Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Initially, I thought the explanations for desiring a white actor to play Bond was a big stretch, but I remembered that when it comes to comic book movies I also prefer the race of the actor to match their comic book counterpart as much as possible, so to each their own. :shrug: I don't think that's racist, as long as the poster's have a well thought out reason. In the case of Bond, I think that's been met even if not everyone agrees.

I keep toeing in the middle line here because I think there's cases where posters do deserve to be called out for saying something ridiculous, whether it be about race, sex, or whatever. But I also think there are posters that are quick to lump too many people in to that boat just because their opinion is similar to the crazies, despite a more reasonable explanation for disliking something, like with the Ghostbusters stuff.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Or it's an attack on a person's character. More "do as I say, not as I do".

You once again avoided answering my question or acknowledging my point about there being offensive posts worthy of the responses they have received.

The other thing that is killing this forum is just how often people end up convincing others to just refuse to even engage them. Bravo!

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Or Irish. Got to love how that's conveniently ignored by anybody stating we must not ignore the white actor standard.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

The mods started pushing things in a good direction with trying to reinforce 2 things:

1. Stay on-topic.
2. Post about the posts and topics, and not about the poster.

A problem as I see it is that this isn't enforced much. There is a lot of refrain from suspensions. And I kind of get that, because it should be a last resort. But if people want change, that's where I'd start.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

I could be wrong, but I don't believe that issue was at all about just one poster. And it hasn't even just been that thread. Any movie outside of rom-coms where women are made out to be the heroes gets the same reaction. And if you read up on the groups that have these opinions, you would know where it comes from.

FTR I'm not even trying to say those posts should not be allowed here. I was responding to the idea that calling that stuff out is the problem. The responses to that shit have been completely and totally valid, and not why this place has problems.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

It would also be nice if they dealt with the trolling and turning one forum into their own personal blog extension.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Accusations, insults, and memes...are not forms of "engaging" a healthy discussion.

Once again, the politics forum is a great example, and now, in movie talk.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

And once again, accusations of trolling on this website seem to be the operative way to force people out of the forums if accusations and insults of being a "white person" and racism don't work as intended.

But yet you say want diversity and engagement?

Your hypocrisy is almost as big as your prejudice.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

An example was posted by myself, actually referencing one of Ian's books because he does mention the race of Bond, and who it is most likely to be.

I have yet to read anything by the accusers of racism, pointing to ANY CONTENT from Ian as a healthy discussion. Which tells me they are just blowing air out their butts and just wanna pick a political fight in a non-political forum, because the political forum has an odoriferous and stagnant aura of insulting commentary to anyone who disagrees there.

Also, as another poster stated, it's not racist to say a person is used to seeing a certain colored character remain that way because they've grown up with that character being that way.

I guess if I said I'd prefer the Black Panther to be a White, drunken hillbilly from Georgia, you'd be ok with this. Or maybe The Shaft movies should be remade with Jim Carrey. Or maybe Fat Albert can be White, and we can have John Travolta do his funny-funny stuff.

Taking the intellectual approach I see so often, if you disagree with me...you're a racist.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

The above exchange with Noonan is a perfect example of what is arguably the bigger problem with these discussions; not that the OP is wrong, but what the OP is talking about is a skewed perspective on what's actually happening.

Person 1: I like Bond the way I grew up with.
Person 2: What do you mean "the way I grew up with"? The first actor wasn't even English.
Person 3: He was from the British Empire.
Person 2: Bond purists should want an Englishman, though. So why is a white Scotsman ok but a black Englishman is not?
Person 1: Fuck off with that nonsense!

Such discourse.

