Moderation on "What Is a Woman?" Post

snoopydoop on 03/06/2023 - 12:22
Last edited 03/06/2023 - 12:55

On recommendation from a moderator, I'm writing here to discuss/clarify on what I feel is inconsistent and insufficient moderation on this controversial post.
Please be civil in these comments - I don't want arguments, and am posting this in good faith in order to hopefully improve the site - not start fights.

There are two main issues I wanted to bring up here:
1) Inconsistency with deal being allowed to be posted in the first place
2) Genuinely problematic comments not being moderated effectively enough on a post which is clearly going to generate them.

Inconsistency with deal being allowed to be posted

The reason that a moderator gave in the comments as to why this deal was allowed is a "documentary which is not usually free thus meets the standards for a deal".

This inspired me to search for an almost identical circumstance (but intentionally not a political/inflammatory one). I truly posted what I would perceive a deal in the same vein. It was a documentary about YouTuber MrBeast, which has been professionally created by streaming service Curiosity Stream. It is available paid on their streaming service, and even has an official IMDB page.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt17008854/

Curiosity Stream has uploaded this for free to their YouTube channel - a documentary which is usually paid for, which is now available for free, thus qualifying for a deal under posting guidelines.
My post was immediately moved to the forums, then removed, and I even received an account warning for posting. ("Trolling level 1")

I personally see no differences between these two posts - this I Am A Woman documentary has been posted specifically to generate comments and outrage, and is by its nature no less genuine a documentary than the MrBeast one on Curiosity Stream's subscription service.

This makes me feel like the reason it has been kept up is for some sort of political point, or moderation bias. I'd love some clarification for whether this is not the case - but I do not see how my own post could have been seen as "trolling" or "inflammatory", when this original post is arguably one of the most inflammatory "troll" posts that has ever been posted on the site. Which brings me to point 2….

Problematic Comments on the Post

When the media posts an article that could attract inflammatory comments, due to the 2021 High Court ruling puting the onus on publications for comments published on their website, they ensure that they have full moderation capabilities to ensure there are no hateful comments. When this moderation capability is no longer available, comments are closed, either temporarily while they catch up, or for good.
However, given there has been moderation for the duration this post has been up (eg. on my post), there has been some level of moderation capacity during this time, despite it being Friday/Saturday.

There are quite a few substantially hateful comments in this thread. I am specifically talking about comments that are genuinely hateful.

Probably the biggest is there are a large number perpetuating the conspiracy theory that the LGBTQIA+ community as a whole grooms children.. This is a view with neo-Nazi roots, and is well documented.
I mean, there is a comment up there right now saying "Destroy pedo freaks", a slogan that the neo-nazi group recently held up in Melbourne.
This is absolutely not the only comment that is blatantly hateful, there are many like it there. Perhaps others can point out the worst offenders. (EDIT: Removed ~2.5hrs after commented - plenty more with similar rhetoric that have been up for a long time)

If it is OzBargain's decision that posts like these are allowed to be up there - they absolutely need to make sure that the comments published are not hateful, and are well moderated. Otherwise it certainly comes across as acceptance of these comments. This is not very welcoming of LGBTQIA+ members of this website.
It was clear from the get go that the decision to keep this post up would require incredible amounts of moderation, given it was posted with the intention of aggravation, and keeping comments such as this one up there is upsetting to see that OzBargain is happily publishing these comments.

TLDR: I am disappointed in OzBargain's decision to leave this post up, their decision to give me an account warning for a far less inflammatory version of the same type of post, and the fact that there are many hateful comments rooted in neo-Nazi ideology currently on the website, still not moderated. To be clear - I am not talking about all comments in favour of this as a deal, I am talking very specifically about the blatantly hateful comments.
Site Discussion

Comments

              • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 17:22
                +1

                @AwesomeSaucem: Nothing more to say now? Expecting me to be a hypocrite as well I assume, how disappointing for you.

                  • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 17:42
                    +2

                    @AwesomeSaucem: You 100% went into this interaction trying to make a gotcha, hence your comment on irony.

                    Yes, more conviction than op and yourself. I don't need everyone who doesn't agree with me to be silenced, I know that's a crazy thought.

                      • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 18:19
                        +2

                        @AwesomeSaucem: The thing is that op didn't actually want to post the mrbeast documentary. They only posted it to protest the "what is a woman" post not being taken down, as they don't like what the show has to say. While I personally still think it should have been left up, as the bar for posting deals is quite low, mods saw it as trolling, which it technically was.

                          • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 18:23

                            @AwesomeSaucem: They are silencing trolling, as has happened a heap of times before in the exact same manner. I'm sure if op had posted the documentary a couple of days ago, it would have been a non issue. Op posted it only to try to make a point. Again, I don't agree with removing it, but it's not my website.

                              • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 20:16

                                @AwesomeSaucem: As I said, there is a precedent where this has happened plenty of times before. No idea regarding the rules, I don't read them.

                                you dont get any brownie points for fence sitting while defending the decision

                                I couldn't give two shits about brownie points on a norwegian basket weaving forum. I think ops post should have been left up, but I don't make the rules. If the mods took the "what is a woman" thing down, I also would have disagreed with that, but also wouldn't have cried into my wheaties over it.

