| 4 Nov 2021 |
 Jonas Chevalier | just as an aside, do you realize you're part of that small vocal minority, just with a different viewpoint | 14:17:21 |
 joepie91 🏳️🌈 | I very intentionally did not use the words "vocal minority", and no, I am very much not a part of the group of people I am referring to | 14:17:46 |
 piegames |
so if you see anything, please send it my way
@zimbatm simply read the existing discussions, especially those that turned out to be controversial or straight up toxic.
Observe how for example people quote known industry misogynists and how they react when called out.
Observer how "we need a code of conduct" and "some communities need safe spaces" are still controversial topics.
How these topics are ridiculed and dismissed with the usual SJW blabla.
And this doesn't only happen in discussions around these topics. Read for example the IRC/Matrix RFC and Discourse for some counter examples.
| 14:17:58 |
| piegames | *
so if you see anything, please send it my way
Jonas Chevalier simply read the existing discussions, especially those that turned out to be controversial or straight up toxic.
Observe how for example people quote known industry misogynists and how they react when called out.
Observer how "we need a code of conduct" and "some communities need safe spaces" are still controversial topics.
How these topics are ridiculed and dismissed with the usual SJW blabla.
And this doesn't only happen in discussions around these topics. Read for example the IRC/Matrix RFC and Discourse for some counter examples.
| 14:18:13 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | you are focusing on the mechanism, not the message behind it - classifying me together with said people because "you're all loud", but the loudness isn't the problem here, the oppressive and broadly unwelcoming subtext is | 14:18:19 |
| Jonas Chevalier | I think there is something fundamental that is different in our understanding of the world | 14:19:14 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | Jonas Chevalier: almost certainly - but that is why I want to engage further on the topic, and why an outright dismissal of it as 'abstract' frustrates me, because that doesn't allow for aligning our understanding | 14:19:50 |
 tomberek | “as soon as it might make new people uncomfortable” is a very low bar. We can apply this very conversation as making many new people uncomfortable. With a bar that low, everything is potentially a problem and selectively picking out what is bad behavior becomes it’s own problem. | 14:20:25 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | tomberek: that is not what I said. | 14:20:49 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | the context around it matters. | 14:20:55 |
| Jonas Chevalier | We're all projecting like crazy ^_^ | 14:21:05 |
| tomberek | Okay. Good. | 14:22:05 |
| Jonas Chevalier | For example one thing I noticed is that there is a lot of the current American culture war that is infecting the conversation. IMO both sides are pretty toxic. | 14:23:14 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | I mean, I can go on here about the paradox of tolerance, and how there's a difference between identity and chosen ideology, and societal circumstances affecting how much certain groups of people can healthily deal with mentally, and how excluding some people from a community is inevitable in 100% of cases and it's about having a frank conversation on who you exclude and why, and I could continue elaborating on that and the reasons behind it for many hours, if people want... but the very short summary is "all discomfort is not equal, and we should aim to make the community as welcoming as generally possible, and that is necessarily going to include some well-chosen forms of discomfort" | 14:23:41 |
| Jonas Chevalier | piegames: I agree that injecting terms as "woke" is not helpful to the conversation | 14:23:52 |
| Jonas Chevalier | As soon as we are divided into camps, we stop seeing each-other as humans | 14:24:45 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | the "well-chosen" is the important part here, and it's why RFC98 is important, and why this discussion is important, and why we can't just let things go however they go like we have in the past, as a community | 14:24:45 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | because "not choosing a group to exclude" is not an available option, there's only "explicitly making a choice vs. letting it be dictated by social dominance" | 14:25:25 |
| Jonas Chevalier | I really disagree with this line of thinking | 14:25:56 |
| tomberek | What group you want to exclude? | 14:26:07 |
| tomberek | Or that we should? | 14:26:43 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | tomberek: those who are unwilling to be empathic, baseline inclusive, and accepting of other people's experiences | 14:26:46 |
| Jonas Chevalier | paradox of intolerance shouldn't be used as a leg-up to create more intolerance | 14:26:59 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | (with "those who are unable to be empathic" being a special case that requires case-by-case consideration) | 14:27:14 |
| Jonas Chevalier | exclusion is an unfortunate thing and should be exceptional | 14:27:22 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | Jonas Chevalier: I completely agree with that | 14:27:35 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | however, I do also recognize that not all exclusion is implicit, and that it is very easy to end up with a lot of implicit exclusion - the path towards "least exclusion" is not "define no social norms" | 14:28:22 |
| joepie91 🏳️🌈 | * however, I do also recognize that not all exclusion is explicit, and that it is very easy to end up with a lot of implicit exclusion - the path towards "least exclusion" is not "define no social norms" | 14:28:28 |
| Jonas Chevalier | please tell me something you are unsure about | 14:28:39 |
| Jonas Chevalier | what are open questions you have? | 14:28:52 |
