Bad Faith and Sealioning

[Deset Gled]

Replace "sea mammals" with "ethnic groups" and sea lions "any particular ethnic group", does it come across as a bit rude or a bit racist?

If you see someone making racist comments on ENWorld, use the report function.

If you want to engage in Civil Disobedience in real life to enact real changes, more power to you, but find a better forum for it than a D&D news site.

 

[Bagpuss]

If you see someone making racist comments on ENWorld, use the report function.

Generally I do, not that it happens much.

But asking bigots why they think what they do is important, both to understanding what motivates them, and in challenging the opinions they hold.

 

[Thomas Shey]

And, just to add to this point, if you hold an opinion that cannot stand up to scrutiny, then, again, it's time for a bit of self-reflection. If one person challenges your opinion, that's one thing. But, if multiple people challenge it, it's probably a good idea to step back and re-evaluate.

Though all that may indicate is you're expressing it the wrong place. Pick almost any forum or Discord dedicated to a particularly game system, and go into it and express criticism of that system. Even if a fair number of people agree with your criticism, or at least think there is something to it, you will get swarmed by a large number of people who don't agree with it, and have enough emotional investment in the system to view your criticism as an attack (if you're new to the venue, their reaction will likely be even stronger). You can virtually count on it.

 

[Jahydin]

That's a hard no from me, two ways.

First, one of the key takeaways should be that someone being "a bit rude" does not justify the behavior. It doesn't matter how much someone "deserves" it. A valid excuse to start sealioning does not exist (in the context of ENWorld, or most other internet forums).

Second, the sea lion actually validates the original complaint. By being a jerk when arguing against her, he proves her right. Which is just one of many reasons why bad faith and fallacious arguments are poor rhetorical tools.

A hard "no"? I wasn't expecting someone to be so squarely in defense of the lady's actions, even going so far in saying she was validated!

Understand the sea lion's behavior is bad, but if the topic expressed wasn't one of bigotry (since sea lions in this world are sentient) or there was a panel showing her apologizing for the silly remark and the sea lion still pestered her, then it would make her more of a sympathetic character.

Also, as discussed here, insincerity plays a role as well. From the comic, for all I know, the sea lion is legitimately offended and is sincerely asking for an answer.

As is, they're both in the wrong as far as etiquette is concerned, but if I had to choose the worst offender, it would have to be bigotry > pestering.

Anyways, my comment was meant to be taken light-heartily (thus the "smirk" emoji). Just some thoughts that were running through my head as I thought about the comic some more as my head hit the pillow last night. I don't want anyone to take them too seriously.

 

[Bedrockgames]

The problem with the original comic, is if you replace the her statement about Sea Lions, with any group (be it by gender, sexuality, race or religion) then the woman is clearly making a bigoted statement, surely members of that group deserve some justification as to why she is being exclusionary to them.

Also Sea-Lioning is generally referred to people persistently asking someone to defend their bigoted stance, when like in the comic they never do. However unlike the comic, generally the Sea Lion sticks to the thread or topic that the person made their bigoted statement (but yeah will keep asking why that person hold bigoted beliefs), it's not like they can follow them home or off the internet.

Maybe that comic would make sense if there were earlier comics where we saw the Sea Lion being a complete dick towards her, that might explain her and justify her opinion of them, and provide a wider context for this comic. But still unless all Sea Lions are always being dicks in earlier comic then she is still judging a whole group of marine mammals on the actions of one... sounds a little racist (speciesist), yet we are meant to believe she's the victim.

I do think this is a legitimate criticism of the sea lion cartoon. I think the issue with it is people can project whatever group they want onto the sea lion (so most people probably mentally insert "this annoying cluster of poster type"). I also think it is so malleable. People seem to accept it when it is against something they don't like, but reject it when it is they feel someone else is doing it to them or to their side. Obviously there is a mod policy against so I try to make a point of not dong anything that could be labeled seasoning. But it is a pretty amorphous concept and very subjective (I find it to be one of those rhetorical tools that tends to be used to largely to dismiss people). I just don't find it a terribly useful category, like a lot of things that have made their way into online discussions via cartoons and memes

 

[zakael19]

The more recent version of the original comic's thrust that's probably more relevant to this place is the long running social media (Twitter) "So you hate waffles" rule. It's so common online for somebody to go "I like a thing" (say: 5e; narrativist play; trad GM authority dungeon crawls; insert your topic here) and then somebody else shows up to go "wait why do you hate [other thing]."

