- 69,610
- 106,150
Yeah if you constantly jump out and deflect any race discussion, especially towards one race, this isn't a wild assumption to make.nobody is racist on nt says the racist
RACISM on NT
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by hand2handking,
- Start date
- Status
- 3,841
- 891
technology will solve that. If they cant already do it soon they will be able to manipulate skin color. We already have an artificial womb and I thought that was like 50 years away.
- 23,022
- 33,723
Naw. Bruh crib smell like jerk tofu cubes and the finest cheeba.
- 64,964
- 196,091
Last edited:
- 30,544
- 33,880
OP don't you push the idea that most Asian Americans want to be white?
- 63,609
- 50,740
i wonder how long before meth makes an appearance in this thread
kdslittlebro
Banned
- 22,357
- 13,700
- 7,382
- 29,117
That was the real issue with JRose: for years there was talk about a "JRose5" on another forum where various washouts and miscreants would go to share porn, talk trash, and whine about NikeTalk. Impostor accounts were reportedly commonplace, as nothing prevented anyone from signing up under any given account name. We had no access to their records and no interest in visiting their site. Thus, we had no way of knowing who posted what on which account on some other website populated by NikeTalk's dregs.With the JRose5 drama:
Did we ever come to a conclusion that it was really him posting on ht?
The brazenness of it.
The moment JRose5 was accused of sending racist PM's on NikeTalk, we had the opportunity and the obligation to verify those claims. He did indeed send at least one abusive PM containing racial slurs through the Yuku PM system, and was subsequently exiled from the community. We never heard from him again after his account was banned, and I don't want to ever hear from him again. He betrayed our staff but, worse, he betrayed the community and its ideals.
We'll never know for certain if he posted under the "JRose5" account on that other site, but I have no reason to doubt it. He claimed his NT account was hacked, but I don't believe that. His usage records don't support it.
Such is the danger in relying on volunteer support from people you've never met in person. He was a prominent, helpful, supportive contributor to the community for years before he was granted staff access. I don't recall anyone complaining about his appointment until the "off site" complaints later began to emerge.
That's the problem with staffing up quickly: if you don't do it, your existing team can become overwhelmed, and in our case that would've opened the door to a lot of harassment. If you pick one wrong person, however, they as a representative of the team can undermine everything you've worked so hard to develop. That's what happened with JRose5. We thought he'd proven himself reliable over years of regular contributions in the forums, but, as it turned out, we didn't really know him at all.
It proved a grave error and if we are understaffed today, it is because I never want to make another mistake like that again.
Unfortunately, when we're understaffed it's more difficult for us to identify violations that aren't reported by community members. With a larger team, we can afford to be more proactive in reading practically every single post in large or "at risk" threads. With a small team, we have to prioritize those issues our fellow members have deemed serious enough to call to our attention, and to resolving support issues generally.
Sometimes, this can give people the impression that a bias exists simply because user reporting is not an objective process. Users report issues that they encounter and that matter to them. The most frequent type of report occurs when a user has been insulted themselves, or they feel personally offended by a comment. If the staff prioritizes user reports, and the users making those reports only care about certain types of violations, it can thus appear as though the staff only cares about those violations.
While it's difficult to keep up with the busiest threads, I nonetheless try to check in to threads where violations are more likely to occur to help ensure that we're minimizing the blind spots created by selective user reporting. NikeTalk is a community and keeping it safe is a collective responsibility.
Together, I think we do a better job than the big social media sites. Twitter is out here verifying White supremacists. Facebook sells targeted ads for bigots. Reddit has whole sections devoted to racism and misogyny. Being a step above rock bottom, however, is not good enough. We all have to work together to make NikeTalk the type of place that you deserve.
There are many, many racist trolls that our fellow members never see - or see for only a brief moment before they're banned.
Back in 1999, we'd see White supremacists show up on the NikePark message board to hurl racial slurs at us. Such "people" are banned on sight. Reporting on these types of comments is usually outstanding. People see it, they say something, and we yank them immediately and take whatever actions we can technically to prevent their return. (Their only recourse is often filling the support inbox with racial slurs.)
The race trolls you're referring to tend to be vocal in threads on social issues, etc. and their MO tends to be the "slick" dog whistle racism where they're really only fooling themselves.
The problem here is that, as a matter of policy, I'd prefer not to ban people from participating on a precautionary basis over their assumed beliefs.
Personally, I'm not a fan of "an eye for an eye." Your reaction to violence can be to murder a murderer before they can kill anyone else. I prefer to believe that the antithesis of violence is non-violence, not "equal and opposite" violence. With that in mind, I would prefer to do unto others as I'd have them do unto me, not to do unto them as they have done unto me. In the context of a forum, I would prefer to avoid making prejudicial judgments about people, and allow content that I may personally disagree with for the sake of promoting discussion and diversity. (The dangers in creating echo chambers should by now be apparent to everyone.)
