The ONLY kind of hate allowed on ATS

Have to agree with the mod's statement summarize in the OP. It's an opinion. It's what someone sees, what's left an impression on their mind and soul, what some members of _insertgroupnamehere_ have done to help form this person's opinion. When someone has an opinion, all you can do if you believe it's wrong is work to attempt to change it and deal with them on an individual basis...that's the best you can hope for. This goes for homophobia, religophobia, racism, feminism, and all the other phobias and -isms. Running around screaming that it's a "hate crime" or some such nonsense typically backfires on the allegedly "wronged" though. Just an observation.

[edit on 18-11-2009 by ~Lucidity]

Originally posted by Roadblockx

As you can see by the u2u's in my inbox, I have spoken with several mods and have a great rapport with them.

Another quick housekeeping item. There is exactly one person who can see u2us - Skeptic Overlord. As busy as he is (since he does all the coding as well), he doesn't have the time or inclination to do that unless there is a specific, significant complaint requiring it.

So let me ask this as it was something being discussed privately. What would be your recommendation as to how someone feels they have been treated unfairly have it reviewed?

Submitting a Complaint/Suggestion available from the member tools button in the toolbar at the top of every page drops a message into the Staff forum which can be, and is, reviewed by all available staff. ALERTS go into a forum reviewed by all staff as well.

My point is that there doesn't seem to be any escalation or mod review process that we can see. This behind the scenes, in dark room review makes it seem like we (I say we in the context to those that have sent me emails and u2u about their feelings that are similar to mine) don't have any say. Most times these situations can go days without any response from a mod/super mod while a ban stays in place. No response on this end seems like we are being ignored and left out to pasture. Maybe that's the case and there is no "appeal" and we just live with what we are given but ATS seems like a perfect place to have something in place to balance the power to prevent mods from over-stepping or using a spur-of-the-moment reaction to decide things. Citizen review board for police, member review board for mods?

I understand the concern. I think we can improve upon the amount of communication we do with members' complaints. Sometimes complaints occur where no action is taken or considered warranted. Sometimes people complain only because they disagree with what someone said (oh, yes it happens). Sometimes things fall through the cracks (oh yes, it happens). A ban (I'm guessing you mean posting ban) stays in place until we're confident the member understands what went wrong and we've reached an understanding about how to correct it. It's done more frequently to keep a member from continuing down a road to a point of no return than anything else. Members are generally asked to work with the staff member who post banned them to resolve an issue. None of it happens in a vacuum. We all have the ability, and are encouraged, to provide input.

Keep this in mind - the only person who didn't start out here as a member is Simon Gray and that's because he started the place. Literally every other person on staff, from Skeptic Overlord, Springer, Crakeur, all the Admins, Supermods and Mods, were at one time a newly registered member. And every single one of us still consider ourselves to be members first, staff second. It isn't too difficult to put ourselves in a member's shoes since we're wearing them every day.

Not every issue will be resolved to a member's satisfaction. I know they aren't all resolved to mine . Some things you just have to accept on faith. Or not. We'll continue to attempt to make ATS as accommodating as we can to everyone with the desire to participate appropriately. And we are continually discussing ways to improve the experience. Communication is one we discuss frequently and I know that can be improved upon. I personally (not speaking for anyone other than myself) think we can do a better job of squelching some of the more speculative absurdities by being more communicative with members who alert and submit suggestion/complaints. I'm sure I could do a better job than I am today. Some days I just feel lazy and don't have the energy for an extended argument. No excuse, just admission.

Remember, we're members first, unpaid volunteers (not that any of us "volunteered". We were asked and not everyone asked jumps at the chance), and do what we do because we believe in the mission and want to give something back. Maintaining a place where people can come and freely (and civilly) discuss any number of topics, is what keeps us going.

Thanks for the opportunity to answer some questions.

[Edit for clarity]

[edit on 11/18/2009 by yeahright]

a smattering of threads on the main forum (christian threads are often moved to BTS, where they die a quick and grisly death of no further input)

Why does god play favorites?
this thread is prefaced by reminding everyone that people who believe in God are lower IQ and less intelligent overall.

