System Lords of the Internets

4:40 PM

. meta.stackoverflow.com/q/408080/124486

5:02 PM

@IsraelisanApartheidState if the avatar is not directly insulting or attacking another, it's not for us to moderate[...]explicit attacks on a particular group of people[...] do not belong in public avatars here

so the question is, does the phrase "Israel is an Apartheid State" insult or attack any group of people.

Another question is if force changes for other avatars that we felt were inappropriate also should include year-long bans.

Israel is an Apartheid State

5:31 PM

. meta.stackoverflow.com/a/408082/124486

Israel is an Apartheid State

5:56 PM

> You are already discussing this in multiple places on Stack Exchange. We don't need to re-litigate your specific issue again here on Meta Stack Overflow. If you have an issue with your account, then the normal steps are raise a flag to see if it can be resolved. If the result of the flag does not satisfy you, then use the "contact us" link available at the bottom of every page. You are already very ware of how that works. – Makyen♦ 1 min ago

I've done BOTH of those things.

Israel is an Apartheid State

6:18 PM

Mods deleted the question for being a dupe. Which was silly. And then the deleted the answer on that question too.

For unspecified reasons..

meta.stackoverflow.com/a/408082/124486

Telling you that whole SOCVR thing is wretched.

Israel is an Apartheid State

6:32 PM

It's clear that Makyen♦ is closing that answer to promote their own position rather than discussing policy here on Stack Overflow, or addressing the request.

Philᵀᴹ

This is a good read en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_and_the_apartheid_analogy

Israel is an Apartheid State

Israel is the only state where they can argue delegitimization is wrong without providing any reason whatsoever.

I challenge anyone to find an example that is so obviously an argument by fiat.

It's like the Queen arguing that democracy is an attempt to deligitimize her sovereign authority. I can only think to reply with "not necessarily" and at the same time "if so, so what"?

Israel is an Apartheid State

7:19 PM

Cool, I thought I lost that one but noap, eventual consistency just being slow. web.archive.org/web/20210530175401/https://…

Israel is an Apartheid State

9:21 PM

I just got banned from StackOverflow, for sharing links to archive.org

Paul White

A three-day suspension was less than I expected. Leaving a load of comments with an archive link to a recently mod-deleted answer seems like a silly risk to take to me. Like, what did you expect to happen?

And it really doesn't help people who might be trying to emphasise your net benefit to the network at the moment.

Israel is an Apartheid State

Well, I didn't expect the question on this to get closed. It was however closed. And It was pushed to an answer on another question where EVERY response without exception speaks in favor of allowing political avatars and pseudonyms. Many of those responses are from moderators. When you can't ask moderators collectively, and you've already asked in email to team@ it seems fair to ask individually those those mods and users that think political avatars and pseudonyms should be permitted.

If for no other reason then so they simply update their answer and stop projecting the wrong information. As all of those answers are simply incorrect: political pseudonyms that do not attack people will be changed, and you will be banned.

Paul White

Yes well meta can be unfair can't it. I mean just look at my recent awesome question. Anyway, it's not that I'm talking about. You would have been fine, I reckon, if you hadn't forced their hand by posting those comments.

Israel is an Apartheid State

9:36 PM

And I would not have posted those comments had I have had any other method of speaking to them privately, but I don't. Those answers are incorrect and if those people who posted them -- also moderators -- believe in those answers (and I hope they do) I would also hope they would stand up for me right now.

And I have no indication that any of them are even aware of this situation

Paul White

@IsraelisanApartheidState I don't know about "simply incorrect". The top-voted and accepted answer says:

> There is a fine line between what is and is not appropriate, and each case would need to be examined on its own merits, but my general take is that politically motivated avatars in support of a cause are fine, but ones that attempt to attack others are not.

@IsraelisanApartheidState Right, well maybe. But you knew what would happen.

Israel is an Apartheid State

But again no one has told me who I attacked? There are "Jews for Peace" literally -- it's an organization. The largest humanitarian organization in Israel is B'Tselem which is say nothing less than what I'm saying. We're on the same page. I'm not attacking Jews in Israel, or abroad (like me). Who am I attacking: no one has ever told me. They tell me I'm attacking a country, and they explicitly in that post say it's ok.

