Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic failed, and it became a general discussion thread with almost no moderation related posts at all. And those that were posted were so buried in non-mod posts that it became a huge time drain on the mods to sort through them. Then, when off topic posts were deleted posters complained about that.
This led to the closing of the mod discussion thread, replaced by the post report/pm approach. This has filtered out lots of noise, but has resulted at times in the General Discussion Thread turning into a quasi-mod thread. This is not desirable, but going back to the old mod thread is also not a workable option.
Therefore, I have created this new moderation thread, but with a different purpose and ground rules than previous mod threads. The purpose of this thread is to provide a place for posters to pose questions to the mods about how policies are applied; to bring to the mods attention posts they think are inappropriate and reach the level of requiring mod action; and for mods to communicate to posters things like changes or clarifications to policies, bannings, etc.
Now let me tell you what this thread is NOT a place for. It is not for nonmoderation related posts, even if the discussion originates from a comment in in a mod related post. It is not for posters to post their opinions about other posters or whether a poster should be banned. It is not to rehash past grievances about mod decisions from months or years ago. The focus of this thread will be recent posts that require action now. Or questions about current policies and enforcement.
So basically, this is a thread to ask mods questions. Which means, pretty much that only mods should be answering those questions. If a poster asks why a particular post was deleted or allowed, only a mod can answer that. Everyone else who wants to jump in with their opinion or their mod war story needs to stay out of it. It just increases the noise to signal ratio and does nothing to answer the question.
Everyone needs to understand that this thread has very different rules than the old mod thread and any other thread. Any non-moderation post will be deleted on sight. Not moved to the appropriate thread, just deleted. So don't waste your time crafting a masterpiece post about wars or transgender issues or the presidential election and then post it in this thread. It will be gone. Also, this isnt a thread for general commentary about our mods performance. Posting "browser sucks as a mod" or any such posts that don't actually ask about a policy or request a mod action will be deleted. Everyone is entitled to their opinion about the moderation of this forum. But this thread isnt for complaining about mods. You are free to go to the ATF forum and make your concerns about modding in this forum there.
So with that intro, this thread is open for those who need to bring questions about mod policies or bring inappropriate posts to the mods attention. Again, it is NOT a thread for group discussions about other posters or for other posters to answer questions directed to mods.
We'll see how this goes. If you have what you feel is an open issue raised in the General Discussion Thread, please copy that post or otherwise reintroduce the issue here.
Thanks.
"If you voted for Joe Biden you support people of dying from fentanyl!
Wait even better
If you vote for joe biden you support people dying from fentaanyl and you support
Wait .. if you vote for joe biden you support killing babies!! Maybe if you vote for Trump too
It's such a ridiculous standard you set
If you support Democrats you are for chopping off body parts of children.
If you support Republicans you are for mass shootings at schools.
In a way I think I understand what browser is trying to get at. But he's a braver (more delusional?) man than me if he thinks he's smart enough to thread that needle.
"If you voted for Joe Biden you support people of dying from fentanyl!
Wait even better
If you vote for joe biden you support people dying from fentaanyl and you support
Wait .. if you vote for joe biden you support killing babies!! Maybe if you vote for Trump too
It's such a ridiculous standard you set
Why do you think I don't vote?
If you support Democrats you are for chopping off body parts of children.
If you support Republicans you are for mass shootings at schools.
In a way I think I understand what browser is trying to get at. But he's a braver (more delusional?) man than me if he thinks he's smart enough to thread that needle.
it not browsers argument. its mine. and ofc those other things arent the same.
and ofc it is possible to "support" Israel in a sense but not its actions or agenda, but a) thats not the meaning in this context b) no one here fits that narrow view.
To clarify, I think he was just outlining victor's argument. In his original post iirc, I think he stated he wasn't endorsing such an argument but merely explaining the pov.
It's ultimately a semantic question about what the meaning of "support" is.
I've been accused of supporting genocide just for paying taxes myself and I barely even pay them.
OK i guess Chillrob isnt the only one who either didnt read, didnt understand or forgot what I wrote two weeks ago about moderating this issue of "if you support Israel you support baby killing", so I'll repost it here. You will see that one, it isnt my opinion; and two, however distasteful you find it, it makes a guilt by association argument. If you dont agree, rebut it (NOT IN THIS MOD THREAD).
Re: Politics and Society Moderation Discussion Only Fans Thread
Quote:
QUOTE] Originally Posted by natediggity View Post
Victor is only allowed to post because you have like 7 active posters. It's a business decision.
Yeah, the commission we mods get every time he posts is much higher than the commission we get on other posters. And the posters we ban are the ones we get docked pay every time they post. Business is business.
As far as the baby thing goes, his argument is fairly straight forward (and tiresome) and goes something like this:
Israeli forces are killing babies (and civilians) in Gaza by the thousands.
The Israeli government is well aware of this.
The Israeli government continues bombings that kill babies in Gaza.
The Israeli government therefore has made a deliberate decision to kill babies because they have decided that destroying Hamas is more important than stopping the killing of babies.
If they prioritized the bables lives over destroying Hamas through bombings they would stop the bombing, but they don't.
Any country that supports the Israeli war effort is therefore de facto supporting the killing of babies, regardless of public statements saying things like "they're tragic"
Talk is cheap. If its tragic and other countries want it to stop, they should cut off all aid to Israel, who made the decision that killing babies will continue as long as Hamas remains viable.
Therefore any individual (ie poster in this forum) who claims they support Israel's war effort also de facto supports the baby killings.
The bottom line is if you support Israel and Israel is killing babies, then you support killing babies.
And you can substitute any conflict where one side or the other (like Russia in Ukraine) and follow that same chain of thought.