                          • cookie2 on 04/06/2023 - 15:06

                            @AwesomeSaucem: Protestors by creating a deal, yes. They've called it trolling.

                            Comments and voting are both in place to protest aka challenge a deal.

                            Also "silencing protest", it's a community page on ozbargain, don't get too excited about silenced protests.

            • chepsk8 on 03/06/2023 - 15:06
              +2

              @brendanm: Evidently not.

  • whatgift on 03/06/2023 - 15:42

    Moderation is always going to be inconsistent because the people applying it are human and fallible - why dwell on it to this extent?

    Edit: the problem is that the OP has taken a genuine concern about moderation and made it about themselves, referring to their own post being removed.

      • whatgift on 03/06/2023 - 16:28

        I’m saying that the OP should’ve focussed on the offending post rather than add their own posting issue into the mix. It comes off more personal than it should (more like a rant) and lessens the impact of their point.

        • snoopydoop on 03/06/2023 - 17:56
          +4

          I am interested in this site being as good as it possibly can be.
          Therefore, I am pointing out a way in which its moderation practices have been harmful to certain members of the site.

          The reason I have put a lot of energy into this is to hopefully change something about the way they conduct their moderation so that similar things do not occur in the future to make it a hostile place to members of the community.

          I do not think that people who are simply searching for a bargain should be subjected to hate speech, simply because the moderation team is "fallible". It doesn't even seem like it is a 'mistake' by the moderation team, it seems very intentional. The silence on the issue is deafening. My hope with "dwelling" on it is that I can get something changed so that this does not happen again.

          They do have a responsiblity here.

          • ozhunter on 03/06/2023 - 18:06

            @snoopydoop: Report the "hate speech" comments and the mods remove it. Is there any you think that are left up? Why not link them in this post? You not doing says a lot. That there is none and you just like to have a whinge.

    • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 00:35

      Moderation is always going to be inconsistent because the people applying it are human and fallible - why dwell on it to this extent?

      While I agree with this of course, is there something specific that has been inconsistent? If anything people are asking to act inconsistently to remove the Twitter post that meets the current guidelines. If the community wants to change the guidelines, then that's fine but let's discuss how and what we want to apply.

  • tomleonhart on 03/06/2023 - 15:43
    +2

    Grab popcorn…

  • pegaxs on 03/06/2023 - 15:57
    +1

    Wow… I was banned so hard for trolling that I ended up as a site Wiki entry… At the top. Even though that entry is entirely wrong.

    Also, MrBeast just makes poverty porn videos, so nothing of value was lost…

  • Cheeky Chelsea on 03/06/2023 - 16:07
    +32

    It would be nice to browse bargains on one of my favourite websites without being told how perverted and morally wrong I am for being transgender

    • snoopydoop on 03/06/2023 - 16:16
      +12

      Completely agree. I don't believe this website is doing enough to stop hate speech in this area. It's absolute crap that you have to be subjected to that when doing something as innocuous as browsing for good deals. I'm really disappointed in both the website and the community.

      Btw, I suspect that many more people would negative vote that post if they could vote without commenting. Since downvotes on this website are limited to a few per day on comments, and you have to comment to vote negatively on a deal (as opposed to not needing to comment to vote positively), there is always a positive skew compared to other platforms. But still.

    • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 16:29
      +11

      I agree with you and I am sorry you have to see all this. And I'm really disappointed in the number of people who just watched this video, upvoted it and called it 'thought provoking' without realising how deeply (and badly) set up it is. Thed editing, the doom music, the wilful misunderstanding and weaponisation of 'the truth'. The cheap ACA doco format. It was cringe. And yet here we are, with so many upvotes.

      Anyway, I see you and you have every right to be here.

      • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 17:24
        +1

        If it's so poorly done, you should be able to answer the question at the heart of it then?

        • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 17:50
          +9

          The question needs to be answered by multiple women including hetero women, women with kids, women who can't have kids, women who were born without uteruses/breasts etc, women who've had mastectomies and hysterectomies, older women, younger women etc etc. They weren't included in the documentary and no one is questioning it. Men don't get to decide what a woman is, anymore than women get to decide what men are.

          Also how could you not see past the lack of any fact checking on what was said by anyone?

          • ozhunter on 03/06/2023 - 18:07
            -1

            @MessyG: How would you know if any of those people you mentioned are actually women though?

            • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 18:25
              +5

              @ozhunter: By their answers.

              And you can't seriously be suggesting that because of your suspicion, only people presenting as men can answer it? Far out.

              • ozhunter on 03/06/2023 - 18:40

                @MessyG: So, if they say their a woman, then they are?

                And you can't seriously be suggesting that because of your suspicion, only people presenting as men can answer it?

                No, anyone with half a brain could answer the question. It's not that hard. I'm saying you're "identity" is irrelevant when answering the question.

                • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 18:51
                  +3

                  @ozhunter: Do you even know where the word woman came from? Can you see that saying women don't need to be involved with answering the question of what is a woman is pretty effed up?

                  • ozhunter on 04/06/2023 - 01:21
                    +1

                    @MessyG:

                    By their answers.

                    What kind of clown logic is this? Someone calls themselves a woman and that means it's true? Does this logic work for anything else?

