The rise in abuse of power, overstepping of bounds, and unbalanced perspectives on BL

[cduggles]

JessFR: Tbc, I'm no expert, but my understanding was that at a certain point the Lounge was private or somehow restricted.

It's gone through many changes. Even the name was changed.

It's a v long, convoluted story.

The bottom line is that there is a v vocal minority who are nostalgic for the old days or the others who don't care but just like to make trouble.

 

[JessFR]

Jess...all they were asked to do was to refrain from using racist, sexist, or homophobic language. That's all. But they need that to get their thrills, so they left. No ones going to create another Lounge where that kinda thing is ok.

I understand that, and that's where I feel divided and yet sympathetic to both sides. Cause on the one hand, I get that some people honestly feel hurt by such language, and I get that others don't.. But pretend they do because they think they're supposed to. And others still don't, but pretend they do to create controversy and bring disrepute onto the person who wrote it. All reasons to not have it.

Yet on the other hand, I think racist and sexist joking around, which can look like the real thing, can also serve to undermine and expose the real thing for the silly joke of an idea that it is. And work as a bonding exercise between people in knowing they can say anything to each other with no ill intent.

And those groups can come into conflict even though neither really intended harm or dishonesty, and then both come to dislike each other and further see themselves as the right side and the other as the wrong side.

Then further complicating it is you have the actual racist and sexists, and the actual racist and sexists who pretend they're joking around when they're really serious and using the idea that they're joking as an out. Plus the people who aren't sexist or racist, but use the language not for fun or social bonding either, but just to create conflict and troll people.

It all collapses together into a giant mess of misunderstanding and drama that is the human condition. What's important is knowing your audience and understanding the context, and being able to see the real intents. The truth is shrouded in the subtle gray areas.

And you end up with lots of people fighting, some see the other as obsessed with social justice and language at the expense of meaning. Some see racists and sexists and bigots who hide behind humor and free speech. Both are correct, and both are wrong. Both extremes exist, fueled by the small minority. But most of it is fairly well meaning people coming to see anyone who isn't them as the worst of and most extreme of the other broad group.

The only way to really know who's who, is to really know each other.

 

[Blue_Phlame]

5 pages of replies to this thread is a lot to reply to, and my original goal of addressing everyone's comments is more than I expected after taking a personal day to reflect on the replies; letting the conversation simmer to reduce heated exchanges tends to lead to more conducive and thought-out responses.

I'm pleased with the response this topic received, and all the questions people brought up. For the most part, there is a desire to understand the reason(s) for me posting this thread, and hopefully I can explain my reasons.

There is an inadequate level of checks-and-balances on Bluelight that regulate the actions of some staff members.

It's hard to measure exactly what makes an organization corrupt, there's a whole slew of characteristics that can put an organization at risk for corruption - I can't say that i'm an expert at identifying all those risks, but will say that checks-and-balances will help keep it from getting to the point of irredeemable corruption. That's the main theme for me creating this thread. Not to expose the organization as being corrupt, or the members who I believe are contributing to the risk of potential corruption, but to encourage self-checks in the administration to identify the patterns of behavior of its staff that lead to unfair and unjust actions. I will give specific examples a little later.

Most of the points I wanted to talk about were already brought up by other members, and through this discussion we can identify the problem areas that cause disjointedness between staff and its members. Some of the claims made by some members about the state of Bluelight and/or the staff aren't founded on anything else but a hunch or a suspicion, and a rational person would seek to find reasons for these claims rather than dismissing them as conspiracy. Claims that The Lounge was never meant to be shut down, and having to see it dwindle from being the most active forum on the site to a forum that barely gets more than a handful of posts daily - there are reasons for this, and i'm willing to believe that it's due to other reasons that aren't due to management purposefully killing that forum. But when I see patterns of behavior that allude to systematic picking-off of specific members that make up the biggest contributions to The Lounge, with an overwhelmingly positive response in favor of infracting/banning, and retaliation against the person who disagrees, then it starts to look like a "my way or the highway" type of scenario - especially if no one else is willing to defend the non-conformist.

