a(n actual) conversation about dev/player relationships

[chequers]

Being moderator of an internet forum is possibly more thankless than working on a free online roguelike. Also, there have been some extremely good GDD threads lately, for example remove monster invisibility. So take my following comments with those points in mind.

In my opinion, the level of discourse of this forum has not improved over the past six months despite moderators who are active and actively interested in improving the place. It's possibly gotten worse. I'd like to suggest the moderation team consider changing how they manage tavern.

Specific things I think are bad include:
* People using inappropriate tone in threads (flaming/trolling, derailing serious threads, etc)
* Weak moderator responses to bad/pushing the envelope-type behaviour (typical response appears to be locking the thread without individual punishment)
* Unclear rules about what is and isn't allowed

My suggestions for future changes:
* Tighten the scope of the tavern. Do not allow threads which are off-topic, non-serious or trolls like Siegert's signature, bees, harambe or girls. Even when quarantined to CYC they influence the whole board's tone.
* Tighten the rules for posting. Have a sliding scale punishment for people who infringe (warn -> temp ban -> long temp ban -> ban). Use the punishments. Forbid flaming, flame-bait/trolling, etc. Further restrict posting in GDD and actively remove posts which are non-constructive.

[n1000]

* Tighten the scope of the tavern. Do not allow threads which are off-topic, non-serious or trolls...Even when quarantined to CYC they influence the whole board's tone.

I don't know how much joke posting on CYC influences discussions on other boards but I enjoy doing it once in a while. I mean 100% serious posts across tavern is not something I would ever support, but I could get behind stricter moderation on GDD

[Shard1697]

If people are actually probated for making posts so bad that they need to be deleted by mods, it would be a good forward step.

[BabyRage]

Do not allow threads which are off-topic, non-serious or trolls like Siegert's signature, bees, harambe or girls. Even when quarantined to CYC they influence the whole board's tone.

Please don't do that. CYC is my home...

[DracheReborn]

http://jeff-vogel.blogspot.com/2011/01/ ... never.html

An old post, but still good.

TL;DR summary
1. "anonymity plus audience makes assholes" - people on Tavern will post stuff they won't say in real life (well, hopefully not)
2. signal-to-noise ratio isn't great
3. devs are human too

I think it's harder for crawl to draw that line between devs and players, if only because most (if not all) devs were recruited from the playerbase.

And FWIW, I don't think this is true for all dev/player interactions. The tone on crawl-dev and crd is markedly more polite, for example.

So maybe my only conclusion is that devs shouldn't take Tavern too seriously, not that they do anyway.

[Sar]

This rebuttal by J.E. Sawyer (Obsidian Entertainment) is worth reading, IMO. http://twofoldsilence.diogenes-lamp.info/2011/01/actually-some-developers-should-read.html

The tl;dr is, I guess, "if you care about how your creations are received by actual consumers, you should". It is known that Crawl devs don't really care, so perhaps they, indeed, shouldn't read Tavern at all? Crawl players are not consumers, Crawl is completely free.

[DracheReborn]

This rebuttal by J.E. Sawyer (Obsidian Entertainment) is worth reading, IMO. http://twofoldsilence.diogenes-lamp.info/2011/01/actually-some-developers-should-read.html

The tl;dr is, I guess, "if you care about how your creations are received by actual consumers, you should". It is known that Crawl devs don't really care, so perhaps they, indeed, shouldn't read Tavern at all? Crawl players are not consumers, Crawl is completely free.

I disagree that the devs don't care. I would argue that crawl being free makes community approval even more important to developers as a reward - the focus just changes from largest possible audience (more $$$) to the audience that the devs actually care about.

Anyway, I don't disagree with anything in the rebuttal. Feedback is valuable, of course, it's just a matter of how much crap each dev is able to tolerate to get to it.

[Sar]

I wasn't saying they don't care as a way to chide them, it's just my understanding of how thinks work. When MD were removed in favour of Minotaurs (and Hill Orcs), the game didn't objectively improve by a very large margin; cognitive load was reduced slightly and so was the codebase, but it wasn't some huge change. A lot of people got upset, but their opinions were irrelevant, and dpeg's preference of Minotaurs was more important because he actually was a developer involved in the creation of the game. It's not a bad thing necessary, just something to consider.

