• Replies 23 replies
  • Subscribers 28 subscribers
  • Views 2903 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

Moderation, respect, and offensive language.

Scorpion0x17

I find the following post deeply concerning:

Autismtwo,

Please stop this. You have no business demanding that Rachel uses words in a particular way. You have already been asked recently to treat other users with respect. This is your last warning. If you do this again, your posts will be moderated, requiring approval from me, or one of the other moderators, before they are published.

When you signed up, you agreed to obey rule 1:

"Don’t post messages that are offensive or insulting to other users."

You made your own views about Rachel's words very clear. This has now gone well beyond that, into aggression and harassment.

I know you don't like the way the NAS does things. I have never censored your opinions about us. But when you harass other users like this, we will intervene.

If you wish to discuss this privately, please email community.manager@nas.org.uk.

Yours,

Alex R - mod

A post was made that used language that several members, who have clearly stated that they themselves are on the autistic spectrum in numerous posts, found to be offensive and dengrating to those on the spectrum.

When this was pointed out it was dismissed out of hand by the original poster, as if the use of such language did not matter.

The above quoted post clearly takes the side of the original poster, and thus, by implication, condones the use of that language.

Should not a representative of the NAS at the very least remain neutral in such matters (reprimanding both those who denigrate people on the spectrum and those who speak out against it too strongly)?

Should an NAS representative not also be aware of the nature of the traits common amongst many on the spectrum and, in particular, their propensity to use very honest, direct, and sometimes too blunt, language without meaning any disrespect or offence?

Should a representative of the NAS, in fact, not actively discourage any language that denigrates those on the spectrum, not matter how mild the nature of the denigration?

Are these not things that every representative of the NAS, no matter their position, or role, should do, and bear in mind, at all times when dealing with the public, or anyone else, be they on the spectrum, or not?

Parents

  • Alex,

    I moderate on a forum myself so can understand the line you need to tread and how difficult that can be at times, however, I would question your assertion that people have been 'driven away' by the tone of discussions.

    From the time I've spent on here it is clear to me that there are actually very few long term members, and many of those who are self-report as being on the spectrum.

    There seem to be a far greater proportion of members that post once, twice, maybe half-a-dozen times at most, and then leave never to return again.

    There are also those that post from time to time and appear to spend long periods of time away from the site.

    Now, of course these observations are based purely on the postings people make, and perhaps you have statistical login data that show my perception to be false.

    But, one thread comes to mind regarding someone saying that they're thinking of leaving, and I'm pretty sure that both the orginal poster, and the only other person in that thread to say they had considered leaving, have posted at least once, if not several times since that thread.

    So I do wonder how much effect the 'problem' that you perceive is really having, or whether the posting and visiting patterns of the users invloved would have been much the same no matter what had been posted or by whom.

    Longman,

    I absolutely agree that there are behaviours that can not be excused on the grounds of autism, and if someone transgresses to that degree then remediating action should be taken.

    However, I have just read through the thread that sparked this one upto the point at which Alex stepped in, and, frankly, I see nothing either offensive or insulting in anything autismtwo posted!

    Forthright, blunt, and direct? Yes.

    But, offensive or insulting? No.

    The use of the word "crazy", however, was, in my opinion, both offensive and insulting to the autistic community as a whole.

    This is what I have the most problem with - an actual insult to the autistic community was left to go apparently unchallenged by the moderators, whereas a forthright and, in my opinion, justified challenge to that insult, by an apparent member of that community, was stamped on.

    To sum up,

    I am of the opinion that, it is of fundamental importance that those that claim to represent and fight for recognition of our needs (i.e. the NAS), should do everything they can to oppose the denegration of the autistic community, and to support the thoughts, views, and feelings of the members of that community, no matter how crudely those thoughts, views, and feelings are presented.

    For, if that does not happen, what hope do we have?

Reply

  • Alex,

    I moderate on a forum myself so can understand the line you need to tread and how difficult that can be at times, however, I would question your assertion that people have been 'driven away' by the tone of discussions.

    From the time I've spent on here it is clear to me that there are actually very few long term members, and many of those who are self-report as being on the spectrum.

    There seem to be a far greater proportion of members that post once, twice, maybe half-a-dozen times at most, and then leave never to return again.

    There are also those that post from time to time and appear to spend long periods of time away from the site.

    Now, of course these observations are based purely on the postings people make, and perhaps you have statistical login data that show my perception to be false.

    But, one thread comes to mind regarding someone saying that they're thinking of leaving, and I'm pretty sure that both the orginal poster, and the only other person in that thread to say they had considered leaving, have posted at least once, if not several times since that thread.

    So I do wonder how much effect the 'problem' that you perceive is really having, or whether the posting and visiting patterns of the users invloved would have been much the same no matter what had been posted or by whom.

    Longman,

    I absolutely agree that there are behaviours that can not be excused on the grounds of autism, and if someone transgresses to that degree then remediating action should be taken.

    However, I have just read through the thread that sparked this one upto the point at which Alex stepped in, and, frankly, I see nothing either offensive or insulting in anything autismtwo posted!

    Forthright, blunt, and direct? Yes.

    But, offensive or insulting? No.

    The use of the word "crazy", however, was, in my opinion, both offensive and insulting to the autistic community as a whole.

    This is what I have the most problem with - an actual insult to the autistic community was left to go apparently unchallenged by the moderators, whereas a forthright and, in my opinion, justified challenge to that insult, by an apparent member of that community, was stamped on.

    To sum up,

    I am of the opinion that, it is of fundamental importance that those that claim to represent and fight for recognition of our needs (i.e. the NAS), should do everything they can to oppose the denegration of the autistic community, and to support the thoughts, views, and feelings of the members of that community, no matter how crudely those thoughts, views, and feelings are presented.

    For, if that does not happen, what hope do we have?

Children
No Data