Not a bar, but plays one on TV - 2019-10-10 (page 1 of 2)

« first day (2011 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (1489 days later) »

user15026

12:16 AM

@KorvinStarmast saw this on Twitter, it is a interesting historical reference to what I meant in regards to the fact that making friends and being civil doesn't always work twitter.com/MWUnicorn/status/1181764973661310977?s=19

3:47 AM

@Ash Good find

Yeah

3 hours later…

7:14 AM

Seems like the current (7th) update from Monica is indicating that the company did nothing to fix the lack of transparency and failed to back words with actions. Just as suspected.

6 hours later…

1:17 PM

@vicky_molokh what a train wreck

1:36 PM

It is worth considering that just because Monica isn't happy with the communication does not mean that the communication wasn't fully acceptable and she simply is refusing to accept what is in it. We simply don't know, but I'm disinclined to judge the success of the company's action based on the one person who is most disgruntled with them.

1:49 PM

It's not Monica alone who said that first step is to fix what's broken and try again with a proper process. As far as can be seen, nothing was actually done to stop the problems the community voiced.

Even the CoC is being pushed at a rapid pace with little transparency and very little time for review by the community, just as it seems to have been before the incident.

@vicky_molokh I'm not sure if this helps assuage your concerns or not, but they have been very active in listening, reacting, and making changes based on moderator feedback to the CoC. So there is that.

@Rubiksmoose Link to the revisions?

@vicky_molokh Nothing public yet unfortunately. Due out today though. Keep your eye on the blog.

(And I really don't mean to tease anybody with things that I can't say, so I'm sorry if it comes across that way.)

@Rubiksmoose Well there's a problem right there. A thing that is supposed to affect the whole community is being hidden by closed doors while the process deciding its fate is underway, denying ability to make the process accountable to the community in question.

well they said "the CoC is not negotiable"

1:57 PM

@vicky_molokh I also would have preferred this to be a community-wide thing. But at least listening to the moderators is somewhat of a first step. And we are, of course, trying to put the best interests of our communities forward at every point.

they'll hammer out some wording things then unleash it on the public

it will probably be an even better beating stick than before

In other news, now rep and badges are also gone, hmm

there's an extent to which it's not reasonable to invite mass community participation on certain things

for a start the amount of discussion you'd have to stay on top of would be monumental

I can tell you even with only some fraction of ~600 moderators actively giving feedback, it has been tough. And we've been using a variety of tools to help do that that would not work at scale.

and there's no way you could possibly arrive at a consensus from the entire SE meta userbase when the issues are even slightly divisive

@AndrasDeak Sounds like another experiment like the voting one of a couple days ago.

2:01 PM

and if you go so far as to put things up to a vote, what do you do when the userbase votes wrong?

This is especially important in considering that the CoC is trying to protect a very vulnerable minority and thus majority voting isn't necessarily the best way to judge appropriateness.

2

I mean, a population can vote for objectively bad things. One of the purposes of representative democracy is to mitigate tyranny by majority.

yeah, exactly

Voting tools can be used to at least arrive at one of the following conclusions about a given section of a CoC:
- there is a strong leaning in the community in favour of a proposal (implement it);
- there is a strong leaning in the community against a proposal or existing rule (reverse it);
- there is no consensus, and so it's a thing that shouldn't be put into stone.

@Carcer Elect another userbase that would vote the way the corp wants, of course.

@vicky_molokh somehow relevant:

in Sugarcube Corner, 46 mins ago, by Derpy

@Shadow To be fair, I would prefer plan B)

in Sugarcube Corner, 45 mins ago, by Derpy

> yep, you folk were right again, 3 days to discuss a CoC change with the mods wasn't enough. We will delay the public release of the CoC to the next month to allow us some more time to discuss.

I understand the pessimism here, but I strongly believe that the intent (at least) behind what the company is trying to do is correct. They are trying to protect a very vulnerable community against things that have and are making things very bad for them. This is a direction they should be taking.

2:06 PM

rest of the discussion is in the linked room, but ye'll have to dig thru a little bit of MLP related content.