> My take on it is that if the avatar is not directly insulting or attacking another, it's not for us to moderate. [...] I understand that there is an implied criticism of another group in this, but as long as someone is not explicitly being called out, I don't think it is our place to step in and force a change. - Brad Larson♦

Paul White

And besides, that's a Q & A from 2014. You can't expected everyone that took part back then (a) to hold the same opinions now; or (b) react to a new answer or comment immediately if at all.

Israel is an Apartheid State

Right, I can't! I agree fully. That's one of the reasons why I commented. That seems like a fair question. I explicitly asked for them to "weigh" in on it.

Paul White

@IsraelisanApartheidState Yes I understand your point. I'm not talking about that. I'm describing how the way you went about it eventually resulted in a short suspension. You know how these things tend to go for you. You could have foreseen it. If you had even waited a little while before posting comments, and maybe fewer of them idk.

Israel is an Apartheid State

9:40 PM

I would expect if they remain silent, they have different sympathies now. But I'm still giving them the benefit of the doubt which is why I felt those comments are ok. They're not partial or political. They're merely pointers to an archive.org copy of a deleted answer which gives context to the answerer itself, and I guess unacceptably other people that StackOverflow doesn't want informed about this.

> You could have foreseen it. If you had even waited a little while before posting comments, and maybe fewer of them idk.

That's a valid criticism.

I knew what I was doing. And I assumed I would get banned for it. But that's not the way it ought to be. I ought to have a right to communicate with moderators that have voiced opinions and to ask for insight when I feel they've expressed a humane opinion. We ought to have that degree of freedom of expression.

Paul White

@IsraelisanApartheidState How do you know the people concerned had even seen the comment? This is what I'm saying about being so in a rush. Yes this whole thing is super-important to you right now, but the others you are seeking to engage might be in a different situation.

@IsraelisanApartheidState Well fair enough but you don't have much of a voice on SO for 3 days now do you.

Israel is an Apartheid State

If the content of those answers is still maintained by Brad and Tim, I have reason to believe they'll be two of the more-fair interactions I encountered to date on this site.

Paul White

Well quite.

I don't know if all this is adding much to The Heap. Perhaps I should move this part of the chat to a different public room.

Israel is an Apartheid State

@PaulWhite Wait to be clear on the answer provided, I am 100% unsure that either Brad or Tim have seen my answer or are informed on this matter. Above and beyond that I assume they have not seen the answer I just posted. However, I assume that without my comment on their own answer they would never have seen it. And I also assume the moderators who have been banning and silencing this would rather that be the case.

Paul White

OTOH the regulars might be interested directly idk. Let's see if anyone says anything.

@IsraelisanApartheidState Maybe so, it's hard to know about any of that. What I am sure about is that you could have found a different or less rushed way to communicate with Brad or Tim. That's all I know really. There isn't always a perfect answer.

A quiet comment in a few days would likely have gone unnoticed by anyone who might flag or otherwise have an emotional reaction in the heat of the moment.

Of course if you comment in the same way after 3 days, having been suspended for exactly that, well you know what is likely to occur. In that sense, you damaged your own options.

Paul White

9:59 PM

You'd think a System Lord of the Internets would have more guile.

Israel is an Apartheid State

10:12 PM

What rule is violated by sharing links to resources off the site, like archive.org? Do we have to link directly to on-site resources, or can we not link to archived copies of them?

Just for reference here, I have emailed team@stackexchange.com, I've also asked on meta.stackexchange.com (as requested by moderators elsewhere). The moderators at meta.stackexchange.com killed the question and asked me to bring this up on sites individually. They did so while changing my pseudonym on all sites. I've also waited over a week for an email back from StackExchange. Note, they requested that I do not…

response to modmail/ban.

Paul White

10:23 PM

That seems pretty good, aside from "Why do I keep running into these politically motivated attacks by StackOverflow moderators?"

As to which rule was violated, I don't know. It's not as simple as rules-lawyering anyway. If it's considered disruptive in some way I guess that can be enough. You'd have to ask the person that issued the suspension, if they didn't make it clear in the suspension message.

Oh I see that was part of your reply nvm.

Transcript for

System Lords of the Internets