detail behind their allegations, corroboration etc when the allegations against him don’t even have an existing post. I really am a complete Reddit noob though, just use it to steal Starcraft builds, I’m unsure if the person who made the post deleted it, or mods deleted it. I assumed the former but then again, Reddit noob. TL lets you know if a mod has nuked a post or a user has edited it or w/e. It’s not that I want to not believe an accusation, I just don’t even know what is being alleged in this particular incident so to have it lumped in with the other accusations outlined in this thread seems a bit off to me. The Starcraft 2 subreddit has a 'no accusations' rule i think and it was deleted by mods (as I understand it). The accusation wasn't really one of sexual harrassment or anything. The user said that rifkin was generally sleazy and invited her and other women back to her flat and things like 'his only tweets are to women saying they have a nice bum' and stuff like that. I don't think they were trying to get him fired, just throwing a bunch of kinda vague accusations his way that he's a pretty sleazy guy. I'll admit I don't know what to think of it.
Thanks for the clarification, was not aware of that rule. Made it appear to me that the person had retracted their accusation.
I mean I don’t really know what to make of it either.
Rifkin’s defence in this thread is that he’s asexual so these things are silly to accuse him of, and also that he tends to room with Zombiegrub and others when on work duty so can’t exactly invite people back to his room unnoticed.
I’m pretty ignorant of how asexuality manifests itself and I’m sure it differs amongst individuals from not really having any concept of the thing to being familiar but not being particularly bothered.
It does seem rather contradictory to claim to be assexual but letting people know they have a nice arse on Twitter, but as I say I’m ignorant of this domain.
|
On July 14 2020 14:07 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2020 13:34 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 14 2020 13:29 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 14 2020 13:16 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 14 2020 13:12 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 14 2020 08:24 BisuDagger wrote:On July 14 2020 07:43 BasetradeTV wrote:
I don't know who I need to speak to about this, but I'd appreciate if my name wasn't included in this considering the post made on reddit was full of straight up lies with zero proof to back up the false allegations against me (Rifkin)
It's not a secret, but it's also not something heavily publicized by me, but I'm asexual, so the idea that they accused me of asking them back to my hotel room is just absurd. Furthered made ridiculous by the fact that every time I've ever attended an event it's been sharing a room with zombiegrub, or feardragon, or panicswitched, or allaryce etc. I removed it for you. You deserve an equal opportunity to stand up for yourself. If something new comes to light that is substantiated then we will make sure to be thorough about whether it should be in the OP or not. However, I must call some BS on your statement. I'm not sure there is a man or woman of any orientation out there who can resist feardragon. Agreed, especially the Feardragon part. But in seriousness I think that’s the right mod call, the reddit OP was deleted for whatever reason so at least to someone who didn’t see it initially there is little I can glean from it/it appears to have been retracted in some form or another. Help me understand why this doesn't conform to the 'always believe the accuser' rule? I thought that rule was a matter of principle. I'm not trying to use a gotcha argument or argue in bad faith, i'm genuinely curious. There’s nothing to believe, or disbelieve. The reddit post OP doesn’t contain anything now. So if you’re like me and didn’t see it until relatively recently and you go in there’s nothing there in terms of allegations, just a ‘this post has been deleted’. With the other posts there are allegations with details of said allegations, with Rifkin being in the OP there is... nothing. Bar responses to the allegations. I feel it’s unfair to lump in Rifkin with other allegations that have tons of detail behind their allegations, corroboration etc when the allegations against him don’t even have an existing post. I really am a complete Reddit noob though, just use it to steal Starcraft builds, I’m unsure if the person who made the post deleted it, or mods deleted it. I assumed the former but then again, Reddit noob. TL lets you know if a mod has nuked a post or a user has edited it or w/e. It’s not that I want to not believe an accusation, I just don’t even know what is being alleged in this particular incident so to have it lumped in with the other accusations outlined in this thread seems a bit off to me. The Starcraft 2 subreddit has a 'no accusations' rule i think and it was deleted by mods (as I understand it). The accusation wasn't really one of sexual harrassment or anything. The user said that rifkin was generally sleazy and invited her and other women back to her flat and things like 'his only tweets are to women saying they have a nice bum' and stuff like that. I don't think they were trying to get him fired, just throwing a bunch of kinda vague accusations his way that he's a pretty sleazy guy. I'll admit I don't know what to think of it. Thanks for the clarification, was not aware of that rule. Made it appear to me that the person had retracted their accusation. I mean I don’t really know what to make of it either. Rifkin’s defence in this thread is that he’s asexual so these things are silly to accuse him of, and also that he tends to room with Zombiegrub and others when on work duty so can’t exactly invite people back to his room unnoticed. I’m pretty ignorant of how asexuality manifests itself and I’m sure it differs amongst individuals from not really having any concept of the thing to being familiar but not being particularly bothered. It does seem rather contradictory to claim to be assexual but letting people know they have a nice arse on Twitter, but as I say I’m ignorant of this domain.
It feels kind of awkward talking about it knowing rifkin is in the thread and maybe reading. That awkwardness highlights how challenging this stuff is for everyone involved, but I think it makes it even more important to be open and thorough in our discussion of where our lines are drawn.