I put that in a quote box not to suggests those are his words, just to separate it from my commentary.
Now, I don't agree at all with this "logic train" ( if one would even call it that at all). And I think that the continual reference to baby killing in places it doesnt pertain is approching the trolling stage where I will need to take action.
But what hasn't happened, as far as Ive noticed, is a substantial rebuttal of his logic chain. Lots of people say no, I support Israel but not baby killing. And that's great. But I havent seen anyone lay out the case that you can say you support a country's war effort but selectively exclude certain war activities. Particularly in the case of the Israeli bombings, which is a major, if not THE major prong of the war effort. So how can someone say they support Israel's war effort but say they dont support the bombing?
There is an argument to counter this line of thinking. But Im not going to make it. That's up to the other posters to do. Engage in the issue. Point out the flaws in his logic. Make the case that support for Israel is not the same as support for the killing of babies. Of course it can go both ways. Make the argument that supporting Palestinian freedom is not the same as supporting Hamas killing civilians and babies as well.
So as you can tell, as distasteful as this strikes so many people, I dont consider it a name calling issue. I consider it an argument to be rebutted. If no one wants to rebut it, and delve into the topic of whether countries or individuals can support a war effort with weapons and intelligence on one hand while claiming they dont support the effects of those war efforts on the other, that would make an interesting discussion. If not, then either ignore the comment or put him on ignore.
I hope people take up the discussion in the appropriate thread. Please dont do it here.
That should clarify things.
If you support Democrats you are for chopping off body parts of children.
If you support Republicans you are for mass shootings at schools.
When you have posters that post very little actual content but engage in extreme hyperbole it just kills threads. Nobody wants to spend time writing a good post when the response will just be "you want to mutilate children" regardless of what you actually said. That's why so few even bother in the Israel thread.
When you have posters that post very little actual content but engage in extreme hyperbole it just kills threads. Nobody wants to spend time writing a good post when the response will just be "you want to mutilate children" regardless of what you actually said. That's why so few even bother in the Israel thread.
You can always ignore whomever you feel doesn't contribute to a useful discussion under your own arbitrary definition of it.
For ex I like Viktor to write in that thread because it keeps me posted on the narratives of the enemy, and their most recent arguments to justify terrorists
When you have posters that post very little actual content but engage in extreme hyperbole it just kills threads. Nobody wants to spend time writing a good post when the response will just be "you want to mutilate children" regardless of what you actually said. That's why so few even bother in the Israel thread.
I agree on this I avoid the thread for that exact reason
OK. I think the moderation aspect of this issue (from my perspective) has been addressed. If you have a question about that, feel free to post it here. But Im going to delete posts that continue to discuss/critique another poster. That's not the purpose of this thread.
Victor has been temp banned for two weeks for posts culminating with the genocide lover comment. As I've stated a debate can be had about whether supporting a country's war efforts lmplies support for the consequences of those actions. But upping that to being a "genocide lover" is a bridge too far.
See my response to your mod thread post in the mod thread. And dont put mod related posts in a topic thread. And btw, when you make a post and then delete it, the mods still see it.
Then I guess you can see what I think would be the equivalent of that post, which would be unfairly treated differently.
There is no equivalency in those posts, and if I had seen it before you deleted it rather than after I would have banned you again for the same thing I banned you for before. If a mod bans you for something, making another post with the same offense because you didnt agree with the ban will rarely end up with a positive result.
You can always ignore whomever you feel doesn't contribute to a useful discussion under your own arbitrary definition of it.
For ex I like Viktor to write in that thread because it keeps me posted on the narratives of the enemy, and their most recent arguments to justify terrorists
If you are really interested in following the pro Hamas narrative (at least the English version) you could just click on a few of the posts Victor linked to the forum and the Twitter algorithm will pick up on it. It is a big circle jerk and Victor mainly just links the posts with the most engagement.
My understanding is the Arab pro Hamas narrative on Telegram/X is much more wild, as there is no gatekeeper MSM to point out the truth, so they can just blatantly make up propaganda, such as that Hamas is actually winning, and Israel is suffering heavy casualties and they aren't. And obviously the anti-semitism is much more overt.
There is no equivalency in those posts, and if I had seen it before you deleted it rather than after I would have banned you again for the same thing I banned you for before. If a mod bans you for something, making another post with the same offense because you didnt agree with the ban will rarely end up with a positive result.
One baseless ad hominem attack is the same as another in my book.
In the post I was banned for I gave a (highly) debatable logic chain.
My point with it was that it would have been a huge stretch in logic to come up with my conclusion, but I think it also takes a huge stretch of logic to come up with the idea that members of the forum support killing babies, and every member of this forum save one seems to agree with me on that (even you, if I understood your comments on it).
For reference this is the kind of generalized group insults i saw being allowed on this forum, this is why i thought i could use disrespectful language toward groups as well.
If you don't see a difference between saying that Republican voters are racist and saying that immigrants are uncivilized garbage, then I don't know that I can help you. I guess every posts you make here will be a crapshoot for you as to whether it's allowable or not.
If you don't see a difference between saying that Republican voters are racist and saying that immigrants are uncivilized garbage, then I don't know that I can help you. I guess every posts you make here will be a crapshoot for you as to whether it's allowable or not.
This is exactly right. So you might want to consider eliminating gratuitous disrespectful comments from your arguments rather than testing where the line is, as it's always a bit of a gray area.
I deleted all those other posts. This thread is for asking mods questions. Mods will answer. It's not for other posters to chime in with their answers or to bash other posters. The easiest way to look at it is that unlike every other thread, this is not a conversation thread where everyone answers or gives opinions on whatever question is raised to a mod. And is designed so mods can quickly identify those questions without wading through dozens of other posts.
Thanks.