[edited]

Just from the first page, i've been slandered with negative comments with no reasonable evidence and contemptuous opinions. I've been told:
? That what I posted isn't true / isn't factual
? that i'm fishing for negative commentary
? that I haven't made any effort to substantiate anything
? that i'm defending posts that are racist, sexist, homophobic
? that my posts aren't constructive
? that my posts are a confusing spray at people
? that my post is a personal beef made public
? that i've chosen not to step up and sit in the sidelines
? that i'm immature and belligerent
? that i'm too bitter
? that my intent is somehow comparable to Hitler and Osama Bin Laden's
? that my post is vague and impotent
? that my post makes no sense
? that I was feeling bold when I made this thread
? that I've got a sandy vagina
? that i'm maliciously shit-stirring with no intention of adding to beneficial discussion
? there is no basis to this besides personal drama
? that I'm one of the two staff members who thinks there's a conspiracy
? that i'm a whiner
? that i'm a constant moaner
? that i'm piling on criticism and negativity
? that other members are just taking my word for there being something wrong on staff
? that i'm not being honest
? that my focus is on allowing racist of bigoted material

This is just from the first page, and all of it is from current and former staff. Tell me, is this how a reasonable and rational discussion on appropriate behavior is supposed to look like? The few bad apples on staff make these comments, this sets the pace for everyone else to jump on the bashing bandwagon. Several times I have reported a post made by another staff member on the forums, addressing the issue of hypocrisy. The concern of my report was dismissed, and ended up being an attack on my character by several other staff members. Pointing out the problems I see as they come up is something a responsible staff member should be doing if they're at all concerned about the way things are executed. If an organization sees any criticisms of its staff behaviors as an attack, then what hope is there in curbing unethical behavior? Thankfully, there is a platform where a member can give feedback or criticisms, most of them are responded to and addressed, despite the profuse objections that there even is a problem.

[edited]

The audacity of some staff to be so happy about banning other members. First by vilifying them to absolve themselves from guilt, then issuing permanent infractions, and patting each other on the back for getting rid of their artificial threat.

I can't believe i'm spending so much time writing about all this when it'll likely not change anything for the better, but rather give me more guff...

 

[Captain.Heroin]

RP posts are staff-only material. Please don’t leak staff-only information.

 

[mal3volent]

Jess..Sigh...all that's great...

then again we could just not post racist, sexist, or homophobic material.

If you can't talk shit, build camaraderie, have fun, and exercise your freedom of speech without doing that...maybe go somewhere else.

 

[tathra]

But if the problem was that the lounge was behaving in violation to the rules, and someone or some group wanted to stop that, was there any reason the problem couldn't be solved by splitting it into two lounges? One, the public official lounge, that follows the BLUA. And another, more private lounge that has its own more relaxed rules?

This private lounge, whatever you wanna call it, you could perhaps make it invisible to unregistered users and greenlighters. Anything violating the rules of the public lounge could be moved to the private one.

rules are rules because they apply equally to everyone. if they dont apply to everyone equally then they're little more than excuses to justify abuses of authority. there is a "secret" lounge btw (and i dont mean the staff forums), unregistered, greenlighters, and bluelighters cant access or see it, but the bluelight user agreement still applies there same as it does everywhere else on the board.

if people want to post and continue posting here then they have to abide by the rules, rules they agreed to follow when the signed up. i dont get how this is so hard to understand (and thats not aimed at you, jess, i know you're just trying to be helpful). one of our responsibilities as moderators is to ensure that the rules are followed, so when people continue to willfully break the rules, its our job to try to get them to stop - by telling them that they are, in fact, breaking the rules so that we can be sure they're aware and that they understand that they are breaking them, and asking them, publicly and/or privately, to follow the rules, or by issuing warnings and/or infractions, escalating as necessary - and if they still refuse to follow the rules then we're left with no other option but to give them a temporary vacation from the board.

if people want to post content that is against the rules here, they're free to do so, so long as they arent posting it here.

it doesn't matter what's in the hearts when it comes to infracting. It's what's in their posts.

this. unintended results of one's actions dont absolve one of responsibility for those actions.

