Social Issues and Giant Bomb: The Internet Is Serious Business (but It Doesn't Have to Be)

@matatat: I can understand that and what Rorie said makes sense, I hadn't thought of that. But that's why off-topic discussions need to be moderated and contained to proper topics and forums. Ignoring the argument doesn't mean it goes away though. And sometimes we do need to talk things out. I assume these discussions will lessen as time goes on, they're just more frequent currently due to all the recent events.

The issue is that a minority is taking up disproportionate amounts of space and attention by being stupid. To put it bluntly. They can have their discussion, some of us just would like them to have it in a way that doesn't get in the way of the primary subject of the site: video games.

Too much of this is seen as an attack on equality. That isn't the case. It's about undeserved attention on drama that doesn't need to exist. Like when hiring anyone other than a female means you're being sexist. That doesn't belong on Giant Bomb. But because things have to be oh so PC these days, all anyone is apparently allowed to complain about is that there were assholes that responded as assholes to that stuff. But that ignores the third party, the majority of people who aren't on either asshole side: accusatory or overly defensive assholes. Crying wolf doesn't help gaming become more diverse. It does nothing but draw out the assholes who are going to vehemently oppose that.

I come to giant bomb for games. I do get distracted by other stuff, but that's why I'm here. When the comments on something that has nothing to do with civil rights end up just being an argument about sexism, that is a failure to appropriately discuss that issue.

When people show they can stop being so fuckin' toxic about this stuff, maybe people will be more open to discussions of touchy topics. But too often it seems both sides are inappropriate about their agenda. There is certainly valid and positive discussion out there, but most of that happens out of the way of the rest.

Censoring discussion isn't the answer. If you don't want to discuss these topics, there's nothing forcing your participation.

@finaldasa said:

I don't know if you browse NeoGAF's Off-Topic board, but at some point that forum became toxic in this way and they have never recovered. There are posters there who are in a perpetual argument about social issues, and they bring it to every single thread they can. Since I know that GAF has a lot of members here too, I really hope we can avoid that.

This was with regards to the automated solution that I was discussing with another member, that could be electively applied to the website. It's not something you would need to use.

@julius: That I can understand, the internet can be incredibly emotional and negative so often it becomes very degrading. I used to watch a lot of angry video game Youtubers and after awhile I wanted to start to like and enjoy games, faults included, thanks mostly to GB (just like you said).

What helped me was focusing on actually having a discussion and focusing only on those willing to have a genuine back and forth. I've had to really curate where I go to enjoy the internet which is part of the reason I'm passionate about keeping GB an open, honest, and safe place for everyone to enjoy the silly videos and video games. So hopefully someone won't come to GB, make their voice heard, and experience some of the terribleness of the internet.

At no point is he censoring anything. He's talking about willingly not seeing content he doesn't want to see. By your definition, I'm censoring Reddit by not subscribing to every single subreddit.

It's not an idea that I like, either. As others have said, hiding discussions doesn't make them go away. It just makes you oblivious toward what others are discussing.

@rorie: I see your point. Sorry about that.

@ohnoaghost: Not my intention to get under anyone's skin, but I can't help but see the sort of mountain-out-of-a-molehill arguments that came up with the new hires as seeing a problem where there isn't one. I'd say the same thing about people who were irritated with this week's podcast content (though I'm not really familiar with what that was all about). I might venture to say that we'd agree on this point since we both already see GB as a "safe, inclusive place for people to talk about video games."

The other part of the new hires arguments (the trolling and threatening) of the site's critics I see as a separate problem. As long as we're putting the "toxic" label on things, I'd put mine there instead.

Okay, well then you wouldn't need to use it. You've gone from telling me that I don't need to participate, to disagreeing with something you don't need to participate in.

Some people wish to remain oblivious, and it's entirely their right if they wish to do so. It probably won't be something we build, but I don't have any issues with someone building a tool like this.

@hailinel: What's wrong with "being oblivious"? If I don't want to participate then why does it matter whether I see it or not?

At least you'd be aware that the conversation is happening in the event that you do want to join in.

@ohnoaghost: Outrage of the Day is a very apt description. This was a community almost free of drama until very recently. For whatever reason the games press and "Twittersphere" have taken a very sudden political interest in what has traditionally been an insular and secular realm. If you want to call it a boy's club, that's totally fine. But objecting to the undermining of a community is entirely valid and will continue.

@hailinel said:

Simple enough, put a button there to enable problematic material if you're feeling like you want to see that kind of thing that day.