@Rubiksmoose yeah, I think the timing is perfect

@AndrasDeak Hmmm if you're implying that because you think they are trying to cover up downvotes on the upcoming CoC post I don't think you'll find that pans out.

@Derpy s/more time to discuss/some hope the users will forget by then

@AndrasDeak waiting to see if that is intentional. If it is... well, they again did it too fast. The rep is still shown on an editor profile link

user image

I imagine the userscript to disable this experiment (if it is one) will be dropping any minute lol

2:12 PM

@Rubiksmoose already there.

18

A: User cards are no longer showing reputation or badges across the network

No, I can't. This is because a span with class d-none, which effectively hides the reputation, etc. <span class="d-none" itemprop="name">ankii <div class="-flair"> <span class="reputation-score" title="reputation score " dir="ltr">222</span><span title="1 gold badge" aria-hidden="true">

I could actually see some benefit to hiding rep among answerers anyways.

@Derpy just a bit buggy

Maybe kinda sorta

@Rubiksmoose I had something higher-level in mind. Distracting the plebs with less socially sensitive topics. Nobody will care about Monica and LGBTQ+ if their dear reputation has disappeared

@AndrasDeak Ah I see. Well, who can say. I'm betting that even if that is their goal, it isn't going to work. Adding more anger and confusion will likely just make people less receptive to changes and less trusting. Setting aside the argument about whether anger is even really truly a reasonable reaction to a change like hiding rep.

(I'm also disinclined to favor these kinds of speculative theories. From what I've seen about SE and how they work, this just isn't the way they do things. No cloak and dagger stuff I mean.)

2:18 PM

hello

@AndrasDeak You mean..... Next episode is available already???

Anywho. The only reason I dropped in was to helpful in assuaging some fears maybe. Carry on.

@Gwideon hi :)

so i came in here so people could answer what I asked in general

This is a bug, a fix is incoming. — Taryn ♦ 3 mins ago

plot twist

oh wow

2:26 PM

@Gwideon ask again?

I was wanting advice for running rise of tiamat

is that the second one in the Tyrrany story?

@Derpy already seen it by the way

Are you running rise of tiamat alone or hoard first?

I'm thinking about just running rise of tiamat

2:28 PM

ah that's right HotDQ is first

there's a lot of setup in HotDQ

I've heard HotDQ can be kinda.... Boring i guess

although I think someone put together a way to run Tiamat after the Mines of Phandelver adventure

@Gwideon HotDQ has some issues in the beginning and middle of the adventure. It assumes much about your party

ahhh

Mostly how there's a massively over-leveld dragon encounter very early on and it makes the assumption the party won't try to stay and fight, and will instead run for their lives

some other issues in a similar vein, and there's an entire series of caravan sequences that can be very dry

Really bad Assumption to make

2:31 PM

yup. It certainly teaches a valuable lesson, that not every fight is meant to be won, but I'm not sure that's the way to do it. Particularly in the first official module for a new edition

@AndrasDeak ... the answer or the episode -_-? If the later... well, they have been broadcasting re-airing for more than a year now.

anyways I'm gonna go for a bit

@Derpy the answer :P

oof, them chat flags

??

2:43 PM

people are a bit on edge

@Carcer one good reason to use my 200rep points "just for chat" user instead of the 10k one.....

@Derpy I only realized that two days ago or so :P

@AndrasDeak it is even funnier when your first meeting with the feature is randomly walking in a chat board for the first time after you got 10K and you see a "weird blue ping" on your avatar.

3:02 PM

I meant the fact that there's two yous, but sure :P

@AndrasDeak .... oh, you meant that. Short version........

in Sugarcube Corner on Meta Stack Exchange Chat, May 25 '15 at 8:52, by DerpyBot

~ Column 0 you say?
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|x|x|_|_|_|
|o|_|x|o|_|_|_|
|o|o|o|x|x|_|_|
|x|o|o|o|x|_|_|

Ok, @SPArchaeologist, then I will play in column 2.
|_|_|_|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|x|_|_|_|_|
|_|_|x|x|_|_|_|
|o|_|x|o|_|_|_|
|o|o|o|x|x|_|_|
|x|o|o|o|x|_|_|

the alternate account once was a bot. The bot is no more, and now I use it just for chat.