[dowan]

This thread is a farce. Dpeg had a very mild temper tantrum on the forums, his personality is occasionally abrasive. Oh well, many of us have done far worse.

I don't think the devs should have special privileges for being unpleasant to people, but they should also not be held to any higher standard than anyone else. The players and devs of this game have a pretty good relationship. Dpeg gets his kicks poking the bear on occasion, and the bears poke him too.

I think the mods generally do a very good job of keeping it from getting out of control when someone feels too poked.

[VeryAngryFelid]

I wasn't saying they don't care as a way to chide them, it's just my understanding of how thinks work. When MD were removed in favour of Minotaurs (and Hill Orcs), the game didn't objectively improve by a very large margin; cognitive load was reduced slightly and so was the codebase, but it wasn't some huge change. A lot of people got upset, but their opinions were irrelevant, and dpeg's preference of Minotaurs was more important because he actually was a developer involved in the creation of the game. It's not a bad thing necessary, just something to consider.

Also if devs cared, they wouldn't explicitly tell that polls don't have any meaning for them. It's even prohibited to create polls in GDD.

[Shtopit]

My suggestions for future changes:
* Tighten the scope of the tavern. Do not allow threads which are off-topic, non-serious or trolls like Siegert's signature, bees, harambe or girls. Even when quarantined to CYC they influence the whole board's tone.
* Tighten the rules for posting. Have a sliding scale punishment for people who infringe (warn -> temp ban -> long temp ban -> ban). Use the punishments. Forbid flaming, flame-bait/trolling, etc. Further restrict posting in GDD and actively remove posts which are non-constructive.

Off-topic to what? The board descriptions are quite clear, CYC is an area for everything which doesn't fit in the other forums. Or do you mean that the whole board and site should only be used to seriously talk about Crawl? Do we even need a forum for that?

Harder moderation of topic choice in GDD is OK, in CYC it makes no sense. I have never seen a forum where there wasn't an area to talk about anything. If you want, CYC could be moved away from Tavern (which is mainly about advice, CIP, and tournaments) into its own "Drunkard's Corner" subforum.

I don't think the devs should have special privileges for being unpleasant to people, but they should also not be held to any higher standard than anyone else. The players and devs of this game have a pretty good relationship. [...]

I think the mods generally do a very good job of keeping it from getting out of control when someone feels too poked.

I agree with this.

I wasn't saying they don't care as a way to chide them, it's just my understanding of how thinks work. When MD were removed in favour of Minotaurs (and Hill Orcs), the game didn't objectively improve by a very large margin; cognitive load was reduced slightly and so was the codebase, but it wasn't some huge change. A lot of people got upset, but their opinions were irrelevant, and dpeg's preference of Minotaurs was more important because he actually was a developer involved in the creation of the game. It's not a bad thing necessary, just something to consider.

Also if devs cared, they wouldn't explicitly tell that polls don't have any meaning for them. It's even prohibited to create polls in GDD.

Polls in such a small forum are pretty much useless for a developer. The answers are given by people who, as a whole, do not represent tendencies in the player base in a proportionate way. It's much better if people give opinions and ideas and these ideas and opinions are considered one by one, instead of seeing them backed by statistically meaningless numbers.

[dpeg]

The tl;dr is, I guess, "if you care about how your creations are received by actual consumers, you should". It is known that Crawl devs don't really care, so perhaps they, indeed, shouldn't read Tavern at all? Crawl players are not consumers, Crawl is completely free.

Watching players and reading what they write *is* important! However, it is just as important that we're not bound by what some of them say or demand. This is one of the big advantages of making a free game: no need to directly cater for the "customer". I'm not saying this out of spite, I believe the game becomes better for it: many design decisions would work out, so it is good to have some focus (it isn't even very tight).

If you look at the history of DCSS, including my contributions, you'll see that non-dev work has always been incorporated: bugs, feature ideas, whole concepts. I like to believe that we live up to the "Stone Soup", at least a little bit. Obviously, we need to reserve the right to refuse stuff.


