WavesInEternity - warning

[Fragment]

Comment that could be taken as promoting illicit drug use.

[WavesInEternity]

I think that's definitely too strict for an obvious joke, but I'll be more careful in any case.

It's a very fine line to toe considering that I make no secret of my belief that those drugs should be legal and that they have immense therapeutic potential. For instance, couldn't this be construed as "advocating" drug use? (If anything, in that case, I was serious, while in that other, I wasn't.)

Edit: I mean, in reply to Walton saying he needed to let off steam, if I had replied something like "Take off your clothes, go run around in the streets, rob a bank. Dunno, that's how I do it. ", would that be "advocating illegal activity"? If anything, I'd be highlighting the self-destructive nature of what he intends to do in that thread.

[Fragment]

Given your frequent statements referring to your own drug use, it's not as obviously a joke as you think.

If someone had made frequent statements referring to their history robbing banks, then said "maybe you should go rob a bank, it'll help you feel better" that would also be subject to warning.

This warning came with a context, it wasn't based on a single post.

I'd also like it if you could pull back and be a little more euphemistic about some of your sexual experiences, too. Especially when talking to AAMs. You haven't given graphic descriptions or anything. But you also haven't shown much restraint.

We shouldn't have to care about that, but we do have to care about it. I think the things you mention should be part of comprehensive sex and relationship education. But as a publicly accessible MAP activist forum online where many people, especially self-identify AAMs, may be catfish, trolls or antis...

Most of the committee have been involved in the community since the days of Boylover.net. Many of our rules were explicitly made against that backdrop.

[WavesInEternity]

This warning came with a context, it wasn't based on a single post.

That context, then, should also take into account the fact that I've repeatedly said that those substances deserve respect and caution, which is very much not what my joke post was suggesting. When I seriously recommend the use of psychedelics, it's with the philosophy of an experienced trip sitter, not as a silly off-hand one-liner. As for the part about "that's how I do it", it should take into account my statement that I hate water like a cat, so definitely no "dancing under the rain" for me.

We shouldn't have to care about that, but we do have to care about it. I think the things you mention should be part of comprehensive sex and relationship education. But as a publicly accessible MAP activist forum online where many people, especially self-identify AAMs, may be catfish, trolls or antis...

I'd like to understand... even if they are catfish, trolls, or antis, what's the risk?

[Fragment]

I'd like to understand... even if they are catfish, trolls, or antis, what's the risk?

There are two main risks as I see it. The first regarding the kind of forum culture being created and what that might mean for people less aware than you. Part of effective moderation is about creating an atmosphere where people don't behave foolishly, even if a moderator isn't online to immediately clean it up.

The second risk is potentially being seen as a "pedophile ring" that attracts LEA attention if the forum culture strays too far from "cold and clinical".

And individual post may not itself be dangerous, but drawing a bright line stops the forum from moving in a direction that wouldn't be safe.

And I hate that we have to do it. It feels hypocritical to talk about "erring on the side of caution" given my stance on AMSC. But law enforcement in the west aren't fucking around.

[WavesInEternity]

There are two main risks as I see it. The first regarding the kind of forum culture being created and what that might mean for people less aware than you. Part of effective moderation is about creating an atmosphere where people don't behave foolishly, even if a moderator isn't online to immediately clean it up.

The second risk is potentially being seen as a "pedophile ring" that attracts LEA attention if the forum culture strays too far from "cold and clinical".

And individual post may not itself be dangerous, but drawing a bright line stops the forum from moving in a direction that wouldn't be safe.

And I hate that we have to do it. It feels hypocritical to talk about "erring on the side of caution" given my stance on AMSC. But law enforcement in the west aren't fucking around.

Regarding the first risk, considering how incredibly vague that is, I'm definitely going to have a lot of trouble determining what's "acceptable" and what isn't, unless you're saying that the forum culture should strictly remain "cold and clinical" regarding sexual matters.

Regarding the second risk, it baffles me that you think my discussion of past sexual experiences with adults is likely to give the impression that we're a "pedophile ring" any more than the many people discussing their attraction, sometimes to babies, and how attractive actual children around them are.

Could you give an example of what I should avoid? Preferably recent, as I was told to be more careful with AAMs specifically once in the past and I have in fact tried to do that.

[Fragment]

Pull it back 20%.

That seems pretty concrete.

my discussion of past sexual experiences with adults

Attraction to minors still needs to be discussed in a sterile way to feel safe. Bringing sexualized language- even about experiences with adults- into it, feels risky to me and the other mods. It shouldn't, but it does.

[WavesInEternity]

Pull it back 20%.

That seems pretty concrete.

It really doesn't... you may not understand, and it may even appear incomprehensible to you (as it often has to people around me) but as I stated elsewhere, I don't have a "filter" like neurotypical people do. I can follow very specific and very obvious rules, but that's about it. That's just the way my particular autistic mind works. Yes, it has landed me in trouble sometimes. No, I was never able to change.

As a result, I'm not confident that I can do what you ask of me. Would it be better for me to leave?

[Fragment]

Would it be better for me to leave?

No.