Heterosexual Pride mod taken down

[dferstat]

Here's what I wrote, more-or-less verbatim, when I reported the mod as offensive:

 

"Heterosexual pride is a slogan often used to denigrate LGBTQ beliefs, and to intimidate LGBTQ people.

 

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight_pride"

 

 

So, yeah, I think there's good reasons for the mod to be deleted.

[Stronglav]

Here's what I wrote, more-or-less verbatim, when I reported the mod as offensive:

 

"Heterosexual pride is a slogan often used to denigrate LGBTQ beliefs, and to intimidate LGBTQ people.

 

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight_pride"

 

 

So, yeah, I think there's good reasons for the mod to be deleted.

 

Rly ?? What are you smoking ??

[HeyYou]

Basically, what they are telling us is, you cannot be proud of being what society considers "normal", or, being part of the majority. You can only be proud of being different, or a minority. Otherwise, you are a bigot, or racist, or homophobic, or some other adjective with negative connotations.

[dferstat]

Basically, what they are telling us is, you cannot be proud of being what society considers "normal", or, being part of the majority. You can only be proud of being different, or a minority. Otherwise, you are a bigot, or racist, or homophobic, or some other adjective with negative connotations.

 

No, that's what you're (mis-)interpreting the site admin's decision as.

 

The slogan "gay pride" is intended to make a minority, who can be quite objectively described as oppressed and discriminated against, feel happier about themselves.

 

The slogan "heterosexual pride" (or "straight pride") is intended to reinforce the prejudices of those members of the majority who actively discriminate against the afore-mentioned minority, and to make those in the minority unhappy, and afraid.

 

There is no equivalency.

[HadToRegister]

This is exactly what happened to the "Black lives matter" movement too.
The People on the Right, took it over and drowned it out with "ALL lives matter" and "Blue Lives matter';

Of the three, which TWO do you still hear about?

This is how the Right Dilutes, Obfuscates, and kills a movement, by removing any power it had, and taking it for themselves.

[HeyYou]

 

Basically, what they are telling us is, you cannot be proud of being what society considers "normal", or, being part of the majority. You can only be proud of being different, or a minority. Otherwise, you are a bigot, or racist, or homophobic, or some other adjective with negative connotations.

 

No, that's what you're (mis-)interpreting the site admin's decision as.

 

The slogan "gay pride" is intended to make a minority, who can be quite objectively described as oppressed and discriminated against, feel happier about themselves.

 

The slogan "heterosexual pride" (or "straight pride") is intended to reinforce the prejudices of those members of the majority who actively discriminate against the afore-mentioned minority, and to make those in the minority unhappy, and afraid.

 

There is no equivalency.

 

That is your interpretation of what it means. Does that make it mine too? Nope. Sure doesn't. It makes it YOUR interpretation. That's it. (along with a fair few on the left that want to give just about any minority more rights than anyone else.) Nope. If Gays, can have pride, Blacks can have pride, Trans can have pride, why can't heterosexuals have pride? We aren't taking anything away from anyone else. This is simply a case of reverse discrimination. The minority screaming loud enough, they get their way. All you have to do is attach some buzzword to your argument, racist, bigoted, anti-whatever, whatever-phobe, and it instantly becomes a rallying cry for the left.

 

Society is truly going downhill, at an ever-increasing rate. All in the name of 'fairness' and 'equitable', which it is neither.

[Guest deleted34304850]

Why so triggered?

[HeyYou]

Why so triggered?

Because its FUN! :D

 

I love to debate. Or, maybe, I just love to argue........ We could argue that point? :D

[StormWolf01]

Here's what I wrote, more-or-less verbatim, when I reported the mod as offensive:

 

"Heterosexual pride is a slogan often used to denigrate LGBTQ beliefs, and to intimidate LGBTQ people.

 

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight_pride"

 

 

So, yeah, I think there's good reasons for the mod to be deleted.

Ok, so I see several points in this post, that just smells fishy.

1) Your very first sentence.

1a) Nobody takes credit for making a report unless they are 1) Trying to claim a victory 2) Trying to stir things up or 3) Trying to make themselves the target of flaming. There is also 4) Which is a mod author reporting another mod to contest that mod for theft or permissions violations of which does not pertain to this.

1b) Your first sentence openly states that you reported the mod as offensive, which in itself is a violation of the site rules.

so that's either NOT how you reported the mod, IF you did report the mod.

Those are some pretty educated words to remember for a report that would have had to be made 20-21 days ago.

 

2) Your third sentence. Most internet related business people do NOT account wikipedia as a credible source of information. Because it is almost entirely posted by other people on the internet, and is only fact checked, by other people on the internet.

Tho, while I don't take that page as fact, I find it very interesting that you'd send that to the staff to remove a mod, where in that same article, it lists that the Shirts were found

in a court of law by a judge to fall into the realm of FREE SPEECH. That you would post a link to a page that says that there is A LEGAL PRECEDENT that in the US, those shirts are LEGAL to wear.

Now, seeing as the Nexus is bound to US and EU law, I don't see why you'd want to do that if you're telling the staff that you believe the mod is "offensive".

Now let's also look at where some of that information came from. Oh....my..... The New York Times. Whooo boy....The Washington Post. Yeah, there's a couple of names that are known as left wing propaganda rags.

 

I did also notice something else really funny about that wiki. There was a lot of mention to the events in or from BOSTON or MA that were listed. Or as source.

Where does this game take place? Boston? MA?

So does that make the shirts Lore friendly?

Or even, oh my god shoot me in the head for saying this.... Immersive as part of the local history?

