1) I'm not sure you understand how the wiggler works. Anyone can get wiggled if a post is deemed harmful enough or inappropriate or whatever. It could be someone not realizing a tchgb thread is closed to outsiders and trying to chime in with helpful advice. When a post gets moved to the wiggler, only OP and mods can see it. There are threads other than yours in the wiggler, that you can't see. I'm sure some of those people think it was an unfair decision. Very occasionally someone successfully lobbies to get a post moved back to tbe main forum. Nobody but you and mods can see your wiggled posts. You can't see anyone else's. But they're in there. 2) I'm not sure you understand how post moderation works. When a user on postmod puts up a post, it gets inserted into the thread as a ghost entry, and only becomes visible when a mod approves it. A few users are under post moderation, including seebs, as mentioned earlier. The majority of moderated posts get approved, yours included. Usually, if a person is placed under post moderation, it's because they've caused harm in some way in the past and the goal is to mitigate future harm. Our job is to look for things being said that would be significantly harmful, whether it's accidental or deliberate, and filter those out. We're not censoring criticism or stifling discussion arbitrarily, if we wiggle a post we have reasons for wiggling that specific post. 3) I'm not sure you understand tchgb. EVERY post to tchgb is moderated. Every post from Etansel was individually evaluated for approval, and every post you've made has been individually evaluated. Again, there were specific reasons some things were wiggled, which we've tried to explain as recently as last weekend. The goal is not to stifle conversation. That makes our lives HARDER. Every post you made that got approved here would have also been approved in tchgb, because they don't feature the things that led to those other posts being wiggled. Pretty sure I forgot something else I wanted to bring up, but whatever, maybe I'll remember it later.
while i agree with most of your post, framing it this way makes it seem like a fact that only athol is putting in hard work in this situation, which is very false. In dm communication with her we established that a large part of her communication issues stem from presenting feelings as fact. A lot of people have worked extremely hard to try and help her understand.
Oh, I meant wrt active translation going forward - sorry, no shade intended. If one person speaks a different language to everyone else, they're the one that needs to adapt. It sucks to be the one, but that's nobody's fault.
This, basically. Everything I have seen you post - with a handful of exceptions that I can think of - has generally read as if you're defensive and more focused on making it clear that you didn't do anything wrong or that you're the real victim. Every time the PPC gets brought up, you try and drag the conversation around to how you believe that they abused you and proceed to ignore all discussion of how even if they behaved badly, your behaviour was so incredibly bad that it cannot be justified by anything that was done to you. I cannot recall seeing anything where you have actually acknowledged that ban evasion is so unacceptable that a community cannot be expected to trust someone who does that. I cannot recall seeing anything where you have acknowledged that the PPC community has the right to decide who is and is not a member. Having conversations with you is extremely difficult. You have shown that you will edit reality so that what you're responding to may have hardly any relation to what actually happened. Even when this does not happen, you have demonstrated that people trying to help you will have - at best - an uphill, thankless battle that doesn't end; people trying to help you avoid dogwhistles, for example, are more likely to be argued with at length over why you should not have been expected to know that something was a dogwhistle or why it should not be counted as one when you were trying to be complimentary. You have demonstrated, repeatedly, that you will not respect hard boundaries set by other people. This is part of the problem. You are convinced that you are being held to a different standard than everyone else, even when it is explained - at length - that you are being held to the exact same standard as everyone else. You keep trying to argue that the mods are biased against you or that there is a conspiracy to silence you, despite the explanations that this isn't so - and despite the fact that if the mods were trying to silence you, there would be no thread about how you are being silenced. You keep demanding that your wiggled posts be shown to people so that you can present them as evidence that you are doing nothing wrong, despite being told that no one besides you and the mods can see wiggled posts and that you have been told repeatedly what the issues are with the posts still in the wiggler, and that posts will not be removed from the wiggler unless the issues with them are resolved. You insist that being on post moderation is a sign of bias against you, despite being told repeatedly that it is not; in fact, if I remember correctly (and I'm sure that the mods will correct me if I'm wrong on this), you agreed to post moderation as part of trying to communicate better with the rest of the forum, so that you would have help with avoiding posting things which are hurtful. And other people on post mod have told you that it is not bias, it's a means of harm reduction. So, once more: you are not being held to a different standard from anyone else on the forum, much less anyone else on post moderation. You are being held to the exact same standard: do not deliberately try to harm people and try to avoid accidentally harming people. You are on post moderation because you have demonstrated that you otherwise have extreme difficulties with meeting this standard. Even with post moderation, you appear to have significant trouble with meeting this standard.
