Support NeoGAF

[Redneckerz]

Now you're misrepresenting me, I never once claimed the majority of Gaf sucks! Unless I misread that you are lumping me in with them? If that's the case my bad!

That's true, i was thinking of other posters. I should have made it more clear that i was speaking in a general way and not specifically you, my bad.

I think I've backed up my claim that this site shares issues, and I disagree with your dismissal of some as relevant issues, I guess time will tell in terms of how this affects us all going forward.

But you were referring to personal issues with other users, not absolutely referring to political issues on the Politics subforum. To that i say that i reckon the truth is more in the middle (Your personal issues, that is). Hence why i brought up the tone part.

If the problem (as is dictated by some users here) that Politics is an alt-right heaven, then we should have a conversation about that. But so far everyone who claims this does not come forth with it. You did come forth, but talked about more personal issues rather than what i was hoping to see. That isn't on you, though.

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

That's true, i was thinking of other posters. I should have made it more clear that i was speaking in a general way and not specifically you, my bad.


But you were referring to personal issues with other users, not absolutely referring to political issues on the Politics subforum. To that i say that i reckon the truth is more in the middle (Your personal issues, that is). Hence why i brought up the tone part.

If the problem (as is dictated by some users here) that Politics is an alt-right heaven, then we should have a conversation about that. But so far everyone who claims this does not come forth with it. You did come forth, but talked about more personal issues rather than what i was hoping to see. That isn't on you, though.

But these are the problems I was talking about. And they're not just personal problems, they're issues that contribute to the overall level of discourse.

The politics sub-forum, as I said above, is right-leaning in tone as that's the current vocal minority in "control" of the conversation. This is similar to Era with one major consideration, it has the potential to grow beyond that due to the moderation being more open. Only an increase in numbers will let us see if this can happen.

Again, you're misrepresenting me, I never claimed this was an alt-right haven.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

The politics sub-forum, as I said above, is right-leaning in tone as that's the current vocal minority in "control" of the conversation. This is similar to Era with one major consideration, it has the potential to grow beyond that due to the moderation being more open. Only an increase in numbers will let us see if this can happen.

It's not going to change. Were in the era (no pun intended) of social media, sub-Reddits and niche forums. Most people have no interest in debate and just seek out their echo chambers of choice.

You get some debate on sites like this that allow it, but it will always skew a certain way as it's mostly people on the same side of the aisle (right leaning her, further left leaning on Era) bickering over mild disagreements rather than liberals and conservatives arguing with each other. That happens, but more more rarely in my experience.

Add in that the people on the extremes on both sides tend to be the most vocal and active participants, and that just further builds up the echo chamber nature of internet discourse. Most people are more moderate and just don't care enough to be that vocal about their beliefs--much less to go up against the volume and intensity of posts from the extremists.

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

It's not going to change. Were in the era (no pun intended) of social media, sub-Reddits and niche forums. Most people have no interest in debate and just seek out their echo chambers of choice.

You get some debate on sites like this that allow it, but it will always skew a certain way as it's mostly people on the same side of the aisle (right leaning her, further left leaning on Era) bickering over mild disagreements rather than liberals and conservatives arguing with each other. That happens, but more more rarely in my experience.

Add in that the people on the extremes on both sides tend to be the most vocal and active participants, and that just further builds up the echo chamber nature of internet discourse. Most people are more moderate and just don't care enough to be that vocal about their beliefs--much less to go up against the volume and intensity of posts from the extremists.

I believe this is probably the case, too.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

You get some debate on sites like this that allow it, but it will always skew a certain way as it's mostly people on the same side of the aisle (right leaning her, further left leaning on Era) bickering over mild disagreements rather than liberals and conservatives arguing with each other.

Which threads do you feel are characteristic of merely "bickering over mild disagreements"?

By my reckoning, most threads have a variety of perspectives offered. In most political threads there is a rash of strongly worded statements (let's put it that way) from all sorts of perspectives. You thought the Kavanaugh thread was bickering over mild disagreements? You thought the thread about "President Horseface doesn't call out Saudi Arabia" was bickering over mild disagreements? If you don't think liberals and conservatives are arguing, then you clearly haven't visited the Politics section.

The narrative that GAF and ERA are basically two different shades of the same thing is a very strange conclusion to reach. I wouldn't bother coming here if it was a right-leaning website because I wouldn't be hearing differing opinions. The proclivity for people to seek out echo chambers is not actually a universal rule. It can happen, but it can also be avoided. Yet, "echo chamber" keeps getting slapped on GAF. No one can explain why it is an echo chamber. No one can define the symptoms without turning around and getting contradicted, but they feel it in their guts that it is an echo chamber.

Make some threads and see how it goes.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

Which threads do you feel are characteristic of merely "bickering over mild disagreements"?

By my reckoning, most threads have a variety of perspectives offered. In most political threads there is a rash of strongly worded statements (let's put it that way) from all sorts of perspectives. You thought the Kavanaugh thread was bickering over mild disagreements? You thought the thread about "President Horseface doesn't call out Saudi Arabia" was bickering over mild disagreements? If you don't think liberals and conservatives are arguing, then you clearly haven't visited the Politics section.