 

[mal3volent]

Just to let everyone know, BPs much anticipated post fits in exactly with his recent pattern of trouble making. He deliberately does something he knows will piss people off. He runs away and lets it fester. After everyone's nerves are worn thin, he comes in and plays the victim.

 

[Blue_Phlame]

Let me try...
mal3volent is a disturbed individual who likes to vilify other people and play the victim. He sucks up to other people and cries like a little child when things don't go his way. He projects his own inadequacies onto others and deliberately has an agenda to slander another person he has a personal beef with without substantiating any evidence. He knows he won't be criticized for his observation, so he has no qualms in exaggerating claims against another person.
CUT IT OUT mal3volent, you're trying to get a rise out of me. You have not helped in this conversation and are only here to cause drama.

Likely, by bringing myself down to the same level of immaturity, and treating the other person the same way they treat me ... I will be punished and told "you should know better" or something along those lines... How is that not fair?

RP posts are staff-only material. Please don’t leak staff-only information.

I did not post anyone's names, or quote content from the RPs. non-staff members won't know who or what i'm referring to, the details I mentioned were an attempt to help my case.

 

[cduggles]

So basically you wanted to whinge about criticism of you in public? You even took time to make a little list. Okay.

And corruption? That's a big word to throw out. You had better back up the insinuation that it somehow exists or might exist here.

I hope that isn't the well thought out post we're all eager to see.

And no, you haven't spent nearly enough time on this thread. You just started a wildfire and let it burn.

 

[mal3volent]

I did not post anyone's names, or quote content from the RPs. non-staff members won't know who or what i'm referring to, the details I mentioned were an attempt to help my case.

Nah man. You fucked up.

 

[tathra]

Some of the claims made by some members about the state of Bluelight and/or the staff aren't founded on anything else but a hunch or a suspicion

seeing as you still havent provided any examples or evidence of anything, it seems like your own posts are the main thing being described here.

 

[JessFR]

rules are rules because they apply equally to everyone. if they dont apply to everyone equally then they're little more than excuses to justify abuses of authority. there is a "secret" lounge btw (and i dont mean the staff forums), unregistered, greenlighters, and bluelighters cant access or see it, but the bluelight user agreement still applies there same as it does everywhere else on the board.

if people want to post and continue posting here then they have to abide by the rules, rules they agreed to follow when the signed up. i dont get how this is so hard to understand (and thats not aimed at you, jess, i know you're just trying to be helpful). one of our responsibilities as moderators is to ensure that the rules are followed, so when people continue to willfully break the rules, its our job to try to get them to stop - by telling them that they are, in fact, breaking the rules so that we can be sure they're aware and that they understand that they are breaking them, and asking them, publicly and/or privately, to follow the rules, or by issuing warnings and/or infractions, escalating as necessary - and if they still refuse to follow the rules then we're left with no other option but to give them a temporary vacation from the board.

if people want to post content that is against the rules here, they're free to do so, so long as they arent posting it here.



this. unintended results of one's actions dont absolve one of responsibility for those actions.

The rules are the rules, but the rules can be changed. They aren't static. There may be good reasons my suggestion isn't desirable or feasible, I can think of some myself. But "the rules are the rules" isn't one of them. There is nothing, absolutely not a thing in the world stopping the higher ups changing the rules to create a section of the site where the default rules don't apply. It already exists. Harm reduction rules in drug culture are enforced differently allowing posts that are not allowed elsewhere.

The rules should be the same for everyone, but they don't have to be the same everywhere.

The rules aren't set in stone. Abuse is caused by abusive people. Abusive people will use both the argument that the rules are static and beyond their control and also that the rules are dynamic and open to interpretation whenever it suits the situation to their preference whichever way they like.

The rules are there so everyone knows what's expected of them. People shouldn't get a pass for playing lawyer or looking for loopholes, much like with real law, intent is very important. And again like real law, the rules can be changed if its deemed appropriate. And as is already the case both in real life and already here on bluelight, different areas can have different standards.