ah :)

@GcL callback to the effects on Monica's personal life:

in Tavern on the Meta on Meta Stack Exchange Chat, 2 mins ago, by Monica Cellio

Some of the crap is abuse from trolls; some of the crap, maybe the worst crap, is recruiting pitches from hatemongers. FFS.

that can't be right

3:27 PM

@AndrasDeak Nah, it's called hugboxing and it's pretty common when someone makes a mistake (honest or intentional), they get swarmed by alt-right types that think that they can exploit the backlash against them to get them to join the cause.

I was more talking about Monica having been publically defamed, but you're probably right

> "Aww, honey, are the mean old (((SJW)))'s attacking you because you don't submit to their groupthink about pronouns? Well, don't worry, we totally agree with you, and there's a whole bunch of us just like you that have been talking about these problems for years! Let me show you around...."

And they hold off on flashing the swastikas until they think you're properly indoctrinated.

I've seen it happen a lot.

3:45 PM

Disgusting :-/

That is bad. Trolls and alt right are the worst. Would be nice to live in a world where they weren't such a big problem.

How is that related to the article by The Register?

Only to the extent that they were triggered by the event, and I would think that "hatemongers" have a larger chance of reading a press release being picked up than a meta post.

but yes, that's just speculation on my part

whether on meta or in the press the company has managed to convey a message that Monica is open to such (I mean alt-right etc.) initiatives

@GcL I don't know if it is related to the article, but it is surely related to some of the "comments" on the article. Would avoid reading them, if you value your lunch, that is....

@Derpy Apparently the comments and posts on SE are bad as well.

@Derpy literally the only place where I read comments is SO/SE

nobody's paying for a hazmat suit for any other place

4:08 PM

@AndrasDeak which got a lot of attention here and then painted to on a lot of other related sites like hackernews and reddit.

@AndrasDeak This was what I thought Aza was really spot-on in observing. Irrespective of whether Monica genuinely screwed up or was just falsely painted, the fact that we don't really know is because SE is so incredibly vague and opaque on the issue—and their vagueness and opaqueness left open the door for commentators to interpret the sequence of events as SE "capitulating to angry SJW transpeople", painting a huge target on the LGBT community at SE.

@GcL true

@Xirema I feel like everyone is being vague and talking around whatever happened without just quoting it. I still feel like I'm in the dark about the conversation that started the whole thing.

@GcL For my part, it's because not once in this entire debacle have I seen an actual chat log or email that would have put the record straight. And of course some of that goes back to the fears that putting direct transcripts out there could potentially make the situation worse.

I feel like I am so out of the loop. It's really hard to make heads and tails of this situation

4:17 PM

This Just In:

6

Q: Official FAQ on gender pronouns and Code of Conduct changes

We expect today’s Code of Conduct changes to generate a lot of questions. We’ve tried to anticipate some of the most common questions people may have here, and we’ll be adding to this list as more questions come up. Q: What are personal pronouns, and why are they relevant to the Code of Conduct?...

discussion faq featured code-of-conduct announcements

Also this new Coc FAQ helps clear up some stuff on the new COC changes. I actually feel the change is fairly reasonable with banning only being used in the most extreme of situations.

though there are always problems that could come up

Also CoC stackoverflow.blog/2019/10/10/iterating-on-inclusion

2

@AndrasDeak I can't view the blog as I'm on a school network that blocks it. can I get a tl;dr

I must say, Monica repeatedly demanding to be reinstated is not a good look. I obviously cannot definitively say one way or another who is really in the wrong here, but making demands in the midst of conflict has never been a smart move, in my mind

It's clear as mud.
>Be inclusive and respectful.
>
>Avoid sarcasm and be careful with jokes — tone is hard to decipher online. Prefer gender-neutral language when uncertain. If a situation makes it hard to be friendly, stop participating and move on.
...
>Use stated pronouns (when known). When in doubt, don’t use language that might offend or alienate.

4:28 PM

@G.Moylan Yeah.

