Journal of Other Forum Analysis

[BIONIC]

The assumption here is that we don't have members of staff who aren't also victims of sexual assault, or whatever variety of affliction might be applicable to the post at hand. We do. We are not oblivious, and we are very cognizant of any experiences that may be relevant. We're not gonna get it right all of the time, but we do have people that can relate to the issue at hand.

So you have members of staff, for example, know people who were, or could have been, kidnapped into a hostile environment, held by an internationally illegal organization with no regard to human rights or conducts of war or visitation with any international organization including the Red Cross, and then sexually assaulted and tortured?

I do not think you are in fact cognizant of "any experiences", and I understand this presumptuousness is meant to be asserting assertiveness as a mod, but it truly shows that I don't think the staff understand why people were mad about the ban in the first place, and a defiance to the idea staff are or could be wrong, despite you saying you're happy to own up to mistakes (well, I guess if you have to say something 20 times, you know it's not true.)
It appears to me, that staff think this all thing is about a community who has gone rogue, and now they've all banded together, and would have for whatever excuse had come along. I do not think staff understands, or tried to understand, why this ban specifically was an issue or why it triggered people - which is DEEPLY troubling.
I think you guys lost the plot. I think you guys would rather focus only on the forum melodrama aspect of this, his friends come in to defend him, these people are against those people, because this leaves the "moral playing field" even and easy to manipulate.
But this is not all that's happening here, and I would expect at least the minimum amount of dealing with that.

————

The staff again fails to see here the issue with Brady's Ban was why was post deemed to be a permanent ban in the first place, and continued doubling down of that ban even after things from the UN report were pointed out.

Will someone be banned now if they say Harvey Weinstein had sex slaves instead of saying he committed sexual assaults?

Harvey Weinstein is Jewish (and a rapist and a criminal), you can say whatever the hell you want about him on here

what is Brady even supposed to say? he meant exactly what he wrote and seemingly only mods here are willing to die on this hill that YOU ABSOLUTELY CANNOT CRITICIZE HAMAS for their sex violence crimes because… there are some tv shows… with rich Arab people… or something??

like holy shit if there is a single person in the world that felt offended by that post, maybe they need to take a step back and realize that getting into the argument of hamas only commiting some other sexual violence act please be fair to them is not the most important thing here

Quick, talk about word limits!