Re: dpeg vs the world: I have been warned, and was close to probation, and I believe there are different standards at work here. (Which I think is probably actually okay.) I am ready to be banned, actually, and have prepared a farewell posting, full of wisdom.
About the latest event ("rewrite"): I didn't throw a tantrum, I wrote everything in cold blood, and I am as serious about the topic as I sounded. It is offensive to drop the r-word without thinking; I realise that people didn't know this; hopefully, they do know.

[TeshiAlair]

Has there been any thought about splitting CYC up? Because right now it's half random bullshit, and half ideas that are not fleshed out enough for GDD (and more the former of late). I definitely think there should be a space for the latter as well.

[DracheReborn]

Has there been any thought about splitting CYC up? Because right now it's half random bullshit, and half ideas that are not fleshed out enough for GDD (and more the former of late). I definitely think there should be a space for the latter as well.

Yes

Needs someone to take up the baton though

[goodcoolguy]

@dpeg: If it's true they're considering banning/whatevering you, that's hilarious. I always figured the mods were motivated by trying to keep guys like you from leaving the forum in a huff.

[dowan]

Oh come on man.. The 'r-word'?

Back up off the ledge a little. That said, I'm very surprised you'd be getting warnings of a ban. I personally have walked that line, and I can tell you this; I am a far more abrasive poster than dpeg. If I've not eaten a ban, he certainly shouldn't.

By the way, how do you keep motivated on this dpeg? Honestly, you've been working on this for a long time, and it's been a finished product (by most reasonable standards) for as long as I've been playing it. What makes you want to keep working on it?

[dpeg]

"r-word" is a joke (my suada isn't). I'm a German, my humour is limited.

Motivation: there's always something that can go in. It's a pain that the first attempt of altar desecration did not work out (but I have a new plan). And pipe dreams like randomly generated gods make sure it won't stop.

[lethediver]

At least the crawl devs will exchange bantz with you and tell you why they think your ideas are shit.

Other games, the devs never speak publicly except to recite with the lawyer/PR firm told them to say, and avoid threads that aren't carefully regulated circlejerks to show that their games have thriving, happy, positive communities.

I will say though, that the better recent game companies are a little more responsive to what players want. Get enough of an angry mob together on the forums, and you can get that dual wield/mountain dwarves/mounts/whatever implemented or re-implemented. Not so for the crawl devs, who are a little more concerned about staying true to their "design philosophy" (whatever that means).

[Shtopit]

At least the crawl devs will exchange bantz with you and tell you why they think your ideas are shit.

Other games, the devs never speak publicly except to recite with the lawyer/PR firm told them to say, and avoid threads that aren't carefully regulated circlejerks to show that their games have thriving, happy, positive communities.

I will say though, that the better recent game companies are a little more responsive to what players want. Get enough of an angry mob together on the forums, and you can get that dual wield/mountain dwarves/mounts/whatever implemented or re-implemented. Not so for the crawl devs, who are a little more concerned about staying true to their "design philosophy" (whatever that means).

Nowadays you can even get horse armour!

[archaeo]

Thread split.

I, for one, want to point out that there usually aren't enough moderators to read every post that appears on the Tavern, and that lots of you who are complaining about the strictness of mods rarely, if ever, hit the report button to let us know about content you don't think should appear.

Likewise, I'd like to suggest that even the insanely gentle moderation we deploy right now, which includes lengthy PM threads patiently explaining to people why getting angry about video games is dumb, already gives several people here (who don't break any rules!) the vapors. Given that none of the current mods had anything to do with the founding of the Tavern, and that several of the posters who cause issues on the Tavern have a credible claim to having been a part of the community long before some of us heard about it, I don't think anyone should be surprised that none of the mods has volunteered to be the hammer of justice or anything.

So let's talk about it, preferably with all due respect to everyone else here, who, I'll remind you, are not just user names but actual human beings.

e: I'll also point out that I only just got over being seriously burnt out over the relentless negativity of the crawl community, so maybe we could try to talk about positive solutions instead of the usual doom-and-gloom?