                    Can you see that saying women don't need to be involved with answering the question of what is a woman is pretty effed up?

                    Not a all, unless you think what a woman is subjective.

                    • Fredorishi on 04/06/2023 - 09:40

                      @ozhunter: If it isn't subjective, then why make a ducumentary about it in the first place? What kind of clown thinks a person shouldn't be able to define who they are themselves? And Imagine pretending to care so much about a question like "what is a woman?" and then not caring enough to ask ACTUAL WOMEN. Its laughable.

                      • ozhunter on 04/06/2023 - 13:20
                        +1

                        @Fredorishi:

                        If it isn't subjective, then why make a ducumentary about it in the first place?

                        Because there's some people using clown logic think that anything they call a woman is a woman.

                        And Imagine pretending to care so much about a question like "what is a woman?" and then not caring enough to ask ACTUAL WOMEN. Its laughable.

                        Do you not see how ridiculous this is? How can I ask an ACTUAL woman as you put it, if we can't even define it.

                        • Fredorishi on 04/06/2023 - 18:13

                          @ozhunter: Define "it"?? Says a lot, really. As does the fact you seem to have zero clue what a woman is. Maybe you should get out of your basement and go mingle with real people occasionally. Once you figure it out. Get back to us. Have fun. Maybe you'll figure out the answer isn't so simple. Or maybe it is. Let us know. Failing that, theres always dictionaries. And biology classes. I'm sure theres lots of definitions out there. It's a complicated world we live. Human beings are complex creatures.

                        • CurlCurl on 04/06/2023 - 18:19
                          -1

                          @ozhunter: You are one sick individual.

                          • ozhunter on 04/06/2023 - 22:46

                            @CurlCurl: Lol. Because I don't think a woman is defined by feelings?

                            • CurlCurl on 05/06/2023 - 07:23

                              @ozhunter:

                              Because I don't think a woman is defined by feelings?

                              So that's the problem. You just don't think. It isn't "just by feelings" but never mind, I'm sure all the studies on trans people are incorrect and your feelings are right.

                              As I have posted here a few times I can guarantee I have more knowledge on trans people than 99% of posters.

                              • ozhunter on 05/06/2023 - 13:47
                                +1

                                @CurlCurl:

                                So that's the problem. You just don't think.

                                Way to interpret what I said lol.

                                I can guarantee I have more knowledge on trans people than 99% of posters.

                                Yet no comment on what a woman is

          • Aarchangel on 04/06/2023 - 13:46
            +2

            @MessyG:

            The question needs to be answered by multiple women…

            But the question was put forward to men who call themselves women though.

            Men don't get to decide what a woman is…

            Can a woman decide what a woman is then?

          • gyrex on 04/06/2023 - 14:25

            @MessyG: The notion that observations and discussions about objective realities, ideologies or theories should be confined to men or women is an asinine one. In the same way that if I visit a Medical Centre, I don't discriminate or choose a doctor based on what's between their legs - both genders are capable of making a diagnosis based on their exhaustive training. Sure, some women or men might feel more comfortable being diagnosed by someone of a particular gender but given the same training and experience, they should both have the same capabilities.

    • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 17:23
      +1

      Not a single person mentioned you that I saw?

        • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 18:02
          +9

          Not to mention in the comments, that statement about trans people have no right to exist. Nothing to see at all..

          • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 18:04

            @MessyG: Again, this happens to people from all walks of life. Straight, gay, black, white, Muslim, Christian, man, woman. There will always be a comment somewhere where someone is saying these things.

            • morse on 05/06/2023 - 07:42

              @brendanm:

              this happens to people from all walks of life

              Sorry what? White people collectively get called pedophiles and groomers because they are white?

              Oh wait… no, no that does not happen.

              The whole narrative that it’s okay to do something bad to one group of people because something bad has happened to other group of people is pretty off even if this was true.

              • brendanm on 05/06/2023 - 08:27

                @morse:

                Sorry what? White people collectively get called pedophiles and groomers because they are white?

                Where did I specify that the
                groups get called pedophiles or groomers, it that they were white?

                I said they get attacked, I didn't specify how, as it changes depending on the group.

                • morse on 05/06/2023 - 08:31

                  @brendanm: That was your response to someone saying that trans people get called pedofiles and groomers as a group. The problem being that saying ‘oh it happens to everyone’ is dismissing the harm caused.

                  Yes people get attack based on groups that they may (or may not) be part of, but it’s not the same, some groups cop worse and no one should cop anything based on the traits you’ve mention. If they are it doesn’t make the first attack right, it makes all the attacks wrong.

                  • brendanm on 05/06/2023 - 09:09

                    @morse:

                    oh it happens to everyone’

                    Yes, attacks in general, not that specific one.

                    but it’s not the same

                    You can't state that if you aren't the one copping the attack.

        • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 18:03
          +1

          You realise this happens to groups of people all the time? They aren't personally targeting you?

          I personally think Matt Walsh is a slimeball grifter, however the question he asks is legitimate. Just because someone doesn't agree with something, you can't label them *phobic all the time, it's very lazy and just dumb. A phobia is a fear.

            • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 18:29

              @AwesomeSaucem: Groups get attacked constantly. You name a group, there will be hate speech about them on the internet. I've mentioned this elsewhere, but Tyler the creator has great advice for people who can't handle a random on the internet saying something that hurts their feelings.

              He is a prick, but I have watched it. He knows exactly what is going to happen, buy the reason it happens is because of the lunacy of just randomly deciding you are whatever gender you want to. The very people who say they are a woman, can not define what a woman is. I bet the people who whine about this being a "gotcha" film, love the Sacha Baron Cohen movies making fun of right wing Americans. You can have it both ways.

              What point am I not making directly? I have no problem making points. I believe that transgenderism is a mental illness (gender dysphoria), in the same way that anorexia is a mental illness. We don't tell anorexic people that they are fat just because they think they are. Filling kids full of random drugs and mutilating their genitals is so absolutely and completely wrong on so many levels, I'm not sure how anyone can agree with it.

                • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 19:42
                  +3

                  @AwesomeSaucem:

                  Groups get attacked constantly and it's fair game to want those attacks nowhere near online platforms and shoved in your face constantly, and it's perfectly normal for the targets of said attacks to be upset by them

                  This may come as a suprise, buy the entire population if the world doesn't agree with each other on a whole lot of things. There is no safe space where no one will say something mean to you. That's just life.

                  I'm sure if you were constantly seeing things that attacked you based on your identity

                  I actually don't care what others think of what I do via words. Sucks for them if they don't like something I like. Also, why base your identity on sexual orientation or "gender", and not just who you are and what you like to do.

                  Gender dysphoria is a mental illness

                  Wrong, history has been erased, and gender dysphoria is not a mental illness anymore.

                  people don't have gender dysphoria from transitioning

                  I'm well aware, studies seem pretty up in the air over whether it actually helps anything long term.

                  They're not "filling kids full of random drugs and mutilating their genitals"

                  That is exactly what they do.

                  a doctor probably knows a lot more than you

                  I know what they know about, they know how much money they can get from this sort of thing. Not only the massive upfront cost, but the lifelong medications required. The sort of thing the pharmaceutical companies just love, lifelong customers.

                  The Victorian government even allows schools to help children with "gender affirmation" without the knowledge or consent of parents.

                    • cookie2 on 03/06/2023 - 22:02
                      +1

                      @AwesomeSaucem: You're twisted. But I ran out of negs. Being a lifelong customer doesn't mean there's happiness.

              • CurlCurl on 05/06/2023 - 13:21
                -1

                @brendanm:

                I believe that transgenderism is a mental illness (gender dysphoria),

                You don't know how wrong you are.

          • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 18:28
            +4

            @brendanm: This guy wasn't asking questions he was loading them. I watched the documentary out of interest because I found the idea of a man asking this question to be quite fascinating. And eff me was I disappointed. The fact that so many groups of women have been excluded from this is staggering. Women with kids, women who can't have kids, women with and without phenotypically female genitalia, women who menstruate, women who don't. Genuinely, what is a woman? It's a great question but if you don't include the spectrum of women then what is it you are actually doing? And if you're not fact checking the people you've brought in to answer this, what are you doing? And if there's more men than women included in the answer, what are you doing?

            The lack of fact checking, the soundtrack, the use of childrens tiktoks…it's all just so off. Most people just accept this whole thing blindly but as a woman, as a parent, as a mother…**** me that was bad and did not remotely answer the question. But perhaps people aren't actually interested in the answers.

            • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 18:31

              @MessyG: So what is the answer?

              The answer in the film was that a woman is an "adult female". I'm not sure how this is difficult.

              Again, as I said to the other person, are you someone that also tells people that Sacha Baron Cohen movies are terrible because they are "gotchas"? Or is it funny, because it's people you don't agree with?

              • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 18:40
                +4

                @brendanm: I've never seen a Sacha Baron Cohen movie so I have no idea.

                The answer is something that needs to be examined and discussed by…wait for it, women. Being a woman is so much more than 'adult female' which, if they'd bothered to ask a spectrum of women they would have discovered. The whole thing is a confection that lots and lots of guys are nodding sagely to and having opinions about while most women are rolling their eyes. A guy in the other thread about this told me that women didn't even need to be involved in the question!

                If you remade that documentary and actually asked that question of all types of women, the answer would be beautiful and complex and very very different to 'adult female'. Instead it has zoomed in on an infinitesimal proportion of the population and hasn't truly asked that question at all. It has asked it as a setup for something very different to the question being asked.

                And no one, not a single Ozbargainer except myself, has asked why this question wasn't asked of the spectrum of women. I could get past the lack of fact checking the experts because of the documentary style setup, but not this. Very disappointing.

                • brendanm on 03/06/2023 - 19:49

                  @MessyG:

                  I've never seen a Sacha Baron Cohen movie so I have no idea.

                  They've been listed as "deals" (subs) on here before, and people loved the conservatives being made to look stupid. They just don't like it when it's progressives being tricked.

                  The answer is something that needs to be examined and discussed by…wait for it, women.

                  Weird, my wife was a woman the last time I checked, and she thought it meant "adult female". It seems she can define herself as a person, using more than just her gender or sexuality.

