
Monica Cellio's account of losing her moderator status on Stack Exchange - djsumdog
https://judaism.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5193/stack-overflow-inc-sinat-chinam-and-the-goat-for-azazel
======
aazaa
For those who don't need all the inside baseball up front, jump to the
lengthly footnote for the gist, which itself doesn't exactly get to the point:

> ... The policy is an update to the Code of Conduct that requires us to use
> people's preferred pronouns (when known). ... I completely agree that it is
> rude to call people what they don't want to be called; knowingly
> misgendering someone is not ok. But the policy was about positive, not
> negative, use of pronouns. I pointed out that ... [I] write in a gender-
> neutral way specifically to avoid gender landmines, and sought clarification
> that this would continue to be ok. To my surprise, other moderators in the
> room said that not using (third-person singular) pronouns at all is
> misgendering. The employee never clarified, and this is one of the questions
> I asked in email. In my email I said clearly that I'm on board with "use
> preferred pronouns when using pronouns", but from the fact that they fired
> me without warning (or answering the question), I conclude that that's not
> the policy. I haven't seen an actual policy, though I am being accused of
> violating it.

Further condensing, moderator asked questions about proposed policy change
requiring proactive use of people's preferred pronouns. These questions were
not answered. After lengthy back-and-forth, moderator status was revoked.

------
fennecfoxen
It's good to know that our community platforms are safe in the hands of people
who will throw you under the bus at the slightest hint that you might be less
than perfectly enthusiastic about consistently toeing the party line. It's
very inclusive of them.

------
jandrese
tldr: In response to a proposed StackExchange rule change requiring moderators
to use users preferred pronouns when addressing them, the author asked if it
was acceptable to continue writing in a gender neutral way; without using
first person pronouns. This was viewed as unacceptable and lead to an
immediate termination.

This is only one side of the story, but seems appalling at first glance.

~~~
krainboltgreene
The goal of the moderator is to enforce the rules, if you can't accept the
rules why would you be a moderator?

~~~
Chyzwar
These rules have not been decided yet. Mod was terminated because of a simple
discussion of new rules.

------
bitwize
Last year in the wake of the Linux CoC thing, y'all were quick to downmod
anyone who commented that CoCs might be used to enforce political orthodoxy.

And now here we are.

Also of note is an emerging new standard: Actual CoC violations are not the
threshold for punishment, perceived risk of potential CoC violations is. I saw
Aurynn Shaw advocate for this position earlier this year[0], and knew dark
times were a-coming; it was hot-takey enough to sound like a great idea to
people who pride themselves on being radicals.

[0]
[https://mobile.twitter.com/aurynn/status/1128053124323655680](https://mobile.twitter.com/aurynn/status/1128053124323655680)

------
brohee
Are we peak woke yet? If not, slightly afraid of what it will be.

------
commandlinefan
> do what we believe fosters a spirit of inclusion and respect

... by forcing 99% of users to bend to the will of the remaining 1%?

------
RobertRoberts
Freedom of speech. Wars are fought over freedoms as fundamental as this.

Do so many people not understand that trying to limit the freedom of others
for your own personal benefit is tantamount to tyranny and oppression? The
very thing they claim they are against?

~~~
krapp
I disagree with SO's rationale as stated, but losing mod privileges on a wiki
is not even close to a fundamental violation of freedom of speech tantamount
to tyranny and oppression over which wars have historically been fought. On
the radar of behind-the-scenes drama that can go on with forums between
administrators and moderators, this doesn't even raise a blip.

~~~
RobertRoberts
Their /intent/ is oppression of speech anywhere and anyway they can make it
happen. It will likely happen here eventually too.

The fact that the space this is currently being fought over is a corporate
sponsored forum is irrelevant to the intent of this group of people.

------
directionless
Stack Exchange is a weird place. I've generally found their user community
pretty hostile. I find the idea of giving people badges for downvoting to
capture something about their negativity.

~~~
workthrowaway
hn is weird in similar regards. you get downvoted and you have no idea who
downvoted you and why...