@GcL What is unclear about that? Genuinely asking

yeah

@G.Moylan Is "they" always a safe pronoun to use?

Also, would just using a full name instead of a pronoun acceptable?

@GcL I think we discussed that a bunch last week. For a brief refresher: if you don't know how someone identifies, 'they' is safe. If you do know, and the person prefers their specific pronoun, you should stick to the pronoun.

@GcL that's true. "He," grammatically, has traditionally been the "safe" default, but we've been culturally shifting to "they" in recent years. Idk, it reads like "try your best, if there's a mistake, gently fix it."

4:30 PM

@Xirema So the answer under the new CoC is "they" is not always acceptable?

it's considered gender-neutral so yeah. most people will be fine with it. also yes it's fine just to use a username.

@GcL no it usually is

It's based on whether a person is fine with you using it or not

@GcL not if it's me saying "Yeah @Gcl did this one thing. Look at the post @GcL wrote. I would totally talk about @GcL this way in normal conversation, even to @GcL's face!" then it's forced avoidance

@Gwideon I don't like usually.

@G.Moylan Those seem correct to me.

@GcL they do but all strung together like that is not

@G.Moylan What's wrong with my username?

4:32 PM

@G.Moylan it would be natural to flow into pronouns after an initial reference or two

user15026

@G.Moylan Exactly, that's intentionally othering that person by speaking about them differently than you would others, because if they used pronouns you were okay with (she/he/etc), you'd've naturally subbed in pronouns in there at least once.

basically you can use they as long as the person says they're fine with it

It's as simple as that

@Gwideon So if someone tells you "they" is unacceptable, is that an acceptable ~~request~~ demand to make of people?

user15026

Not entirely, but that's part of it

well, use "they "if unsure or until corrected

@GcL in a case-by-case, yes, but I don't thin kblanket-banning "they" as a default is particularly smart

user15026

4:34 PM

Basically - use whatever stated pronouns a person requests, if you don't know what they use, try to be as gender neutral as possible, until you know otherwise.

if they tell you they is unacceptable then they will usually tell you what they would prefer. use that instead

@Gwideon No, use what they prefer, don't use "that".

user15026

Also, don't intentionally avoid pronouns just because you don't think it's grammatical or what have you.

@G.Moylan That's how the language is set up. I'd love a singular neutral pronoun, but we don't have one aside from "they" yet.

@GcL then use that....

@G.Moylan that's what we're saying. "They" should be the default unless informed otherwise

Many RPG books ahve gone this route

4:36 PM

@GcL I'd need to look it up but I don't think singular "they" is some kind of novel turn-of-the-century invention.

yeah it's not

i've seen it in like sherlock holmes books and stuff like that

Even when someone insists on being referred to as only xyz, is they then incorrect?

yeah it's been around for a long time. In and out of style. Since we've eliminated "thou" from typical use, "They" really is the only remaining option

user15026

@Yuuki It really, really isn't.

@GcL yes, especially then

user15026

4:37 PM

@GcL once a pronoun set is stated, use whatever's stated.

@Yuuki It's not. It's just not only singular. It can also be plural.

@Ash unless you flat out don't know/didn't get the message

@Ash When does that demand become unreasonable?

user15026

@GcL Never.

@GcL but it doesn't matter. Part of the new CoC explicitly states that grammar shouldn't take precedence over someone's worth

4:37 PM

Does a eight character pronoun a reasonable demand?

it shouldn't be unreasonable

Is a 28 character pronoun a reasonable demand?

okay this is irrational

user15026

@GcL Can you find me an actual practical example, or are you just making stuff up to find loopholes in respecting people?

@Gwideon Yes, but what is reasonable?

4:38 PM

I think this is quickly getting into hyperbole and what-about-ism

@Gwideon It might be a word from a different language that has a lot of meaning to the person.

user15026

Why are people so averse to a simple respectful act?

@GcL then use that word?

When is making up absurdly hypothetical situations unreasonable?

no rational person would use a 28 letter pronoun if they are requesting that they're most likely a troll

4:39 PM

@Gwideon Would you still use that pronoun even if you thought they were just trolling you?