God Commands You To Kill Gays
this thread is directed at and laid on the shoulders of christians even though the precedent in scripture is purely old covenant judaic. it is further pointed out that right wing wackjobs, as they are called, are espousing this belief, further demonizing anyone who considers themselves right wing or christian. it seems just anyone can say anything they want, and as long as they identify themselves as christians, they automatically lose IQ points and become old covenant jews who are out to exterminate gays.


here is a story, are christians really good people?
poor guy gets taken to the cleaners by a woman who claims to be christian and this thread is the result

Conservative Christians are Hypocrites
apparently the only people on the entire planet that are hypocritical, are conservative christians, and these make up the bulk of american christians specifically. marx explains christianity away by calling it the opium of the masses, thereby isolating out all believers on the planet and relegating them to the same social group as opium addicts.

Why do Christians always assume they're right?
by the second post in, we are reminded that christians are arrogant and self-righteous, well, some of them anyway. who knows which is which? it's arbitrary and can be applied to anyone who disagrees with anything, literally.

Born Again Christians actually Satanists!


Why do people hate Christians?
this one got stuffed into BTS because it was actually posted by a christian in defense of christianity

Christians should be against global warming. I can prove with scripture.
this suggests christians are against the environment. sigh.

Flipside-Christians, what if the Bible isn't true?
self explanatory

Who made eating pork and swine flesh lawful for Christians?
this one was particularly interesting as it was a muslim questioning why christians eat pork, and it was supported by copious amounts of muslim scripture and never moved to BTS. i don't mind that it wasn't moved to BTS, i just wonder why it wasn't

Christians Are Nothing But Dellusional Morons & Jesus Was A..
looked like it was going to be an antichristian thread and i was surprised to see it was moved to BTS, that is, till i discovered it had been moved to BTS because the op was trying to warn people that such titles are used by anti-christians to suck the emotional energy out of any body who responds to it

Eleven Christians Arrested, Jailed And Charged Under Hate Crimes Legislation, In America!

i.don't.know.what.to.say, but some of those responses were real darn scary

Christians...how do you justify all of this?
right off the bat the op provides a video link, in which the video creator has made the assumption that christians work on the sabbath (which is friday sundown to saturday sundown and not sunday but he doesn't care about that cause as far as most naysayers are concerned, what the pope says is the epitome of christianity .isn't that convenient?) and this means they should be put to death according to the ten commandments. this guy has a huge reaction to it,
tiny.cc...
proving once again that things are escalating and they are all pointing to one thing as its target: Jehovah and anybody that believes in jehovah. sadly, little to their credit, do they not realize jehovah is the god of pretty much every belief on the planet (even the pagans and polytheists), from literally thousands of different viewpoints. it's regrettably ironic when you get to the point where you want to kill off someone else for believing in the same exact thing that you do because you haven't done your homework.

this goes on and on and gets even worse. some of these posts are so horrible, i just can't believe they are on ATS

Originally posted by undo
a smattering of threads on the main forum (christian threads are often moved to BTS, where they die a quick and grisly death of no further input)

And just really quickly, let me address that. The ATS forum is "Conspiracies in Religions". If it's a thread that does not have a specific conspiratorial aspect, it doesn't belong there. We move them as we find them. The BTS venue is Faith and Spirituality. If it's a faith discussion (i.e. a "Christian thread"), that's where it goes.

Are there some in the wrong forums? Probably. They're addressed as they're brought to our attention, or noticed by a Forum mod, typically.

reply to post by yeahright


i know the job is a tough one and i realize you are up against something much bigger than even ATS, so to expect ATS to respond to it any differently than the rest of the planet does, is not reasonable, and i do try to be reasonable.

but frankly, it does make christians uncomfortable to find so much anomosity directed at them for what just anybody says or does. you know ya hear about how the media is used to cast islam in a dim light. well i gots news for ya, they've been doing that to christianity for many years now, and not just the media, but pretty much every form of social communication in public reference. some of it is earned but not by all christians, yet no distinction is made and the end result is this weird double standard

Please explain the difference between the sort of anti-Christian threads mentioned by the previous poster (which is allowed) and antisemitic threads (not allowed) other than the latter dealing with Jews instead of Christians.

