It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"The end of hate speech" needs to be clarified.

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
The rule is apparently meant to cover "subtle" uses of hate speech, but it's obvious that the moderators will not take action unless the hate speech is blatant.

The post explaining "the end of hate speech" needs to be updated to explain that subtle hate speech is very much allowed. For example, posting images of monkeys in a thread about black people is acceptable here. There's no planet on which "oh, it's just a big coincidence that the imagery is also racist" is not just a defense of subtle hate speech.

If the moderators are not able to respond to anything but direct hate speech which admits to what it is, this rule needs to be clarified to reflect that.
edit on 22-4-2011 by sepermeru because: edit button is my best friend




posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by sepermeru
The rule is apparently meant to cover "subtle" uses of hate speech, but it's obvious that the moderators will not take action unless the hate speech is blatant.

The post explaining "the end of hate speech" needs to be updated to explain that subtle hate speech is very much allowed. For example, posting images of monkeys in a thread about black people is acceptable here. There's no planet on which "oh, it's just a big coincidence that the imagery is also racist" is not just a defense of subtle hate speech.

If the moderators are not able to respond to anything but direct hate speech which admits to what it is, this rule needs to be clarified to reflect that.
edit on 22-4-2011 by sepermeru because: edit button is my best friend


Like in any environment, "hate speech" is often a moving target. Much offense that is suffered seems brought on by those seeking it.

For one thing:


.. posting images of monkeys in a thread about black people is acceptable here...


This can only be said to be true in this context, if you are automatically going to refute that no offense was intended. Such "automatic" designations of imagery and or verbiage as "hate speech" raises serious questions about bias, ignorance, and those who exploit it to silence others. Unfortunately, I am unclear on where you saw such a post, but considering the context, it was likely a 'political' thread, where many people seem unable to resist the idea of caricaturization as valid commentary. I will say this though, hate speech is not tolerated anywhere on this site; under any circumstances... so to call something "hate speech" is a muzzle against those using it.

But are all hateful things said between members hate speech? That's a broad brush to paint the community with. Sometimes, what is "hate speech" to the perceiver, is just the plain ignorance of the speaker. Silencing ignorance is not the same as denying it. In fact, it often backfires completely because it allows the ignorance to fester unchecked. Perhaps a well thought out response can abate the ignorance, or even eliminate it.

Frankly, I have, at times, been inclined to consider celebrity politicians as 'fair game' for whatever comes there way. But I also recognize that those who identify with the targets of the cruel practice are empathetically offended. Does that constitute "hate speech?" It may; and then it also may not.

For the future though, please alert any post in which you feel the content needs to be reviewed. This venue is not really intended for the discussion of specific instances of complaints, so you have not crossed any lines, and you have brought forth a legitimate concern... your statement that some kinds of hate speech are allowed here is patently incorrect.

You may be correct that Mods fail to react to some things as opposed to others; but it is not systemic or institutional; it is a function of the human weaknesses of Mods who like you, can't be everywhere and understand every perspective of everything that is posted here at all times. Hence the alert function. We just topped 11 million posts, and are growing more all the time. We try to keep up, we really do.

If you wish to stand by your declaration that some level of hate speech is allowed here, that is your prerogative. I disagree, as does the T&C which we do adhere to.


edit on 22-4-2011 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


I did report the post. I try to be extremely polite when dealing with mods, because I think you have all earned that, but I was upset when I reported it and included a comment that I was pretty sure no action would be taken. I hope that wouldn't actually be the reason no action was taken, but I should apologize for it in general, so I do.

Thank you for your very thoughtful response. I'm reading it over again and thinking about your points. I believe that blatant hate speech isn't tolerated here, but I also think sometimes determining more subtle cases tends to lean toward assuming innocence without overwhelming evidence -- which to me means that subtle cases will mostly be allowed, when the "end of hate speech" post is specifically about subtle cases not being allowed.

But I'm going to think over what you've said, because it's certainly possible my perspective has been too limited.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by sepermeru
 


Another point I'd like to make - when you're alerting on a post and not using the actual ALERT function (like via the Complaint/Suggestion function) please include a link to the post you're referencing. Otherwise, what we see is a vague reference and virtually nothing to go on.

We're glad to review any and all complaints and take appropriate action, but please do us a small favor and make it simpler by either using the Alert button, or including a link with the Complaint function.



edit on 4/22/2011 by yeahright because: Link



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by sepermeru
 


I'm sorry I missed your alert. And thank you kindly for the reception of my comments.

Now, I'm off to see if I can't do a better job averting this sort of occurrence.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   
You mods have got to stop being so cool. You're really making it hard for me to keep feeling righteously outraged!