If somebody shows up tomorrow spouting "#MAGA," you might immediately label them a SWS - and, honestly, that's a very reasonable precaution. You're free to suspect them. Convicting them on that basis, however, strikes me as premature. It's not an easy call.
It's not unfair to suggest that 100% of the people who've been here for over a week and were eventually banned for racist comments will have first been labeled as SWS - but it's also possible that not everyone who was labeled as a SWS will go on to make overtly racist comments. Should we ban those who haven't formally violated our policies to play the averages, or to ban them, minority report style, for what we believe they'll do in the future?
Barring overtly racist comments, the threshold for racially offensive comments is subjective and challenging. It is only through extreme restraint that Rexanglorum's account survived his undergraduate career, for example. Honestly, I don't know if that was the right call - but it's challenging to devise a bright line when it comes to offensive comments that still allows us to have respectful discussions with people who have different perspectives.
Can you have a respectful conversation with someone whose views are, themselves, disrespectful? Do we ban for the "culture of poverty" belief? At what point? If someone clings to the notion that our society is an egalitarian meritocracy, they thus believe that anyone who's arrested or impoverished "deserves it." That lends itself to believing negative group stereotypes.
Traditionally, we've drawn the line at overt expressions of racism, sexism, heterosexism, and xenophobia. That said, if softer "bigotry adjacent" views become pervasive it can create a hostile environment - especially for anyone capable of reading between the lines. (e.g. "Blue lives matter.") We've thus used the trolling restriction as the catch-all to weed out users who are deliberately antagonizing others.
The downside there is it does allow the "sincerely ignorant" more leeway than you or I would like - and the question, then, is whether or not that's worth it in defense of larger values like diversity of opinion or leveraging the community's diversity to help promote mutual understanding in a way that other social media sites rarely, if ever, manage.
It's challenging and there's no easy answer - but it's something that I think we ought to discuss and consider collectively, as we contemplate who we are and who we want to be as a community.
The TL;DR, shut up and fix it already because you have unlimited power and I demand perfection crowd won't read or like that response, and that's fine. Understanding has never been a prerequisite for complaint, and it's our responsibility to listen and consider all feedback, fair or not, to try and help improve the community experience in whatever way we can.
- 87,865
- 50,387
I was gonna agree with him but when I see that all I read is white cheddar. Never bothered to read SmartfoodYou never seen this famb? They are everywhere.....
Last edited:
- 47,251
- 96,796
They have a gouda and chives flavor thats quite delicious
- 64,964
- 196,091
Famb, I had to Google the name myselfI was gonna agree with him but when I see all I see is white cheddar. Never bothered to read Smartfood
- 69,610
- 106,150
ht jrose5 was def the same as here. There's a certain bad dad jokes quality you can't hide.- 69,610
- 106,150
Pirates booty puffs>I was gonna agree with him but when I see all I see is white cheddar. Never bothered to read Smartfood
That's funny as hell to read.
llerraj
Banned
- 5,441
- 6,974
Jrose5
The Asian preferential treatment from the staff. Threads about them would get shut down instantly while threads about Black people would go on for days before someone stepped in.
The Asian preferential treatment from the staff. Threads about them would get shut down instantly while threads about Black people would go on for days before someone stepped in.
- 87,865
- 50,387
Oh, I see now. Sounds like something that would spur him on to make a thread.
Gotta see which mod though.
- 63,609
- 50,740
but that was legit funny though
- 27,787
- 12,451
but i dont think you take it as a shot.
cause you wear no tipping and "sampling" food like a badge of honor
- 63,609
- 50,740
but i dont think you take it as a shot.
cause you wear no tipping and "sampling" food like a badge of honor
calibeebee
Supporter
- 19,695
- 25,687
2 posts after this. Are you a wizard?!
- 87,865
- 50,387
Sure but I bet it wasn't that post alone that got him going.
- 16,182
- 32,700
- 30,544
- 33,880
- 16,182
- 32,700
Dude was posting tweets as evidence
This is why I don't get how he can complain about racism and not check himself.
- 63,609
- 50,740
But I’ve seen and heard from some Asians
Who prefer their kids to date white
Who prefer whiter skin
My wife’s Filipino and her parents stay watching the Filipino channel
And I see skin whitener commercials on the daily
Who prefer their kids to date white
Who prefer whiter skin
My wife’s Filipino and her parents stay watching the Filipino channel
And I see skin whitener commercials on the daily
- 30,544
- 33,880
Some =/= all or most.
- Status