Your toxic assumption that people are "bros" which I'm sure is code from you to say "biggot" or something is exactly the problem with the discussion. Having a conservative idea of how the discussion should take place is seen as being an evil jack ass.

You're right, people should be able to discuss what they want. In the proper place and manner. Which is not always how it happens, lets be honest.

We should also be able to discuss the topic of the site without being shut down by 3 people who take over a comment thread all on their own.

The site IS about video games and that SHOULD be what takes prevalence. Plenty of sites are dedicated to social discussion about the industry. This place is dedicated to uniting people in gaming. By just enjoying gaming and not dragging our fuckin' differences into it. See, when we just talk about video games, the worst that happens is some dumbass says that Half Life 2 isn't the best thing ever.

But now we have people degrading other people, people trying to make claims that if taken seriously could ruin lives/careers, and general asshattery that goes beyond someone's taste in games.

That is, in my opinion, the opposite of encouraging equality. It just encourages people to pick sides and make a mess.

This site is for gaming. So stop worrying about our differences so we can realize that they aren't really that big. Because until you bring that shit up, we're buddies. Then, you bring that shit up and everyone's at everyone else's throats. How is that encouraging unity in the industry? We need to have a place to just come together. I think Giant Bomb is that place. And I think if you want to have different discussions there are more productive ways and places to have them than some of the things that have happened lately on the site.

@vonflampanker: Hey you're 100% in your right to see criticism as unfounded (personally I'm mixed but that's extra off topic), but the issue isn't the criticism itself. The problem was the response - harassment and abuse from people who identified as members of this community. Then, in a shocking revelation, members who felt that their needs are being met by this site didn't want to address the issue here.

Change is scary, and it makes us uncomfortable. That does not mean this site or the moderators have to cater to people who just want it to go away.

I don't see how talking about social issues counts as undermining a community.

This is a friendly reminder to keep your posts calm and civil. If I feel this thread is devolving I won't hesitate to lock it.

@jarmahead: "Bro" was admittedly a poor choice of words on my part. Allow me to restate:

It's not enough to bring out that same tired quote any time these discussions occur. "Video games, you guys!" is more or less code for "Stop having this serious discussion that I could just as easily avoid by posting in a thread dedicated to mustard instead."

Same thing, more or less, but not as charged. In either case, I'm not accusing anyone of bigotry. But I am accusing some of trying to push an anti-intellectual mindset.

@ohnoaghost: the response was a major problem, but wasn't the only one. We already had seen a joyous post about hiring two new people turned into a complete wreck, and that could have been disapproved of early on by moderation.

@hailinel: Possibly. both sides have pros and cons. That's why it would need to be responsive to text content ideally. But when I block people on Facebook I'm fine just not seeing anything they post whether its interesting or not. The thing I've realized about people's personalities on the Internet is they usually don't change or vary greatly. So if I don't like the stuff someone is posting I can safely assume a large portion of what they post I'm not interested in.

We don't want social justice to go away. We just want that to go elsewhere so we can focus on what we want from GB: games. It's not about shutting people up or censoring, it's about clearing up what we are looking for from the site.

People opposed to the viewpoints expressed here don't seem to understand that the vitriolic discussions and politicization of the industry are hiding content we would like to have available. I don't need another thread about how Jeff was sexist for wearing only one blue sock, but I doubly don't need it when it gets in the way of me seeing a discussion about how Windjammers was programmed in a secret monkey coding language designed by Dave Lang's time traveling monkey, whom he trained before sending back in time. To create the world's most entertaining spectator sport. Windjamming.

Many of us come to Giant Bomb to enjoy, celebrate, learn about, and even discuss and debate about video games. When content other than that exists in the same space, it displaces the video game content. That displacement is what bothers me, and if I understand some of the other posters in this thread, they feel the same.

The choice not to split that thread up immediately was mine, and I recognized my mistake later on and split it into two subjects so that moderation could be focused on the more volatile one.

@ohnoaghost: One specific example: Undermining the forums is undermining the community. Taking a thread intended to welcome the new hires aboard with open arms off topic to complain about Giant Bombs hiring practices with respect to equal opportunity employment is undermining the forums.

If one thinks the hires were bad that is a perfectly legitimate position deserving discussion in its own forum thread. It's unfortunate that the discussion of that topic has ended up having multiple threads locked that didn't originally exist to discuss that very specific concern. This stuff has been happening a lot.