The narrative that GAF and ERA are basically two different shades of the same thing is a very strange conclusion to reach. I wouldn't bother coming here if it was a right-leaning website because I wouldn't be hearing differing opinions. The proclivity for people to seek out echo chambers is not actually a universal rule. It can happen, but it can also be avoided. Yet, "echo chamber" keeps getting slapped on GAF. No one can explain why it is an echo chamber. No one can define the symptoms without turning around and getting contradicted, but they feel it in their guts that it is an echo chamber.

Make some threads and see how it goes.

Oh I wasn't really speaking of any recent specifics as I opted out of reading political threads months ago and haven't even ventured into the political sub here other than opening it a few times out of curiosity to see how active it was (and not opening any threads). So I'm thinking more from further back on both sites and don't care to dredge up examples. I could speak to the social issue threads on the gaming side here and there though. Things like the GOG tweet, Rockstar "100 hour weeks" the trend was definitely outrage there and people here thinking it was no big deal, belittling people outraged. No real debates as any dissenters just mostly get ignored, drowned out or dog piled. I just don't see any places on the internet that are truly a 50/50 mix of people from both sides and all along the spectrum (rather than the majority of active posters being on the extremes). It just is what it is.

With the gaming stuff really fractured the community here and it seems like what has happened is GAF is left with the people who supported gamer gate (very small number) and those who just didn't think it was a big deal or just didn't care at all, lots of hypermasculinity, fandoms of games, anime etc. with hyper sexualized women and so on. With a much smaller number of active posters on the other side. Resetera is full of the people who were fully on the side of Sarkeesian, along with people who just didn't give a shit, and a much smaller number of gamergate supporter types (or at least ones willing to openly show those views and get banned). It just makes threads on such topics pretty pointless as there's so much agreement and dogpiling and the littler actual thoughtful debate gets lost in that noise.

I don't care to try to change it personally as I have zero interest in engaging in that stuff beyond sometimes perusing for amusement and finding the extremist nut jobs to ignore before I get baited into a ban in a gaming thread by their nonsense. I wasted to much energy in political forums (especially vs. on cheapassgamer) in my 20s to ever bother with that again. I'm set in my ways and was never once swayed by anyone's arguments and I'm pretty sure mine never swayed by any one on the other side (there was a decent mix of views on that subforum at its peak). I'm a social scientist so I stick to scholarly research for evolving my policy views and anything moral is just set in stone with myself and most people and not worth arguing over.

That said, I don't think I used the term echo chamber. There are debates to be had here (and apparently going on in the Politics sub) for people who can tolerate reading extremists views and care to engage in that stuff. There are debates to be had at Era too, just far less as the mods shut down opposing views on so many topics. But again, it's moot for me beyond identifying the extremists and blocking them to avoid bait in gaming threads since I just don't go in those topics. Plus I just frankly don't care to interact with the right much so the membership over there is more my ilk. I don't deal with those types in real life living in a liberal area and having an academic job. Don't want to deal with those types online. I just wish I didn't have to deal with the extreme leftists either as they're nearly as bad even though I agree with their general platform most of the time. And my life isn't really an echo chamber, we just mostly all know we largely agree on things and rarely talk politics and just enjoy our lives. All this ranting and raving about politics, echo chambers etc. is mostly just no lifers online and those on both sides can fuck off.

Anyway, the gaming side of this site is mostly fine, lack of active posters aside. But I do like the slower pace at times for things like major AAA games where the OT there goes a page a minute or more near launch making discussion impossible. So I'll keep it in my rotation of sites. I'm just not going to put time into making OTs, making threads for game news etc. as it's just not active enough to be worth the effort vs. just sticking to the more active threads on Era.

 

[Dr. Claus]

Oh I wasn't really speaking of any recent specifics as I opted out of reading political threads months ago and haven't even ventured into the political sub here other than opening it a few times out of curiosity to see how active it was (and not opening any threads). So I'm thinking more from further back on both sites and don't care to dredge up examples. I could speak to the social issue threads on the gaming side here and there though. Things like the GOG tweet, Rockstar "100 hour weeks" the trend was definitely outrage there and people thinking it was no big deal, belittling people outraged. No real debates as any dissenters just mostly get ignored, drowned out or dog piled. I just don't see any places on the internet that are truly a 50/50 mix of people from both sides and all along the spectrum (rather than the majority of active posters being on the extremes). It just is what it is.

I can't speak for all, but I would love some more dissenting voices that actually want debate instead of throwing petty insults and childish retorts. Looking at the GoG tweet in particular, most of the "dissenters" did not try to have any discussion, and when questioned they either refused to answer or rely on petty insults (Do Make Say Think is a perfect example of this).

