Westminster to use constitutional tool to block Holyrood gender recognition law.

[Pickman's model]

That seems a bit of a cop-out, to criticise the moderators response without being specific about what it is they should have responded to.

i am not criticising the moderators' response. i am criticising their lack of response. the refusal to mod.

 

[Santino]

Given that the FAQs also mention "general all-round irritating arses" I think many of us benefit from a light-touch moderating style.

 

[Athos]

i am not criticising the moderators' response. i am criticising their lack of response. the refusal to respond.

Very good. Same point, though - which posts should they have responded to? If you like, start with Co-op's posts that you read - which of them?

 

[Pickman's model]

Very good. Same point, though - which posts should they have responded to. If you like, start with Co-op's posts that you read - which of them?

i can see you think another episode of the athos show is starting.

 

[Athos]

i can see you think another episode of the athos show is starting.

As I said, cop-out.

 

[Pickman's model]

As I said, cop-out.

no, you said it seemed like a cop-out. i don't much care what you think

 

[Athos]

no, you said it seemed like a cop-out. i don't much care what you think

That's fine. But it's easy to criticise the mods for not responding, despite not being able to point to what it is they should've responded to.

 

[Pickman's model]

That's fine. But it's easy to criticise the mods for not responding, despite not being able to point to what it is they should've responded to.

you've made some interesting posts on this thread about the legal issues in the government's use of s.35 but you're at risk of undermining that good work by turning this thread into another episode of the athos show.

 

[Jennaonthebeach]

Was that me saying no shit stirring on the sofa?

It's not so much that I think the sofa should be kept positive and upbeat, it's just that I would just hate it to become the bare knuckle terf/trans pile on that all the political threads become. You know for k & s gubbins and stuff.

I don't think anywhere should be like that, but I did feel after that that challenging transphobic innuendo is a no no. I did feel that it was me that had transgressed some unwritten rule by challenging something I viewed as a dig at trans people.

 

[Athos]

you've made some interesting posts on this thread about the legal issues in the government's use of s.35 but you're at risk of undermining that good work by turning this thread into another episode of the athos show.

Clearly, you're unable to answer the question.

 

[belboid]

If trans people were discussing their issues then the trans threads on urban would be full of people moaning about how shitty trans healthcare is in the UK. or whether surgery is the right decision or workplace discrimination or seeking support because they'd just been abused in the street or sexually harassed by some grim man. Trans people don't get to do that here, all they get to do is defend trans people and try to correct misinformation and misunderstandings made by cis people. And even that seems too much for some to tolerate.

Healthcare was brought up a few times on at least one of 'the' threads. The usual 'liberals' objected to that on the basis of 'ohh they want special treatment do they, everything else is being cut but not they're bit, selfish wankers.' It's fucking shameful.

 

[Jennaonthebeach]

Healthcare was brought up a few times on at least one of 'the' threads. The usual 'liberals' objected to that on the basis of 'ohh they want special treatment do they, everything else is being cut but not they're bit, selfish wankers.' It's fucking shameful.

as if we don't all know that everything else is being cut as well - as if we don't have health problems that are nothing to do with being trans. I think a lot of cis people just don't engage their thinking apparatus when talking about or to trans people. Which is glaring on here as being thick can be a banning offence.

 

[Pickman's model]

Clearly, you're unable to answer the question.

Bollocks. I can answer the question, I just won't answer the question.

 

[Athos]

Bollocks. I can answer the question, I just won't answer the question.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Bollocks. I can answer the question, I just won't answer the question.

This sounds remarkably similar to mods being able to moderate whilst also refusing to.

 

[Pickman's model]

This sounds remarkably similar to mods being able to moderate whilst also refusing to.

in no way. i am not a moderator. i have no responsibility for the boards at all. i haven't any power to coerce or warn as mods do. i have highlighted an issue that affects discussion of trans subjects here, i don't need to point to every egregious post made to substantiate it.

 

[Athos]

... i don't need to point to every egregious post made to substantiate it.

You haven't pointed to a single one; you haven't substantiated it.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

in no way. i am not a moderator. i have no responsibility for the boards at all. i haven't any power to coerce or warn as mods do. i have highlighted an issue that affects discussion of trans subjects here, i don't need to point to every egregious post made to substantiate it.

I just found it interesting that having criticised the mods, when placed in the same predicament as them you reached the same outcome.