And then its 17 pages later in a discussion and the person is still going "well I just don't understand why you hate [otherthing] so much" as the original poster is totally worn down and has given up on their point and 6 other people have showed up to only engage on the "OP obviously hates thing" line of conversation that was never stated.

 

[Jahydin]

The more recent version of the original comic's thrust that's probably more relevant to this place is the long running social media (Twitter) "So you hate waffles" rule. It's so common online for somebody to go "I like a thing" (say: 5e; narrativist play; trad GM authority dungeon crawls; insert your topic here) and then somebody else shows up to go "wait why do you hate [other thing]."

And then its 17 pages later in a discussion and the person is still going "well I just don't understand why you hate [otherthing] so much" as the original poster is totally worn down and has given up on their point and 6 other people have showed up to only engage on the "OP obviously hates thing" line of conversation that was never stated.

That's a really good point.

I'm seeing a version of the comic where she says she "loves seals" and then the sea lion pops up to pester her about her hate for sea lions.

 

[Morrus]

The problem with the original comic, is if you replace the her statement about Sea Lions, with any group (be it by gender, sexuality, race or religion) then the woman is clearly making a bigoted statement, surely members of that group deserve some justification as to why she is being exclusionary to them.

Also Sea-Lioning is generally referred to people persistently asking someone to defend their bigoted stance, when like in the comic they never do. However unlike the comic, generally the Sea Lion sticks to the thread or topic that the person made their bigoted statement (but yeah will keep asking why that person hold bigoted beliefs), it's not like they can follow them home or off the internet.

Maybe that comic would make sense if there were earlier comics where we saw the Sea Lion being a complete dick towards her, that might explain her and justify her opinion of them, and provide a wider context for this comic. But still unless all Sea Lions are always being dicks in earlier comic then she is still judging a whole group of marine mammals on the actions of one... sounds a little racist (speciesist), yet we are meant to believe she's the victim.

To be excruciatingly clear, whatever you think of the original comic, sealioning is not acceptable here. If we think that’s what you’re doing, we’ll act.

 

[FrogReaver]

To be excruciatingly clear, whatever you think of the original comic, sealioning is not acceptable here. If we think that’s what you’re doing, we’ll act.

I have 2 inquiries then.

You have said ‘it’s not sea lioning if it’s not bad faith’.

Yet it’s nearly impossible to say whether someone is doing something in bad faith. So how would it be determined whatever reported sea lioning behavior was bad faith?

Are you all really getting into the business of determining and moderating ‘bad faith’ in general, or is that only reserved for sea lioning?

The past advice from the mod team has typically been, if you think someone is acting in bad faith then ignore them.

 

[Morrus]

Are you all really getting into the business of determining and moderating ‘bad faith’ in general,m

That’s literally our job. If you don’t trust us to do that in good faith, we are comfortable with you going to other communities run by people you do trust. Basically if the good faith trust is broken, either you leave or I do. It’s my place, so you do.

Sorry man, that’s just how it is. iI’s just basic social skills. We’re not here to educate you or get all My Fair Lady on you—call your mum, or your high school teacher, or your therapist, or somebody. We’re not qualified to help you if you don’t understand how to interact with others. We’re not a court which can penalise you, or deprive you of wealth, life, or liberty. We’re just here to keep the peace the best way we can.

We’re not politicians. You’re not customers. You’re guests, and you’re expected to behave accordingly. If you’re in my house and you don’t like my rules, then leave. If you can’t understand the rules, then go somewhere with rules you do understand. It’s that simple.