With the gaming stuff really fractured the community here and it seems like what has happened is GAF is left with the people who supported gamer gate (very small number) and those who just didn't think it was a big deal or just didn't care at all, lots of hypermasculinity, fandoms of games, anime etc. with hyper sexualized women and so on. With a much smaller number of active posters on the other side. Resetera is full of the people who were fully on the side of Sarkeesian, along with people who just didn't give a shit, and a much smaller number of gamergate supporter types (or at least ones willing to openly show those views and get banned). It just makes threads on such topics pretty pointless as there's so much agreement and dogpiling and the littler actual thoughtful debate gets lost in that noise.

I would have to disagree with that. There are plenty of good discussions on both sides here, especially in relation to GamerGate. Just look back at the GamerGate thread as an example.

I don't care to try to change it personally as I have zero interest in engaging in that stuff beyond sometimes perusing for amusement and finding the extremist nut jobs to ignore before I get baited into a ban in a gaming thread by their nonsense. I wasted to much energy in political forums (especially vs. on cheapassgamer) in my 20s to ever bother with that again. I'm set in my ways and was never once swayed by anyone's arguments and I'm pretty sure mine never swayed by any one on the other side (there was a decent mix of views on that subforum at its peak). I'm a social scientist so I stick to scholarly research for evolving my policy views and anything moral is just set in stone with myself and most people and not worth arguing over.

That's awesome! Do you have any published research I could read? Love meeting other scientists.

Anyway, the gaming side of this site is mostly fine, lack of active posters aside. But I do like the slower pace at times for things like major AAA games where the OT there goes a page a minute or more near launch making discussion impossible. So I'll keep it in my rotation of sites. I'm just not going to put time into making OTs, making threads for game news etc. as it's just not active enough to be worth the effort vs. just sticking to the more active threads on Era.

Understandable, but I hope you change your mind in the future. Change can't happen unless people put forth the effort. Sometimes it takes a while before things to take root. Being stubborn can be a good thing every once and a while, depending on context.

 

[Revolutionary]

They managed to chase away their one* industry person in record time.
https://archive.fo/tKRGX

* - Stinkles doesn't count because no one cares about Halo

 

[Cunth]

Any industry figure posting on that forum with their name and company position publicly known needs to have their head read

 

[DeepEnigma]

They managed to chase away their one* industry person in record time.
https://archive.fo/tKRGX

* - Stinkles doesn't count because no one cares about Halo

It took him this long, someone who has an analytical mind, to finally see that?

And the thread is closed too.

Anywho, he went through the GOG thread there:

 

[Zaru]

Again, you're misrepresenting me, I never claimed this was an alt-right haven.

I'll go ahead then: It's certainly most of the way to being one.

GAF before the split was stifling, yes, I even got banned once for downplaying the fears about Trump.
But recently I checked this place out again - particularly with that new Politics section - and the immediate impression is that it's filled with alt righters, conspiracy theorists and other people from the american right wing spectrum (which, by my european standards, is essentially far right). Not all of them obviously, but the same could be said about places like /pol/ and other places that turned into white nationalist recruitment fronts. I've spent enough time reading those places, I recognize that shit.

Sure, unlike on Resetera, you can still call someone out for going off the deep end of their respective political spectrum without getting banned, but that only matters as long as there are enough people with sense left to begin with.

 

[Whitecrow]

I dont check the politics forum usually, but I would check if by 'far right' I mean 'avoiding political correctness', which is something good.

 

[Cybrwzrd]

I'll go ahead then: It's certainly most of the way to being one.

GAF before the split was stifling, yes, I even got banned once for downplaying the fears about Trump.
But recently I checked this place out again - particularly with that new Politics section - and the immediate impression is that it's filled with alt righters, conspiracy theorists and other people from the american right wing spectrum (which, by my european standards, is essentially far right). Not all of them obviously, but the same could be said about places like /pol/ and other places that turned into white nationalist recruitment fronts. I've spent enough time reading those places, I recognize that shit.

Sure, unlike on Resetera, you can still call someone out for going off the deep end of their respective political spectrum without getting banned, but that only matters as long as there are enough people with sense left to begin with.

Please cite examples of this far-right/alt-right recruitment effort going on here. Conservative and centrist social, economic and political stances are not indicative of being far-right or alt-right. It is possible to carry a wide variety and degree of stances across multiple issues. You can be economically and politically liberal while being socially conservative, and vice-versa. That is normal, and natural - and honestly wanted in discussion. Having a bunch of people parrot the same views creates bubbles of "NPCs" who cease to think and follow what the group tells them to think. That is much, much more frightening. I'd argue /pol even is a more rational place than ResetERA, as it is open to every type of speech, and so much of the banter that goes on there is tongue in cheek and trolling for lulz.

 

[Zaru]

Please cite examples of this far-right/alt-right recruitment effort going on here. Conservative and centrist social, economic and political stances are not indicative of being far-right or alt-right. It is possible to carry a wide variety and degree of stances across multiple issues. You can be economically and politically liberal while being socially conservative, and vice-versa. That is normal, and natural - and honestly wanted in discussion. Having a bunch of people parrot the same views creates bubbles of "NPCs" who cease to think and follow what the group tells them to think. That is much, much more frightening. I'd argue /pol even is a more rational place than ResetERA, as it is open to every type of speech, and so much of the banter that goes on there is tongue in cheek and trolling for lulz.

