https://lemmy.nz/post/18610200/13255360
This user describes how most of the women-centered communities on Lemmy were shut down due to harassment of their members.
Another user adds “We need a safe space, but most of the women I know on here don’t have the time or energy to moderate it. And there’s so few of us, it feels like it’s not worth the effort anyway.”
Genuinely not trying to. Genuinely trying to be productive.
Good luck trying to solve social issues alone, friend.
dont worry im not alone i have plenty of people in my corner who dont spam me with weird begging behavior when i stop interacting with them
to be clear you seem nice you are just being offputting and weird doing this negging behavior- if this was a real life relationship i would cut ties with you immediately. please chill tf out.
I’m only begging because I’m desperate to be welcome in your corner and I’m desperate for solidarity and I’m desperate for anyone with your class of experiences to be willing to listen and engage with anything outside of your own goddamn echo chamber bubble.
There’s beauty and longing in desperation, it means that you’ve not given up.
I’m sorry that you’re so lacking in empathy.
Hey, starting over here:
You’re welcome in my corner, homie! I want to approach this with good faith, but I need to address some things because your earlier approach made me deeply uncomfortable. I hope we can work toward mutual understanding, but I also need to set a few boundaries going forward:
I’m doing my best to approach this with a blank slate and give you the benefit of the doubt. I don’t hold any ill will toward you, but I need these boundaries respected for us to move forward. If they’re crossed again, I’ll have to block and report. I hope it doesn’t come to that.
Thank you for coming towards me and expressing boundaries. I’m going to come towards you now. To do so I will focus on the boundaries of our experience that you have outlined. I’ll go in reverse order.
.
.
At this point I would normally offer to move this conversation into DMs, but I understand that that would make you uncomfortable.
I see that you are trying, and I hope that you see that I am as well. Since DMs are out, how would you like to proceed?
EDITED to fix numbering
Hi, new person in this conversation. I hope you don’t mind if I drop my two cents here.
Cherry Picking is the practice of choosing evidence that supports your argument while ignoring evidence against it. It is also almost always intentional, or a result of ignorance, and the term carries negative connotations. Cherry picking is an accusation of bad faith arguing, and people will interpret it that way regardless of your intent.
For ones own experiences, which are inherently anecdotal, the ancedotal fallacy might be more applicable. But it’s only a fallacy if that narrow view is used to make a broad claim. I don’t think pointing out the existence of a certain kind of conversation is very broad, and in the context of this thread just a few instances can have a large effect.
I would even go so far as to argue that you are commiting an argument from ancedote when you dismiss the claim that harrassment exists with only your ancedotal evidence of not having seen it yourself. They brought sources, and you dismissed their experience as not good enough with no supporting evidence. If you really want to dismiss the notion that their evidence is significant, you could try seeing how many people interacted with those posts compared to average interactions for those communities, or checking how often you visit those communities to put your own experiences in context. Anything but dismissing them and refusing to engage with the intent of the message.
It’s true that everyone is susceptible to confirmation bias and dozens of other faults of logic, and it’s also true that recognizing those faults is important for improving, but being so aggressive in the specifics of data validation can be alienating and will likely miss the intended message.
Just my two cents, dismiss as you please. I do hope this ends up being useful to someone though.
I agree with this definition.
I disagree with this part.
Not what I’m trying to do, and I’ve tried to be very explicit about that. I’m not dismissing that it exists, just that it’s severe or pervasive enough to be worth warning people away from this place. Minor incidents happen everywhere and should be dealt with accordingly. Title IX uses the metric of whether actions are “severe or pervasive”, and I think that that’s appropriate here as well. The problems pointed out by spujb are a problem that we should try to address, but are not a problem worth reacting to with slash and burn techniques advised.
I don’t. I really, really don’t. I’m trying to be as clear as possible that their evidence is valid and significant and ought to be taken seriously. I keep saying this. Please read my words.
Thank you for sharing. Your thoughts are welcome.
yup. thank you.
I know that you haven’t responded to my other post yet, and I’d usually put this aside into a DM, but I just wanted to thank you for being willing to use this medium to litigate the boundaries of our shared reality.