~~~
yellowapple
Not to mention that at as a comment gets downvoted it'll turn more and more
desaturated and harder to read, literally silencing someone over a
disagreement.

~~~
ratsmack
This is one of the annoying features of HN that is unfair to the person making
the comment. I, as the reader, should decide if I want to read it or not.

~~~
yellowapple
Agreed. Thankfully the fading goes away if you click into the comment itself
(i.e. on the timestamp next to the username), but it's still annoying.

------
asdaddasdad
Code of Conducts - have they ever done any good? Maybe installing a CoC should
be considered an inflammatory act in itself.

~~~
cdumler
Yes, a Code of Conduct can be a good thing. A good CoC is about the outcome,
not the action. For instance, a good CoC in software development has things
like:

* Write your code for other people who may be up at 3am trying to figure out what's wrong with the logic.

* Be considerate of other ideas, smart people who disagree are usually both correct but differ in benefits and consequences.

* Consider if you are writing beyond the scope of the ticket, no code is easier/faster to debug/understand than no code.

Notice, there are no rules of what to do, but what is attempting to be
avoided. Unfortunately, the Western Thinking (TM) (as opposed to Eastern
Thinking) asks the question "What is...?" Like:

* What is the correct way to address someone?

* What is the acceptable code style?

* What are the maximum number of lines in a function?

The problem with this thinking is that it ignores outcome and enforces
concrete thinking. The irony here being that the goal is to be considerate of
people and they are being utterly inconsiderate to the moderator.

~~~
asdaddasdad
But are your suggestions a "Code of Conduct"? Like would anybody be expelled
from a community for "not thinking about people who may be up at 3am trying to
figure out their code"?

They are good suggestions, but I would put them in another category than CoCs.

------
cujo
In this thread we learn how (I would say overly) invested some people are with
online forums.

------
TheRealDunkirk
This was precisely the argument in the Canadian Senate, 2 years ago, that
propelled Jordan Peterson to public visibility.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnIAAkSNtqo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnIAAkSNtqo)

~~~
rmilejczz
Precisely? No definitely not precisely. The question at hand here is whether
or not absence of pronouns constitutes misgendering, and the real crux of the
issue is a lack of communication between staff and the moderator in question.
I fail to see how that is meaningfully related to legislation which sought to
classify intentional misgendering as a form of harassment in the work place.

~~~
TheRealDunkirk
The fundamental question of whether or not it was to be deemed malicious if
someone were not to inquire about and use someone's preferred pronouns -- and
not simply use generic pronouns or personal names -- was central to that
debate. I guess it just goes to show how widely disparate opinions around this
topic can be, given that you and I can't even agree as to what the argument is
about!

~~~
rmilejczz
Part of the problem is that Peterson really obfuscated the nature of the
legislation. It was never about whether or not misgendering someone is
malicious, it added workplace protections against discrimination.

Peterson, for the sake of his own career, made it into the larger debate you
describe. In fairness, it’s a debate that engages a lot of people, but the
legislation in Canada was never intended to affect common parlance.

~~~
TheRealDunkirk
Very interesting. Your comments are the first I've heard that the law only
applied to workplace discrimination. This seems a pretty thorough overview:
[http://sds.utoronto.ca/blog/bill-c-16-no-its-not-about-
crimi...](http://sds.utoronto.ca/blog/bill-c-16-no-its-not-about-
criminalizing-pronoun-misuse/). Like most legal things these days, it clearly
gets complicated very quickly.

------
daneel_w
What are the chances that her religious zeal is part of the decision?

~~~
apta
Why are you accusing her of such? Where's your proof?

~~~
zenexer
I think the parent is more asking, "what are the chances that her religious
affiliation played a role in SE's decision?" It's a fairly loaded question.

~~~
apta
Because she's Jewish/a moderator of the Judaism forum?

------
ykevinator
Cry me a river. SO mods are overzealous hall monitors who work for badges
instead of money. They get what they deserve. Now she knows what it's like to
be flagged as a dupe. You can beg and plead but the mod has spoken, so you
move over to Reddit and if that doesn't work, Google groups.