You're unironically using an alt-right meme (NPCs) and calling /pol/ rational. A place that is roughly equal parts conspiracy theories, alt-right circlejerking and antisemitism/holocaust denial.
I'd say the recruitment is in full force.

 

[Dr. Claus]

You're unironically using an alt-right meme (NPCs) and calling /pol/ rational. A place that is roughly equal parts conspiracy theories, alt-right circlejerking and antisemitism/holocaust denial.
I'd say the recruitment is in full force.

Ah, so you are a troll pushing disingenuous assertions/claims without backing it up with evidence. Got it. If you want an echo chamber, Reset is thataway.

 

[Zaru]

Ah, so you are a troll pushing disingenuous assertions/claims without backing it up with evidence. Got it. If you want an echo chamber, Reset is thataway.

Evidence? Pretty much the entire politics section on this site is evidence. Do you need a link?
I've seen enough places turn to alt-right shit over the last few years to notice the patterns. Should I cite myself or what?

 

[Dr. Claus]

Evidence? Pretty much the entire politics section on this site is evidence. Do you need a link?
I've seen enough places turn to alt-right shit over the last few years to notice the patterns. Should I cite myself or what?

You are not a valid source of evidence. Simply pointing into a general direction is not a viable source of evidence. Show actual posts, supported by most of the community that proves this place is an "alt-right" haven that is recruiting and celebrating anti-semitism like you claim. Otherwise, you are full of shit and are better served going elsewhere, where you can continue to post ignorant shit without proof or evidence.

 

[Cybrwzrd]

You're unironically using an alt-right meme (NPCs) and calling /pol/ rational. A place that is roughly equal parts conspiracy theories, alt-right circlejerking and antisemitism/holocaust denial.
I'd say the recruitment is in full force.

NPC is an alt-right meme? Fuck me, I didn't know that humor was programmed to be only usable by certain character archetypes. Are class changes allowed in this game? Cause I rolled as a center lefty myself.

 

[hariseldon]

Yeah tbh I'm a socialist type and while the NPC meme is one that's primarily used by the alt-right, it's one that I can see the sense in, applying to both the IdPol 'left' and the Trumpsters, both of whom regurgitate views from their particular media sources, re-use the same tired lines, etc. It's a pretty good commentary on how any argument plays out online, almost like a chess opening where both sides have set openings they'll select from, such that it's a routine done without thinking. Person suggests not all men are rapists.. "Did you just #notallmen me? Did you? You misogynist fuck", etc. There is literally a set of standard responses to every line of inquiry, such that debate is impossible. Yeah I'd say the NPC meme fits pretty fucking well.

 

[DeepEnigma]

NPC is an alt-right meme? Fuck me, I didn't know that humor was programmed to be only usable by certain character archetypes. Are class changes allowed in this game? Cause I rolled as a center lefty myself.

For real, and same.

 

[Redneckerz]

But these are the problems I was talking about. And they're not just personal problems, they're issues that contribute to the overall level of discourse.

In the sense that everyone can see them and be influenced by them i agree. Tonally though, 2 out of 3 cited links are more about personal interactions than that they display a structural problem with GAF it iself.

The politics sub-forum, as I said above, is right-leaning in tone as that's the current vocal minority in "control" of the conversation. This is similar to Era with one major consideration, it has the potential to grow beyond that due to the moderation being more open. Only an increase in numbers will let us see if this can happen.

I wouldn't know, i would want to have a conversation where everything isn't always US focussed, even though we are on a predominant US forum.

Again, you're misrepresenting me, I never claimed this was an alt-right haven.

You are misreading the cite and think i am misrepresenting you, i said ''If the problem is (as is dictated by some users here) that Politics is an alt-right heaven,''. I am not referring to you, but ''some users'', who treat it as if it is alt-right heaven. ''Some users.'' Not you. Don't see bears on the road when there aren't none

Evidence? Pretty much the entire politics section on this site is evidence. Do you need a link?

By all means, list some cites and in a seperate thread. Just claiming ''Just look around'' isn't evidence. If you are absolutely certain (And you seem like it), then examples should be a cakewalk for you. Don't cite yourself, but independent instances of problematic commentary from the Politics sub section.

 

[lock2k]

Yeah tbh I'm a socialist type and while the NPC meme is one that's primarily used by the alt-right, it's one that I can see the sense in, applying to both the IdPol 'left' and the Trumpsters, both of whom regurgitate views from their particular media sources, re-use the same tired lines, etc. It's a pretty good commentary on how any argument plays out online, almost like a chess opening where both sides have set openings they'll select from, such that it's a routine done without thinking. Person suggests not all men are rapists.. "Did you just #notallmen me? Did you? You misogynist fuck", etc. There is literally a set of standard responses to every line of inquiry, such that debate is impossible. Yeah I'd say the NPC meme fits pretty fucking well.

