What do you think of NS's mainly male population?

[Nadkor]

I want a space that's more friendly to women in general, where we don't have people with the mentality of thirteen year olds saying that women don't deserve to be on the Internet, to get out, and to shut up when someone says something sexist.

Sorry. What I am hearing is "I don't want to hear opinions I don't like."
Not much room for debate if you're going to get rid of the opposing side, no matter how asinine the opinion is.

This is a pretty major misreading of what Indi actually said which was not "I don't want to hear opinions I don't like", but was "maybe being the kind of forum where a significant proportion of the posters are teenage boys and where posts such as 'women shouldn't be on the internet' or whatever are bandied around regularly is one of the reasons why we don't have a large proportion of female posters and maybe it would be nice to do something about that".

[Katganistan]

Indi... As much as it pains me to say, I honestly think Night is right, you need to leave NSG for a while.

I am so bad. This is my second warning this week. Prior to that, I had a clean record. >_>

Thing is, you bring a lot to the table. It's just that in both cases, you got upset and went a little too far. If you find yourself getting that annoyed, take a ten minute break.

[Nadkor]

It hardly matters, this isn't a dating site after all. If it doesn't appeal to a broad audience then not much can be done about that.

See, how this reads is "I don't care about the opinions and experiences of women I'm not potentially going to fuck".

[Individuality-ness]

I am so bad. This is my second warning this week. Prior to that, I had a clean record. >_>

Thing is, you bring a lot to the table. It's just that in both cases, you got upset and went a little too far. If you find yourself getting that annoyed, take a ten minute break.

I am aware. I know I should not have gone that far, I should have taken a break. My apologies.

[Forsher]

I want a space that's more friendly to women in general, where we don't have people with the mentality of thirteen year olds saying that women don't deserve to be on the Internet, to get out, and to shut up when someone says something sexist.

Sorry. What I am hearing is "I don't want to hear opinions I don't like."
Not much room for debate if you're going to get rid of the opposing side, no matter how asinine the opinion is.

I reckon you probably view such comments in much the same way as Individuality-ness does and that's why I am often quite suspicious of certain claims that the likes of the (spelt incorrectly*) "dykes" comment that TSM brought up (without sources, that helps too) are condoned by the mods.

* That is to say, it's very much possible that "dyke" isn't actually being used offensively. For example, I've been reported for my use of fag and, well, NERVUN's ruling says it all. Well, basically it comes back to the idea that in my experience "dykes" are very common in the Netherlands.

[Katganistan]

Sorry. What I am hearing is "I don't want to hear opinions I don't like."
Not much room for debate if you're going to get rid of the opposing side, no matter how asinine the opinion is.

Some opinions aren't worth taking seriously.

Some are worth having out there so other people can see just how asinine they are.
I never said you had to take them seriously.

[2nd Baron of Moyne]

See, how this reads is "I don't care about the opinions and experiences of women I'm not potentially going to fuck".

Holy shit, it's palpably bothering me how much I just realized I think that way.

I need to immediately go back to pretending I don't think that way.

Okay, done.

[Individuality-ness]

I want a space that's more friendly to women in general, where we don't have people with the mentality of thirteen year olds saying that women don't deserve to be on the Internet, to get out, and to shut up when someone says something sexist.

Sorry. What I am hearing is "I don't want to hear opinions I don't like."
Not much room for debate if you're going to get rid of the opposing side, no matter how asinine the opinion is.

I don't want to shut down debate. That would be asinine and counterproductive.

What I want is a bit more civility. I want less people who say "women shouldn't be on the internet hurr durr make me a sandwich" and then try to tell those who call them out on it to shut up. And I don't want a repeat of what happened in my gender-neutral discussion thread.

[Individuality-ness]

Sorry. What I am hearing is "I don't want to hear opinions I don't like."
Not much room for debate if you're going to get rid of the opposing side, no matter how asinine the opinion is.