Historical accuracy in fictional work only matters when it suits the needs of toxic fans, apparently.
A black man is being considered for the role of Bond? "Gimmick! Fleming wrote him as a white man and only white men would have the privileges Bond has had!"
But Fleming wrote him as an Englishman and in that era, there's no way a Scotsman like Connery would be allowed to be a spy for the English? "Doesn't matter. British Empire is good enough."
So for current-day Bond, in 2018, why can't he be a Canadian like Ryan Gosling? Or a New Zealander like Russel Crowe? Or an Aussie like Mel Gibson? Or Irfan Khan from India? "Not those parts of the British Empire, though."

The problem, as I see it, is any time anyone tries to drill down the core reason someone doesn't want something to be different (after exhausting the "I want historical accuracy in some cases but not others" and other such arguments), it's taken as insulting, belittling, accusatory, aggressive, etc. when it's usually only meant to be part of the reasonable discourse. Sometimes, it goes too far, but more often than not, it's just that one person is having trouble explaining their point in a way that doesn't come off as sounding exactly like the folks who ARE racist, sexist, etc.

As for the PMs the OP got; that's a textbook example of confirmation bias by way of "atta-boy" type comments. If you look at the actual discussions that some members participated in, you would likely find that they weren't "attacked" for their conservative views, but rather that people disagreed with them and provided solid arguments that they couldn't/wouldn't rebut. Just going off the top of my head:
- One member told me he doesn't wear a MAGA hat in public because he's afraid of having drinks thrown at him. I acknowledged that as a legitimate concern, but also asked if he understood that people feel that way about the color of their skin or other parts of their identity, and the response was... silence. Such discourse.
- One member said he wanted better sex-ed in schools. I asked him to clarify what he thought was good sex-ed vs. bad sex-ed, and he said it was up to the parents to decide. I clarified that I wanted his PERSONAL opinion of what sex-ed should be taught in schools, as parents need to express their opinions to the schools in order for the schools to know what parents found acceptable, and he refused to answer. So he wanted better sex-ed, but refused to explain what that should be. Such discourse.
- One member said that some folks on this forum were hoping for a specific celebrity to get caught with an underage boy, just because he's a conservative. When questioned about this gross generalization about other forum members, he said it was just a joke. No reprimanding, either. Such discourse.
- One member, in response to the above comment, said he only disagreed with him posting it not because of the content, but only because of the reaction he knew it would get. When asked to clarify, that member went off on a tangent about something terrible someone else said in a different thread. Such discourse.

Then these people throw their arms up and say the forum is toxic, they can't express their views anymore, it's too "PC" (:lol:), etc. etc. So forgive me if I don't take the same message from their PMs as the OP.

I've likened this to the "widescreen vs. fullscreen" debate before, which is appropriate for this forum. If someone comes in and says, "Hey guys. What's up with widescreen? I hate those stupid black bars. Why can't everything just fill my screen? I paid good money for those 75 inches, and I want them to be used." Dollars to donuts, at least in the mid-2000s, most folks would have reacted fairly negatively: "Fuck off, casual! Google it, bitch! OAR matters! Learn to do your own research and throw all your fullscreen shit in the trash!" There might have been 1 or 2 who were like "Actually, check out this informative link!" but they're drowned out by the anger. Then, of course, there's the handful who respond or PM the new user and say, "Look. I totally agree with you. Those people are assholes, right? Don't worry, you're not alone. Come join us over here and just ignore those elitist jerks. We have a nice collection of fullscreen discs just for you!"
Who do you think the user would gravitate towards? The people who are mean, but ultimately right, or the people who are also misguided, but civil?
In political talk, I'm NOT saying the "left" is always right, or the "right" is always wrong, but agreeing with the general notion that how people react to honest questions can sometimes be harsh, but it's largely in part because of bad actors who ARE racist, sexist, etc. and are really just JAQing off when they ask disingenuous questions that appear, at the surface level, identical to honest folks just trying to get an idea of what the issue is actually about.

The BEST criticism of "the left" comes from a fellow person on the left. I hope you'll give this video an honest watch. It's only 14 minutes, including the credits at the end.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Hi everyone, we have a new mod in the Politics Forum (story, who is awesome). Changes take time and obviously a couple of mods can't catch everything, but I'm happy the way story and VinVega are handling it.

