Tone Policing Under The Guise of "Trolling"
Nov 6, 2022 14:54:32 GMT -5
Post by theflying on Nov 6, 2022 14:54:32 GMT -5
I've had my warning increased twice in the last two weeks, and I need some open and transparent clarification here, because what I'm feeling like is that I'm being tone-policed because I guess my wording is too direct to be in the tastes of some, and it's being called trolling.
Let's talk about my first incident. Someone came in to Meghan Trainor's thread, and said she was never a viable artist. I said that sentiment was sexist nonsense. This was deemed to be a "personal attack".
First off, the poster seems to be queer, and I thiiiiiink a person of color, and I think an artist? That's great! This does not mean someone of any particular identity is incapable of saying something sexist. Second, I repeated it there, I am repeating it here -- I'm not "trolling", I'm not "derailing the thread", if you come in to the artist's thread and delegitimize them and their accomplishments, it is my genuinely held belief (as I explained in detail NUMEROUS TIMES throughout the thread) that that is a double-standard that is not backed up by the facts, that gets lobbied around artists like Meghan because she's beloved my moms and young girls and has always struggled to be taken seriously. It's a sexist sentiment.
So, I'd like to understand how exactly I am "allowed" to frame such sentiments. Are you saying I'm allowed to express the sentiment, only if I cushion it with sunshine and rainbows?
"Hey friend, I'd like to just point out to you, these are common sentiments often expressed in a double-standard way, that have followed Meghan throughout her career. Her stats don't lie: she's been a viable artist ever since she debuted."
I have a feeling I wouldn't have gotten warned if I'd said that -- but why? It's the same thing. The only difference is tone. But I'd like to remind you, I responded that way because I DO feel strongly about this, I DO get upset by these sentiments. So I responded that showed that I was upset by it. So why, if I'm substantively saying the same thing, am I not allowed to demonstrate my upsetness by it?
Or, am I just not allowed to point that out? That a poster can post something that I truly believe is sexist, and I just can't say anything, lest any response to it be deemed "upsetting"?
Something that is not being taken into account, that really deserves to be, is that I don't go around tagging things as _____ist all the time, throwing a grenade into the thread and derailing it, and leaving. No! Trolling and baiting is an MO; it's bad-faith posting designed to rile people up. Me sharing a genuinely held belief as a response to something someone said is the opposite of trolling and baiting, even if you don't agree that the poster said something sexist. That's fine if you don't agree --- I happen to very strongly believe that it was. But not only did the mods refuse to entertain what I was saying, it was treated as such a joke that they changed the poster's username to "White Sexist" -- like, haha, can you believe what someone said?
Because, I guess, it was just *unfathomable* that saying a woman, with tens of millions of records sold, was never a viable artist, and that that could have something to do with her being a blonde popstar beloved by audience demographics not generally taken seriously. What a joke of a suggestion that is, huh? Let's warn theflying and change your username because it was SO FUNNY that that idea was even ENTERTAINED.
I then got warned for "trolling and baiting" when, a poster in the Taylor Swift thread, described her ticket pricing as:
I responded by saying if this person really believed it, they were drinking some kool-aid and in a bubble. 4 people liked the post, because the quote was an extremely out-of-touch thing to say on multiple levels. There are multiple of us in that very thread who will be spending a few hundred bucks on tickets, and that's not an abnormal thing to do, and it was completely detached to call us rich people connections who don't care. So saying someone needs to lay off the kool-aid and they're in a bubble, after they say something totally ungrounded from reality, is now trolling/attacking? Or is it all deemed by who happens to get upset?
Is that just not "the way" I'm supposed to convey such sentiment? Is being too direct and blunt against the TOS?
I've been on this forum since it was Radio and Records in 2002. Twenty years ago. I have no desire to troll. I'm giving my blunt, honest thoughts because it's a forum. I'm sorry I can come across as a bit of an a**hole if I believe in something strongly, by why is a tone that is a bit of an di*khead against the TOS if I'm responding on topic, about the discussion, in a good faith way? A forum is literally a place for discussion, and, yes, debate. I've never "attacked" anyone.
I also got warned because someone told me to chill, and then I jokingly replied with "That's not my brand." Huh? Why is that against the rules?
So, I would like some clarity here because I really feel like I'm being warned just because people don't like the tone of my posts (which really should not be considered against the TOS), rather than me ACTUALLY trolling, "attacking" someone, or derailing discussion.
