does anybody else feel like they maybe just fundamentally do not understand the Code of Conduct, or is it just me?

I know the subject of updating it has come up in this thread. this is not about updates; this is about my comprehension of the current content.

I understood her argument as advocating for opting first for calling-in with other leftists and well-intentioned others, not as advocating for never calling-out anyone ever.

I understood her to mean that calling-in can reinforce community behavioral expectations in an educational and edifying way, while calling out is often exclusionary and punitive and can accidentally reinforce oppressive systems, so we should call-in within our communities.

if this interpretation is incorrect, or if it is correct but the thesis is problematic in some way, please lmk. I will delete the post.

since your account is relatively new and has <200 comments, I took a look and it seems like you aren't a reading club poster. I'm not either, but I bring it up because when I realized how much anger I was seeing from frauddogg, I looked at null's account to get a fuller picture of void's presence on the site, and null was a book club power poster. void didn't just write moving responses to the material; null actively engaged with other posters, offering insightful, respectful dialogue.

in the same way that I think it is bonkers to think REgon is on some kind of wrecker long-con, I think it is bonkers to think any wrecker would take the time to make those comments. I understand that you might not have seen them, but if all you base your impressions of other posters on is whatever comments you chance upon, I would like you to please consider that this will necessarily give you a distorted view of that person.

if someone is rubbing you the wrong way, I encourage you to please go look at their account and try to understand where they're coming from.

"... Your anger is not coming from a genuine place, so we shouldn't have to respect your anger nor interrogate why you feel so angry because your anger is a personal problem, not a symptom of a systemic issue."

I don't know how to properly communicate my anguish over the idea that what I said came across this way. I am very, very, very sorry.

I know frauddogg's anger came from a genuine place

I respected null's anger and reacted to it with curiosity (because I knew it meant there were things I didn't understand!) and caution (because childhood abuse left me afraid of confrontation, and being flamed – rightfully or not – by a popular poster that everyone agrees with, especially for reasons I do not understand and would get flamed even more for asking about, would have devastating mental health consequences).

my personal opinion is that persistent deep anger is both a personal problem and a systemic issue, regardless of its root cause:

• personal, in that it can be harmful to your health and cause interpersonal friction, but those possible consequences are for each us to weigh for ourselves. sometimes the personal price of rage is worth it.
• systemic, in that things shouldn't be so fucked that anyone ever feels that way.

frauddogg had mentioned childhood abuse, beatings by racists, and had been tricked as a child to sign up for even more systemic abuse – fucking of course null was angry. who isn't angry reading about it?!?

I celebrated null's anger in the lemmygrad masking struggle session that brought void to Hexbear.

I am every bit as scared of getting yelled at by you or kristina or Nakoichi or Awoo or Dirt_Owl or Galaxy_Brain or literally any of you as I was scared of getting yelled at by frauddogg. I hate confrontation and I hate hurting or upsetting people who don't deserve it. none of you deserve it.

I'm sorry.

reading between the lines of what has been said about the incident that led to banning Foucaults, it sounds like a disagreement behind the scenes about moderation descended into an argument that got very personal, and personal apologies/amends need to be made.

I suspect that they're not expecting a post in /c/selfcrit anymore and probably have communicated that to Foucaults, but unbanning and rebanning to change the message to reflect the current situation feels like pointlessly dredging up drama, so they didn't change it to reflect the current situation.

idk for sure, but I think it was this interaction, in which another em_poc user brought up null's military service.

"remembering the human" goes both ways: that when someone is doing something you find rude and unreasonable, that there is always a context for it, even if you might not be aware of that context.

yes, this very much.

learning that frauddogg had been a troop made void's behavior make a lot more sense to me. sometimes, when people leave religion, they become militant atheists; it doesn't seem strange to me that someone would leave the military and be passionately anti-imperialist and ready to attack any inkling of that evil.

to you and @amberSuperMario@lemmygrad.ml and any other em_poc user reading this:

I want to apologize for anything I've said that has given you the impression that I think frauddogg was a secret troop infiltrating the site or harbored reactionary views.

I absolutely do not believe that. I like to lurk the reading club threads sometimes, and null made some deeply moving and thought-provoking comments that I can't imagine were anything but genuine. void made good contributions to the site.

on the surface, our personalities couldn't be more different, but I have been known to get in faces about injustice irl and I'm sure there are people who know irl frauddogg as a sweetie. it takes all kinds, we all contain multitudes, etc. I won't pretend I was a fan of null's tendency to jump to insults in interactions with other local users, but I saw void's popularity and understood that there were social dynamics I was just not comprehending. the popularity of that behavior became a puzzle for me – I wanted to see it the way others were seeing it, especially considering how many people were saying that everyone who didn't get it was a cracker or fragile or part of the problem etc.

