Intolerance on BPL [serious thread]

[Jeffs Eleven]

“Are not human beings sacred?”

NO

we are just like any other animal, just have language and tools on lock.

“As sacred as the anteater”

 

 

[Gabe P]

Jacob,

you stated: “Gabe, you saw an injustice in the world, asked someone else to deal with it, then complained about how they dealt with it. I understand you believe censorship is the solution, hence your actions. But why not also try to pick up the megaphone and fight the injustice yourself? Instead of scrubbing one slur off the face of the universe you could have silenced a source of slurs.”

The reason I focused on BPL leadership is because Monte made it crystal clear that his use of a racial slur was a complete mistake. Mistakes happen. The offending word also showed up in at least one other post, referencing the original post, and not written by Monte. As a result, Monte was then unable to remove the offending word from the site altogether.

Worth adding is that BPL states in the forum rules that offensive language is not allowed.  Since racial slurs are offensive, I repeatedly asked BPL to remove the offending word. When their response was unclear, I asked them several questions, referencing their own policies – asking for clarification. I also mentioned to them that there are larger and more serious issues like this with other sites that are emblematic of how bad this problem can get if it’s not addressed and also how advertisers are beginning to respond to those issues (i.e., no longer advertising on the site).  I do not want BPL to falter. I love this site. Jacob, I hope this helps.

I only wanted the offending word removed. It has been removed, which I am grateful for. Thank you BPL for taking action and again to Monte, I am sorry this was so public. I feel bad about that and hope you can forgive me. Like I said, if anyone from BPL ever contacts me directly, will will ask them how I can express my concerns with more grace and tact in the future. I did try, but failed. My apologies

Mathew, thank you for your patience and efforts.  Best of luck to you in your work as a teacher. Your profession is an honorable one – and a real public service.

 

[Diane “Piper” Soini]

Censorship applies to the government. Backpacking Light isn’t the government. Censorship is perfectly valid on someone’s private property. When I go to work I can be punished or fired for saying things they don’t want me to say. The government can’t punish or fire me for stuff I say at work, but my employer can. That’s what censorship is and isn’t.

[DAN-Y/FANCEE FEEST]

[derail post removed. Please PM if you strongly feel the post belongs here. I’ve saved the text – MK]

[Matthew / BPL]

Jacob,

Thank you for your extremely thoughtful post. You have articulated and extended my original stance clearly. I’m grateful.

[Gabe P]

Quick question: Have BPL leadership/owners decided that racial slurs no longer have a place on BPL and will in the future, when brought to their attention, be removed from the forums? I’d like full clarity on this please.

 

[Gabe P]

NM

[Matthew / BPL]

Gabe, Ryan has been traveling the last couple of days. I understand that he will be available this weekend. My intention is to revise the forum guidelines pertinent to this issue this weekend.

I don’t think racial slurs (or intolerant speech) has ever had a place on our forums. The question has been: how do we deal with it when it occurs?

[Gabe P]

<p style=”text-align: left;”> I’d like to suggest that a moderator simply moderate the forums based on BPL  forum post guidelines – be an impartial judge. I find the moderator’s gratitude to a post in which I was cited as a complainer a bit hard to take. To be clear, racism is a hugely destructive and self-destructive force in our world. The suffering it causes cannot be overstated. While the offending term that prompted this discussion was a mistake, the term itself is offensive – much more than a simple cuss word. BPL forum guidelines make it clear that offensive terms are not allowed. I look forward to gaining clarity from BPL leadership as to whether they agree that racial slurs, regardless of intent, are not allowed on their site. My affinity for this site only goes so far.</p>

[DAN-Y/FANCEE FEEST]

Jon Fong said:

Discriminatory remarks have no place in a forum like this. I have very strong opinions about this due to an experience at another backpacking forum. I made a lot of contributions to expand on the knowledge base and was an active member. I was just start to grow my cottage industry and this was a great launching point. Unfortunately, some people on the site started to post political comments about immigration as well as what they considered religious jokes about events in the Middle East. At that point, I decided that I no longer wanted to be associated with that forum and left. I was not the only one who left the site as several other contributors felt the same way.

Matthew k said:

I missed Jon’s post earlier. Thank you for sharing your experience on the other forum.

My deleted comments were to clarify what Jon had said and add some insight to what takes place on forums. I deleted the thread that caused Yon to leave. I was a moderator of the site. Apologies were made to Yon. Opologies were made in the fishing reel thread.