To me, NPC fits braindead types of people who regurgitate stuff without thinking, and that kind of mentality applies to left and right. There are imbeciles on both sides. I'm more of a right-wing guy but I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[The Elite]

To me, NPC fits braindead types of people who regurgitate stuff without thinking, and that kind of mentality applies to left and right. There are imbeciles on both sides. I'm more of a right-wing guy but I agree wholeheartedly.

As someone who is left wing and not even borderline, I am full on left wing, I agree.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

As someone who is left wing and not even borderline, I am full on left wing, I agree.

I think the meme is dumb and did originate from the alt-right, but do agree with the gist of the problem and that it's very much on both sides. As I've said, discussion of politics online is mostly useless as too many of the most active posters are just extremists regurgitating the same talking points ad nauseum. Yes, there's some actual discussion between more reasonable people in between (especially here where the mods don't thought police). But it's just not worth dealing with that vocal minority to try and engage with others IMO.

I'd rather just stay out of those threads and not get triggered by the non-sense the drones on sides are spouting and I'm just not really interested in debating anything even with reasonable people online. Wasted too much time in my teens and 20s on that nonsense. It's just a complete waste of time and I'll reserve my debating for real life, in person conversations (a frequent occurrence as an academic--though more often about field specific things than political stuff).

I wish Tyler had stuck to his guns in the initial aftermath of the meltdown and just banned political discussion and got GAF back to being about games and other media/random fun stuff in Off Topic (but only having gaming would have been fine by me). All the political focus just generates so much infighting and negativity on forums, and is much worse on a slower one like these that doesn't have enough activity to drown out that stuff.

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

I'll go ahead then: It's certainly most of the way to being one.

GAF before the split was stifling, yes, I even got banned once for downplaying the fears about Trump.
But recently I checked this place out again - particularly with that new Politics section - and the immediate impression is that it's filled with alt righters, conspiracy theorists and other people from the american right wing spectrum (which, by my european standards, is essentially far right). Not all of them obviously, but the same could be said about places like /pol/ and other places that turned into white nationalist recruitment fronts. I've spent enough time reading those places, I recognize that shit.

Sure, unlike on Resetera, you can still call someone out for going off the deep end of their respective political spectrum without getting banned, but that only matters as long as there are enough people with sense left to begin with.

Oh, don't get me wrong, there is a clear amount of alt-right style talking points thrown around in the politics sub. I think it's very clear this site has attracted a decent amount of those types. They were extremely focused on Gaf before the split on other sites mocking threads, users, etc... and it would be extremely naive of anyone here to think they didn't rush in to help fill the void after the core left-wing base left.

 

[Dunki]

To me, NPC fits braindead types of people who regurgitate stuff without thinking, and that kind of mentality applies to left and right. There are imbeciles on both sides. I'm more of a right-wing guy but I agree wholeheartedly.

This is what NPC means. You can use this on each ideology or political spectrum these days. Most people only spit out phrases they have learned without thinking for themselves. Ideologies today are like a fucking religion or a cult.

I'll go ahead then: It's certainly most of the way to being one.

GAF before the split was stifling, yes, I even got banned once for downplaying the fears about Trump.
But recently I checked this place out again - particularly with that new Politics section - and the immediate impression is that it's filled with alt righters, conspiracy theorists and other people from the american right wing spectrum (which, by my european standards, is essentially far right). Not all of them obviously, but the same could be said about places like /pol/ and other places that turned into white nationalist recruitment fronts. I've spent enough time reading those places, I recognize that shit.

Sure, unlike on Resetera, you can still call someone out for going off the deep end of their respective political spectrum without getting banned, but that only matters as long as there are enough people with sense left to begin with.

That is why you need more balance. But people are actually not afraid anymore to post here which is a huge plus. If you are left leaning and want to talk about it do it. You will certainly get pressured but the moment you get insulted or personally attacked this person gets warned or banned.

So every view is welcome.

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

To add to the above due to 5 min edit thing...

Is it an alt-right haven? I guess in some ways it could be, they have their right-wing leaning tone to help shroud them, keep them comfy, they can be the vocal minority and let their shit fly relatively freely without fear of being banned due to the open moderation policy... but there are also many right-leaning people who present their opinions reasonably.

And while I personally find many right-leaning opinions abhorrent, I do actually want to converse with these people. I want to find out more about them on a personal level, and to discover the core of their opinions. I think knowing these things is essential.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

Oh, don't get me wrong, there is a clear amount of alt-right style talking points thrown around in the politics sub. I think it's very clear this site has attracted a decent amount of those types. They were extremely focused on Gaf before the split on other sites mocking threads, users, etc... and it would be extremely naive of anyone here to think they didn't rush in to help fill the void after the core left-wing base left.

To add to the above due to 5 min edit thing...

Is it an alt-right haven? I guess in some ways it could be, they have their right-wing leaning tone to help shroud them, keep them comfy, they can be the vocal minority and let their shit fly relatively freely without fear of being banned due to the open moderation policy... but there are also many right-leaning people who present their opinions reasonably.

And while I personally find many right-leaning opinions abhorrent, I do actually want to converse with these people. I want to find out more about them on a personal level, and to discover the core of their opinions. I think knowing these things is essential.