                  In fact, of any women I've talked to about it, they universally hate their "womanness" being taken away by terms like "birthing parent", and whatever other silly things they come up with. The word is mother, as only women can give birth.

                  infinitesimal proportion of the population

                  This is the portion of the population who is trying to telling everyone what to think about gender, and that anyone who doesn't agree is a bigot.

                  And no one, not a single Ozbargainer except myself, has asked why this question wasn't asked of the spectrum of women.

                  It's because there is only one answer.

                  • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 21:27
                    +4

                    @brendanm: But the term isn't being taken away from us. I'm free to call myself a woman. I'm free to call myself a pregnant woman if I am. So what exactly is being removed? Other people want to be called a pregnant person or whatever, fine by me. It does me no harm. I am still free to call myself a woman.

                    And frankly it is deeply insulting to women who cannot give birth to say that mother is restricted to that group only. There are many, many people who have taken on the role of mother who have been unable to give birth for whatever reason. This kind of limited thinking is so harmful.

                    FWIW, I have a colleague who transitioned from a woman to a man while I was working with them. I didn't really care, they were great to work with. They didn't shove anything down anyones throat. I grieved the loss of my colleague's gender, not going to lie. But they were so much happier living as a man and they are a good person, so I got over it and referred to them by their new male name and as a he. We don't work together anymore but are friends and I think of them and everything they went through when I read comments like these. My god the hate they got from their bosses was just cruel to watch, and I see this hate from all corners of society and while hating they are crying about being called bigots. And I notice that it is men, by magnitudes, that have the biggest problem with this. To my colleague, on here, on the wider Internet. They'll truck out a few token women, but at all the protests, on all the forums, it is men. Obsessed with whose got what genitals. Most women couldn't care less. We know who the dangerous people truly are.

                    And no there isn't only one answer to what is a woman. The word itself derives from the term 'wife-man', not that again, anyone has had the curiosity or bothered to delve into the history of that. You'll find that women are by far more sympathetic to the trans community due to their own history throughout the ages too. You may find yourself wondering why more people aren't taking on your cause. The answers are right in front of you.

                    • cookie2 on 03/06/2023 - 22:05

                      @MessyG: You may say that it does you no harm and you can continue to call yourself what you will but what about you calling them by their preferred gender? And what if you didn't want to because it goes against your views? should it then harm you?

                      • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 22:25
                        +1

                        @cookie2: It does me no harm to call them by their preferred gender. Why would it? I'm not an expert in this, I don't pretend to be and on balance I'm accepting of my fellow human so it's fine. Why should my views be more important than someones mental health?

                        • bobbified on 03/06/2023 - 23:48

                          @MessyG:

                          Why should my views FACTS be more important than someones mental health?

                          FTFY. That's a more accurate question.

                        • cookie2 on 04/06/2023 - 15:28
                          -1

                          @MessyG: If you not using someones pronoun, impacts that persons mental health, then that person should speak with a professional. That's not on you or me to own.
                          And as much as possible we should try and be true to our beliefs and views in our interactions with others. It's the person we are. My feelings and my beliefs are of course more important to me than someone elses. Expressing them through words (or not using words) is my choice.
                          How do you know it doesn't impact peoples mental health to lie? I hate lying or omitting information. If this causes someone anxiety then it affects their mental health.
                          So should someone worry about someone elses feelings before themselves?

                    • brendanm on 04/06/2023 - 16:28

                      @MessyG:

                      You may find yourself wondering why more people aren't taking on your cause.

                      Not at all, the majority of people don't believe in this nonsense.

    • ozhunter on 04/06/2023 - 01:21

      I don't believe you.

      Did anyone actually call you that?

    • cookie2 on 04/06/2023 - 15:22

      I would hope nobody is telling you these things. Unless you've asked for their opinions of course.
      Perverted, not nice. Morally wrong, well that's someones opinion based on their own morals. While it may be hurtful to you, i don't think most people share their personal opinion (especially not on a topic about a group of people) with the aim of negatively impacting you.

      I myself see comments on this site sometime that annoy or upset me as they're so opposite of my own strong views or core values. It's annoying but nothing can be done.

      None of this applies to personal attacks etc, they should always be reported.

      I do feel like these topical posts have generated a lot of opinions and comments because unfortunately people aren't provided with socially acceptable formats to share their opinions but most people have a strong opinion. Maybe the best thing is for people to be able to share their opinions so that then everyone feels heard and can move forward.

  • Protato on 03/06/2023 - 16:27

    Where's the poll?

  • djsweet on 03/06/2023 - 16:57
    +8

    The fact that we’ve got to the point as a society where this movie could even be construed as controversial is disturbing.

  • MtLs199 on 03/06/2023 - 17:07
    +3

    Disagree = Neo-Nazi
    hahahaha get (profanity) (profanity).

    • snoopydoop on 03/06/2023 - 17:49
      +6

      I've replied to countless people with this - I was very specific. Once again - I am not referring to the many, many comments I disagree with.
      I am referring to very specific comments which I outlined above with sources which are actual neo-Nazi talking points. This was incredibly clear in the post.

      Make sure to read things properly before you engage with them. Or alternatively, you're being disingenuous, in which case I am not interested in engaging. Cheers.