[Lasty]

I think most of the devs care about what the playerbase wants, but that doesn't mean that we'll change direction just to give them what they want. I think we all want to make a fun game that many people enjoy, but we don't all think that players always know best about what makes a great game for everyone. We aren't perfect on that front either, of course; we're each just trying our best and taking most seriously the feedback of people whose judgment we trust.

Being a dev doesn't make you immune to Tavern moderation, as dpeg said. However, I try to weigh the value a poster provides against the problems they cause. I'm a lot more inclined to escalate to a ban on a poster who hasn't ever posted anything of value than a poster who has a long history of providing good content or useful perspectives or contributing to crawl.

dang. this was supposed to be a shitpost about not having a girlfriend but i think duvessa was the only person who realized that.

Fabulous.

[lethediver]

e: I'll also point out that I only just got over being seriously burnt out over the relentless negativity of the crawl community, so maybe we could try to talk about positive solutions instead of the usual doom-and-gloom?

THE END IS NIGH!

[Siegurt]

e: I'll also point out that I only just got over being seriously burnt out over the relentless negativity of the crawl community, so maybe we could try to talk about positive solutions instead of the usual doom-and-gloom?

THE END IS NIGH!

https://youtu.be/7PsBxG8neok

[Shtopit]

e: I'll also point out that I only just got over being seriously burnt out over the relentless negativity of the crawl community, so maybe we could try to talk about positive solutions instead of the usual doom-and-gloom?

THE END IS NIGH!

[dowan]

It's tough to avoid the relentless negativity, because saying "X or Y design feature doesn't bother me at all and is good" isn't exactly actionable. But certainly the tone can be kept respectful, and posters can try to be mindful that these are humans on the other end of the conversation.

I tell people that dungeon crawl might be the best game ever, and I really mean it. That doesn't mean I think it's perfect, and the more I think about little individual problems the larger they become. When all we talk about is those little problems it starts to sound like that's all we see, but if there wasn't a good game with those problems we wouldn't bother to complain about them.

I know I've been moderated several times, and I don't think most of them were unreasonable, and I think my behavior changed in the direction the moderator hoped for (at least for a little while). I don't think my presence here is totally valueless, although I'd guess plenty of people would put me right on that line where my small contributions might not be worth the trouble I cause. I don't know. Either way, a gentle "Come on man" from the mods does do wonders most of the time, at least to people who aren't actually trying to mess with other people.

I don't think the level of discourse has gotten worse. I think some posters (perhaps including me) need to be reminded to be respectful even when they disagree, and any moderation in that area needs to be goddamned consistent, because having a "more valuable" member of the community be rude to you, and then get moderated when you act the same way in return causes a lot of anger, bitterness, and hurt feelings that are going to spill into the discourse. I'm not saying moderation isn't consistent, and I think our mods do a great job, I just want to really hammer that point, because uneven moderation really splits communities.

[Lasty]

Just to be clear, I will not base my decision to moderate based on the "value" a poster offers. I will only consider it to some degree in how quickly I escalate to more severe moderation -- bans, really. Bad behavior is bad behavior no matter who does it.

[archaeo]

I have a hard time taking concerns regarding consistency very seriously. We've been relentlessly consistent in being extremely lenient. It's hard for me to think of a longtime community member who is gone because we've banned them; everybody else is still here (or doesn't want to be unbanned!).

Admittedly, we probably let bad posts smolder too long, or fail to notice things that should've been addressed. But in my experience, most moderation is just invisible to the rest of the forum, because it's handled via PM, and it's overwhelmingly biased toward discussion and warnings instead of temp bans and permanent bans.

And in re: "relentless negativity," I guess I'm getting some ribbing because of how lamely dramatic that line was, but I'm not kidding; so much of the community's discourse about Crawl is sharply critical and jaundiced, and the routine cynicism just bums me out. Some of that is on us, the moderators, who could do a better job promoting posts and content that focus discussion on the things we collectively like instead of what we dislike. But I mean, it's also just video game forum stuff and I should just get over my deal, maybe.

[dpeg]

I wasn't saying they don't care as a way to chide them, it's just my understanding of how thinks work. When MD were removed in favour of Minotaurs (and Hill Orcs), the game didn't objectively improve by a very large margin; cognitive load was reduced slightly and so was the codebase, but it wasn't some huge change.