 

3) It's been that same 20-21 days since this thread went on the site. You haven't chimed in anything about it, up until now? If you feel so strongly that the mod needs to be deleted (which, it hasn't been) I'd think you would have spoken up about it.

 

 

So....while I'm not arguing against your "side" of the debate, discussion.... I'm just trying to point out some holes there, that I don't want my fellow members to fall into.

 

I will however give some friendly advice, given in all good spirits. When you're posting to mod author's mod pages, be careful of you wording. Very careful. Very, very careful. There's a part of the site that has the nickname "The Wall of Shame". There's quite a few people on there that should have been more careful about their constructive criticism, or advice to the authors. How different staff members view entitled behavior is a pretty large field. ;)

[dferstat]

 

Ok, so I see several points in this post, that just smells fishy.

1) Your very first sentence.

1a) Nobody takes credit for making a report unless they are 1) Trying to claim a victory 2) Trying to stir things up or 3) Trying to make themselves the target of flaming. There is also 4) Which is a mod author reporting another mod to contest that mod for theft or permissions violations of which does not pertain to this.

1b) Your first sentence openly states that you reported the mod as offensive, which in itself is a violation of the site rules.

so that's either NOT how you reported the mod, IF you did report the mod.

Those are some pretty educated words to remember for a report that would have had to be made 20-21 days ago.

 

2) Your third sentence. Most internet related business people do NOT account wikipedia as a credible source of information. Because it is almost entirely posted by other people on the internet, and is only fact checked, by other people on the internet.

Tho, while I don't take that page as fact, I find it very interesting that you'd send that to the staff to remove a mod, where in that same article, it lists that the Shirts were found

in a court of law by a judge to fall into the realm of FREE SPEECH. That you would post a link to a page that says that there is A LEGAL PRECEDENT that in the US, those shirts are LEGAL to wear.

Now, seeing as the Nexus is bound to US and EU law, I don't see why you'd want to do that if you're telling the staff that you believe the mod is "offensive".

Now let's also look at where some of that information came from. Oh....my..... The New York Times. Whooo boy....The Washington Post. Yeah, there's a couple of names that are known as left wing propaganda rags.

 

I did also notice something else really funny about that wiki. There was a lot of mention to the events in or from BOSTON or MA that were listed. Or as source.

Where does this game take place? Boston? MA?

So does that make the shirts Lore friendly?

Or even, oh my god shoot me in the head for saying this.... Immersive as part of the local history?

 

3) It's been that same 20-21 days since this thread went on the site. You haven't chimed in anything about it, up until now? If you feel so strongly that the mod needs to be deleted (which, it hasn't been) I'd think you would have spoken up about it.

 

 

So....while I'm not arguing against your "side" of the debate, discussion.... I'm just trying to point out some holes there, that I don't want my fellow members to fall into.

 

I will however give some friendly advice, given in all good spirits. When you're posting to mod author's mod pages, be careful of you wording. Very careful. Very, very careful. There's a part of the site that has the nickname "The Wall of Shame". There's quite a few people on there that should have been more careful about their constructive criticism, or advice to the authors. How different staff members view entitled behavior is a pretty large field. :wink:

 

 

Let's address your points more-or-less in order.

 

1) various

 

I started my contribution to this thread to explain just why I not just disliked, but disapproved of, the original mod. I wanted people to understand just what it was about the original mod that made it offensive to so many.

 

Against site rules to report something as offensive? I'm sorry, but this is just so much bovine stuff. Why the flying fruitbat does the site give us the option to report content to moderators if we can't use it to report that which we find offensive? Given that no moderator has complained about my actions, I must presume that I haven't broken any rules.

 

Pretty educated words? It's all relative, I guess, but I didn't use any words beyond the average level of a senior Australian high school student. As far as remembering three weeks back goes, please bear in mind that the original mod was quite memorable (not, sadly, in a good way) and my post was quite brief. For me, it's no great feat to remember the gist.

 

2)

 

Wikipedia, for all its faults, is an excellent starting point for research, especially as the better pages are copiously annotated and referenced. Given that, these days, almost everybody is on the Internet, criticising Wikipedia because it's fact checked "by people on the Internet" is non-sensical.

 

You mis-understand legal precedent. Just because a judge in Minnesota, in 2001, declared "Straight Pride" to be protected free speech does not mean that another, or later, court, in Minnesota or elsewhere, would agree. You also misunderstand jurisdiction. The Minnesota verdict only holds sway in Minnesota, and carries no legal weight elsewhere.

 

You also misunderstand the effect of civil law on sites such as Nexus. The Nexus is private property, and is not legally bound to protect free speech. Just look at the behaviour of Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, et al; these have all, at times, censored the content of their users, and usually for reasons that appear quite arbitrary. Nexus management has every right to hold the behaviour of its users to a higher standard that required by law.

 

3)

 

I don't live on the fora. I check the main site daily, but the fora infrequently. I hadn't posted on this thread earlier because I didn't know about it.

 

 

In a collegiate mood, I'll give you some advice.

 

A)

 

Try actually reading what other people write, instead of assuming, and/or cherry-picking. I know that you looked at the Wikipedia page. In that article, you'll see that "straight pride" has been used by the KKK, who are not, despite what Trump declared, very fine people. You'll also see that the slogan has been (very closely, as in, on the same garment) associated with Biblical verse calling for the killing of homosexuals.

 

B)

 

Also, try to cut down on the sweeping statements ("Nobody takes credit for making a report ...", "Most internet related business people ...", etc). Arguments using sweeping statements tend to fall over when you rely upon them.

 

If I recall correctly, I didn't post on the mods page; I found the content to be so rebarbative that I saw little point. Instead, I reported it direct to the moderators, using functionality on the site.