I have to retract my comments. It's clear you are all much more open to discussing this than I thought. Next time I decide to come galloping in here waving a flag, I'll try to look at this thread and remind myself that as a one-man army I've been known to tilt at a few windmills.



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by sepermeru
 




It's all good! We need a reality check dosage every now and again; and it helps that it gets brought by a civil member. I've endure much much worse over my short time wearing the Mod hat. You are actually a pleasure to converse with!



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
Hate speech is such a retarded concept in a free society.... The only people who would label anything hate speech, is someone that is offended by words. Being offended by words, in most cases is weakminded IMO. Labelling something hate speech, and reporting it as such, is nothing more than trying to silence words or opinions, that offend your sense of morality. Morality is very subjective.


edit on Fri, 22 Apr 2011 16:48:46 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 04:52 PM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


Not having the capacity to be respectfull, well spoken and polite during any conversation is the result of weak mind as well.

Something to remember.

As far as hate speech, it's subjective. What offends one may not offend another. This is why staff consensus is very important. I've alerted plenty of things that have been decided that they were non-actionable due to staff consensus.

Just use the alert button, it's what it's there for.

~Keeper
ATS Moderator
edit on 4/22/2011 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 06:09 PM
link   
Assuming that anything in violation of the TAC is "allowed" here is a natural contradiction of logic. The fact the TAC exist to define the limits of what is allowed here defies this assertion. Consider ATS like an "All Risk" insurance policy, everything is covered except for what is specifically excluded (by the TAC).

The fact the staff can't possibly look at nearly 9,000 new posts everyday means we are "covering" things that are excluded. It's basically insurance fraud happening but, instead of the member's policy rates rising (the site is free after all) there is non ATS material polluting our beloved corner of the Internet.


I know I've typed it many, many, times but, this is one great example of why the ALERT button is so important. Filing a complaint sans a link to the offending post is really not a practical way to get something fixed, that's why we created the ALERT feature, it automatically includes a link directly to the offending post making it an exceptionally easy (read efficient) way to take out the trash.

Real hate speech, subtle or otherwise, is most definitely, positively, without a doubt, NOT allowed on ATS, but like any other community comprised of fallible Humans, we need everyone's help in finding and abating it.

Ayone who thinks hate speech is an effective communication tool really needs to find another site to express their low rent perspective on IMO, and with thhe help of the membership the staff can see that it happens.

Springer...
edit on 4-22-2011 by Springer because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Haters Gonna Hate... Elsewhere

At the risk of being redundantly redundant, I can't resist chiming in on this.

Personally, I'm not a big fan of the term "hate speech", because it connotes speech codes which in otherwise intellectual circles are used to suppress different points of view -- something that is the antithesis of what ATS stands for, and not how we do things around here. The wide range of opinions found in every thread in our forums is proof enough of that.

There are indeed epithets, slurs and forms of profanity that are either automatically removed by the forum code or are subject to removal by moderators. None of them are required to discuss any of the topics that are suitable for discussion in our forums.

ATS is not a free-for-all board where anything goes. There are limitations on what can be discussed and how it can be discussed. Perhaps most relevant to the question of "hate speech" is this passage from the AboveTopSecret.com Terms And Conditions Of Use:


16) Behavior: You will not behave in an abusive, libelous, defamatory, hateful, intolerant, bigoted and/or racist manner, and will not harass, threaten, nor attack anyone.

It is possible to discuss almost any topic and express almost any opinion without being hateful, just as it is possible to disagree without being disagreeable.

Some effort is needed to achieve that but the rewards are significant, most notably an online community where different ideas are discussed every day, with (ideally) a minimum of grief.

Definitely a worthwhile goal, and one I encourage every ATSer to support.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   

the putridness that is islam.



Does any muslim challenge a imam for what he says?



your hateful death and sex cult



muslims are taught to care for their own and only their own no exceptions.



I can certainly see why they wouldn't want the dregs of their society there to ruin it. They should have started deporting them last year and had one less problem to deal with.


While I appreciate the thoughtful nature of the replies, I have no choice but to return to my position that hate speech -- even overt, unsubtle hate speech -- is very much allowed here.