You've fallen in love with your own conspiracies, friend, but I'm glad that you're willing to converse with people who have "abhorrent" opinions.

Maybe your doublespeak is what's causing the confusion?

You say there are "a clear amount of alt-right style talking points" and that "it's very clear this site has attracted a decent amount of those types" and that "it would be extremely naive of anyone here to think they didn't rush in to help fill the void".

Yet previously when asked about the accusations you retort:

Again, you're misrepresenting me, I never claimed this was an alt-right haven.

Help us out. Which one is it? Am I at risk of being manipulated by the alt-right? Where are the Holocaust deniers? Where are the neo-Nazi threads? Where are these "alt-right style talking points"? I'd like to jump in with you and argue vehemently against those posters. I have no interest in allowing those opinions to go unchallenged.

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

You've fallen in love with your own conspiracies, friend, but I'm glad that you're willing to converse with people who have "abhorrent" opinions.

Maybe your doublespeak is what's causing the confusion?

You say there are "a clear amount of alt-right style talking points" and that "it's very clear this site has attracted a decent amount of those types" and that "it would be extremely naive of anyone here to think they didn't rush in to help fill the void".

Yet previously when asked about the accusations you retort:



Help us out. Which one is it? Am I at risk of being manipulated by the alt-right? Where are the Holocaust deniers? Where are the neo-Nazi threads? Where are these "alt-right style talking points"? I'd like to jump in with you and argue vehemently against those posters. I have no interest in allowing those opinions to go unchallenged.

No double speak, I'm being honest. I find many right-wing opinions abhorrent. Stances on abortion, LGBT rights, social care, etc... I think you know this is actually inherent to many left-wing people so why you're acting like it's a surprise I don't know.

And my post very clearly states the answer to your question if you read it again, there are very clear alt-right talking points here, to suggest those people didn't rush in to help fill the void is naive, BUT there seems to be enough reasonable right-leaning people here that calling it a "haven" might be taking it a bit too far.

It would obviously look like a haven to anyone coming from Era where this stuff isn't even tolerated.

 

[DunDunDunpachi]

No double speak, I'm being honest. I find many right-wing opinions abhorrent. Stances on abortion, LGBT rights, social care, etc... I think you know this is actually inherent to many left-wing people so why you're acting like it's a surprise I don't know.

Who says I was surprised? My curiosity is about your need to include the word "abhorrent" in your statement. It's great that you are willing to engage with the forum that you signed up to join, but you act as if you had to cross yourself before stepping into this territory out of fear of a demon influencing you. Are you afraid someone is watching over your shoulder?

And my post very clearly states the answer to your question if you read it again, there are very clear alt-right talking points here, to suggest those people didn't rush in to help fill the void is naive, BUT there seems to be enough reasonable right-leaning people here that calling it a "haven" might be taking it a bit too far.

It would obviously look like a haven to anyone coming from Era where this stuff isn't even tolerated.

No references to the "very clear alt-right talking points" and the "rush in" of alt-right sympathizers. You've stated before -- several times -- that you prefer facts instead of opinion and conjecture. Is that no longer the case for this particular topic?

If you're willing to hear a friendly word: you've got a blind spot. There's no need to assume there are alt-right sympathizers hiding behind every thread. There's no need to assume unless your motive is merely to stir the pot and push an agenda. However, I take you at your word when you say you're here to talk and discover the core of other people's opinions.

I could understand how someone might assume it's a "haven" if they agreed with the enforced standpoints on ERA, but again, if there are alt-right sympathizers here it's important to point it out and stamp it out with better argument. They can go spew that vitriol on Reddit or 4chan or wherever else.

 

[Dr. Claus]

No double speak, I'm being honest. I find many right-wing opinions abhorrent. Stances on abortion, LGBT rights, social care, etc... I think you know this is actually inherent to many left-wing people so why you're acting like it's a surprise I don't know.

And my post very clearly states the answer to your question if you read it again, there are very clear alt-right talking points here, to suggest those people didn't rush in to help fill the void is naive, BUT there seems to be enough reasonable right-leaning people here that calling it a "haven" might be taking it a bit too far.

It would obviously look like a haven to anyone coming from Era where this stuff isn't even tolerated.

Right-wing opinions does not an alt-right make. Provide evidence, clear and verifiable to show the "alt-right" infestation, the "alt-right" talking points, the "holocaust denials" that seem to permeate the site as you just stated. Do not be vague, do not handwave - give EVIDENCE (caps for emphasis).

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

Who says I was surprised? My curiosity is about your need to include the word "abhorrent" in your statement. It's great that you are willing to engage with the forum that you signed up to join, but you act as if you had to cross yourself before stepping into this territory out of fear of a demon influencing you. Are you afraid someone is watching over your shoulder?

I mean, it's clear this has upset you somehow due to your use of language, or are you just having fun mocking me?

I've explained in previous posts why I'm here, I like to test my views against the opposition. I find the opposing views abhorant and that's inherent. The comments about "crossing myself" just seem redundant and a bit petty.