@GcL that's just it though, you can't make that assumption

Do you believe in doing the right thing enough to indulge someone you think might be just jerking your chain?

@GcL Probably. No skin off my teeth.

yeah

@G.Moylan because if it's a legit request, you've now done wrong by that person

user15026

4:40 PM

Honestly, I don't see why this is so hard for people. All we want (we being people who use pronouns outside of he/him and she/her) is the same respect you naturally give others.

It literally wouldn't bother me to type out a slightly longer word.

it's called being compassionate

@GcL They very well might be! But I think it's a mistake to start from the position of presuming someone is trying to mess with you.

@Ash Saying "they" is unacceptable is asking for something beyond what is applied to everyone else.

Nobody's tracking my wpm on Chat.SE.

user15026

4:41 PM

@GcL no?

but seriously find me an example of an overly long pronoun. I doubt you will

user15026

@Yuuki Little do you know.....

user15026

;)

I don't use he or she even when I know. They keeps gender out of the conversation.

@Ash oh noes

4:41 PM

@GcL until they explicitly say " hey, that kindof bothers me, can you call me this instead"

Especially applicable in some fields I communicate in. Gender one way or the other has implications.

user15026

You are not in charge of deciding what other people's comfort level is acceptable.

2

@G.Moylan That

user15026

If someone expressly tells you you are making them uncomfortable, the correct response is "I'm sorry" and then not doing the thing that hurts them, as much as possible.

3

@GcL I don't see the argument. Use "they" until informed otherwise, on a case-by-case basis

4:42 PM

yes it really is

As for "what if", we'll handle it like we handle proposed tags: we'll get there when we get there.

Galaxy Brain Take: ya'll is an excellent plural second-person pronoun, and it's a criminal shame we don't use it enough.

@Xirema As a Texan, speak for y'allselves.

user15026

@Xirema It's the start of one of my favourite contractions (y'all'd've)

sorry if this is rude but I honestly don't get what's so confusing about this. You wouldn't call someone who prefers her he. there's little difference. continue to use natural language and use pronouns when it applies

Y'all

that's a fun contraction

user15026

4:46 PM

@Gwideon I'm right there with you, honestly.

@Gwideon Exactly. Personal example: I, for whatever reason, assumed it was correct to refer to @Xirema as "he" in the past. Not sure why, that's just where my head went at the time. Now that I can see her clear preference to be referred to as "she" or "they", I will use those pronouns

@Ash "Y'all'd've'f'I'd've".

user15026

@Yuuki shutting down computer sounds

use't'could

as a texan i have to stop myself from using y'all when chatting with people

4:47 PM

@Ash hehehe

@G.Moylan and along those lines, @Xirema, if I've offended you in the past by doing that, I'm terribly sorry

user15026

@Gwideon It's a good word :)

anyways I've got to go

toodles!

user15026

See you later :)

4:51 PM

@Gwideon what GcL said. I don't think it clarifies anything about Monica's situation

@G.Moylan yeah, that looks a bit petty. But I don't blame her in her given situation.

@AndrasDeak I mean, I get it, but it's definitely not doing anyone any favors, including her.

yeah

OK, this one's about Monica's situation

The intent of the requirement is to avoid users feeling singled-out, disrespected or invalidated. If someone's natural writing style always pertains equitably to everyone through typical discourse or isn't frequently interpreted as a clever means to avoid someone's stated pronouns, then, in theory, one might conclude that would work. In practice, it may simply not, and if we received multiple complaints of deliberately avoiding someone's pronouns, regardless of the intent, we'd need to take corrective action. — Cesar M ♦ 5 mins ago

This ^ would mean that if Monica chooses not to use any pronouns whatsoever, she's doing it right. So firing her was wrong.

@G.Moylan I appreciate the sentiment. My situation is "complicated" (and that's all I'm prepared to admit at the moment) so I've been very specifically not correcting people who misgender me, nor holding it against them.