As I see it, the biggest effect is displaying the will to cut stuff. It's been said often, and it is very true, that more gets added than cut, but I think it is really important to actually shed stuff that we think is not good enough. [Personally, I think it is way too much to expect a game of this size and age to shrink in content over time. But standards have risen, and it is very good that each new dev generation looks at the inherited content and throws out some stinkers.]

Not giving in to public pressure on something like MD is very important for other reasons (as everyone who has children can probably share): if you give in to vocal pressure, just once, then where will it end? Afterwards, players know how to drill it!

[ydeve]

Not giving in to public pressure on something like MD is very important for other reasons (as everyone who has children can probably share): if you give in to vocal pressure, just once, then where will it end? Afterwards, players know how to drill it!

There is a name for this logical fallacy. It's called a "slippery slope" argument.

Letting public pressure make the decision for you when you're fence sitting isn't the same thing as letting public pressure persuade you to do things you don't want to do.

[dpeg]

ydeve: This would be true if we had never reversed stuff. Which we did, however. In the MD scenario, it was an almost exclusively flavour decision which of the three names (HO, MD, Mi) to kick out. Not giving in to pressure here is a pretty good idea. You say slippery slope, I say broken window! (Content replaced by internet buzzwords, yay!)

[HardboiledGargoyle]

it kind of sucks quite a bit that you keep inventing or bringing to the forefront the principle of establishing artistic control and sweep aside the principle of making the game better

[Sar]

maybe that because something like "making the game better" is completely subjective

[Cimanyd]

I, for one, want to point out that [...] lots of you who are complaining about the strictness of mods rarely, if ever, hit the report button to let us know about content you don't think should appear.

If that's what we're supposed to do, then that's worth knowing. I think on most forums, the rules would decide what isn't allowed, and if you wanted the moderation to change you'd start a post discussing changes to the rules. On this forum, that would belong in this specific subforum, like this thread.

Also:

Use this form to report the selected post to the forum moderators and board administrators. Reporting should generally be used only if the post breaks forum rules.

(That might be a forum default, or something written years ago?)

[archaeo]

If that's what we're supposed to do, then that's worth knowing. I think on most forums, the rules would decide what isn't allowed, and if you wanted the moderation to change you'd start a post discussing changes to the rules. On this forum, that would belong in this specific subforum, like this thread.

I'm not even really talking about changing the rules, but asking people to report posts they believe break the rules we have, which cover most of the problems people talk about. When I don't see reports as I'm skimming through the forum, I'm inclined to trust that things aren't getting out of hand.

I also would love to talk about the rules and whether or not they need to be changed. While the mod team has the final say over any changes to the rules, I think it's fair to say we don't want to do anything that would alienate the community.

Use this form to report the selected post to the forum moderators and board administrators. Reporting should generally be used only if the post breaks forum rules.

(That might be a forum default, or something written years ago?)

None of the active mods had anything to do with writing that, AFAIK. As I said, though, most of the stuff here sounds like things that do break the rules.

[dowan]

I'm a German, my humour is limited.

I just wanted to comment on this, because I was thinking about it a bit. I've certainly interpreted the 'tone' of your posts in the past as being rather... curt at times. But, if english isn't your first language(although you obviously communicate in it extremely well), perhaps I'm interpreting tone that isn't there. Maybe I've been a bit unfair in interpreting your posts, so I apologize if that's the case.

However, english is my native (and only) language, so I have no excuse .

I have a hard time taking concerns regarding consistency very seriously...

I don't think there is a lot of inconsistency, as you say, there's not a lot of moderation in the first place. And what moderation there is typically takes the form of light warnings. The inconsistency typically hasn't been in moderation of individual posters, but more in the deletion of posts, or locking of threads, and the last time I can think of that happening was quite a long time ago, so I'm not saying it's a problem, just something that has to be kept in mind.

As to the relentless negativity... it seems to be unavoidable in things like this. Trying to focus discussion on things you like is rather like trying to focus the news on good things rather than bad things. Good things don't need action taken, they're good. Positive feedback is always a good thing of course, and there is some of that here, but when discussing game design generally you discuss things that need to be changed. They wouldn't need to be changed if they were good.