I specifically looked into the last few pages of that James Bond discussion and found nothing objectionable (keep in mind that I generally don't moderate unless there is a case of illegal activity or very obvious spam).

Obviously, social issues will have heated opinions, and the only way to avoid conflict in discussion for some things is "not to play". But that is every individual user's choice.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Comparing Bond being played by a local (and talented) English black actor to BP being played by a southern white guy from Georgia is silly.

And to throw some humor in, now I actually want to see Fat Albert featuring Travolta...

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

My recollection about the ghostbuster threat was basically that one poster making ridiculous comments about women and then a bunch of posters turning those comments into sarcastic comments which then derailed the thread. I’m sure there were more than just that one poster making posts with that same attitude so you’re probably right with that. It’s been a while since I read that thread and do remember it going off the rails for some time before it was closed.

I’m also not saying the absolute bullshit racist sexist, etc. posts shouldn’t be called out, they should but way too often people who aren’t racist or sexist get lumped in that group because their opinion is different than others, all I’m saying. Just as I hate “women shouldn’t be allowed to carry proton packs” or “Bond is white. End of story” I don’t like “You’re sexist for thinking women shouldn’t be cast in a man’s role” and “anyone who thinks Bond cant be black is racist”

Like I said, there’s no in-between with our conversations anymore. You’ve apparently either got to be on the extreme end of the spectrum or your opinion only counts as lies or “inconsistent”. And that’s not true at all.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

You can thank our current government for that.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

:up: I agree with so much of this. Especially the portion about some people just not being able to explain their point of view as well thought out as others and coming across poorly.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Is also like it on the record that I try to be courteous with all other posters and in return I feel that I’ve been treated with respect. I can’t say I’ve ever had any issue with any poster here and I currently don’t. I’ve also never put anyone on my ignore list as I find it plenty easy to ignore people on my own.

Of course, like I’ve states before, my opinions fall somewhere in he middle of where the heated debates are going so it allows me to 1. Not get so emotionally involved with any one side and 2. To, for the most part, understand where both sides are coming from. :shrug:

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

I agree 100%. I stated earlier that I think what’s happening at DVDTalk is a microcosm of what’s happening in he rest of the country - you’re either for a border wall or you’re for completely open borders, you either stand for the flag or you hate America, you either support the NRA or you want the Government to take all our guns, you either want Idris Elba to be the next Bond or you’re racist...

It’s a disgusting place our country is in right now and nothing will change if this is how we approach every issue.

Life isn’t always black and white (no pun intended). Various issues are complex and can’t be decided with a “if you’re not with us, you’re against us” attitude.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Stay on topic, please. And let's try to keep the scope relegated to the site.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

I agree this is a big part of the problem. But when people are not as clear as they should be, it is better to assume they are implying everybody believes the same way or ask for clarification? I suspect I'm not alone in always trying to be clear that I am calling out specifics, and rarely trying to say anything about everybody, but I'm not always successful in making that clear.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

A good rule for life in general, and especially online, is to well-articulate your point of view and be critical of your own opinion. Keep in mind that your emotions may translate into your writing (thus your readers may sense anger or resentment) or may not (so your readers may impress their own assumptions onto you).

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

I actually don't think this a fair characterization of the "widescreen vs. fullscreen" talk that occurred on this forum, especially if the person was genuinely ignorant.