 

[Pickman's model]

I just found it interesting that having criticised the mods, when placed in the same predicament as them you reached the same outcome.

i didn't

 

[Magnus McGinty]

I refer you to post #433 - there isn’t much wiggle room.

 

[Pickman's model]

I refer you to post #433 - there isn’t much wiggle room.

it's an unhappy sight, to see you talking so out of your arse. the question was, which posts do you think the mods should have dealt with? as you'll see if you skip back through athos's sub-forensic questioning. and for me the issue is far less 'where do you think the mods should have intervened?' than 'should the mods have intervened?' and for me, they should have. but now, because of the failure / refusal of mods to get involved several years ago any successful intervention is far less likely even than it was in 2020. there's been numerous threads over the last five, six years where the most disgraceful abuse has been handed out, where bans were deserved and were never even considered. there's been loads of posters who've either left or stepped back from posting. and after that history it's a bit late to say 'where on this thread do you think the line should have been drawn' when the line should have been drawn several years ago on other threads.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

it's an unhappy sight, to see you talking so out of your arse. the question was, which posts do you think the mods should have dealt with? as you'll see if you skip back through athos's sub-forensic questioning. and for me the issue is far less 'where do you think the mods should have intervened?' than 'should the mods have intervened?' and for me, they should have. but now, because of the failure / refusal of mods to get involved several years ago any successful intervention is far less likely even than it was in 2020. there's been numerous threads over the last five, six years where the most disgraceful abuse has been handed out, where bans were deserved and were never even considered. there's been loads of posters who've either left or stepped back from posting. and after that history it's a bit late to say 'where on this thread do you think the line should have been drawn' when the line should have been drawn several years ago on other threads.

The point was you refused to answer the question for reasons probably not unlike the refusal to moderate.

 

[Pickman's model]

The point was you refused to answer the question for reasons probably not unlike the refusal to moderate.

i refused to answer because no answer is ever good enough for athos, not when it's the athos show as it so clearly is here

 

[Magnus McGinty]

i refused to answer because no answer is ever good enough for athos, not when it's the athos show as it so clearly is here

Perhaps the mods won’t moderate for similar reasons.

 

[Pickman's model]

Perhaps the mods won’t moderate for similar reasons.

that's rather a step back from your 'for reasons probably not unlike the refusal to moderate'.

 

[Athos]

it's an unhappy sight, to see you talking so out of your arse. the question was, which posts do you think the mods should have dealt with? as you'll see if you skip back through athos's sub-forensic questioning. and for me the issue is far less 'where do you think the mods should have intervened?' than 'should the mods have intervened?' and for me, they should have. but now, because of the failure / refusal of mods to get involved several years ago any successful intervention is far less likely even than it was in 2020. there's been numerous threads over the last five, six years where the most disgraceful abuse has been handed out, where bans were deserved and were never even considered. there's been loads of posters who've either left or stepped back from posting. and after that history it's a bit late to say 'where on this thread do you think the line should have been drawn' when the line should have been drawn several years ago on other threads.

Disingenuous obfuscation. You seemed to be suggesting that these sorts of threads should be moderated differently, now. Which is easy to say in general terms; it's much more difficult to say with any specificity what should be done differently. When invited to do so with reference to this thread, you couldn't.

 

[Pickman's model]

Disingenuous obfuscation. You seemed to be suggesting that these sorts of threads should be moderated differently, now. Which is easy to say in general terms; it's much more difficult to say with any specificity what should be done differently. When invited to do so with reference to this thread, you couldn't.

no, when invited to do so with reference to this thread i refused to do so. because i don't think you're coming at this with good faith. that's very different from an inability to say anything, and if someone else had asked me, in fact pretty much any other contributor to this thread, even co-op, i would have indulged them.

 

[Athos]

no, when invited to do so with reference to this thread i refused to do so. because i don't think you're coming at this with good faith. that's very different from an inability to say anything, and if someone else had asked me, in fact pretty much any other contributor to this thread, even co-op, i would have indulged them.

Convenient.

 

[Fozzie Bear]

I don't think that the best response to people raising an issue about the general culture of the boards is several pages of cross-examination by our resident Barrister.

 

[Fozzie Bear]

I've got friends who are gender critical and it's pretty uncomfortable for all parties navigating all that. But none of them would get away with some of the shit that gets said on these threads.

I don't really know what else to say - several trans posters who make incredibly insightful contributions to these boards (and not just on trans issues - far from it) have said that they don't feel able to post here about their lives and experiences. That should be enough to make people have a word with themselves, surely?