There's also the issue of a smallish community, so sometimes personalities can grate on one another, and some people naturally have a more cynical or sarcastic style. Trying to moderate that is deeply subjective, and prone to bias, having a sarcastic reply deleted when it was in response to a sarcastic post that isn't deleted can feel unfair. But occasional reminders to try to keep it friendly do seem to be effective, and nobody can feel unfairly treated by that, I think.

[duvessa]

IDC about tone but can we not make "jokes" that just throw people or groups of people under the bus? The actual "r-word" is something people hear right before they're abused, locked up, or even murdered. Attributing it to someone who offered a theoretical video game development suggestion is not cool, no matter how many "the joke is that you didn't actually use a slur, it's a prank bro!" disclaimers you attach to it, and is a prime example of negativity.

[Siegurt]

IDC about tone but can we not make "jokes" that just throw people or groups of people under the bus? The actual "r-word" is something people hear right before they're abused, locked up, or even murdered. Attributing it to someone who offered a theoretical video game development suggestion is not cool, no matter how many "the joke is that you didn't actually use a slur, it's a prank bro!" disclaimers you attach to it, and is a prime example of negativity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4_COOh4VXw

[stickyfingers]

I just wanted to comment on this, because I was thinking about it a bit. I've certainly interpreted the 'tone' of your posts in the past as being rather... curt at times. But, if english isn't your first language(although you obviously communicate in it extremely well), perhaps I'm interpreting tone that isn't there. Maybe I've been a bit unfair in interpreting your posts, so I apologize if that's the case.

However, english is my native (and only) language, so I have no excuse .

This is how the Germans talk. Didn't you know that in German every phrase sounds like a declaration of war?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41lZmGcRWHU

[dpeg]

If there is an actual meaning of "r-word", then I don't know about it. I said it as a joking nod to "f-word".

Also, I care about tone, and I find duvessa's tone to be aggravating, not always, but certainly most of the time. Funny that this guy intends to get away with establishing how we talk in this place. It's almost like being a jock and a SJW at the same time.

[Sar]

The actual "r-word" is something people hear right before they're abused, locked up, or even murdered.

well at least we don't have to worry about the last category getting offended

[dowan]

I certainly don't think dpeg meant anything but 'rewrite' when he said the 'r-word'.

Spoiler: show

People use r-word to mean "retard" or "retarded" which is short for mentally retarded, or mentally disabled, disadvantaged, etc. People use it as an insult, when it in fact is a medical condition, which is mean, obviously.

I also think "fuckboy" is pretty damn derogatory and negative, so while we're discussing words people probably ought not to just throw around to insult people, can we add that to the list?

[goodcoolguy]

re: that video, interesting how antiracism, for example, has been the dominant ideology of educated people on race for at least 30 years, yet things are objectively as bad or worse today for black people in America as compared to 30 years ago. It's almost like real life doesn't come down to a matter of how people talk or think about things. Perhaps the focus on language helps people who benefit from oppressive social structures, but oppose them intellectually, mitigate their anxiety re: doing nothing about it.

On the other hand, obviously you shouldn't use the "r-word" or joke about it. On the third hand, I don't think it's reasonable to infer that's what dpeg was trying to do there.

[dowan]

re: that video, interesting how antiracism, for example, has been the dominant ideology of educated people on race for at least 30 years, yet things are objectively as bad or worse today for black people in America as compared to 30 years ago.

Would you like to share your objective data on this? Because I find this comment hilariously incorrect. I'm not saying things are all as they should be, but to claim things haven't gotten better, or have even gotten worse is laughable.

[dpeg]

dowan: Thanks for the explanation, I had no clue! Guess I gotta research my future jokes... that's slippery terrain.

[dowan]

Eh, just make your jokes, if people just don't assume bad faith it's fine, and if you accidentally offend someone it's easy to apologize. Better to have lots of laughs and an occasional apology than a boring bunch of carefully calculated non-offensive statements. And you'd still have to apologize, because some people are professionals at being offended.