I find it really difficult to stick to the 'always believe the accuser' thing. I'm not saying its wrong, i'm saying I find it very hard not to take the accused's side at times. Rifkin here is one of those cases. I want to believe him because my brain says to believe him, but at the same time i know i should believe the victim because of all the things about victims being marginalized by an uncaring indifferent system.
Then again the victim in this case isn't really a 'victim' in the normal sense of the word but again i don't know if that's my man brain doing what man brains do.
Its like I'm all twisted up by the ideology and that is distracting me from the details of the case, but simultaneously i'm all twisted up by the details of the case and that is distracting me from the wider political point.
|
Northern Ireland23248 Posts
On July 14 2020 14:17 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On July 14 2020 14:07 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 14 2020 13:34 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 14 2020 13:29 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 14 2020 13:16 Jockmcplop wrote:On July 14 2020 13:12 Wombat_NI wrote:On July 14 2020 08:24 BisuDagger wrote:On July 14 2020 07:43 BasetradeTV wrote:
I don't know who I need to speak to about this, but I'd appreciate if my name wasn't included in this considering the post made on reddit was full of straight up lies with zero proof to back up the false allegations against me (Rifkin)
It's not a secret, but it's also not something heavily publicized by me, but I'm asexual, so the idea that they accused me of asking them back to my hotel room is just absurd. Furthered made ridiculous by the fact that every time I've ever attended an event it's been sharing a room with zombiegrub, or feardragon, or panicswitched, or allaryce etc. I removed it for you. You deserve an equal opportunity to stand up for yourself. If something new comes to light that is substantiated then we will make sure to be thorough about whether it should be in the OP or not. However, I must call some BS on your statement. I'm not sure there is a man or woman of any orientation out there who can resist feardragon. Agreed, especially the Feardragon part. But in seriousness I think that’s the right mod call, the reddit OP was deleted for whatever reason so at least to someone who didn’t see it initially there is little I can glean from it/it appears to have been retracted in some form or another. Help me understand why this doesn't conform to the 'always believe the accuser' rule? I thought that rule was a matter of principle. I'm not trying to use a gotcha argument or argue in bad faith, i'm genuinely curious. There’s nothing to believe, or disbelieve. The reddit post OP doesn’t contain anything now. So if you’re like me and didn’t see it until relatively recently and you go in there’s nothing there in terms of allegations, just a ‘this post has been deleted’. With the other posts there are allegations with details of said allegations, with Rifkin being in the OP there is... nothing. Bar responses to the allegations. I feel it’s unfair to lump in Rifkin with other allegations that have tons of detail behind their allegations, corroboration etc when the allegations against him don’t even have an existing post. I really am a complete Reddit noob though, just use it to steal Starcraft builds, I’m unsure if the person who made the post deleted it, or mods deleted it. I assumed the former but then again, Reddit noob. TL lets you know if a mod has nuked a post or a user has edited it or w/e. It’s not that I want to not believe an accusation, I just don’t even know what is being alleged in this particular incident so to have it lumped in with the other accusations outlined in this thread seems a bit off to me. The Starcraft 2 subreddit has a 'no accusations' rule i think and it was deleted by mods (as I understand it). The accusation wasn't really one of sexual harrassment or anything. The user said that rifkin was generally sleazy and invited her and other women back to her flat and things like 'his only tweets are to women saying they have a nice bum' and stuff like that. I don't think they were trying to get him fired, just throwing a bunch of kinda vague accusations his way that he's a pretty sleazy guy. I'll admit I don't know what to think of it. Thanks for the clarification, was not aware of that rule. Made it appear to me that the person had retracted their accusation. I mean I don’t really know what to make of it either. Rifkin’s defence in this thread is that he’s asexual so these things are silly to accuse him of, and also that he tends to room with Zombiegrub and others when on work duty so can’t exactly invite people back to his room unnoticed. I’m pretty ignorant of how asexuality manifests itself and I’m sure it differs amongst individuals from not really having any concept of the thing to being familiar but not being particularly bothered. It does seem rather contradictory to claim to be assexual but letting people know they have a nice arse on Twitter, but as I say I’m ignorant of this domain. It feels kind of awkward talking about it knowing rifkin is in the thread and maybe reading. That awkwardness highlights how challenging this stuff is for everyone involved, but I think it makes it even more important to be open and thorough in our discussion of where our lines are drawn. I find it really difficult to stick to the 'always believe the accuser' thing. I'm not saying its wrong, i'm saying I find it very hard not to take the accused's side at times. Rifkin here is one of those cases. I want to believe him because my brain says to believe him, but at the same time i know i should believe the victim because of all the things about victims being marginalized by an uncaring indifferent system. Then again the victim in this case isn't really a 'victim' in the normal sense of the word but again i don't know if that's my man brain doing what man brains do. Its like I'm all twisted up by the ideology and that is distracting me from the details of the case, but simultaneously i'm all twisted up by the details of the case and that is distracting me from the wider political point.
I mean personally my line is not to believe accusations, but to believe the accuser believes them, in the absence of solid contrary evidence.
Which doesn’t immediately damn the accused, as sometimes cross wires will happen.
Still covers abusive behaviour with malicious intent, also covers inadvertently poor behaviour that perhaps lacks said intent, but yet the victim feels uncomfortable with.
Also doesn’t preclude throwing out allegations if they seem total BS. As with Rifkin the whole chain of what’s even being alleged is so messy to unpack I really don’t even know.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