My issue with this is that we already allow a wide variety of off-topic discussion, and no one has ever complained about threads like "Ever feel like someone has a crush on you at your job" as displacing discussion of video games. It's a big site and forum system and can sustain a wide variety of discussions. I don't want to talk about Weird Al, so I'm going to avoid the thread about him; it seems fairly clear that the same option is there for people who don't want to discuss social or political issues. (So long as we, as moderators, do a good job of separating it from other discussions more strictly about games, which we probably need to do a better job at).

Where would you want people to discuss it, if not here? We talk about games all the time, but that discussion also includes the social and cultural aspects. Are you suggesting that Giant Bomb should be a home to all aspects of video games and their surrounding culture, so long as it isn't social or political? Where do you draw that line?

I've been wanting to write something about this forever.

I have a job in politics. I also, related to this, but seperate, regularly curate discussions between passionate people on fairly incendiary, topical subjects. Sexism, racism, social mobility, immigration, rights, property and thinks of that ilk. This is my life, it's what I wake up and do for around twelve hours, and think about most of the time. It's what my friends and I will often talk about.

This means that when I go to Giant Bomb (the only gaming website I've visited for the last six years), I want to see Jeff, Ryan, Vinny, Brad, Alex, Dave, Drew and Dan talk about video games and energy drinks and just stupid, hilarious stuff. I then want to scan through a hundred comments where you've got a bunch of knowledgeable, funny, friendly people talking about said video games / energy drinks / hilarious / dumb stuff.

When instead I log onto Giant Bomb and it's just amateurish, toxic arguments going on, where each side is so, so blatantly misrepresenting the other side that the discussion is both pointless and embarrassing to everyone who realises how unhelpful it is to be that misrepresentative of each other, it's saddening and very, very off-putting. It puts all moderate, reasonable people off commenting at all, because they know they willl be labelled as taking a side and accused of either being a 'White Knight' or a 'moronic prejudiced man', depending entirely on the views of the person that reads the comment.

Each side is just desperately eager to take offence from something the opposite side does and use it to slander the opposition. Divisiveness is being actively sought by both sides.

I understand people might tell me to just not come to Giant Bomb or not read the forums, and yeah... I suppose maybe I should, but I don't want to. I love Giant Bomb and it's given me more entertainment over the past years of my life than any other website, TV programme or podcast.

I also understand that the games journalists, developers, publishers and others that devote their life to video games, want to talk about more than just video games, and want to be known or heard speaking about bigger issues. My problem is just that that isn't me. I, like most people, talk about these issues in contexts much, much wider and in a far more practical way, so when I come to Giant Bomb I want video games and dumb stuff, and that's what I'm interested in hearing about. Instead it's becoming slightly more like the place where people try and shoehorn all their thoughts on social issues into video games, often in an actively unhelpful way.

God damn that's convoluted, sorry.

There's a few things that I think you should consider. One, the community discussion and staff generated content on Giant Bomb is still overwhelmingly associated strictly with games. Even most of the discussion of social issues is itself actually related to video games. Like it or not, the video game industry and audience have grown to a point where it has become socially relevant and political and social issues will forever be entwined with it to some degree going forward.

Also, please keep in mind that what you're looking for from Giant Bomb might not be exactly what other people want from Giant Bomb. I think there's more than enough room for everyone to get what they want out of the community interaction - not all of it has to be in your wheelhouse. You're free to ignore the stuff that you don't like if that's what you feel you need to, but you can't just tell the people that wish to engage with those discussions to go away.

I think making it much more clear that your moderation team expects the "General Discussion" forum to be a "general discussion of video games" forum and the "Off-Topic" forum to be about "anything not directly about video games" would help, but as I only visit the Recent Forum Activity page (as I'm sure many others do) that wouldn't necessarily separate them the way I'm imagining.

I can't imagine how overwhelming this place must be to moderate at times, there are all sorts of terms thrown around in threads about gender and equality these days that I either have never heard of (for example, I thought people were randomly talking about medical procedures when they typed "MRA" for weeks) or have no understanding of their necessity (much of the stuff your team has deleted over the past month).

I hope whatever solution you find helps you guys in whatever small way. I've found this period of GB forums very interesting sociologically, but I imagine it's been a nightmare for anyone with any larger investment than my measly $5 subscription fee.

@rorie: I don't blame you for not splitting it up, I would not have felt this way before seeing what happened. Now that we see how ugly things can be, rules on the contextual appropriate-ness of subjects can be set up to avoid repeats of that scenario.