Let's talk about my first incident. Someone came in to Meghan Trainor's thread, and said she was never a viable artist. I said that sentiment was sexist nonsense. This was deemed to be a "personal attack".
First off, the poster seems to be queer, and I thiiiiiink a person of color, and I think an artist? That's great! This does not mean someone of any particular identity is incapable of saying something sexist. Second, I repeated it there, I am repeating it here -- I'm not "trolling", I'm not "derailing the thread", if you come in to the artist's thread and delegitimize them and their accomplishments, it is my genuinely held belief (as I explained in detail NUMEROUS TIMES throughout the thread) that that is a double-standard that is not backed up by the facts, that gets lobbied around artists like Meghan because she's beloved my moms and young girls and has always struggled to be taken seriously. It's a sexist sentiment.
So, I'd like to understand how exactly I am "allowed" to frame such sentiments. Are you saying I'm allowed to express the sentiment, only if I cushion it with sunshine and rainbows?
"Hey friend, I'd like to just point out to you, these are common sentiments often expressed in a double-standard way, that have followed Meghan throughout her career. Her stats don't lie: she's been a viable artist ever since she debuted."
I have a feeling I wouldn't have gotten warned if I'd said that -- but why? It's the same thing. The only difference is tone. But I'd like to remind you, I responded that way because I DO feel strongly about this, I DO get upset by these sentiments. So I responded that showed that I was upset by it. So why, if I'm substantively saying the same thing, am I not allowed to demonstrate my upsetness by it?
Or, am I just not allowed to point that out? That a poster can post something that I truly believe is sexist, and I just can't say anything, lest any response to it be deemed "upsetting"?
Something that is not being taken into account, that really deserves to be, is that I don't go around tagging things as _____ist all the time, throwing a grenade into the thread and derailing it, and leaving. No! Trolling and baiting is an MO; it's bad-faith posting designed to rile people up. Me sharing a genuinely held belief as a response to something someone said is the opposite of trolling and baiting, even if you don't agree that the poster said something sexist. That's fine if you don't agree --- I happen to very strongly believe that it was. But not only did the mods refuse to entertain what I was saying, it was treated as such a joke that they changed the poster's username to "White Sexist" -- like, haha, can you believe what someone said?
Because, I guess, it was just *unfathomable* that saying a woman, with tens of millions of records sold, was never a viable artist, and that that could have something to do with her being a blonde popstar beloved by audience demographics not generally taken seriously. What a joke of a suggestion that is, huh? Let's warn theflying and change your username because it was SO FUNNY that that idea was even ENTERTAINED.
I then got warned for "trolling and baiting" when, a poster in the Taylor Swift thread, described her ticket pricing as:
I'll never not be disappointed at these insanely high prices. I know she didn't choose them, but she is the biggest star in the world right now and definitely has a say in the pricing of her concerts. It sucks that true fans miss out on watching their favorite artist perform live, and instead rich people with connections (who don't even care about her that much) make it to the tour.
I responded by saying if this person really believed it, they were drinking some kool-aid and in a bubble. 4 people liked the post, because the quote was an extremely out-of-touch thing to say on multiple levels. There are multiple of us in that very thread who will be spending a few hundred bucks on tickets, and that's not an abnormal thing to do, and it was completely detached to call us rich people connections who don't care. So saying someone needs to lay off the kool-aid and they're in a bubble, after they say something totally ungrounded from reality, is now trolling/attacking? Or is it all deemed by who happens to get upset?
Is that just not "the way" I'm supposed to convey such sentiment? Is being too direct and blunt against the TOS?
I've been on this forum since it was Radio and Records in 2002. Twenty years ago. I have no desire to troll. I'm giving my blunt, honest thoughts because it's a forum. I'm sorry I can come across as a bit of an a**hole if I believe in something strongly, by why is a tone that is a bit of an di*khead against the TOS if I'm responding on topic, about the discussion, in a good faith way? A forum is literally a place for discussion, and, yes, debate. I've never "attacked" anyone.
I also got warned because someone told me to chill, and then I jokingly replied with "That's not my brand." Huh? Why is that against the rules?
So, I would like some clarity here because I really feel like I'm being warned just because people don't like the tone of my posts (which really should not be considered against the TOS), rather than me ACTUALLY trolling, "attacking" someone, or derailing discussion.