The creation of an area of the site with lax content rules may well be a bad idea, but not because of anything to do with the rules of rules.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

Let me try...
mal3volent is a disturbed individual who likes to vilify other people and play the victim. He sucks up to other people and cries like a little child when things don't go his way. He projects his own inadequacies onto others and deliberately has an agenda to slander another person he has a personal beef with without substantiating any evidence. He knows he won't be criticized for his observation, so he has no qualms in exaggerating claims against another person.
CUT IT OUT mal3volent, you're trying to get a rise out of me. You have not helped in this conversation and are only here to cause drama.

Likely, by bringing myself down to the same level of immaturity, and treating the other person the same way they treat me ... I will be punished and told "you should know better" or something along those lines... How is that not fair?




I did not post anyone's names, or quote content from the RPs. non-staff members won't know who or what i'm referring to, the details I mentioned were an attempt to help my case.

You made a laundary list of stuff people said about you and then slung shit at staff.

Don?t leak staff only information. Please redact it from your post.

Your reply was convoluted and didn’t address many (all?) of the responses people had to your first post.

 

[mal3volent]

To put it plainly, these two and two other staff members are the biggest culprits of the problem.

Plain would be one way to describe this post. How many accusations are you going to make without anything to back them up?

 

[Blue_Phlame]

seeing as you still havent provided any examples or evidence of anything, it seems like your own posts are the main thing being described here.

I just received a PM saying that I cannot post any materials that originate from the staff forums, even with no mention to names or specific posts.

Show proof!
-I can't because it's staff-only info
Oh well then post it in the staff forums!
-Where i'm a vocal minority and will be ass-blasted by the majority.

Plain would be one way to describe this post. How many accusations are you going to make without anything to back them up?

I could say the same thing to you.

You made a laundary list of stuff people said about you and then slung shit at staff.

Don?t leak staff only information. Please redact it from your post.

Your reply was convoluted and didn’t address many (all?) of the responses people had to your first post.

The laundry list is only the tip of the iceberg at what people have been accusing me of. There wouldn't be a laundry list if people didn't sling shit at me first.

My reply isn't as good as I wanted either, because i'm not fully invested in combating every single point everyone made. If that was the case, i'd be here after midnight, and i've already spent my whole day responding. My mind is elsewhere, and bringing myself back to this issue is making my brain hate me because it would much rather be outside doing something much more enjoyable.

 

[mal3volent]

Let me try...
mal3volent is a disturbed individual who likes to vilify other people and play the victim. He sucks up to other people and cries like a little child when things don't go his way. He projects his own inadequacies onto others and deliberately has an agenda to slander another person he has a personal beef with without substantiating any evidence. He knows he won't be criticized for his observation, so he has no qualms in exaggerating claims against another person.
CUT IT OUT mal3volent, you're trying to get a rise out of me. You have not helped in this conversation and are only here to cause drama.

Likely, by bringing myself down to the same level of immaturity, and treating the other person the same way they treat me ... I will be punished and told "you should know better" or something along those lines... How is that not fair?




I did not post anyone's names, or quote content from the RPs. non-staff members won't know who or what i'm referring to, the details I mentioned were an attempt to help my case.

go back and edit a post ten minutes later to add in personal attacks against me. All I said was, you fucked up by posting stuff you knew better than to post. You did. So what? Was that really cause to attack me?

 

[SheWasLvL18]

The rules are the rules, but the rules can be changed. They aren't static. There may be good reasons my suggestion isn't desirable or feasible, I can think of some myself. But "the rules are the rules" isn't one of them. There is nothing, absolutely not a thing in the world stopping the higher ups changing the rules to create a section of the site where the default rules don't apply. It already exists. Harm reduction rules in drug culture are enforced differently allowing posts that are not allowed elsewhere.

The rules should be the same for everyone, but they don't have to be the same everywhere.

The rules aren't set in stone. Abuse is caused by abusive people. Abusive people will use both the argument that the rules are static and beyond their control and also that the rules are dynamic and open to interpretation whenever it suits the situation to their preference whichever way they like.

The rules are there so everyone knows what's expected of them. People shouldn't get a pass for playing lawyer or looking for loopholes, much like with real law, intent is very important. And again like real law, the rules can be changed its deemed appropriate..

Much respect JessFR, but I just wanted to add my thoughts.