I'm not a Christian myself, but I do object to double standards.

reply to post by undo


I know, it's hard. We try to balance between allowing free expression of opinion without it extending over into hate. There's just no way we'll ever be able to draw that line to everyone's satisfaction. Allow me to share my consolation with you-

Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
—Matthew 5:10-12

If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you. Remember the word that I said to you: ‘A servant is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours.
—John 15:18-20

We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies. For we who live are always being given over to death for Jesus' sake, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh.
—2 Corinthians 4:8-11

Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted,
—2 Timothy 3:12

Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery trial when it comes upon you to test you, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice insofar as you share Christ's sufferings, that you may also rejoice and be glad when his glory is revealed. If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you.
1 Peter 4:16

Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name.
—1 Peter 4:12-14, 16

reply to post by PC equals Newspeak


well it is allowed as long as it is blamed on christians. i noticed that and wondered why it was that laws that had been created by judaism and considered no longer applicable in the new testament, were being blamed on christians none the less. it seems the posters who post such topics, are really trying to pit christians against jews as well, because the ops often have a healthy enough understanding of the bible and yet make these false accusations specifically against christians, almost egging them on to say anything derogatory about judaism. this place is a maze of agendas, i'll tell ya.

reply to post by yeahright


it was kind of you to respond with uplifting verses.
i starred ya. i think the verses could apply to alot of other people too, not just christians, but it was personalized and that's always a nice bonus.

I know, it's hard. We try to balance between allowing free expression of opinion without it extending over into hate. There's just no way we'll ever be able to draw that line to everyone's satisfaction.

First of all, most so-called "hate speech" is actually just informed opinion about a particular minority, which is why it's so silly for a conspiracy site like ATS to use such a concept.

Further, it is quite easy to make a distinction between informed opinion and pre-judice :
-- SOME JEWS are racist Zionists --> informed opinion
-- SOME CHRISTIANS are idiots --> informed opinion
-- SOME MUSLEMS want to destroy Western culture --> informed opinion
-- SOME NAZIS are racist idiots --> informed opinion
-- SOME ANARCHISTS are violent nihilists --> informed opinion
-- SOME HOMOSEXUALS are hedonist and promiscuous --> informed opinion
-- SOME BLACKS have a very low IQ --> informed opinion

-- ALL JEWS are racist Zionists --> prejudice
-- ALL CHRISTIANS are idiots --> prejudice
-- ALL MUSLEMS want to destroy Western culture --> prejudice
-- ALL NAZIS racist idiots --> prejudice
-- ALL ANARCHISTS are violent nihilists --> prejudice
-- ALL HOMOSEXUALS are hedonist and promiscuous --> prejudice
-- ALL BLACKS have a very low IQ --> prejudice

Basicly, the difference between informed opinion and prejudice is whether or not you characterise an entire group with the characteristics of a part of the group, regardless of how representative that part is. Nevertheless, due to so-called "political correctness" this distinction has somewhat been replaced by a whole new approach based on a double standard (and this forum is no less guilty of such an approach). Due to "political correctness", some informed opinions are BY DEFAULT labeled as prejudice (or "hate speech") and some prejudices are BY DEFAULT labeled as informed opinion. As such, all objectivity is lost.

reply to post by yeahright




Thank you for your response and explanations. I mis-spoke regarding the u2u's and who can access them. I was trying to say that I would open them up to you but I didn't say it the way it was intended. My apologies.

