Skinner's response, the admin chooses to not clarify if MI is covered under new insensitivity rule

[HereSince1628]

at this time.

The following is the text of the reply also available at ATA


"Our intent is that all forms bigoted intolerance should not be permitted.

We wrote the rule to be open-ended so people could apply it wherever there is bigotry on the site. If juries do not deal with bigotry against mentally ill people then we can re-write the rule to clarify."

[mopinko]

1. sheesh.

well, i guess it is on us to point out the comments that withstand juries.

keep an eye out folks, alert, and post here and ata if you see something.

[HereSince1628]

3. Yes, I think this says that those who feel it is insensitive must alert on it

to determine if jurors will treat it as bigotry, to trigger any more specific guidance on insensitivity.

[HereSince1628]

2. A further statement from Skinner, which is stronger, and my reply to that.

This exchange can be seen at the thread in ATA http://www.democraticunderground.com/125910848

Skinner: I just clarified that in fact it is not permitted.

Bigotry against the mentally ill is not permitted in the rules as currently written.

If juries fail and do not remove it we will rewrite the rule.


Me: I accept it as your approach.

I think leaving it the hands of jurors is asking for the existence of a community standard that is regularly breached. The popularity of using stigmatizing language as adjectives within the chauvinism of the "us" good "them" bad nature of discussing political opponents is, as I believe you know, very common on DU.

I respect that this is your decision to make, and I hope that the alerters whose actions are needed to demonstrate when juries fail on this issue will not be acted against.

[Tobin S.]

4. Thanks, HS.

I appreciate your advocacy for the mentally ill.

[HereSince1628]

5. As you know this is a problem of society that is reflected by DU

It's generally made worse in primary and election season, and after high-profile and/or mass shootings.

IMO alerting on it shouldn't be anything like an organized campaign. That would be seen as trolling or worse.

Skinner's second response was clearly stated, he felt bigotry about the mentally ill was covered, even while leaving it up to jurors to deal with alerts.

So if DUers encounter insensitive language that is bigoted toward persons with mental illness, they should feel they can alert on it and make choice in the alert that best name the problem.