I think you're right that some rules are more relaxed on Drug Culture. I'll admit I don't have them all memorized, but sometimes there are posts that may not be entirely focused on HR and I've made a few of those myself. However, I feel like making a separate set of rules or area of the site would distract from the goal of HR or at least devalue the rules in place. Like if the administration doesn't even believe in their own rules enough to enforce them than why have them?

Also like real laws, nothing is perfect and there will always be ways to manipulate the situation or find a loophole. That being said, I think the situation is better the way it is now: a common set of rules that promote HR and the goals of Bluelight, while being relaxed enough to allow people to socialize and enjoy their time as well.

Admittedly, I might have a different view of Bluelight as I never used it as socially as some of the more frequent users and maybe I have a bit of an idealistic view of the site, but I think a lot of people who use the site do so for more than just banter.

 

[cduggles]

Let me try...
mal3volent is a disturbed individual who likes to vilify other people and play the victim. He sucks up to other people and cries like a little child when things don't go his way. He projects his own inadequacies onto others and deliberately has an agenda to slander another person he has a personal beef with without substantiating any evidence. He knows he won't be criticized for his observation, so he has no qualms in exaggerating claims against another person.
CUT IT OUT mal3volent, you're trying to get a rise out of me. You have not helped in this conversation and are only here to cause drama.

Likely, by bringing myself down to the same level of immaturity, and treating the other person the same way they treat me ... I will be punished and told "you should know better" or something along those lines... How is that not fair?

I did not post anyone's names, or quote content from the RPs. non-staff members won't know who or what i'm referring to, the details I mentioned were an attempt to help my case.

I think mal3volent has been one of the most articulate posters in this thread you abandoned. Your post about him is uncalled for and unbecoming.

You just showed everyone reading this exactly who you are.

Many BLers have stated in this very thread that they make mistakes. It's a sign of strength of character to be able to admit when you are wrong and move past it.

 

[Blue_Phlame]

You are the worst ^

go back and edit a post ten minutes later to add in personal attacks against me. All I said was, you fucked up by posting stuff you knew better than to post. You did. So what? Was that really cause to attack me?

mal3volent, your reading comprehension is abysmal.

I said "by bringing myself down to the same level of immaturity, and treating the other person the same way they treat me ... I will be punished and told "you should know better" or something along those lines... How is that not fair?"

 

[JessFR]

Much respect JessFR, but I just wanted to add my thoughts.

I think you're right that some rules are more relaxed on Drug Culture. I'll admit I don't have them all memorized, but sometimes there are posts that may not be entirely focused on HR and I've made a few of those myself. However, I feel like making a separate set of rules or area of the site would distract from the goal of HR or at least devalue the rules in place. Like if the administration doesn't even believe in their own rules enough to enforce them than why have them?

Also like real laws, nothing is perfect and there will always be ways to manipulate the situation or find a loophole. That being said, I think the situation is better the way it is now: a common set of rules that promote HR and the goals of Bluelight, while being relaxed enough to allow people to socialize and enjoy their time as well.

Admittedly, I might have a different view of Bluelight as I never used it as socially as some of the more frequent users and maybe I have a bit of an idealistic view of the site, but I think a lot of people who use the site do so for more than just banter.

I don't see how it can devalue the rules in place any more so than the existing exceptions. Although I wasn't suggesting an entirely different set of rules, just a section where the rules of hateful language are more focused on underlying intent than the actual words, so basically more relaxed and less strict.

You make a good point that I've been thinking for a while regarding this thread. Bluelight is first and foremost about drug harm reduction. So I understand and agree that focusing on the community section and free speech can be distracting. Which is why I'm not sure myself that the idea of a separate free speech lounge is all that desirable. I brought it up more to try and point out that compromise is possible and that a lot of this seems to me like a question of desire to compromise. Or rather the lack thereof. I said before I feel broad sympathy to a lot of the conflicting views here, because I don't sense nearly as much malice by anyone as it seems like people keep seeing. I understand why people see it, but I don't. Anyway, in feeling that broad sympathy, I wanted to show that perhaps this could be approached with a greater emphasis on understanding and compromise.