I reckon you probably view such comments in much the same way as Individuality-ness does and that's why I am often quite suspicious of certain claims that the likes of the (spelt incorrectly*) "dykes" comment that TSM brought up (without sources, that helps too) are condoned by the mods.

* That is to say, it's very much possible that "dyke" isn't actually being used offensively. For example, I've been reported for my use of fag and, well, NERVUN's ruling says it all. Well, basically it comes back to the idea that in my experience "dykes" are very common in the Netherlands.

Actually, what happened in that one was that Fris said "not trolling", then Euro said "trolling" and banned the person accordingly.

This was what TSM was referring to.

[Katganistan]

Sorry. What I am hearing is "I don't want to hear opinions I don't like."
Not much room for debate if you're going to get rid of the opposing side, no matter how asinine the opinion is.

I don't want to shut down debate. That would be asinine and counterproductive.

What I want is a bit more civility. I want less people who say "women shouldn't be on the internet hurr durr make me a sandwich" and then try to tell those who call them out on it to shut up. And I don't want a repeat of what happened in my gender-neutral discussion thread.

TBQH I would like that too. A lot.
The best we can do is tell folks they are out of order when they are being rude, warn them for continuing, ban them if they persist, and delete them when it's clear they don't have any interest in civil debate.

[Olthar]

Some opinions aren't worth taking seriously.

Some are worth having out there so other people can see just how asinine they are.
I never said you had to take them seriously.

"There are no women on the internet" isn't one worth keeping around.

[Nailed to the Perch]

I want a space that's more friendly to women in general, where we don't have people with the mentality of thirteen year olds saying that women don't deserve to be on the Internet, to get out, and to shut up when someone says something sexist.

Sorry. What I am hearing is "I don't want to hear opinions I don't like."
Not much room for debate if you're going to get rid of the opposing side, no matter how asinine the opinion is.

I think, as Nadkor said, you're misreading Indi's point pretty significantly. Disagreement is fine, but the rules establish certain opinions as ones you're not allowed to state here, even if you truly believe them - as well they should, because the forum is not improved by letting people "debate" someone's statement that all members of [insert race here] are subhuman or that all members of [insert religion here] should be murdered. Indi is simply saying that the forum would be better and more attractive to female posters if comments like "lol there are no girls on the internet, now make me a sandwich" were among the things not tolerated here, because they in no way contribute to constructive debate.

ETA: Aaaaand ninja'd by Indi herself, heh.

[Individuality-ness]

I don't want to shut down debate. That would be asinine and counterproductive.

What I want is a bit more civility. I want less people who say "women shouldn't be on the internet hurr durr make me a sandwich" and then try to tell those who call them out on it to shut up. And I don't want a repeat of what happened in my gender-neutral discussion thread.

TBQH I would like that too. A lot.
The best we can do is tell folks they are out of order when they are being rude, warn them for continuing, ban them if they persist, and delete them when it's clear they don't have any interest in civil debate.

I know, but sometimes I feel as if there's a disconnect between players and moderation, when players already knew someone was trolling and it would take moderation ages to actually get there. Sometimes I don't report stuff because I'm afraid that it's too borderline to be actionable.

The really obvious misogyny, yes, that's enough to get people banned. But how much is "obvious"?

[Forsher]

I reckon you probably view such comments in much the same way as Individuality-ness does and that's why I am often quite suspicious of certain claims that the likes of the (spelt incorrectly*) "dykes" comment that TSM brought up (without sources, that helps too) are condoned by the mods.

* That is to say, it's very much possible that "dyke" isn't actually being used offensively. For example, I've been reported for my use of fag and, well, NERVUN's ruling says it all. Well, basically it comes back to the idea that in my experience "dykes" are very common in the Netherlands.

Actually, what happened in that one was that Fris said "not trolling", then Euro said "trolling" and banned the person accordingly.

This was what TSM was referring to.

Ah, I was looking at a different example that was very much not an easy decision. Which is stupid because this one is both more recent and I've read it before (I read moderation as a habit, like a lot of people).