Hopefully everyone on your staff does welcome and try to improve on their communication as that would be the biggest complaint I have regarding ATS. It seems that when their is communication, it can sometimes appear to be slightly sarcastic or skewed. The most recent example was in relation to a thread SO started named something like "No place for racism on ATS". In this thread, I asked about other prejudices and it was quickly removed as violating t/c because it seemed unrelated to the topic (more then willing to revisit this if you would like). Several others also received violations because the questions weren't easy ones which to me seems kind of rude. The others I spoke with seemed to have a similar opinion. In a thread about advertising being directed towards a competitiors site, several posters there received violations for posting questions that weren't "easy ones". It just seems that questions can't be asked that go against the grain. When the communication becomes less or doesn't seem to benefit all parties, assumptions begin to be made. In summary, I think you, the others here and myself can agree that communication needs to be a major topic of growth on ATS, both from posters and ATS staff.

As for the option to seek assistance using the method you brought up, I know I used that option during my 9 day isolation and received minimal response. Others seem to experience the same isolation or lack of any response during the "review of the situation" or "during further investigation" by any mods. Is this routine that no contact can be made between mods/staff and suspect? If so, that's fine but I would rather know this then be left wondering.

Again, your time and attention to this thread is very appreciated. I know for me it helps answer some questions I had and your explanation instills some confidence that these issues will be worked on going forward. Hopefully at the same time, you understand there is a growing concern that this needs to be addressed soon as some people are leaving or getting banned from ATS because they are acting out in frustration.

Thank you yeahright.

reply to post by PC equals Newspeak


you knocked that out of the ballpark!
star for you!

so the offensive signature talked about frequently in this thread, should really say:

I DON'T HATE CHRISTIANS. I JUST HATE WHAT SOME OF THEM DO.

yes?

[edit on 18-11-2009 by undo]

reply to post by yeahright


How nice of you. That is what I was trying to get across in my post on page 18; I don’t think many got it though. Of course I did not use scripture I simply spoke from my heart at the time.


I believe you were sincere in your posts, but I have seen posts similar to yours by “regular” members that were not so sincere. Again though I believe you are sincere in your postings. I do thank you though for providing the scripture that I failed to provide so that others might understand.

I believe that the biggest problem though is threads that are created attempting to link (as posted by undo) Christians with Old Testament actions such as stoning adulterers and homosexuals. When one tries to explain that we are not to do so because each of us has sinned as well we are taunted, ridiculed and generally ignored when pointing out honest facts. Anyone who tries to understand the teachings of Jesus would understand that to do anything other than loving the sinner is not a Christian value. Again though that is where the scripture you provided comes to play. This is why I might open up and read similar threads but very seldom reply to them as I just let the haters do their thing and I can get to know them through their posts. I am surprised that I actually replied to this thread at all to tell the truth. It did take many days and 18 pages before my response came though.

Again I would like to thank you for what I feel are sincere posts. I know for a fact that some mods will not allow a direct attack on a Christian poster because they themselves are and they were on my friends list prior to ever becoming mods. I will not say which mods they are, they know who they are and they know I enjoy discussions with them tremendously.

Raist

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by PC equals Newspeak

 

you knocked that out of the ballpark!
star for you!

so the offensive signature talked about frequently in this thread, should really say:

I DON'T HATE CHRISTIANS. I JUST HATE WHAT SOME OF THEM DO.

yes?

Or something similar, yes. I'm not a Christian myself and I'm not even a supporter of your religion (although I was raised a Catholic), but I do respect your choice to be a Christian and I don't feel people should be free to explicitly offend you while not being able to even provide justified criticism of certain other groups. That's my reason for joining the struggle against so-called "political correctness" both on this website and elsewhere.

reply to post by PC equals Newspeak


well that is admirable and wise, since history has proven what happens when we allow unfair precedents into our culture.

Originally posted by PC equals Newspeak

Let me try to address this, with what will probably be a bad example . If someone makes a post about "Jewish bankers" being evil, it's not an absolute (since not all bankers are Jewish, nor are all Jews bankers), but it is irrelevant. Why call out a specific group? Are all non-Jewish bankers honest and blameless? Are all Jewish bankers bad? If someone is using a specific group as an adjective for pejorative commentary, that's not intellectually honest and it is offensive. Replace "Jewish" with any group and it's the same thing. Not all [fill in the blank]s are anything, other than what defines them as a member of the group. I don't know how you can possibly call anything "informed opinion" that labels an entire group as anything other than the characteristics that make them a group. Prejudice is mis-informed opinion. How Hate Speech could ever be confused with informed opinion is way beyond me.