Ignoring the problem is the worst thing you can do.

I was once a member of the AtariAge forums for a year or so. I went there primarily as a collector interested in networking with other game collectors.

The AtariAge community is (I discovered) focused primarily on hardware and not so much on games. The community plays games almost exclusively through what's called a Harmony Cart, a glorified USB stick which is usually loaded with the entire catalog of the Atari 2600.

I foolishly attempted to chastise veteran members of the community for what I saw as essentially emulation and implied I was a more genuine Atari fan for collecting the "real deal."

They shouted me out of their community and deservedly so. I came as an outsider with an agenda and demanded a place at the table, despite my contempt for everyone else present.

I eventually apologized and they accepted me, once I was willing to participate as a member instead of a reformer.

This is an analogy but I think it's applicable.

@drebin_893: While I agree with your sentiment I find myself hesitant to align my thoughts too closely to an admitted member of the New World Order.

@darkstalker: the problem would continue to be discussed where it is deemed contextually appropriate. No one is trying to mute anyone, only to relocate conversation that affects the image of the site and the morale of its users to somewhere you would need to elect to be.

Who's the "outsider with an agenda" on Giant Bomb here? If you're implying that people from outside Giant Bomb are coming here and loudly proclaiming what we should and should not be allowed to discuss, then I think a cursory glance at some of the comment counts in the discussion here would show otherwise.

@wsgexe: Your implication that those of us who want to see more diversity and are open to discussing social issues are outsiders with an agenda is really horrible. I've been listening to the Bombcast since it was Arrow Pointing Down and a subscriber for three years. I'm not an outsider.

I commented before on other off topic... topics usually being better relegated to appropriate places. Like Off Topic. I don't often see relationship advice coming up in comments for the bombcast unless it's relevant.
It's a big challenge but if moderators could remove the discussion from places it doesn't belong it would help a lot. But I know that there's only so much that can be done short of spending time cracking down on people to demonstrate an interest in changing the way things go down.
Hopefully I'm getting what you're saying, I just noticed it's after noon and I have yet to sleep!

Fair enough on the first bit.

But there's nothing anti-intellectual about encouraging intellectual discussions be relegated to the proper places. I don't go and start shitting on Phil Fish's beard on a clip of Oprah, ya know? I think discussion about sexism is fine when A) it's not just a bunch of finger pointing and yelling and B) it takes place where the topic belongs. In the case of Giant Bomb, that'd be Off-Topic (at least in my opinion). A place that rarely actually seems to see such discussions, oddly enough.

If anything, I think that the current way of hijacking other threads or comment sections harms the ability of those who want to be involved in such discussions to take part in them the the fullest extent.

As for avoiding, again, I can't avoid something that's in my path. If I want to open a bag of doritos, but all the bags of doritos are covered in shit, and only some aren't, I'm going to have to touch some shit to even get at the ones that aren't covered in shit, and by then, there's shit on my doritos! Meanwhile, I'm wondering why people are shitting on doritos when there are much better things to shit on. Things that actually better support the act of shitting and potentially make it a fully functional and positive and productive action. It's yet another dumb metaphor or whatever but it's the best way I can put it. At least in my current state.

And to be clear, in the metaphor shitting is a perfectly valid and needed activity, in case I look like I'm calling "civil rights" shit. Because I'm not.

I just want a place to be comfortable with being the grouch who thinks people need to shut the fuck up and just be themselves and stop shitting on literally everyone else. I don't care what you are or who you love or what color your feces are. If you love video games, lets love em together. You ask me, that's the real solution to our social issues. It's not a wall to be torn down. Things are way more fluid than that. We just need to hang out and talk about video games and relax all of our boundaries and forget about our differences because we're too busy yelling about the god damned yellow latter that's right goddamn in front-

Too tired to continue.

I honestly think there are some great discussions happening on the site right now that have to do with social issues, and there are also some great discussions about creating content that involves Dan trying new foods, because Dan's taste in food is weird (no offense, dude).

