1/3
I've seen all the interactions you've sent about slurs and banning them and about bad moderation. In this section I will talk about the moderation of slurs. I will use pronoun "I" instead of "we" to try to simplify things in those posts.
For me, I find moderating not easy as moderation threat of violence or suicidal thoughts. I've seen in real life and even on this platform itself that there is no universally agreed-upon definition of what counts as a slur. For some people some slurs are considered as regular benign insults and for some they're extremely offensive and must be never said by anyone. Unlike explicit threats such as "I find you and harm you", slurs exists in some kind of gray area. There is no official clear list of forbidden terms. The definition of a slur varies between peoples and communities and some words that were offensive may lose their impact over time and some will still be taboo. I understand that. Yet, this doesn't help me at moderating.
I find that words can be hurtful in one context and harmless in another which makes moderation harder. What happens if peoples/groups targeted by a slur reclaims it among themselves and that without malice? What happens if a slur is used in an artistic or historical context such as a quote, a song lyric, a reenactment, or an educational discussion? What happens to slurs who lose their original hate power such as "queer", "bitch", "slut", "cunt", "lady", "nerd", "geek", "pervert", "brat", "jew" and more? Should those be banned too or they're fine? Each insult words seen in an interaction must somehow distinguish between insults meant to harm, reclaimed use, satire, quoting/discussing about those words, artistic or historical references which is extremely hard with a simple blacklist.
There are some slurs who are heavily reappropriated, some are partially reappropriated, some have lost most of their offensive impact, while others remain socially unacceptable. So what happens when I check a post and think should it count as hate or it is okay, what should I answer? For me there's no simple answer.
But I have no choice, I have to answer multiple questions about this sensitive subject such as about what to put in the banned list? I'm I responsible for respecting reappropriation of these words? Should a word be globally banned or only when used as hate speech? What reason should be the word banned for? No matter what, someone will disagree. Bans can feel arbitrary or unfair especially when there's no objective standard to follow. I don't want to over-moderate as it might censor even more discussions, art, or even marginalized voices... If I under-moderate, it might hurt people or communities and if I use an automatic filter (although I tried) it cannot reliably interpret context, intent or identity. It's borderline a political question.
I've seen all the interactions you've sent about slurs and banning them and about bad moderation. In this section I will talk about the moderation of slurs. I will use pronoun "I" instead of "we" to try to simplify things in those posts.
For me, I find moderating not easy as moderation threat of violence or suicidal thoughts. I've seen in real life and even on this platform itself that there is no universally agreed-upon definition of what counts as a slur. For some people some slurs are considered as regular benign insults and for some they're extremely offensive and must be never said by anyone. Unlike explicit threats such as "I find you and harm you", slurs exists in some kind of gray area. There is no official clear list of forbidden terms. The definition of a slur varies between peoples and communities and some words that were offensive may lose their impact over time and some will still be taboo. I understand that. Yet, this doesn't help me at moderating.
I find that words can be hurtful in one context and harmless in another which makes moderation harder. What happens if peoples/groups targeted by a slur reclaims it among themselves and that without malice? What happens if a slur is used in an artistic or historical context such as a quote, a song lyric, a reenactment, or an educational discussion? What happens to slurs who lose their original hate power such as "queer", "bitch", "slut", "cunt", "lady", "nerd", "geek", "pervert", "brat", "jew" and more? Should those be banned too or they're fine? Each insult words seen in an interaction must somehow distinguish between insults meant to harm, reclaimed use, satire, quoting/discussing about those words, artistic or historical references which is extremely hard with a simple blacklist.
There are some slurs who are heavily reappropriated, some are partially reappropriated, some have lost most of their offensive impact, while others remain socially unacceptable. So what happens when I check a post and think should it count as hate or it is okay, what should I answer? For me there's no simple answer.
But I have no choice, I have to answer multiple questions about this sensitive subject such as about what to put in the banned list? I'm I responsible for respecting reappropriation of these words? Should a word be globally banned or only when used as hate speech? What reason should be the word banned for? No matter what, someone will disagree. Bans can feel arbitrary or unfair especially when there's no objective standard to follow. I don't want to over-moderate as it might censor even more discussions, art, or even marginalized voices... If I under-moderate, it might hurt people or communities and if I use an automatic filter (although I tried) it cannot reliably interpret context, intent or identity. It's borderline a political question.
Comments
-
xnu 5 months agowoah