SOME [fill in the blank]s are just about anything, and taken that way, identifying them as [fill in the blank] serves no useful purpose and if I may, is redundant. Some Christians are stupid. Some homosexuals are promiscuous. So what? How does that further a discussion? Can we not just concede that nearly every cultural/national/professional/whatever group has elements of good and bad? What you're calling Political Correctness we call civility. Don't attack a member, don't smear a group.

The site has a clearly articulated Terms and Conditions. Staying within that will result in little trouble from the staff. Going outside it will cause a potential conflict. Sometimes those are easily resolved and sometimes not. That's as plain as I can make it. People who can't or refuse to grasp the concepts outlined in the T&C are the ones who get sideways, with few exceptions that are generally a result of misunderstanding and are usually cleared up quickly. No, we're not perfect.

[Edit to fix code]

[edit on 11/18/2009 by yeahright]

Originally posted by Raist
I know for a fact that some mods will not allow a direct attack on a Christian poster

The goal is to not permit a direct attack on anyone, at any time, regardless of their religion, ethnicity, nationality, or any other reason. We say all the time, "play the ball, not the player". It's a soccer thing. (No I'm not going to call it "football", but that's an altogether different fight ).

[Edit to add]

One more quick thing - The T&Cs apply across the board to all facets of The Above network. That includes chat, Mutter, and u2u.

I have yet to see anyone banned for any reason other than a repeated (or particularly egregious) and willful disregard for the T&C and generally a continued refusal to comply with staff requests for cooperation.

[edit on 11/18/2009 by yeahright]

an old music video that i think some here might find interesting:



Lyrics

In a ninety-floor Manhattan address
Lives a watchdog called the National Press
And around his collar's written the line
"The Protector Of Our Hearts And Minds"

Hark! Hark! The dog will bark
And we believe this hierarch
But read between the lines and see
This dog's been barking up the wrong tree

Meat the press
Meat the press
Meat the press
Meat the press

When the ratings point the camera's eye
They can state the facts while telling a lie
And then watchdog shows to the viewers at ten
He's a bloodhound with a pad and pen

Can't pin the blame--he's out of reach
Just call the dog "His Royal Leech"
We held the rights for heaven's sake
'Til we gave this sucker an even break

Meat the press
Meat the press
Meat the press
Meat the press

When the godless chair the judgment seat
We can thank the godless media elite
They can silence those who fall from their grace
With a note that says "we haven't the space"

Well lookee there--the dog's asleep
Whenever we march or say a peep
A Christian can't get equal time
Unless he's a loony committing a crime

Listen up if you've got ears
I'm tired of condescending sneers
I've got a dog who smells a fight
And he still believes in wrong and right

Meat the press
Sick 'em, Fido
Meat the press
Meat the press
Get 'em, boy
Meat the press

Meat the press
(I'm only doing my job)
Meat the press
(I mean, it's not like there's a conspiracy or anything)
Meat the press
(By the way, what did you say your name was?)

Meat the press
(Your address? Can I write that down?)
Meat the press
(Do you have anything you'd like to say off the record?)
Meat the press
(Hey! Who you calling arrogant?)

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by lifecitizen

 

yes i'm serious, and that's because my view is not necessarily the same as other views of scripture. what that translates to for you, since you seem to want to sit in judgement of me, is that ya can't fit me in a predetermined box with the word "christian" stamped on it because christians are individuals not clones.

Christians follow the teachings of Christ- you all basically think the same thing

I asked you a question- how does that equate to sitting in judgment- here you go again- seeing offense where there is none.

reply to post by yeahright


As your time is limited, I understand but when the opportunity arises, could you please address the issues/concerns raised in my most recent post? It would be greatly appreciated.