| 8 Sep 2023 |
 @joepie91:pixie.town | I don't want to deal with being in constant danger of severe harm either, but being marginalized, I don't get that choice | 10:16:52 |
 vcunat | In reply to @vcunat:matrix.org
Many people in the community don't want to deal with this, but IMHO that's why we have moderation team - people who volunteered to deal with this. So IMHO this team (and people around) need to get together and figure out how to do this, like review code of conduct, etc. | 10:16:58 |
 Arian | So you want clarity on the position of the foundation on the sponsorship decision? Or is it about the discussion on discourse in particular | 10:17:11 |
| Arian | I want clarity on the first one as well . Would love to see a more complete statement of the situation | 10:17:38 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | Arian: I want some actual effective action and/or support around the community safety issues, instead of the constant "🤷 well they're just opinions, nothing we can do about it" | 10:17:59 |
| vcunat | In reply to @arianvp:matrix.org
I want clarity on the first one as well . Would love to see a more complete statement of the situation I agree that both need to be figured out somehow. And I don't think it will be easy. | 10:18:27 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | the sponsorship itself is a separate matter, and I am awaiting the statement on the matter; this is entirely about the community safety issues | 10:18:29 |
| Arian | Okay so you want that discussion to be more heavily moderated so that it can happen safely? | 10:18:52 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | that would have been a way to prevent RFC98 from becoming the shitshow that it did, for example, yes | 10:19:25 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | but I am not asking for one specific singular action | 10:19:46 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | I am asking for a commitment to take future actions and/or provide support where necessary to address these community safety issues, and to put a stop to the constant sabotaging | 10:20:28 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | which exact form that takes will depend on the specific case | 10:20:38 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | and recognizing that murder machine apologists are not, in fact, people who create a safe environment for marginalized folks (who are disproportionately on the receiving end of said murder machines) would be a minimal first step | 10:21:35 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | like, to put it more bluntly: the comments in that forum thread are damning evidence of just how comfortable a number of community members feel in actively defending a murder machines company that, among other things, kills immigrants at the border | 10:23:41 |
| Arian | Okay but what part of the discussion is making you feel unsafe? That there are people who are pro-military? I'm afraid this is an extremely high bar to reach. Especially in the current situation of having Europe being attacked by a literal fascist terrorist state I think support for military is quite high in society.
I do think that making our community a safe space from military conflict is a low bar that we should be able to decide on and can make a policy pushing forward.
But if discussing the topic on its own is already problematic then I don't know how we can come to a decision on that. | 10:23:28 |
| vcunat | Well, whenever there's a strong call to refuse someone from a huge community, it very often happens that some other members would push back. | 10:23:52 |
| Arian | * Okay but what part of the discussion is making you feel unsafe? That there are people who are pro-military? I'm afraid this is an extremely high bar to reach. Especially in the current situation of having Europe being attacked by a literal fascist terrorist state I think support for military is quite high in society.
I do think that making our community a safe space from military conflict is a low bar that we should be able to decide on and can make a policy pushing forward. E.g. not associate with military af all
But if discussing the topic on its own is already problematic then I don't know how we can come to a decision on that. | 10:23:57 |
| vcunat | Moderators could've locked the discussion a bit earlier 🤷 | 10:24:15 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | vcunat: funnily enough that only seems to happen when the 'someone' is a privileged tech dude | 10:24:28 |
| vcunat | But what else? | 10:24:20 |
| vcunat | No, I disagree there. | 10:24:41 |
| vcunat | That's basic human psychology. | 10:24:47 |
| vcunat | Some people have tendency to defend those who get attacked, often even if the attack is justified. | 10:25:19 |
| vcunat | In a huge community, you have all kinds of opinions, unavoidably. | 10:25:59 |
| vcunat | (but yes, it is good to moderate to some extent) | 10:26:24 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | you can call it "basic human psychology" all you want, but the reality is that as soon as there's any discussion about consequences for people being shitty about defending oppressive systems, there's immediately a whole lot of "oh no we can't possibly do that, it's just an opinion, this should be a welcoming place, there should be no politics here, banning them would be overreach for just having a different opinion" whereas when a marginalized person indicates that they're burning out and leaving the community because they don't get safety/support, the first response is to start questioning whether they aren't imagining the problems | 10:26:47 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | which, incidentally, is literally what just happened here above | 10:26:58 |
| @joepie91:pixie.town | so apparently some people leaving is considered more objectionable than others, and the exact groups for both of those raise some questions | 10:27:43 |
| Arian | I support a blanket ban on military-related topics in the community fwiw. I think it's a no brainer | 10:27:52 |
| vcunat | I think it will be best if I limit my posts on this topic here as well. | 10:28:11 |