You are too focused on defending yourself I literally just said this. The problem is that you "need to defend against" absolutely all criticism of any kind whatsoever. You are not getting that message. You are making it up. It comes entirely from you, not from anything anyone else said.
Oh I kno it's not just trolling or being willfully inflammatory! But the latter is smth u r obviously doing every time u ping the person. I don't think ur weaselling around when called on shit is trolling either! I do think ur trying to calm things down! Unfortunately, it's not the right way to go about that. Sometimes u gotta take the criticism and not defend urself bc the behavior has no valid defense and even trying to compounds the wrong.
It doesn't help that at this point it's a derail of a derail of a derail of I believe an additional derail. It's compounded, 'cause there's a lot that needs to be unpacked to go anywhere with it. Honestly athol what might work is making your own tchgb thread, specifically inviting help with breaking down why people have been upset at you and how to approach it on a case by case basis. That way you know the playing field is even, you know everyone will be held to the same moderation standards, nobody has to engage when they don't want too in an unrelated discussion to a main thread. I can't guarantee it'll get many hits, but having it might be a useful platform for you to start untangling things and work toward improvement.
I absolutely agree that it's not just trolling or being willfully inflammatory. But it turns out that it doesn't matter why someone is specifically trying to hurt people! If they say "well, I'm doing this because they did it first", that doesn't mean they're not doing it.
One time I jabbed my finger in someone's eye while gesticulating wildly and it was magically healed bc I didn't have malice in my heart
And they insisted that you did it on purpose, and you apologized for flailing around instead of deliberately poking them in the eye.
yeah thats the whole issue you shouldnt be apologizing for flailing you should be apologizing for poking even though it was a mistake the apology is not an admittance of intent
Good: "I'm sorry I poked you in the eye." Good: "I'm sorry I poked you in the eye. It was an accident, I did not mean to hurt you." Bad: "I'm sorry that me trying to help made your eye somehow become poked. I won't try to help you anymore." Good: "I'm sorry your feelings were hurt by my choice of words." Good: "I'm sorry your feelings were hurt by my choice of words. I don't understand this issue and it's hard for me to avoid missteps. Please help me do better in the future." Bad: "I'm sorry I tried to be friendly, and you misinterpreted it as a deliberate insult."
We did ask, and originally she thought it might help, but she finds it very frustrating. We do too. But given how bad the drama is now, and looking at the posts we're not approving... I really, really, don't think it would be okay to remove that right now. Note, by the way: Nothing prohibits her from screenshotting or cutting and pasting into messages elsewhere, if she wants to show people the text of wiggled posts, or of things the mods said. You're allowed to forward your own posts, and I don't think it would be sane for us to insist that moderator communications about wiggled posts are generally confidential. We aren't approving them as public posts here because we think they would cause a lot of distress and harm. We don't control her use of, say, Discord.
See, there's where the disconnect comes in. What you call good wasn't good enough for the PPC. The only times I got apologized to was "I can't take responsibility for something that isn't true" in reference to my buttons being pushed and then "I wouldn't do anything differently." The last jab was that I was unapologetic because I asked repeatedly what I should apologize for.
Yeah, they talked to me after they did it, then pressured me into conscenting. I've withdrawn my consent several times. They won't even work with me to make it less painful. Durrr, we're not being unfair, you're bringing it on yourself.
I would argue that a better option for the first sentence is "I'm sorry I hurt you with my word choices." The original wording sounds a lot more like you don't think your words are at fault for hurting them.