[Individuality-ness]

Actually, what happened in that one was that Fris said "not trolling", then Euro said "trolling" and banned the person accordingly.

This was what TSM was referring to.

Ah, I was looking at a different example that was very much not an easy decision. Which is stupid because this one is both more recent and I've read it before (I read moderation as a habit, like a lot of people).

Well yeah, I think I read almost all of the moderation threads.

[2nd Baron of Moyne]

I know, but sometimes I feel as if there's a disconnect between players and moderation, when players already knew someone was trolling and it would take moderation ages to actually get there. Sometimes I don't report stuff because I'm afraid that it's too borderline to be actionable.

The really obvious misogyny, yes, that's enough to get people banned. But how much is "obvious"?

I have some tiny modicum of experience with this, and I will say that on NSG, obvious is a spectrum wherein not all see with mammalian eyes.

[Olthar]

I know, but sometimes I feel as if there's a disconnect between players and moderation, when players already knew someone was trolling and it would take moderation ages to actually get there. Sometimes I don't report stuff because I'm afraid that it's too borderline to be actionable.

The really obvious misogyny, yes, that's enough to get people banned. But how much is "obvious"?

I have some tiny modicum of experience with this, and I will say that on NSG, obvious is a spectrum wherein not all see with mammalian eyes.

Are you implying that the moderators are bird people?

[2nd Baron of Moyne]

I have some tiny modicum of experience with this, and I will say that on NSG, obvious is a spectrum wherein not all see with mammalian eyes.

Are you implying that the moderators are bird people?

No, that's preposterous. Don't be ridiculous.

David Icke has proven that they're actually reptiles.

[Nazi Flower Power]

Normally, I don't mind NSG being mostly male. Some of the threads on feminism and rape can get a little annoying, though, with the large numbers of angry teenage boys.

To be honest, I wish there were more genderqueer folk, as the queer voice is rather small in most threads dealing with gender as compared to Cisgenders, both gay and straight.

That's probably just a reflection of the general population. Cisgendered people are much more common in RL too.

[Veceria]

I don't mind. I grew up with websites who were mostly frequented by males. Of course it is nice to see females or trans folk, but I won't force anyone to join NS just to fullfill a quota or something

[Faolinn]

Because the patriarchal societies we all come from generally discourage women from even participating in simulations of political dealings on an institutional level at the very least? That's my guess on why it is so.

[Forsher]

Because the patriarchal societies we all come from generally discourages women from even participating in simulations of political dealings on an institutional level at the very least? That's my guess on why it is so.

Then why is that effect more pronounced now than in the past? What changed?

[Faolinn]

Because the patriarchal societies we all come from generally discourages women from even participating in simulations of political dealings on an institutional level at the very least? That's my guess on why it is so.

Then why is that effect more pronounced now than in the past? What changed?

My answer depends on what exactly you mean by that.World wide it's declining but it's been entrenched in our society for so long that it will die a terrible and slow death.

[Battenburgia]

Because the patriarchal societies we all come from generally discourage women from even participating in simulations of political dealings on an institutional level at the very least? That's my guess on why it is so.

or perhaps women are just too busy actually running the world to want to pretend they are in their spare time

[Forsher]

Then why is that effect more pronounced now than in the past? What changed?

My answer depends on what exactly you mean by that.World wide it's declining but it's been entrenched in our society for so long that it will die a terrible and slow death.

Which is really weird given the cited decline from a third to an eighth (although I believe that the real figure for the current percentage to be more like a tenth).

You're telling me that The Patriarchy is declining to help explain why the number of females on NS is falling (although it's more NSG) given that the supposed reason for the small number is the Patriarchy?

I think you just misunderstood what I was saying though, hence my confusion.

Because the patriarchal societies we all come from generally discourage women from even participating in simulations of political dealings on an institutional level at the very least? That's my guess on why it is so.

or perhaps women are just too busy actually running the world to want to pretend they are in their spare time

Definitely doesn't jive with the "patriarchal societies" answer.