My comment was relevant.

[Jerry Adams]

I was just perusing bplite.com, interesting info, lots of stoves.

A lot of the same posters as BPL but often they have slightly different names so I have to be detective : )

[Gabe P]

I’d also like to suggest that if BPL leadership and owner or owners are not a diverse group and are unclear on how to respond, that they have discussion, outside of the forums, with a diversity of people and seek advice from a widely respected civil rights organization. MLK day is just around the corner and so Monday may be a good day to start that process – if BPL does lack diversity amongst its leadership team.

[Jacob]

Gabe you keep posting as if you believe censorship is a solution to bigotry. Can you please tell us more about why you believe in censorship, especially how it will end bigotry? In reductionist terms, I think exposing bigotry will do more to end it, while censoring bigotry will allow bigotry to spread.

 

“Censorship applies to the government”

Censorship is the act of stopping someone’s expression. There’s censorship by governments but also censorship by private organizations, and even people. Social censorship (like the McCarthy era) is arguably just as bad if not worse than what governments or private organizations are capable of. Private censorship is commonplace and normal (most business and home owners do not allow activists to protest on their property), but it is still censorship. While most of the writers I linked to earlier were writing about governments’ role in society (political philosophy), I think most citizens of free countries today can recognize the different contexts in which different authorities have the power to censor. Moreover the types of expression and reasons for censoring them being discussed on this private forum are the same as applies to governments.

 

 

 

[Gabe P]

Sure. Here are a few reasons.

 

1.  Please see my earlier posts, in this thread and the one about fishing, regarding Facebook, Twitter and the bigger problems that I would like BPL to avoid
2. BPL’s forums are a megaphone, with an owner and leadership team. It’s their property. I don’t allow racism or racist slurs on my property – even by visitors. Doing so would be a quick way to get kicked off my land right away.
3. Rejecting racist attitudes and slurs has been very effective in reducing the ubiquity of racism within many societies. This is oftentimes how younger generations are freed from the biases they were brought up with. Norms of behavior and attitudes can change this way.
4. I do not live in a communist society. I can grab a soap box and say whatever I want from the street corner. And when I visit websites, it’s clear to me that I am in someone’s store or business. To me the internet is not the street corner. It’s a portal to a whole digital universe that exists to make money off of my presence and actions. It’s different to me than walking down the street. The internet, for the most part, is digital private property.
5. When I have submitted letters to the edior of my local paper, I have always been cognizant that certain rules of decorum apply and not cried fowl when, for whatever reason, they opted not to publish what I wrote.
6. it is my opinion that racial slurs have no place on this backpacking website.
7.  if you read through the posts in this and the fishing thread, the BPL community has not overwhelmingly made it clear that racial slurs are unacceptable. An impressionable reader could think that people who point out a racial slur and ask that they be corrected are complainers, who take themselves too seriously – and as a result be emboldened to more aggressively spread their racist beliefs. Saying you don’t like intolerance is quite different from acting on that belief. Please note that in my first response to the offending slur, in the fishing thread, I said the poster should remove it immediately – since at that point it had been clearly identified as a racial slur. Had this worked, we’d not be spending our time on an screen right now debating censorship, or in my perspective appropriate versus destructive social norms. I don’t know about you, but I don’t consider thus fun.
8. A myriad of studies have shown that offensive content online get lots more attention that constructive content. This matters to me.
9. I don’t fear censorship on BPL. In the voting booth, at town hall meetings and other public venues that are designed to ensure that our government is representative of its citizens is where I fear censorship. BPL is just where I go for backpacking info and discussion.
10. I’m not a victim – not of PC police or of censorship. To me the word “victim” just doesn’t apply. Victims are people who are genuinely harmed, injured or killed. I’m just a guy who wants BPL to focus on backpacking and who doesn’t want to see racial slurs while doing so. They’re offensive and so much worse than cuss words.

Does that help?

[Gabe P]

One more thing. I’m not saying that “censorship” is how we end bigotry. Who am I to tell you or anyone else how we end bigotry? If any of the readers were to wish to explore that, I’d recommend reaching out to a well respected civil rights organization.  the individuals there might be able to help someone explore the many ways our society has worked to address and stamp out racism  and where we have seen the most success

 

All I’m saying delete the word from BPL  because it’s offensive. I have provided several reasons for why I believe that. I’d like to know what BPL leadership believes

 

 

[Jacob]

If you’re not having fun don’t respond, I understand. However, I am interested in your way of thinking.

