Moderation Questions and General Chat Thread
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.
writings are not allowed as evidence.
At least not these ones.
It's not enough to jail someone for life.
You can't even read them right?
I don't care enough to tally up but there seems to be quite a bit of left leaning people who post here regularly - chez, jal, micro, d2, vic, Mr rick, Biggerboat, Bryce, CN and both Gansta and Roc are left leaning. I mean, it was pretty much all lefties before but there seems to be at least somewhat of a even mix, atm as opposed to a decrepit shanty shack of sensitive pinko heads.
d2 is a self-confessed Tory. I have some hope for d3, the next generation.
I'd argue it's better than the echo chamber experiment that started off with everyone celebrating that they were finally free of all the reactionary right-wing dogshit, before quickly realising that they had nobody left to dogpile and turning on each other.
This is almost correct. It's is a lot better than the dogshit echo-chamber you're referring to, that did start off with everyone celebrating that they were finally free of all the reactionary right-wing dogshit, before the non conservatives/shitlibs realised who they were posting with and had enough of their self-serving turdisms.
Who are you calling left leaning? I'm just anti-Trump. Is that considered left leaning these days?
Oh, and you forgot Victor. He was so far off into the distance when you looked left, you couldn't see him.
I didnt forget victor, but I'd put you farthest to the right of my list if that makes you feel a little bit better, maybe Roc would sitting directly to your left. Either way, we've got characters from both extremities with a sprinkle of centrists mixed in and the forum has somehow managed to not burn down while having entertaining conversations withs nazis and commies about crypto and handjobs.
I didnt forget victor, but I'd put you farthest to the right of my list if that makes you feel a little bit better, maybe Roc would sitting directly to your left. Either way, we've got characters from both extremities with a sprinkle of centrists mixed in and the forum has somehow managed to not burn down while having entertaining conversations withs nazis and commies about crypto and handjobs.
Did someone say handjobs?
Spoiler
You are wrong in law and fact. The writings were admitted as evidence. They would only be inadmissible if they were recovered in an illegal search, which was not the case.
The larger point, being, of course, that something being inadmissible as evidence is not evidence of factual innocence, nor does it mean that the evidence ceases to exist.
Confessing to the crime has got to be way too prejudicial for a jury.
It seemed like that was what Gansta man set forth this morning in the Israel thread. Again, you seem to be glossing over my point.
Got it. So this is what you perceived as over the top censoring of micro specifically:
It was brought to my attention that there have been more insults in here than normal. Please tone it down. Maybe take a break from this thread if you need. Regardless of any history, short bans may be given if things seem out of control later today or tomorrow when I can make it back here.
This is the lightest possible form of moderation. Yet you perceived it as heavy handed and specifically directed at micro. And to top it off, the person you think you are defending has explicitly stated that, if it were up to him, no one would ever be banned. Micro doesn't want the style of modding that you claim to want.
Got it. So this is what you perceived as over the top censoring of micro specifically:
This is the lightest possible form of moderation. Yet you perceived it as heavy handed and specifically directed at micro. And to top it off, the person you think you are defending has explicitly stated that, if it were up to him, no one would ever be banned. Micro doesn't want the style of modding that you claim to want.
it confounds me that there are people who still don't have him on ignore and even more so there are some who actually engage with his fantasies
My very obvious point here is that mild swears draw the ire of mods while derogatory ethnic slurs and other hateful **** constantly gets a pass.
Again, the question you keep ducking is: what kind of a forum do you want? I think you would agree that making everyone happy is a fool's errand (yes? no?), so which people is the community going to cater to and why?
it sounds like he wants the kind of forum where he isn't the moderator anymore
Where in the world did you get this idea? Most trial exhibits are documents of one sort or another.
I got it from hearing lawyers talk about this case.
This is probably the only case where the most significant evidence, or rather the only non circumstantial evidence was the persons own notes. And like I said these notes mean nothing really or can mean something else.
Its def not enough of evidence to convict someone of murder.
Not on these notes alone.
But that's all they got. Everything else is circumstantial.
My very obvious point here is that mild swears draw the ire of mods while derogatory ethnic slurs and other hateful **** constantly gets a pass.
Again, the question you keep ducking is: what kind of a forum do you want? I think you would agree that making everyone happy is a fool's errand (yes? no?), so which people is the community going to cater to and why?
Dude, nobody here owes you anything.
I don't think anyone does, which is yet another argument for either shutting it down or letting it become a zoo.
I'm just giving my take like you and most everyone else here. No one really has to respond.
I got it from hearing lawyers talk about this case.
This is probably the only case where the most significant evidence was the
persons own notes. And like I said these notes mean nothing really
or can mean something else.
Its def not enough of evidence to convict someone of murder.
Not on these notes alone.
But that's all they got. Everything else is circumstantial.
You say this was the most significant evidence, then say it wasn't enough to convict without other evidence.
But there was other evidence - the shifts she worked and volunteered for that correlated highly with baby deaths. Sure it's not concrete proof but it is evidence of the type you'd expect to see if she was gaily and not to see if she was innocent.
Also, circumstantial evidence can be enough to convict, despite what people like to say.
The forum would be fine if we just banned (temporarily) some of the genocide lovers, rape denialists, Zionists, antisemites, war mongers, and trolls in the Israel thread.