The places I see "toxic" discussion happening are either in comment threads, where for whatever reason a bunch of people got angry that someone dared even mention diversity issues in gaming on a podcast about gaming for like ten minutes (which the mods came in, cleaned up, locked when it got out of hand, and then reopened, which allowed people to discuss poop water and whether aoli is mayo (it totally is you guys)), and the new hire threads, which were split by the mods into a thread where you could talk about the larger social issues the hiring illuminated, and a thread where you could say hello to the new hires and express excitement about them being there (I posted in both, because I did see the hiring as indicative of a larger social problem that deserves discussion, and also I was hyped to see the new stuff that the new hires could bring to the site. I made these posts on the same day, even, within minutes of one another). There is a whole forum labeled "General Discussion" (which is where we are right now), the front page of which contains the following:

• A thread about choosing gender in games where that's an option (arguably a "social issue" discussion)
• A thread about video game books
• A thread about the most disappointing game you've ever played
• The Ryan Davis memorial thread
• A thread about Sega's "most neglected" IP
• A thread about your favorite Cry game (Cryengine, I assume?)
• A thread about @video_game_king playing Metal Gear IV
• A thread about unpopular opinions (some of which may be "social issue" discussion, but a look through shows mostly it's people talking about thinking DKC is overrated and the like)
• A thread about Yogcast's Kickstarter game tanking
• The Feeding Dan Ryckert thread (which someone named Encyclofeedia Dancastica in the Bombcast comments, which is what the thread name should be because that name is AWESOME)
• This thread, which is lamenting the fact that people keep talking about social issues in gaming culture on a website about video games

Other stuff too, but I'm too lazy to write it all down. Out of those threads, there are three--and I'm being generous with the unpopular opinions thread--which are having a discussion about social issues. I don't see where social discussion is ruining your fun, or where it is impossible to have discussions that aren't about social problems/issues. This site being a safe space for people who like games includes being a safe space for people who like games but also like social issues and want to address them vis a vis their hobby of choice means that social discussions which you may think should be held somewhere else where you don't have to see them (and hey, if you want to remain ignorant of social issues I will not stop you! It is depressing talk even at the best of times, and if you're here to watch some dudes play some video games and tell jokes then those topics aren't for you. I might, and this isn't meant to be insulting, but I might be a little disappointed, because I think it's important to be aware of these issues, but I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you get your thinking about social issues done somewhere else you designate more appropriate). It is tough to have to scroll by the two or three threads that discuss these issues in the forums, but it would be much worse to eradicate them from the site entirely. They're important discussions, or at least important discussions to me, and other users like (and unlike) me, just as discussions about bats vs knives are important to you (and also me. FYI, bats all the way. Better reach and a good swing will do the trick way better than having to get in close with a knife).

Unfortunately, these discussions are going to keep happening whether you like it or not--because the industry and the culture is evolving, and becoming more aware of these issues, and folks want to discuss it. Given the choice, they'd like to discuss it here, because this is a safe space for gamers! If you see a thread about something you aren't interested in/don't want to think about, pass it by, friend, pass it by. I think you would be missing out--there are good things to be gotten from those threads! You might consider viewpoints you've never considered before!--but it's your choice and that's all there is to it. On the other side of the coin though, have the decency to refrain from complaining in those threads about how much you dislike seeing social issues. You can make a thread about it (or I guess in this case a blog post about it), but then of course you have to be ready for people to come in and tell you they disagree and like having those discussions on this site.

Which is more or less what I've just done here.

@jarmahead: You're certainly allowed to think that "people need to shut the fuck up," but saying it in those terms, especially in a heated thread like this, is not going to be permitted.

@rorie: Not that it's relevant but comment counts don't amount to a whole lot. I've had a paid account since 2011 and haven't even made 200 comments. Some of the more active new members could top that in a day.

The argument that new voices are derailing an established community is evidenced even by the existence of this thread. There is a bit of a culture war going on in video games and acknowledging it is hardly controversial.

That's counter-intuitive. You want people to shut up, but you want them to be themselves at the same time? So doesn't that just mean you want people to be themselves so long as they're agreeable with you? I don't understand what you're trying to argue here.

Here are my two cents and a nickel;

I don't really come to Giant Bomb for social issues, gender politics, racial and cultural diversity discussion or anything like that. I generally come here for video game enthusiast discussions, videos and a fantastic podcast. If I browse the forums and I see a politically loaded topic, I'll probably steer clear of it. Likewise, if a topic is steering off the main topic into some social issue discussion, I'll avoid those posts in favor of reading the posts I feel are on topic. So I can empathize with people who might feel like such topics could (or are) derailing and taking over at times.

But I don't really find it that difficult to pick my own plate of topics to consume and completely ignore those I don't want to participate in. Yes, there's always going to be posts and users that might at some point get under your skin, but that's life. There's no escaping voices you don't necessarily want to hear. But as someone who's been around this site for a while, I've never experienced this tsunami of social issue topics and posts some people here seem to be so bothered by. Maybe I am just very good at cherry picking my subjects. So, it may say more about me than anyone else.

