You mentioned something in a comment on your post at SE that you would want any funding overage to go to charity - but specifically mentioned a "lavender" charity. I think you are trying to help but making the same error as the pronoun policy - first, it acts as an admission of guilt (I need to make repairations - watch the mob swarm on this), second, which "lavender" charity? Maybe something like this one: https://www.facebook.com/gaysguns ? I'd recommend something more neutral like a Children's hospital, or STEM scholarship. Third, even if not an admission, it has the condescending air of "oh, you poor lavender people, let me help".
If we weren't in a war of feelings and weaponized words the kind of charity would not be a problem either way. Instead it just causes people to assume some alterior motive behind the most reasonable act. Welcome to the culture wars.
The other thing is simple justice. If a Lavender moderator was fired in a similar unclear manner and then libeled, those who did it would have already lost their jobs. SE's actions speak far louder than any procedure document they can write. Your case is well beyond violating "Be Nice" and "Assume good intent". Your case is negative, but the flip side would be if there was a truly bigoted transphobic post they refused to remove for over a month with only some comments "we've contacted the person and hope to work on a solution" but it remains up. You remain removed and the libels unrecanted.
Every day that you don't get justice - have an apology, retraction, and reinstatement shows SE is engaging in irrational hatred with actual harm toward you and that is the essence of bigotry. It might be a "magnificent" (Augustine: "Pagan virtues are magnificent vices") bigotry, but it is still bigotry.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Crowdfunding, and who is the hater?
Date: 2019-10-25 03:41 pm (UTC)You mentioned something in a comment on your post at SE that you would want any funding overage to go to charity - but specifically mentioned a "lavender" charity. I think you are trying to help but making the same error as the pronoun policy - first, it acts as an admission of guilt (I need to make repairations - watch the mob swarm on this), second, which "lavender" charity? Maybe something like this one: https://www.facebook.com/gaysguns ? I'd recommend something more neutral like a Children's hospital, or STEM scholarship. Third, even if not an admission, it has the condescending air of "oh, you poor lavender people, let me help".
If we weren't in a war of feelings and weaponized words the kind of charity would not be a problem either way. Instead it just causes people to assume some alterior motive behind the most reasonable act. Welcome to the culture wars.
The other thing is simple justice. If a Lavender moderator was fired in a similar unclear manner and then libeled, those who did it would have already lost their jobs. SE's actions speak far louder than any procedure document they can write. Your case is well beyond violating "Be Nice" and "Assume good intent". Your case is negative, but the flip side would be if there was a truly bigoted transphobic post they refused to remove for over a month with only some comments "we've contacted the person and hope to work on a solution" but it remains up. You remain removed and the libels unrecanted.
Every day that you don't get justice - have an apology, retraction, and reinstatement shows SE is engaging in irrational hatred with actual harm toward you and that is the essence of bigotry. It might be a "magnificent" (Augustine: "Pagan virtues are magnificent vices") bigotry, but it is still bigotry.