For example, see this thread, which is very civil with many people trying to help the OP understand:
https://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk/5...-2-35-1-a.html

This one where a person admits that they think at least some fullscreen presentations are better was civil:
https://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk-a...er-better.html

Or these...
https://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk-a...pen-matte.html
https://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk-a...rphic-dvd.html
https://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk-a...ullscreen.html
https://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk/3...ison-pics.html
https://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-home-t...-vs-4-3-a.html
https://forum.dvdtalk.com/dvd-talk/4...wide-full.html

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

The problem are these "okay, then have fun at your next alt-right rally" and "oh, you are offended that we are calling you a racist, maybe you need to reflect on why you are being called that", and the general go to comment in the political forum "anyone that supports this administration is a racist!". Plus the general "you must be trolling!" response to any debate discussion on a topic. Then about 6 people will follow up to the hateful comments with their thumbs up and such.

The Trump thread is a vile nasty place right now, is the C*** word acceptable nickname for Kelly Anne Conway, deciding on whether to Trump should be executed for treason, what do about the eventual resurrection from Trump supporters rioting in 2020, and the likely odds on the next democrat president getting assassinated by a Trump supporter. I even saw a recent post from the moderator mentioning the next Hitler is currently watching Trump with hope. If people can't see how ugly that is, then there is no help for that forum. But, sure, you want some conservative posters in that forum to discuss the new tariff agreement with Mexico. Sure thing.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Thanks Jay. Yeah, probably not the best analogy to use, then. I was just trying to use something that everyone here would (hopefully) relate to in some way, but you're right that the discussions weren't as negatively emotional as I would have thought/recalled. In fact... that in itself is a good point. Sometimes, especially in the moment, we see others' posts as being more emotional/accusatory than they really are when you're able to take a step back and review it after cooling off, just as IBJoel says above as well. :up:

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Maybe we've got a generational gap going or something, because among my generation saying someone is on drugs is synonymous with, "You're crazy, " or, "That's stupid." Certainly not an accusation of taking illegal narcotics.

I thought that you were ok with jokes. (Gunn...)

Who says your interpretation of those posts is accurate? You do seem like you look to be offended. I've posted things with humorous intent and you ass/u/med the worst. There isn't always nefarious or malicious intent. I've seen several innocent people accused of being racists and sexists when it wasn't warranted.

And that's why you address the comment, not the person. Not if you're seriously going nuclear on them. You don't know that person. You don't know how he lives his life. You're looking at very scant information and jumping to huge conclusions.

It is completely unacceptable to accuse someone of those things when you really can't know. What you think or suspect is far removed from fact.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Are you serious? Really? Personal attacks against other board members' personal character isn't objectionable?

Wow.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

You probably shouldn't use "you're crazy" either. The idea is to attack the position, not the person. "That's stupid" is more acceptable since the "that's" is likely in reference to a statement or stance, not the person.

Like making insinuations that someone is likely a pedophile because they made a few pedophile jokes?

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Maybe report the specific posts you think are objectionable.

Personally, I went back over the last two Bond pages, and there's no personal attack. There's Sonic's "No Bond fan should get in an outrage over a black actor playing Bond unless they are racist..." but that's not calling any specific person racist. Instead of assuming he was calling you racist, you could've countered, "well, I think there's valid, non-racist reasons to object to it, and they are...."

It's a fine line though. One thing I think is that there's a difference between calling a specific statement or argument out as racist, and saying "you are racist." People get very upset being called sexist, racist, etc, but we still need to be able to call out sexist, racist, etc. statements and arguments.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

When someone quotes not one but two of your posts and says the only reason to have that opinion is if someone is racist it's pretty clear that they're referencing the person they quoted.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Fair enough. Did you report it?

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

The government is telling you what to do? That's interesting.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

When somebody brings the topic of racism up in a Bond character discussion and implies that anyone who disagrees with a non-white Bond character is racist...you don't see a problem with that?

The members who are bringing up that subject, have been around long enough to know what is proper and what is not. And they are bringing it outside the politics forum because they can't accuse enough people in THAT forum of racism and whatever else.

It's certainly not story's fault. It's got nothing to do with mods not coming across it. It's got everything to do with members who know damn well the topic is going to be flamed and getting controversy when they post it.