So you are posting to make BPL more comfortable in the future? Not because you believe deleting the post is the ‘right’ thing to do? I’m under the impression that its both that motivate you

I don’t understand how most of your points are explaining why bigotry should be censored. The way I read it 2, and 4 are about the right to censor?, 5,6,9, and 10 are about you?, and #1 and the add on say you are posting for decency not morality, did I understand correctly? Responding to the ones I got:

#3 is very much what Plato talks about. But I think rejecting and censoring are different. How can we reject an attitude that has been deleted? That is why censoring allows bigotry to spread. Instead we should expose and reject bigotry for all to see.

#7 I wholeheartedly disagree. Anyone who reads the locked thread can see the original poster put his foot in his mouth. Impressionable readers should be supervised on the internet, precisely so these sort of moral lessens can be taught properly, relating back to #3.

#8 I think those studies are saying more dramatic content gets more attention. Taboo stuff gets a drama bonus. But that extra attention is related to its taboo-ness, everyone will turn their head to look. Going back to #3, when everyone is looking, that is when we reject it openly.

 

[Gabe P]

Hi Jacob,

I’m at a loss for words, since so much of what you wrote about your take on what I wrote has me baffled. I think at this point I’d like to just wait for BPL’s official policy on this issue. If your interest in my perspective is based in any openness to my perspective, feel free to reach out through a personal message.

Have a good weekend

[Eric Blumensaadt]

Use the “DELETE” button when necessary. AND send the offender a PM to let them know exactly what they said that was not up to the standards of civility.

 

[Franco Darioli]

What ?

That would deprive other people from wallowing in their own sense of self righteousness.

[Iago Vazquez]

Personally, I agree with those who said offending posts should be edited or deleted. BPL is a brand with an owner. What image does BPL want to have?

In my opinion, a newcomer to the site looking for information on lightweight backpacking, for example alcohol stoves, and finding a bunch of irrelevant posts from folks discussing the offensive or unintended language of some poster will turn people off. As a newcomer a few years back, I would have left. As a current member, I will lose interest fast.

Regarding Chaff, I have enjoyed it quite a bit. What turns me off is when people start poking at each other and lose sight of the conversation. But Chaff is what it is and one doesn’t go there if not interested.

[Gabe P]

NM

[Matthew / BPL]

Franco, thanks for your post above. I almost moderated it out but I didn’t because it brings up another issue: when we moderate stuff it breaks the conversation and subsequent comments don’t make sense.

So, instead of deleting it (on the grounds of the first post in this thread where I shared some ground rules for the discussion that I think your post breaks or comes close to breaking) I’m going to respond directly to you here:

I find your post obejectionable because I think there is quite a bit more to this conversation than self-righteousness. I’m bothered that you chose to be sarcastic here rather than just being direct while maintaining a respectful tone in a serious thread.

I think Franco’s post is interesting as well because it is not *that* objectionable. It’s on a grey area. As a moderator I have to deal with grey areas. It ain’t all black and white (except maybe in the fishing thread and I really wish I had handled that differently when it first happened a couple weeks ago – again, sorry for that). Franco’s response bothers me and I responded to it. And it’s still there for others to see and respond to.

So coming back to my original point, as a moderator, I’m inclined to leave stuff up rather than delete it and this post is another example of why.

Franco, I hope you are not offended by my response. I apologize in advance if using this as an example bothers you. I’m guessing you will be ok.

[Greg Mihalik]

At the moment there seems to be a bit of self-righteousness, IMHO.

I saw Franco’s post as to-the-point levity in the face of the usual downward spiral.

If we can’t stand back and laugh we are lost.

[Jerry Adams]

I agree with Gabe, there shouldn’t be racial slurs, even less bad ones that weren’t malicious.  And the other things he said.

Sometimes a thread will degenerate.  It’s not possible to achieve closure.  There’s nothing a moderator can do to fix things.  Same on other web sites I’ve seen.

Best to just ignore it.  If you get negative energy from a sequence of responses, stop “beating your head against the wall”.  On a particular website, if you get more negative energy than positive energy, go somewhere else.  If you leave a website because of just one bad exchange, you’re missing the good stuff from that website.

In my opinion

Nice try Mathew : )

[Matthew / BPL]

I like situations that have clear black and white answers. Stuff like alcohol vs. Esbit.

All this grey area stuff is hard to deal with.

[Author]

Posts