@AndrasDeak I read that sentence very differently, which is something I pointed out in a comment on Monica's post.

interesting :)

@Xirema I saw that I think I agree with you. What Cesar M is trying to say is that, writing in a gender-neutral way is fine, but going out of your way to avoid using an individual's pronouns because you disagree with that is wrong

5:02 PM

wait, I don't think Xirema believes that

That was two thoughts written together, one sec

@G.Moylan This, although there's more to it.

assuming "100% pronoun-free" is gender-neutral

in any case I have to be elsewhere so I'll read up on developments later :)

@AndrasDeak yeah but that's impossible without it looking like you're deliberately othering somebody.

@MonicaCellio I think certain kinds of writing styles will come off as "forced avoidance". Like, if I write a post that says "This is my friend Elizabeth, Elizabeth is 27 years old and is part of my Rugby Group. Elizabeth wanted me to introduce Elizabeth because Elizabeth is shy and Elizabeth has difficulty introducing Elizabeth to new people", it sure seems like I'm very conspicuously avoiding referring to Elizabeth as a non-binary person by not using their pronouns of 'they/them', which seems like an attempt on my part to not respect their gender identity. — Xirema 24 mins ago

user15026

5:03 PM

@G.Moylan nods

user15026

People will naturally use pronouns. Everyone does. When you don't, it's noticeable, even if you don't think it is.

Simply avoiding pronoun use can read as an attempt to invalidate someone's gender identity, even if you don't intend it that way.

I think the takeaway here is to always try to remain neutral by using natural language and neutral pronouns like "them" and "they."

Then, if you're informed otherwise, use those pronouns

@G.Moylan And this is, IMO, a pretty safe rule that most people can effortlessly follow.

the "natural language" bit I think is the hangup here. Speaking they way @Xirema used as an example is definitely not natural

@Xirema I agree

@G.Moylan while it technically is neutral, it is still offensive by way of appearing to other the individual being discussed.

@Ash indeed

5:07 PM

It could be difficult to follow if you're super uncomfortable with singular-they, which... I mean, I get it. But it is grammatically valid, and we need to move past that discomfort, because failing to do so is causing direct harm.

@Xirema right, the personal discomfort here is invalid. I'm personally a little put off by all the neopronouns like xe, xir, etc., because it's different for me. That's not something I grew up needing to know, or learning about, or seeing as "normal." BUT, I need to get over it, because it doesn't matter if I find it odd, or "weird," or even just different - what matters are the people in the conversation, and that all parties feel valid

I'm learning, and I'll get there. Personal bias is still a thing, and always will be, to a degree, but we all should be actively working towards overcoming it

and if this new CoC is an enforceable measure to help us get there as a community, then I'm for it

Maybe I'll learn a thing or two along the way

TBH I think it's a missed opportunity that I'm not using 'zir' or 'xir' as my pronouns, except that I've tried that and it just doesn't quite feel right. XD

@Xirema I think the biggest discomfort for me is I don't understand those pronouns. It's a "fear of the unknown" kind of thing for me

@G.Moylan "On fleek" is still arcane knowledge to me but I'm not yelling at the youngin's to get off my lawn.

@Yuuki exactly

5:13 PM

So someone please, please correct me if I'm mistaken, but my understanding of those terms is that they originated from people who were certain that 'they' was exclusively a plural pronoun, and felt English didn't have singular, gender-neutral pronouns. So they tried to create pronouns to slot in alongside he/him/she/her

I'll use whatever pronouns are requested of me. I don't have to "get it," but it helps my personal bias to understand the words I'm using

@Xirema think I've heard that before but I cannot attest to the validity. I also at some point thought a portion of those pronouns were to refer to trans or gender-fluid people in a specific, identifying manner. But, again, I just don't know.

@Xirema I imagine part of it is also "cis-gendered people have their own pronouns, why does everyone else have to be 'they'?"

I can definitely see that as potentially othering.

@Yuuki @G.Moylan I think there's probably truth to this.

It's as if in a race survey, you have the following options: British, French, Spanish, Italian, German, and Non-European.

I would definitely wonder why I'm being grouped as "non-European" and why isn't there an option for "Chinese".