[goodcoolguy]

@dowan: Well, here's a link that makes a related point: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... -50-years/

More generally, what positive developments in quality-of-life measures have come about for black people in America track strongly with broader economic trends, not a pattern of American elites getting woke af.

[duvessa]

It's almost like being a jock and a SJW at the same time.

oh no, first the feminazi beta cuck SJWs came for our video games, then they came for our pepes, and now they're going after our jokes! how will we ever survive?
Like, christ, I can respect what you're saying about tone but it's really really hard to do when you do things like use "SJW" unironically

It's almost like real life doesn't come down to a matter of how people talk or think about things. Perhaps the focus on language helps people who benefit from oppressive social structures, but oppose them intellectually, mitigate their anxiety re: doing nothing about it.

While sincere reparations from white America have been disgustingly absent, and there are a lot of shortcomings in any social movement, I don't think anyone is focusing on language to the exclusion of all else. It's perfectly possible to acknowledge more than one problem at a time, and how people talk about things might not be the biggest one, but it does have an effect. If you're bombarded with jokes that disparages a group or trivializes their suffering, it suggests societal acceptance of that discrimination.

I think my tone has improved quite a bit btw

[Siegurt]

things are objectively as bad or worse today for black people in America as compared to 30 years ago.

That is objectively false. Things aren't *good enough* much less 'equal' but they are objectively better.

The overall poverty rate in the us has held steady at about 20% for the last 30 years, black poverty has declined from about 40% to about 30% in that same time period (the decline in black poverty rates is between 5 and 10 percent, depending on which sources you use and what you define as "poverty"

The overall homicide rate has declined over the last 30 years, and more sharply among blacks in the US, it is still triple the average, but that is down from 5 times the average 30 years ago.

The overall arrest rate has increased in America in the last 30 years, black arrest rates spiked sharply in the late 80s/ early 90s (coninciding with the step up of enforcement from the "war on drugs") at the time it spiked from double to 8 times the white arrest rate, and has held mostly steady since then, white arrest rates have increased gradually since then, such that now white arrest rates are about one fifth that of blacks, down fron one eighth in 1990.

There is a really really long way to go, but saying no progress has been made is false.

[dowan]

I think my tone has improved quite a bit btw

I do agree with that. I see you rationally explaining yourself occasionally, which is great, because then people can see the merits of what you're saying rather than having someone who doesn't really understand it come in and try to explain what you meant, muddying the waters further.

@dowan: Well, here's a link that makes a related point: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... -50-years/

More generally, what positive developments in quality-of-life measures have come about for black people in America track strongly with broader economic trends, not a pattern of American elites getting woke af.

If you think the only problem for black americans has been economic disparity, I don't know what to tell you. There are more important problems than relative wealth, like being able to get a job, being allowed to rent an apartment or get a mortgage for a house, not being murdered, etc.

As I said, it's obviously still far from perfect, but focusing on disparity of wealth indicates that you don't quite understand how bad things have been, and in some cases, continue to be, although it has clearly gotten better. And the fact that people are willing to talk about some of the problems that still remain (police police police) is an indication that there is a will to make things better.

I might agree that playing PC word police isn't what makes things better, and might be primarily an exercise in making yourself feel like you're doing something when you actually aren't (or more commonly, making yourself feel like you're better than some other people).

Also we've gotten wildly, extremely off topic. I probably hold some blame in that.

[goodcoolguy]

While sincere reparations from white America have been disgustingly absent, and there are a lot of shortcomings in any social movement, I don't think anyone is focusing on language to the exclusion of all else. It's perfectly possible to acknowledge more than one problem at a time, and how people talk about things might not be the biggest one, but it does have an effect. If you're bombarded with jokes that disparages a group or trivializes their suffering, it suggests societal acceptance of that discrimination.

I guess the questions I'd ask are "What social movement?" and "What could suggest societal acceptance of discrimination more strongly than its persistence across so many decades?" I'm never going to say people shouldn't be considerate in their choice of words, but the moral good of doing so and especially in calling attention to other's shortcomings in this way is overestimated. At the end of the day, most of us who talk about this stuff at all are equally guilty.

@dowan: It'd be worth your while to at least skim the article I linked to.