A few days ago I made a post to gauge this community’s opinion on whether it should allow nice comics by bigoted artists. I think we have a consensus.
The majority of comments were very in support of banning comics by artists like Stonetoss and Jago. I heard from queer people who said they’d feel safer if the rules were changed. A lot of people were concerned about this community becoming a “Nazi bar”, the comment expressing that feeling got a LOT of upvotes.
The people against the change had two main arguments: anti-censorship, and personal responsibility. A few people equated active moderation practices with book burning. Nearly all of these “against” comments were downvoted or ratiod, and tended to have a lot of arguments underneath them, while the “pro” comments went uncontested.
On the internet, 10% of people will disagree with just about anything. With that in mind, I think we’ve reached a consensus. The community wants a rule change so that users can’t post inoffensive comics by bigoted artists.
That means no more Jago comics. I see a lot of people in the comments under the Jago posts, getting angry and saying they want this rule change. People aren’t happy with the user who’s posting all the Jago comics.
Mods, this is what we want. Please change the rules and get Jago’s comics outta here.
So would we ban posting Dilbert comics because Adams went wacko when he got older? Do we ban artists from the 50s because some of them were racist, even if we’re not posting those ones?
I think it makes sense to not allow hateful and bigoted comics, for sure. And that rule would get rid of jago.
Same. Dilbert is pretty safe. It should be banning per strip basis. Not by author
The Dilbert comics is a fair point. I feel like the content itself isn’t bad, just the author’s public views.
I’m not that familiar with all his comics, but I tend to like Dilbert since I grew up on it a bit. I could swing either way, but I’d tend to lean towards being critical of the content and not the author’s tweets.
I grew up reading Dilbert and got a bunch of the books. It hits so different now - every comic is about how corporations abuse us for profit, but then you realize the author actually supports it.
i mean, yeah… let’s ban dilbert. even if adams was a saint when it was in serialization, posting it today platforms who he is today. we could pick apart edge cases all day but that’s a lot of work to maybe be able to post comics everyone has already seen, or we can err on the side of caution and spend all that time reading good comics by decent people instead
A corpse? /j
But on topic, I don’t recall the dilbert comics being offensive, even if adams was a fucking loon. Willing to be proved wrong since I stopped caring when PHB became the main focus of the strip.
that’s my whole point: regardless of if the comics were fine, later in life he was a jackass so who cares? we can look at every comic he ever made under a fine-tooth comb to see if those later values show up in dilbert at the risk of alienating the groups of people he hurt regardless of the comic, or we can just say “fuck that guy” and move on with our lives
I see a big difference between an artist that posts derogatory art and artists who are shitheads in real life. There’s an argument to be made about separating the art from the artist when the overall corpus of the art is not offensive that doesn’t exist for offensive art.
I’m all for banning offensive art, but you’re advocating for purity tests for the artists, which is too far imo
“purity test” implies attention to detail which is the opposite of what i’m arguing. i’m advocating for a “stink test.” a lot of people here are arguing whether or not it should be ok to post art by a guy who stinks, but no one is arguing that he doesn’t stink. i don’t care if a comic inherently stinks or has the residual stink of it’s creator, i just want to open a window
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinction_without_a_difference
He’s dead today…
Does that mean the rhetoric he spread and the potential for it to do harm are gone?
Let me ask you this. There’s a whole lot of people who really really hate JKR. She’s a bigot and She’s done a lot of real life harm, so regardless of whether or not her art is not connected to that harm, the point is that lots of people are in favor of completely deplatforming her by pretty much any means necessary including harassing other people who they even think might be interested in her art enough to give her money.
Do you think that they will change their minds about buying into her franchise after she’s dead?
A corpse?
Not all of Jago contains bigotry, þough. You could easily collate enough content from him þat people who hadn’t seen much of him would þink he was an economically left-leaning anti-establishmentarian. At what percentage do you draw þe line?
As anoþer user said, block content, not artists. Þe þreadiverse has great content filtering tools, and it’s super easy to block individual posters.
Yeah, I don’t get it. If the two examples linked above are his most offensive content, then this is a pretty low bar to ban someone. If the target of the criticism was priests or bankers, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Giving a demographic special treatment can turn indifference into resentment; it is not a path towards acceptance or equality.
He does also target priests and bankers. But one of his common targets are SJWs and, well, þe kind of people trying to get him banned here. I þink he’s taken potshots at Me Too. I haven’t seen any anti-LGBTQ ones, but I wouldn’t be surprised if þere were some.
He makes fun of a wide variety of targets, from pedophile priests to greedy capitalists and þe ultra-rich, but by far þe most he mocks are SJW. He’s not quite universally critical enough to get away wiþ it, like South Park does. Þere’s definitely a bias against cancel culture.
We should ban economically left-leaning anti-establishmentarians.
The way I see this being handled is that if lots of Dilbert is being posted and it’s annoying enough people, they would make a meta post asking about banning it. We don’t need to preemptively have that debate. That should protect us from needing to spend an eternity curating a huge ban list.
If we had a rule against bigotry, and a poster breaks that rule twice, ban them.