    • Tee Rex Arms on 03/06/2023 - 18:20

      Cancelled out your neg

  • bananabendera on 03/06/2023 - 17:37
    +16

    Whole-heartedly agree with you, the deal you're referring to only exists to generate controversy. A vast majority of the comments are users flinging crap at each other with little to no constructive discussion because one or all commenters involved are there for the popcorn/trolling. The deal itself holds little to no actual value as a deal and may as well be labelled as propaganda, it would be better suited as a forum post. It seriously degrades the quality of the site having stuff like that grow out of control and mocks the core values of the helpful and inclusive community here. Imagine the comments of that deal incarnated as a verbal discussion at one of the in-person meetups, it would be an absolute pi**take for everyone involved.

    I think a fair compromise is to lock/remove the deal before (or after) it gets out of hand and duplicate the deal as a forum post with appropriate notice, so that users don't feel censored. People aren't really saving money over this deal and it promotes hate, as seen in the comments.

  • Deals For Days on 03/06/2023 - 18:06
    +2

    I have posted a similar deal, a documentary which is now free, so it should satisfy the post guidelines. I think it's never been posted and is a good contribution, being an informative film about farming in Australia. check it out! https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/779195

    • Deals For Days on 03/06/2023 - 18:39
      +3

      Evidently, we are only allowed to post political content if it aligns with the moderators' viewpoints.

      • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 00:39

        Evidently, we are only allowed to post political content if it aligns with the moderators' viewpoints.

        No, removed for trolling. Again, your comments.. Consistent with the OP's trolling and how staff deal with these over the years.

        Also as an aside, that is an always free movie thus belongs in the forums per Deal Posting Guidelines. I've seen the stickers around my neighbourhood for years.

        • Deals For Days on 04/06/2023 - 03:23
          +1

          Overall I really don’t think this is a good faith execution of the rules of the site.

          Firstly, Dominion has has been free for a while but it obviously wasn’t free for a long time (their website lists that it became free access in October 2018). So I disagree and believe it satisfies the deal posting guidelines. I’ve never seen a sticker in my life, and I only realised it was free when looking for it today, so while you might claim it’s always been free, I would say that’s wrong based on the publishers own information. It used to be paid, then became free permanently.

          Second, I also take issue with my post being called ‘trolling’ yet the obviously inflammatory ‘What is a woman’ documentary, hosted by one of the most political/polarising outlets in the US, is not trolling. Theirs gets to stay up because they posted first? Not really sure how that makes sense. How long do I need to wait before I’m allowed to post Dominion?

          The entire point of the ‘24 hours free’ is to generate attention on social media, which is exactly what OzBargain is then doing for the Daily Wire by hosting the deal. I really do not believe that the video was posted sincerely as a ‘deal’ because the content so obviously pushing a political agenda - it was posted like many other highly partisan ‘free media’ deals, and to me, that is obviously trolling.

          You’re welcome to just keeping repeating your comments about the deal posting guidelines but I think it’s quite clear to a lot of people that there interpretation you’re sticking with curiously seems to amplify a whole lot of negative, political, hateful speech on the site.

          • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 11:46

            @Deals For Days:

            I’ve never seen a sticker in my life

            I live in Brunswick. Can't walk a block without seeing climate action & other signs :)

            Theirs gets to stay up because they posted first?

            No. There is no relation to the 2 posts.

            You’re welcome to just keeping repeating your comments about the deal posting guidelines but I think it’s quite clear to a lot of people that there interpretation you’re sticking with curiously seems to amplify a whole lot of negative, political, hateful speech on the site.

            Not directed to you but I'm trying to get people engaged in discussion (in this discussion forum) instead of being on team A and team B, something I think has been unfortunately been lost in our current world. So if people want change on this site, then let's decide what we want going forward that can be applied uniformly. Cheers.

  • Clear on 03/06/2023 - 18:08
    +5

    It would have been very easy to ignore the deal and it would have disappeared under all the other deals to be forgotten about. But nope everyone ran around negging, counter voting, comment and so forth to bring more attention to it.

    Basically what the media does.

  • klonky on 03/06/2023 - 18:13
    +15

    Ozbargain's own posting guidelines says to me the post should have been removed.

    Trolling and Other Inappropriate Comments

    “Trolling” is considered unacceptable behaviour on most Internet sites, including Ozbargain.

    Any comment or post that is made to, or appears to be, intended to incite controversy or conflict or cause annoyance or offence is considered “trolling”. The content of a “troll posting” generally falls into several areas. It may consist of an apparently foolish contradiction of common knowledge, a deliberately offensive insult to the readers of the website, or a broad request for trivial follow-up postings.

    Any content that falls within the area of trolling will be unpublished, while the offender's user account may be banned temporarily or permanently based on their user history and severity of the offence.
    Generally inappropriate comments that are not considered Trolling may not qualify for an offence, but will be unpublished by a Moderator and a warning given. However, users who commit repeated offences despite receiving multiple warnings may have their accounts penalised under the same “Trolling” offence.

    Hate Speech

    Hate speech attacks or expresses prejudice against a person or a group on the basis of particular attributes (including, but not limited to: race, religion, ethnic origin, national origin, disability, sexual orientation or gender). Hate speech includes spreading misinformation about a person/group with the intent to harm, create prejudice or create fear. Sexist, racist, xenophobic or similar comments will be deemed as a personal attack or hate speech depending on context.