All this talk about making reports and such, while I'm sure it's well-intentioned, is really a smokescreen for the reality that hate speech is so rampant on this site it would be impossible to control. It's everywhere, it's blatant, and reports about it are routinely overlooked. That may be due to the fact that there's just too much of it to police -- I am willing to believe that there is no malicious intent involved on the part of the mods at all. But the fact remains that having a post which proclaims "the end of hate speech" when no such thing is even possible is misleading.
edit on 27-4-2011 by sepermeru because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
Hate speech is such a retarded concept in a free society.... The only people who would label anything hate speech, is someone that is offended by words. Being offended by words, in most cases is weakminded IMO. Labelling something hate speech, and reporting it as such, is nothing more than trying to silence words or opinions, that offend your sense of morality. Morality is very subjective.


edit on Fri, 22 Apr 2011 16:48:46 -0500 by TKDRL because: (no reason given)


I take it you are defending my right to start posting that all white people are stupid and dirty? You are claiming that nobody on this site should take offense at that, correct? Are you under the impression that nobody would? Are you saying they should not? Are you saying that this site should let me post such things?



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by sepermeru
All this talk about making reports and such, while I'm sure it's well-intentioned, is really a smokescreen for the reality that hate speech is so rampant on this site it would be impossible to control.


Look, it's very simple. There is no way to control what people post. The best thing we can do, is deal with the violations as they occur, provided we know where they are.

Bank robberies occur, too. Law enforcement doesn't permit them, but there's no way to prevent them. If a bank's robbed, hopefully someone thinks to report it.

If it concerns you, report the violations. If you don't want to properly report them, then there you go.

By the way, some of your "examples" there aren't hate speech at all. There's plenty of criticism meted out to virtually every nationality, ethnicity, creed, religion, and political persuasion imaginable here. Just because it's disagreeable, and even if it's something with which you disagree, doesn't make it hate speech. Sometimes, it's just stupid. And no, we can't fix that, either.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by yeahright
 


I do report them, and nothing happens. There could be many reasons for this -- the mods are too busy, or they don't think a statement like "every single Muslim is X negative thing" is hate speech, which means that even overt hate speech is okay and subtle forms are highly unlikely to be responded to. If what constitutes overt hate speech cannot even be agreed on by the mods, then having a sticky post that claims even subtle forms will not be tolerated is clearly misleading.

I appreciate what your position is. That's my point. It's misleading to have a post which purports that these things will be brought to "an end" when it's just not the case, and cannot be the case.

I'm not asking for everything I think is hate speech to be eliminated. I'm asking for consistency between actual policy and stated policy.
edit on 27-4-2011 by sepermeru because: edit button likes my hair this way



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by sepermeru
I do report them, and nothing happens.


I think that's an unfair categorization. I went back and looked at all the alerts through 4-22. You've sent 4. 2 were actioned, one was determined to be not actionable, and one was apparently missed. I bumped that one for attention.

We're as consistent as we can be, given the nature of the forum and the speed at which things move. It seems you're looking for perfection, more than consistency. No, that won't happen either.

If you're on the lookout for 'hate speech", you'll see it everywhere. What we endeavor to provide is an environment for civil discussion. I think we do a pretty good job, and we couldn't without the assistance of the membership utilizing the alert function.

You've been here what, 5 weeks? Give it a chance. It's people having discussions, and sometimes they're messy. If you want to hear that there's no way to proactively prohibit hate speech, consider this the official announcement:

There's no way to proactively prohibit hate speech.

It's a concept, not a promise.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 04:05 PM
link   
reply to post by yeahright
 


I really think you're missing my point.

I'm not saying you should police hate speech better.

I'm saying you should change the stated policy to reflect the reality.

You just flat-out contradicted this site's stated policy yourself. You said it: there's no way to proactively police this. So why is the site's policy so clearly a statement that hate speech, subtle or otherwise, is being put to an end here?

If you have to clarify to me that it doesn't really mean that, why not clarify the statement? That's what I'm asking for, as the title says.

Also, I believe what you say about my reports, but I'm sure I've sent in a few more than that -- or I was sure. So part of the issue here could very well be that I'm making some mistake and not submitting when I think I am, somehow. If so I certainly apologize for suggesting nothing was being done when it was me being foolish. However, it doesn't change my point. I think the level of policing is probably about what it's able to be, and that it's just not able to match up with the policy.
edit on 27-4-2011 by sepermeru because: edit button is my best friend



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 04:24 PM
link   
I hate hate speech.

Sounds ridiculous.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by macman
 


If that's your an idea of an argument, then yes, I'm afraid it does rather sound ridiculous.

But of course, the point here is not to end hate speech, but to end the claim that hate speech has been ended.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by sepermeru
 


Ah, I stand corrected.

I still don't understand why hate speech is something to get up in arms with. If someone wants to verbally personally attack you, who cares. It is the internet. It shows their level of character.
To use unsavory language or terms, again, it shows them for them.
It can't hurt you.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join