@Yuuki yeah, when I was in high school there was "asian, hispanic, non-hispanic, etc." where the primary demographic was causcasian/white

it felt obtuse and arbitrary. Like, they could have said german and non-german

5:30 PM

Hey

o/

I’m just popping in for a second.

Honestly some of the discourse around this subject has been kinda hurtful. Not here but elsewhere. It kinda sucks

I get certain concerns but it’s kinda clear that some people just feel that they shouldn’t have to use someone’s preferred pronouns. Sorry i’ll Shut up

@Gwideon You might find Aza's post on the new meta pertinent, as she made the same observation.

@GcL Note that some cis people (eg Monica) consider it rude to be referred to using "they". This is not a demand being made by only one group of people.

In case it isn't clear, I'm frustrated with Monica's post on that same meta as well. It seems like she's still in the position of feeling she did absolutely nothing wrong, despite what appear to have been several attempts to inform her.

5:45 PM

@AndrasDeak Except that isn't what she had been doing. So the situation is much more complicated than "firing her was wrong".

Not absolving SE in any regard with that observation: at the risk of sounding like a broken record, SE made a lot of very big mistakes, up through and including the manner in which they dismissed her.

user15026

@Gwideon I feel you. offers hug

I’m not really wanting to delve into the whole Monica thing. One of the arguments I find really frustrating is the whple “what if some one wants me to use -insert ridiculous pronoun”. First of it’s a logical fallacy to attempt to use outliers and extremes as proof for your argument. Second this is very simple to deal with you continue to engage with the person as long as you need to until you can disengage with the conversation.

@Gwideon No need to shut up. Unfortunately I suspect people are going to be disrespectful and lash out in the near term. I hope I'm wrong. So, everyone who may be affected, do what you have to do to keep yourself in a good mental place.

Sorry i’m Venting some frustration here

5:49 PM

That's perfectly acceptable :)

@Gwideon I think a lot of us are, that's perfectly reasonable given the context.

user15026

@Gwideon You're not saying anything I've not thought over the past few....however long this has been.

user15026

So...you're not alone.

It’s honestly a simple policy that I think will work well.

> "You remember last week? That was two years ago."

user15026

5:50 PM

@Xirema This is so how I feel lately

Yeah things have been moving so fast that it feels like an eternity since this all started

I’m honestly kinda scared to tell people I prefer they as i’m afraid people will react..... badly

one of the tenets of SE is "assume good intent." Unless someone gives me a legitimate reason to think they're acting in bad faith, then even if they request to go by a pronoun (not a title, as so many of the "ridiculous" examples are) that I'm unfamiliar with, it is my responsibility as a decent human being to 1) assume good intent, and 2) oblige such a request as best I can

5

at least, I like to think I'm a decent human being. I suppose the jury could very well still be out on that one :P

@G.Moylan I honestly agree and a lot of it really depends on context.

the other thing I find frustrating is that it takes very little effort to be nice and considerate to someone, and it often takes extra effort to be a dick. It's not hard to be nice.

and yet, people are acting like this is some huge inconvenience.

user15026

That's what frustrates me the most - people are acting like this is something so onerous, and it really isn't

user15026

5:58 PM

It feels very much that people are more angry they have to accept people different from them than anything else

"hey, that offends me can you do this thing instead going forward?" "sure."

21 mins ago, by Gwideon

I get certain concerns but it’s kinda clear that some people just feel that they shouldn’t have to use someone’s preferred pronouns. Sorry i’ll Shut up

Like, that kind of hits the nail on the head, IMO.

One problem with hypothetical scenarios is that, in my experience with implementing these sort of policies, people generally don't bring up hypothetical scenarios to try to solve any potential weaknesses. People bring up hypothetical scenarios to prevent the policy from being implemented.

2

@Xirema I agree

« first day (2011 days earlier) ← previous day next day → last day (1489 days later) »

Transcript for

Oct '1910

Not a bar, but plays one on TV

I'm not a place to unwind after work, but I play one on TV.

movies ponies splorts tv

join this room
about this room

00:00

06:00

12:00

18:00

all times are UTC

site design / logo © 2024 Stack Exchange Inc; legal

mobile