    • Tee Rex Arms on 03/06/2023 - 18:21
      +5

      Used all my negs so unfortunately can’t give this comment one

      • klonky on 03/06/2023 - 18:24
        +11

        Why would you? I just copy pasted the community guidelines. Do you disagree with them?

        • Clear on 03/06/2023 - 18:51

          Downvoter

          Says it all ;)

        • Tee Rex Arms on 03/06/2023 - 19:46
          +4

          I disagree with your interpretation of them relating to this thread

    • capslock janitor on 03/06/2023 - 19:09

      they keep bringing Jv back whats ur point

    • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 00:42

      Ozbargain's own posting guidelines says to me the post should have been removed.

      Except you've quoted from the commenting guidelines. The OP posted a deal and not a comment.

      • AngryBlobFish on 04/06/2023 - 01:56
        +3

        So, a deal that is posted to incite controversy or conflict is fine but comments doing the same is considered trolling?

        • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 02:06

          I think the differentiation is that the linked Twitter video in the deal post, based on comments I've read (maybe what you're implying?), is inciting controversy or conflict. This differs from what a member of this site has written in a comment or post (aka words).

          • AngryBlobFish on 04/06/2023 - 02:40
            +4

            @neil: Wouldn't posting a link to something that the user knows exists to incite conflict also be considered inciting conflict themselves? The result is the same in the end and what is going on in the comments of that post is clearly not a civil discussion.

            Also, since Ozbargain isn't exactly a political forum and most of the comments in that post doesn't involve finding deals, wouldn't it just be easier to just move the post to the forums and lock comments on it?

            • klonky on 04/06/2023 - 05:55
              +4

              @AngryBlobFish: Exactly. The video was deliberately posted with the intent to incite the reaction it got. I mean it even says "they don't want you to see it". Ozbargain is not the right platform for such content.

              I don't really see why comments and deals should not have the same guidelines anyway?

              As Scotty has said before:

              OzBargain should be approachable by general public, safe for work, and something you don't have to worry about leaving on your computer screen unattended. With those in mind, sorry some of the offers have to go.

              Although this was in the context of 18+ deals, it's still relevant. The decision to leave up divisive content doesn't not make it an approachable website, it's just alienating some of the community.

            • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 11:37

              @AngryBlobFish:

              Wouldn't posting a link to something that the user knows exists to incite conflict also be considered inciting conflict themselves?

              Well, then you'd have to apply that to say any vegan food deals, caged eggs, those high end video cards which seems to rile everyone up so saying anything that could cause conflict would result in lots of items on that list. How do we measure conflict, a little conflict OK? a lot conflict not OK?

              Also, since Ozbargain isn't exactly a political forum and most of the comments in that post doesn't involve finding deals, wouldn't it just be easier to just move the post to the forums and lock comments on it?

              The deal is a temporarily free made video thus it doesn't belong in the forums according to guidelines.

              • chepsk8 on 04/06/2023 - 14:02
                +4

                @neil: I think there’s a pretty easy to see distinction between an anti-trans identity dailywire video, and expensive videocards, like it’s pretty obvious, and you’re only mentioning these things to further complicate the argument here.

                Something so politically charged on either side of the spectrum should be f’d off, this isn’t the site for such garbage, or at least it shouldn’t.

                • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 14:22

                  @chepsk8:

                  you’re only mentioning these things to further complicate the argument here.

                  Not complicated it. I'm trying to point out that subjectively removing things creates issues for moderation as it's difficult to act uniformly.

                  If there are some guidelines suggestions that can be enforced unilaterally by any staff member then that might be more helpful.

                  • AngryBlobFish on 04/06/2023 - 16:59

                    @neil: How about simply banning "products" which exists to turn people against a protected class (gender identity is one). That "documentary" was made by someone who is openly far-right, anti-trans and whose whole identity revolves around inciting some sort of "culture war" in America for views.

                    • franco cozzo on 04/06/2023 - 17:04
                      -1

                      @AngryBlobFish: ….your personal beliefs & politics should dictate the content of the site….??? lmfao

                      its not banned content. its not illegal. piss off with the censorship

                      • AngryBlobFish on 04/06/2023 - 17:09
                        +1

                        @franco cozzo: I never said that my personal beliefs should dictate the content on this site but anti-discrimination laws lists trans people as a protected class and if they want a consistent way of moderation regarding politics wouldn't banning anything which targets race, gender, religion etc… be a good way of maintaining consistency.

                        I also never said that post should be erased, simply that it belongs in the forum as it isn't a deal.

                    • ozhunter on 04/06/2023 - 17:08

                      @AngryBlobFish: Turn people against a protected class?

                      It just shows how fragile the transgender propaganda/movement is. Simply asking what is a woman has people losing their minds.

                      • AngryBlobFish on 04/06/2023 - 17:12
                        +4

                        @ozhunter: Anyone with any level of media literacy should be able to understand the subtext of that "documentary". Especially when the host is quite open about his views on the matter elsewhere.

                        Keep your American culture war BS out of my favourite bargain site, that stuff doesn't belong here, at least not in the deals section.

