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.

  • _NetNomad@fedia.io
    1612·
    4 天前

    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

    • Passerby6497@lemmy.worldEnglish
      121·
      4 天前

      posting it today platforms who he is today.

      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.

      • _NetNomad@fedia.io
        54·
        4 天前

        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

        • Passerby6497@lemmy.worldEnglish
          41·
          4 天前

          regardless of if the comics were fine, later in life he was a jackass so who cares?

          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

          • _NetNomad@fedia.io
            32·
            3 天前

            “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

      • deliriousdreams@fedia.io
        1·
        3 天前

        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?

        • zout@fedia.io
          1·
          2 天前

          Does that mean the rhetoric he spread and the potential for it to do harm are gone?

          Nope, just stating he is dead today, since the OP seemed unaware. About Rowling; no I don’t think so. But it could well be that decades after her dying people will have forgot about her world views, and the books will be in fashion again. This is assuming the books are worth reading, which I hear they’re not.