More importantly though for me is that while I don't look for topics regarding social issues, I am looking for discussion on video games as it is a corner stone of entertainment in our society at large. I enjoy talking about a specific game and specific mechanical implementations of a cover mechanic. But I also like to look at what game's portray and represent socially in our world. Because games are a part of our world, and what affects our world also affect out games and vice versa. I don't always agree with the conclusions people draw and the criticism people lay at certain companies, games and even places like Giant Bomb. I do however feel that ignoring social issues as it relates to games in favor of just "fun and games" is a great disservice to the medium as a whole. Especially if the discussion is constructive and meaningful.

But it should be opt-in, not opt-out.

I'm...what? I don't know what your implication is, but maybe scroll up a bit and see how many premium emblems you see in this comment thread. Implying that the people who are discussing this issue are somewhat less worthy of being involved due to some kind of lower stature in the community for being newbies is both false and really, really off-base. I'm not going to start checking IDs before I start deciding who gets to discuss this.

Ok so I finally got up to speed about what this is about. I haven't listened to the bombast yet.

But it kinda makes me sick that another thread had to be locked for this same issue. This board is becoming toxic and giant bomb. Is going to lose a lot of credibility community wise if something doesn't happen.

I'm gonna sound like an ass here but I think we need to get past the idea that every opinion is valid as long as it's not a personal attack.

The gaming spectrum is growing and There are two groups of people: the people who see an issues with the way certain groups are being treated and people who don't .

One is right and one is wrong. If you think there isn't a problem then youre simply not correct. What's happened the last few weeks proves it

There are certainly people on both sides who are goi to extremes or are seeing an issue in something specific where there arguably isn't.. Those can be debated but the way certain groups are represented as a whole is an issue.

It just makes me sad that giant bomb is losing credibility because of a certain loud group of people refuse to see a change is needed. If this keeps up the views of the community are gonna be viewed as the opinions of the go crew and then it will be too late.

I know I'm repeating myself and not being very articulate it just sucks seeing something you love get destroyed and there is nothing you can do about it. I've seen women on here say they won't come back after all this and I don't blame them. If a women simply being on the podcast causes so much controversy can you blame them?

I just wanted to chime in and say that for me video games and video game coverage is a form of entertainment and escapism and Giantbomb has always been a great source for that.

I find political discussions to be mentally and emotionally draining and I save such energy for local issues where I can actually have a meaningful impact.

Global political discussions on the internet always degenerate into Orwellian Two Minutes Hate sessions in echo chambers with the various groups occasionally taking a break to scream at each other. Its not what I want any part of.

I hope that you keep making lighthearted and game-centric content and the bombcast especially stays that way. Don't take that to mean no Samantha or something like that she was great and it is sad if she got shit talk.

So yeah please stay away from political and social issues and keep it Giantbomb Classic™

I think that reducing an issue like this to a binary either/or choice is a bit simplistic, honestly. There are a lot of varied opinions out there.

I'd say I draw the line when it becomes more about the social issue and outrage around it than the games themselves. Giant Bomb is about video games, not issues tangentially related. I'm totally spacing on it but there's that site about games from the perspective of homosexuality. That might be a more appropriate place once things become more about the social issue than actual video game stuff. If people want to discuss the gay relationships in Mass Effect, that's awesome. When it starts to leak out into more broad terms about the industry, that becomes less awesome. When it becomes about politics, I think it needs to be taken to a place where that's the focus. Even if it's on this site, I think it should be separated at least a bit.

Hopefully that's clear.

Yeah, sorry, my writing "voice" tends to come off way more aggressive than it should. Which is my fault, my choice of vocabulary is just a bit looser than most peoples and I should recognize that without context, it just looks like I'm belligerent. Trying to be a little more aware of that now.
PS, while I have you here, could you maybe address this in that PM convo you brought me in on, as I can't respond to PMs because of how I connect to the site:
Is there a better way to talk about behavior like "white knights" and the like? I feel like most of what I said that caused problems was fair in concept but I just need to find a way to better express it according to this site's tone. I didn't mean to be dismissive so much as address specific issues. It'd be useful in the future at the very least to know how better to communicate those kinds of concepts. So if you have any quick suggestion just adding that to the PM would be great, no need to derail this thread any more than I already have with this mention of all that. And if not I'll just try to steer clear of the topics.