                        • ozhunter on 04/06/2023 - 22:45

                          @AngryBlobFish:

                          Anyone with any level of media literacy should be able to understand the subtext of that "documentary"

                          Lol, it's asking what is a woman. Biology is goes against the transgender movement; that's why there so much hate for this deal.

                    • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 19:37

                      @AngryBlobFish: So if say a documentary that was about a protected class but you would deem that it doesn't turn people against that class, it would be fine to post as a deal (assuming it's temporarily free)?

                      • AngryBlobFish on 04/06/2023 - 20:29

                        @neil: In the end it would be up to the mods whether the documentary is inflammatory or not but in the case of this post it is quite obvious what the intent is.

                        • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 21:23

                          @AngryBlobFish: Yeah, this is what I think again goes towards us having to make an arbitrary decision on whether a documentary turns people against a class. This also requires us to have to watch the documentary which seems to be an hour long in this case.

                          Would maybe be better for a blanket ban on deals or multimedia deals for a protected class? Say there is a documentary that shows all the points of the current doco and also includes counterpoints. Wondering how hypothetically handling that would work?

                          • labyrinthinecities on 24/06/2023 - 02:39

                            @neil:

                            Would maybe be better for a blanket ban on deals or multimedia deals for a protected class? Say there is a documentary that shows all the points of the current doco and also includes counterpoints. Wondering how hypothetically handling that would work?

                            Personally I would be okay with this or something like this going forward i.e. All multimedia deals that are about a protected class (positive, inflammatory, negative, whatever) getting banished into the shadow realm off into the forums. Probably use the definitions for protected class by the government.

                            I used to visit Ozbargain a lot, but especially in the last couple of years, I've used the site less and less because it feels like there's a constant flood of people making comments about "snowflakes" or the same three jokes about pronouns on posts that have nothing to do with this sort of thing.

                            I'd personally prefer inflammatory "deals" like the example in the OP banned, and I feel that pushing these inflammatory deals into the forums won't do anything to stem/pause/reduce the amount of these stupid comments in completely unrelated deal posts… But at least it won't be on the front page, and I won't have to see it.

                            Also, a blanket ban/banishment to the forums seems like an OK compromise that doesn't put extra burden (such as making mods watch usually 1+ hour long documentaries) on the moderation team?

                • gyrex on 04/06/2023 - 15:28
                  +3

                  @chepsk8: I don't like it so ban/censor it? A dangerous road to be travelled for sure. If a deal was posted for something I was vehemently opposed to politically or ideologically, I (and I'm guessing the vast majority of other people on here) wouldn't give a damn but I guess that's the difference between a proponent of free speech and fascism.

                  I think the OzBargain moderators have done an excellent job in remaining absolutely neutral and allowing free and open discourse without being censorious and I applaud all of them for not bowing down to the small crowd who are demanding censorship of this or any other deal or topic for that matter.

  • ozhunter on 03/06/2023 - 18:14

    This inspired me to search for an almost identical circumstance (but intentionally not a political/inflammatory one). I truly posted what I would perceive a deal in the same vein.

    Moderation is never gonna be perfect, but it's very likely you just posted this in response to the "What is a woman?" deal. It's happened few times before like those religious deal. If you posted it before or a week later, I doubt a mod would have an issue with it(if it cost money before and is now discounted/free)

    • snoopydoop on 03/06/2023 - 18:22
      +4

      Wouldn't this logic apply if someone posts a heymix powerboard and it inspires someone to search for a deal for a different power board? The reason the person searched for a deal is kinda irrelevant, right?

      Just because it inspires me to search for a similar deal, doesn't mean it wasn't fitting the guidelines for a deal in the exact same way the other post was. Yet mine was moved to forums, then removed and account warning.

      Moderation isn't going to be perfect, no, which is why in this post I suggest that if something is clearly controversial comments should be paused while they are moderated, then restarted, or comments should be closed if they don't have the capacity to remove hate speech.

      But there has been complete silence on this from the site which makes me feel like they condone everything.

      I would like this site to be the best it can be and not force certain groups to leave because they have to see terrible things about their sexuality, gender, ethnicity, or whatever else it may be on this site.

      • ozhunter on 03/06/2023 - 18:45
        +1

        You can talk with a mod about it. But if you're simply trying to post a controversial deal in response due to one being posted then it's gonna get removed.

        I suggest that if something is clearly controversial comments should be paused while they are moderated, then restarted, or comments should be closed if they don't have the capacity to remove hate speech.

        In case you haven't been told; that's just dumb. Does any website have real-time removal of comments?

        Looks to me that they have removed all the hate speech comments. No wonder you can't find any.

        • snoopydoop on 03/06/2023 - 18:53
          +2

          The suggestion is to write here. This is the post.

          I also posted in talk with a mod but they have not responded and the auto message said don't bother and post here instead.

          Mate it's not dumb, it is industry standard. As mentioned in the post that's what all major news organisations do on their socials. They absolutely do not leave neo-nazi rhetoric published online for hours and hours.

          I've given out plenty of examples of hate speech now and many have been many hours old. I'm not going to look through the post again to verify if they've finally taken them down, but today there were comments 20 hours old that had not been.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join