Slop.

The problem is that this person is proud to be a racist. He literally calls these tweets 'expert racism'

I hope you’re not suggesting that we ignore the advice of marginalized groups in our community.

This comes off nearly as bait. No one is saying that we must silence the voices of marginalized groups in this community, they are simply acting like there is space between "ignore" and "obey" where we can actually discuss what is correct or incorrect in a way that people can actually engage with rather than receive dictates.

I'm absolutely revolted by the idea of needing to say "I'm ND btw" to not immediately get written off as a neurotypical chauvinist, but I guess I need to because only people in that category get to say something about this topic by your logic. I'm ND btw.

We should consider their feelings, and it may well be that that's the deciding factor (I expect that to be the case), but this idea that someone suggests that we take a different approach and, instead of being properly refuted or referred to a refutation is simply told "You don't want to be a bad ally, do you? You aren't trying to oppress people, are you?" is gross and thought-terminating.

Something as simple as "There isn't much intrinsic value in the rhetorical affectation that you're attached to, but there is value in 'making this a more welcoming environment for' ND comrades" actually engages with them while still substantively being what I assume you were trying to say (which is why I phrased it quoting you).

And it is actually my opinion that, if it is a big deal to them, then whatever, it doesn't matter so go ahead I guess. Just put it in the language filter with the hundred thousand other words that mean "unintelligent" along with, I must assume, the word "unintelligent," so that people don't need to keep the list in their head of what common words aren't allowed here. I feel like there's probably a healthier way to deal with this, but I don't have the motivation to try to work through that with people, so I have no grounds for asserting that it must be the route the board takes. So yeah, I guess I have contempt for the decision, but I don't disagree on a practical level, if that makes sense.

Complete aside: I fucking love how people have sniped at me endlessly for being a "debate bro" or whatever phrasing they prefer to say "autist who is annoying me" but here is the place where we have Manichean language policy. Maybe that was updated, since I do see the term less now, but I likewise don't have the motivation to follow what the admins adjudicate.

Because being "dumb" (in both senses of the word) is not necessarily a bad thing. Some people can't retain and recall reliably as much information or they may learn more slowly, but neither of those things are present here. This person collected a lot of information and can reliably recall it, they're just wrong. Lack of what one would normally call "intelligence" is not the issue. You could as well call them ignorant, which at least is accurate, but again it's not morally wrong to be ignorant. Then there's what we really see here: willful ignorance. Intentionally supporting harmful false facts in spite of presented evidence. That's not a lack of intelligence, and often the most insidious of these are the more intelligent ones who may use rhetoric or pseudoscience more effectively than this fellow in the post. I know it forces people to use more words and doesn't allow for snappy comebacks, but maybe we can correctly identify the problem and not marginalize innocent people in the process.