So, again, is that not the definition of Troll behavior? Some of us are called trolls all the time but who are the people who start the accusations of racism and other political issues...outside the politics forum?

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

That's the point - we shouldn't have to. That kind of behavior should be clearly unacceptable and the Mods should set the tone that behavior like that will not be tolerated.

Look, I don't cate if someone calls me stupid or crazy or ignorant, but when you attack my character or integrity you've really crossed the line.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Look, that's EXACTLY what the report button is for. The mods don't have the time or the inclination to read every thread.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

I get that. I mod a different board myself. But when you know a thread is near dumpster fire territory you should be checking that thread a couple times a day.

And it's also the fact that no one ever sees any repercussions for that behavior, so it emboldens some people.

And when a mod (Dex) starts piling on your faith in the mods takes a dump.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

But... the reporting is to alert the mods.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but while mods are identified as such on all their posts, mods typically only mod certain specific subforums. So even if you see a "mod" participating in a thread, they may not be moderating that thread.

Reporting a post should alert the proper mod to review and actually moderate.

While I agree that attacking the person isn't right, there still needs to be room to talk about racism and other things. Maybe not say "you're racist for thinking that," but "that thinking is racist" could be a fair criticism of something.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

So if somebody screamed at you for not moderating a post in a thread you didn't know was a "dumpster fire," you don't think the fact that nobody reported it should be considered?

...because that behavior wasn't reported.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

Just my opinion, but the two examples of posts from dex14 referenced out of the Guardians thread do not strike me as "piling on" at all. One refers back to a comment made in a previous topic that provides insight and background to where a poster, B5Erik in this case, might be coming from.

And the other is just a general statement about the topics that people seem to get worked up about and not targeting any user in particular.

But I agree, the alt right comment should have been addressed (and reported).

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

:up: You and I seem to agree on far more than we disagree (even if I'm clearly more Left due to my accent ;)) I looked at those same posts and came to the same conclusions. I remembered someone posting about their coworker in the harassment thread, but forgot who it was. And the one about the Catholic priests was an observation about this place in general. I posted the thread about the priests, and there wasn't a single reply for four days, well after it had become big news, but someone digs up James Gunn's poor-taste jokes, and there's pages and pages of discussion in two separate threads (now three!). It's wild. I mean, get why the Gunn situation is a popular discussion on this here entertainment forum, but I thought Dex's comment was an observation on the difference between the GotG2 thread and the Catholic church thread, not an attack on any specific poster at all, and definitely not "piling on."

Also, for what it's worth, I also agree with you on the alt-right comment. It should have been reported and dealt with. I do find it worrisome that people tend to parrot alt-right talking points without really realizing where they originate from (Side note: I'm seeing this a lot with two really for real not DVDTalk people, and I'm genuinely concerned about the truly hateful things they're saying. These are people I wouldn't call alt-right, even though, more and more, they're saying the same things the prominent alt-right people have been saying since before they coined the term.)

There's a lot of "If it's TRUE, it doesn't matter HOW it was found or WHY!" type of talk, which is tough to argue against in a simple manner, because the explanation is more complex than a boolean true/false binary. Ultimately, most people just don't care about the How, Where, When, Why. In this age, Who and What are the only focus. Who: James Gunn. What: Made pedophile jokes. If that's all that matters to most people, it's really difficult to get them to even try to care about the other bits, and certain nefarious groups of people feed on that willful dismissal.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

If you don't report posts, how are the mods going to see them? We do not have 24/7 monitoring for the site, and if we did, asking volunteers to read an entire 34 page thread isn't feasible. If you have a problem with a post, report it.

Re: Houston, We Have A Problem...
 

This seems like a good time to repeat that many of us have reported posts, but never hear anything back. So we essentially stopped doing it because it didn't seem to be getting anywhere. The mods would probably receive more legit reports if they spent some time giving feedback on why no action was taken and how the reported post was not out of line.