No references to the "very clear alt-right talking points" and the "rush in" of alt-right sympathizers. You've stated before -- several times -- that you prefer facts instead of opinion and conjecture. Is that no longer the case for this particular topic?

I've played this game twice.

First time I provided links the person outright ignored me. Second time the person just dismissed them all.

I've no interest in a third time.

If you're willing to hear a friendly word: you've got a blind spot. There's no need to assume there are alt-right sympathizers hiding behind every thread. There's no need to assume unless your motive is merely to stir the pot and push an agenda. However, I take you at your word when you say you're here to talk and discover the core of other people's opinions.

And your own blind spot is showing. I've literally explained this above. There are clear alt-right voices on this forum and I know you know this. Much like Era is a safer space for more extreme left-wing views, Gaf is a safer space for the opposite. It's very naive to deny this.

Is it a haven? No.

Is it a safer pace they will take a liking to? Naive to suggest otherwise given the history of this place.

I could understand how someone might assume it's a "haven" if they agreed with the enforced standpoints on ERA, but again, if there are alt-right sympathizers here it's important to point it out and stamp it out with better argument. They can go spew that vitriol on Reddit or 4chan or wherever else.

I don't know what to say, if you truly think that this place won't attract these people, or that they're not here after browsing the politics forum, I think we should agree to disagree.

Right-wing opinions does not an alt-right make. Provide evidence, clear and verifiable to show the "alt-right" infestation, the "alt-right" talking points, the "holocaust denials" that seem to permeate the site as you just stated. Do not be vague, do not handwave - give EVIDENCE (caps for emphasis).

Played this game twice as stated above, I've no interest in doing it a third time. and I've very clearly stated a reasonable opinion on this.

 

[Dr. Claus]

Played this game twice as stated above, I've no interest in doing it a third time. and I've very clearly stated a reasonable opinion on this.

There is an "opinion" and then there are making claims, which is what you have clearly done multiple times on this page. You made a claim and you have yet to show any evidence to prove such. If you had posted evidence prior, then you should have no problem going back and reposting it in a reply to myself, DunDun, or others who question the validity of your aforementioned claims.

Otherwise, it would be safe to assume you are full of hot air.

 

[hariseldon]

supermassiveblackhole I'm wondering if there's an issue here with English as 2nd language? Calling something abhorrent is pretty insulting and is hardly going to make people want to engage you in a constructive discussion.

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

supermassiveblackhole I'm wondering if there's an issue here with English as 2nd language? Calling something abhorrent is pretty insulting and is hardly going to make people want to engage you in a constructive discussion.

No, I'm English. I find the right's views on abortion, LGBT rights, social care, etc.. abhorrent. I have already told everyone here I am left-wing, and this is pretty much inherent to most left-wing people I know so it shouldn't come as a surprise at all. I'm fairly certain many of my views and opinions would get me the SJW tag, and I'm perfectly fine with that.

That doesn't mean we can't talk about it, that doesn't mean I'm calling you a monster if you have these views.

There is an "opinion" and then there are making claims, which is what you have clearly done multiple times on this page. You made a claim and you have yet to show any evidence to prove such. If you had posted evidence prior, then you should have no problem going back and reposting it in a reply to myself, DunDun, or others who question the validity of your aforementioned claims.

Otherwise, it would be safe to assume you are full of hot air.

Assume what you want, I'll do the same based on what I see as clear denial of reasonable facts.

 

[hariseldon]

Actually it kinda is calling them a monster. I disagree with those views (note that not all right wing hold all of the most inflammatory versions of those views), but calling people monsters does nothing of use. I sense that you wish to feed your ego, to be the magnanimous and generous person who talks to the monsters, perhaps aiming to educate them, rather than looking for a frank exchange of ideas. If that's the case there's probably nothing here for you.

 

[NickFire]

Is it a safer pace they will take a liking to? Naive to suggest otherwise given the history of this place.

No it is not. For it to be what you claim, there would need to be a moderation team who blocks out dissenting voices. That does not exist here, and there is ample evidence that is not the case as shown by the actual debates between the two primary sides. By your standard, any place that allows people who disagree with the left to speak would be a safe space for the far right.

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

Actually it kinda is calling them a monster. I disagree with those views (note that not all right wing hold all of the most inflammatory versions of those views), but calling people monsters does nothing of use. I sense that you wish to feed your ego, to be the magnanimous and generous person who talks to the monsters, perhaps aiming to educate them, rather than looking for a frank exchange of ideas. If that's the case there's probably nothing here for you.

No it's not.

Also notice I didn't say "all right wing opinions".

And you want me to be honest about my opinions? Or should I try to soften the blow to make sure I don't upset you?

No it is not. For it to be what you claim, there would need to be a moderation team who blocks out dissenting voices. That does not exist here, and there is ample evidence that is not the case as shown by the actual debates between the two primary sides. By your standard, any place that allows people who disagree with the left to speak would be a safe space for the far right.

Completely fallacious argument.