I don't want to be part of the problem. I don't want to be one of the white users making the em_poc users uncomfortable, and I worry a lot that my empathy comes off as apologia to you all. I worry in all my interactions, both online and irl, that my confused questions seem obtuse or judgemental because I get that feedback a lot, and idk how to fix it. after 40 years, the best I have come up with is apologizing thoroughly and often and hope it doesn't start to sound insincere. I'm sorry for anything I've said that has hurt you or made you feel uncomfortable or unwelcome.

I mentioned the specific users I did because

• they are not active users
• the stark difference in their moderation history illustrated my point that some people are moderated differently than most users
• I do genuinely think null might not have felt compelled to delete void's account if null had been moderated differently. it's easy for a "take-no-prisoners" attitude to become "shoot first, ask questions later," and that can make us vulnerable when we stumble.

the Code of Conduct is pretty clear about how we're supposed to behave, and it reads to me like it's not just about not hurting others but very much also not hurting ourselves. would frauddogg have expected grace from the community about the troop thing if null had been more willing to offer it to others?

I hope so. I would like to think it would have been given to void. I know I'm not the only person who read those book club posts and saw a beautiful person they were glad to have on the site.

you are one of the people I respect the most on this site. I was not kidding when I said that I think of you every time somebody looks at me weird for masking in public. I care about you and your opinion very much, and I appreciate your taking the time to talk with me. in advance, I want to say that I have tried hard to make sure there was nothing hurtful or dismissive in this message, but if I failed in that or otherwise made this come across poorly, I would very much like to talk it out because the absolute last thing I want to do is hurt you.

or anyone else, for that matter. I have debated deleting my account a lot over the last few weeks. I don't want to hurt anyone. I was only here for companionship and news; I don't need either so badly that anyone needs to suffer for it. I would rather disappear than hurt any of you.

I am not advocating for anyone to be okay with anyone who dismisses their needs and agency. I am only advocating for the idea that it would be good to interrogate further to ensure they're actually being dismissive and aren't just an autistic person having a Theory of Mind moment.

I just learned last week that difficulties with "Theory of Mind" don't necessarily mean that a person is incapable of understanding another's point of view, but that it is also responsible for autistic naivete.

for example: the possibility that someone would purposely fuck with a /c/mutual_aid user for unknown ends just never even entered my mind until the fact of it was presented to me. how many other things do I just not even know about because the idea that anyone would want to behave that way seems crazy to me? lots. tons. this is why autistic people are so vulnerable to scammers etc. the idea that anyone would do that just doesn't fucking occur to us until it is hammered in.

I am sure that there are a lot of conflicts generated from this deep misunderstanding, especially considering how many users are white people coming from the thoroughly-propagandized imperial core.

I don't think anyone should tolerate shitheads. I just think that sometimes we are quick to assume shitheadedness of each other, and I wish that were not the case. and tbqh, considering how often frauddogg called out other em_poc users as settlers or crackers just because they didn't post regularly in the em_poc megathread (is that required for all em_poc users?), I think it would help reduce the number of friendly-fire incidents.

it's also part of the CoC, which I know you know better than I do. you've been here much longer, and you're a mod.

• We are committed to providing a friendly, safe and welcoming environment for all, regardless of gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, personal appearance, body size, race, ethnicity, age, religion, nationality, or other similar characteristic.
• Please "remember the human" and be kind to your fellow leftists.
• Respect that people have differences of opinion and that every leftist has a place in our community. Discussing differences in theory is fine and encouraged, just don't make it personal. Remember: Sectarianism is liberalism.
• We are a platform that welcomes anyone who wants to be here in good faith. With that said, we are also an intentionally leftist platform; conservative and reactionary ideologies will not be tolerated here.

I used to be a shithead. people can change.

edit: all joking aside – genuinely, if you don't believe people can change, then there is no hope for human society and we should all euthanize ourselves immediately to minimize destruction to the rest of the biosphere.

I would prefer to believe that it is worth trying to help people to change. I grew up deeply indoctrinated in evangelical bullshit and here I am, a mostly-anarchist commie-leaning bi poly lady with a trans son 🤷 change is possible

perhaps unpopular opinion I'd like to discuss:

if frauddogg had been moderated like autismdragon instead of celebrated for null's behavior, void might not have felt the need to delete null's account when found out to be a former troop

this is not conspiracist, "mod-cabal" bullshit – it is undeniable that some people are moderated differently than the vast majority of users. I would prefer to not call out more examples – I'm not interested in a struggle session or interpersonal drama – but I have been poking around and saving them up since the TC69 incident, because "no investigation, no right to speak," and I've seen how @REgon@hexbear.net et al have been treated for trying to discuss this difference without having a fucking catalog of evidence.

if frauddogg had been required to treat other hexbears with the good faith etc called for in the Code of Conduct, would void have felt compelled to delete null's account when the troop thing came up? would it have even come up at all in that conversation, if void hadn't been consistently behaving belligerently towards others, including other em_poc users?

🤷

this place is deeply baffling, and if I could figure out somewhere else full of trans leftists where I could get news that isn't entirely drenched in American propaganda, I would have already deleted my account.

edit1: removed an archive link per admin/mod request

edit2: changed another archive link to screenshots per admin/mod request