The open moderation allows for more extreme types of voices to be heard, which is an inevitable by-product of allowing more open discussion. Close moderation would make an echo chamber, ie Era. Open moderation allows for extreme voices on both sides to be more present, but as the general tone of this forum is right-leaning currently there's more opportunity for the extreme voices on the right to feel safer.

 

[hariseldon]

Well, good luck I guess. I'll leave it there but before I do, I'll leave you a link that you may find useful. https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0044XUINS/ - please have a read and see if it helps you.

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

Well, good luck I guess. I'll leave it there but before I do, I'll leave you a link that you may find useful. https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B0044XUINS/ - please have a read and see if it helps you.

No thanks.

I've presented myself very resonably so far ITT, and I've had some good chats with opposing voices. I have no interest in wrapping my opinions in cotton wool.

 

[Redneckerz]

I've played this game twice.

First time I provided links the person outright ignored me. Second time the person just dismissed them all.

I've no interest in a third time.

On the off-chance that this is me: I didn't dismiss all your links. If this is me, assuming good faith that this isn't the case, then this is an actual case of misrepresentation.

supermassiveblackhole in case you didn't get a notification since i accidentially removed a bracket from the quote at first.

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

I've played this game twice.

First time I provided links the person outright ignored me. Second time the person just dismissed them all.

I've no interest in a third time.

On the off-chance that this is me: I didn't dismiss all your links. If this is me, assuming good faith that this isn't the case, then this is an actual case of misrepresentation.

Ok, not all, but you made a reasonable effort for most of them.

 

[Dr. Claus]

No, I'm English. I find the right's views on abortion, LGBT rights, social care, etc.. abhorrent. I have already told everyone here I am left-wing, and this is pretty much inherent to most left-wing people I know so it shouldn't come as a surprise at all. I'm fairly certain many of my views and opinions would get me the SJW tag, and I'm perfectly fine with that.

That doesn't mean we can't talk about it, that doesn't mean I'm calling you a monster if you have these views.



Assume what you want, I'll do the same based on what I see as clear denial of reasonable facts.

Facts are supported by evidence. Provide that evidence, that is what people are asking for - something which you ardently refuse to do.

Also an opinion (what you had stated that you gave) is not the same as a fact (what you now claim your opinion to be). Please get your story straight.

 

[Redneckerz]

Ok, not all, but you made a reasonable effort for most of them.

So it was me. Tsk tsk. (Finally i can say that lol).

Its kinda funny since this was an actual misrepresentation and your earlier claim that i misrepresented you was not.

Well yeah, a proper dismissal is always better than Yeah no, right?

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

Facts are supported by evidence. Provide that evidence, that is what people are asking for - something which you ardently refuse to do.

Also an opinion is not the same as a fact. Please get your story straight.

Again, no thanks, done this a few times now and it didn't pan out. I consider all my comments and observations ITT regarding this reasonable.

So it was me. Tsk tsk. (Finally i can say that lol).

Its kinda funny since this was an actual misrepresentation and your earlier claim that i misrepresented you was not.

Well yeah, a proper dismissal is always better than Yeah no, right?

No, my claims of your misrepresentation have been valid. you even outright admitted to one which was a nice surprise!

 

[Cybrwzrd]

Why do so many of our British posters have an unhealthy obsession with American politics and a radical left viewpoint? It seems to be really, really common....

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

Why do so many of our British posters have an unhealthy obsession
with American politics and a radical left viewpoint? It seems to be really, really common....

This kind of petty, needless comment is completely against the notion put forward by many ITT.

You want open debate, but when someone appears who is being honest about their opinion and wiling to engage, they get piled on.

I don't see how this is any different to Era in this regard.

And politics affects us globally, it's not an "unhealthy obsession" it's engagement.

 

[Airbus Jr]

So many triggered people in ResetEra

I saw one of them getting triggered so hard he went Super Saiyan 3 in an instant

 

[Dr. Claus]

This kind of petty, needless comment is completely against the notion put forward by many ITT.

You want open debate, but when someone appears who is being honest about their opinion and wiling to engage, they get piled on.

I don't see how this is any different to Era in this regard.

And politics affects us globally, it's not an "unhealthy obsession" it's engagement.

You have done no such thing with open debate or willing to engage in discussion. You make a claim, refuse to back it up and continuously make excuses as to why you shouldn't. You have put forth more effort in *not* providing the evidence you stated you had than posting the evidence and having a discussion.

 

[supermassiveblackhole]

You have done no such thing with open debate or willing to engage in discussion. You make a claim, refuse to back it up and continuously make excuses as to why you shouldn't. You have put forth more effort in *not* providing the evidence you stated you had than posting the evidence and having a discussion.

As i have said, I have twice been asked to "provide receipts" and the first time I was ignored by the person entirely, the second I had most of them dismantled and told they weren't examples when they clearly were. And while this may have been about another topic, I have no interest in playing this game again in a forum where I'm clearly outnumbered. It's exhausting.

My comments regarding this place being right-leaning and a safer space for extreme right wing views as a mirror to Era being the opposite are reasonable.