Politics and Society Moderation Discussion Only Fans Thread
Hello everyone. I've closed the previous mod thread, and opened this to capture all issues related to moderation policies and actions going forward. I'll kick it off by reposting my intro post from the other thread. Again, I'm happy to be here and look forward to hearing from you.
Browser
Hello everyone.
I'm very pleased to have the opportunity to serve as a moderator in Politics and Society. I asked for this position because I believe we are experiencing a polarization in our politics and society unseen since the 1960s. We may well be at a juncture from which we will either make great progress or suffer great setbacks in regards to our democratic foundations and civil rights over the next few years. So I believe it is important to maintain a forum for discussing these important topics. When the other mods had to step back a bit due to their real life time obligations, I asked to join the mod team to help keep the forum going.
I have not followed this forum in the past, though I have been reading through threads the last few days and made a few posts. This has allowed me to get a sense of the initial impression the forum likely makes on new readers who are deciding if our forum is a place they would like to visit regularly and participate in. While I see some familiar names from the live poker forum, many of you I have not had any interaction with to date. I have no preconceived notions of anyone's posting behavior and will essentially start from a clean slate.
I will shortly post more about my modding approach and give my initial impressions of the forum based on my observations over the last several days. I will be soliciting your input on things you like about the forum that you want to remain, and things you don't like that you would like me to change. Your candid input and feedback is very important to me. Especially, please don't hesitate to let me know if you think a policy or a proposal is a bad idea. I'd rather hear it before it goes into effect than after.
My overall modding principle is simple: Be Nice. Disagreement need not be disrespectful, and everyone must be treated with respect. Calling a poster derogatory names or hurling snarky insults never usefully advances a discussion. It just bogs things down and turns off many would be participants. And it's not nice. Don't do it.
My goal is to have a forum where people with a wide variety of opinions along the political spectrum enjoy expressing and debating their views in a spirited manner, free from insults, bigotry and denigrating comments. If you enjoy discussing these important and often polarizing issues in a passionate, yet respectful manner, I look forward to getting to know you and working with you to create a forum people will enjoy visiting and contributing to. You can be as committed, determined and relentless as you like in advocating for your position. Be persuasive, thought provoking and challenging. But be nice.
I want to thank tame_deuces and King Spew for their support in bringing me onboard and for all the time and effort they have put into making the forum better. While I am taking over most of the day to day modding responsibilities, both are retaining their mod status and superpowers, and will be supporting the forum as their availability permits. And I personally welcome their continued advice and feedback.
Again, I am happy to be here and look forward to getting to know you.
Browser
Jeez. Weed is a hell of a drug.
I've moved the discussion of dicks and assorted things to the general discussion thread. There didnt seem to be enough material to be covered for its own thread.
Clearly my earlier attempt to get the dick conversation to the general thread failed to penetrate. So I moved the additional posts as well. But that's it. Wave that **** around here again and instead of moving it I'll just cut it off.
I deleted that last small sack of messages. As I have said many times, discussion of other members is not allowed itt.
well played sir
He said members
Bowser, I know you don't like me, but hear me out for a second because I thought you might want to reconsider this
So the question raised is whether the bolded part is a racist statement slurring the Palestinian people as a whole that should not be allowed and the post be deleted and/or the poster temp banned; or a harsh and exaggerated personal opinion of the Palestinian people in Gaza that, while many may disagree with, should be allowed to be expressed and then rebutted by others.
IMO while I believe the statement is deliberately extreme to provoke ot
Let me ask you this, have you ever met a Palestinean? Ever had lunch or whatever with a guy from Lebanon or Syria? I find they're generally some of the most decent people you'll find anywhere and they don't deserve to have these ugly racist stereotypes put upon them. There are Midestern communities like Hamtrack and Dearborn with big Palestinean and Arab communities, they're not hotbeds of violent tribalism, they're just boring, normal-ass towns.
Your position that this slurs aren't racist because "Palestinean isn't a race" is so silly it's almost not worth commenting on. These are obviously shop-worn anti-Arab tropes being deployed against people who are overwhelmingly Arab. You'd have to be rather dense not to connect the dots. I'm not even sure why you think bigotry against ethnicity or nation or origin would be more acceptable than racism, it's just an odd point to raise.
BTW, shoutout to Ganstaman, who's doing fine work keeping some of the more ugly anti-LGBT bullshit off of the site via clear, bright-line rules. I know he gets a lot of flack for it, but the quality of the diiscourse has improved dramatically.
Have you considered that Palestinians in the Middle East might, on the whole, have a different attitude towards the West and its values than 1st/2nd generation Palestinian immigrants in Hamtramck and Dearborn (if not at the very least, because the latter is a self-selected group, or raised by that group)? Perhaps with good reason, but different nonetheless.
I'm not sure that having an ex-US Army guy in charge of moderating opinions about conflict in the Middle East is a great idea.
I'm not sure that having an ex-US Army guy in charge of moderating opinions about conflict in the Middle East is a great idea.
I haven't really noticed browser to be particularly biased or opinionated in any particular direction on any topic. His excessive deletions and bans seem to be equal opportunity.
We should also ban referring to Palestinian people as hamas during the Israeli driven genocide.
Bowser, I know you don't like me, but hear me out for a second because I thought you might want to reconsider this
Let me ask you this, have you ever met a Palestinean? Ever had lunch or whatever with a guy from Lebanon or Syria? I find they're generally some of the most decent people you'll find anywhere and they don't deserve to have these ugly racist stereotypes put upon them. There are Midestern communities like Hamtrack and Dearborn wit
I'm not sure that having an ex-US Army guy in charge of moderating opinions about conflict in the Middle East is a great idea.
I'll briefly address jalfrezi's comment, as it ties into trolly's as well.
Im not sure why you would think being an ex Army guy would make any difference in moderating a discussion about a conflict in the ME or anywhere else. Mods enforce forum rules. But in my particular case, my military experiences probably enhance my ability to see all sides. I've lived or worked in about 35 countries around the world, including ME countries. The PSYOP Battalion I commanded had responsibility for the ME, the Horn of Africa and the Asia Pacific regions. Since PSYOP products require an indepth knowledge of cultural aspects of populations we had teams of analysts and Phds, mostly native residents of the key countries in each region. I have had much more exposure to the cultural issues underpinning various regional conflicts than the average military person.
So in my particular case, my experience in the military is likely a positive thing. But as I said, none of that is really required to mod any topic in politics.
This ties in to Trollys first question about whether I had ever met any Palestinians or people from other ME countries. The answer is yes. Dozens. Ive worked in country with military and government personnel of several ME countries as well as have known many who live in the US. And they were all great people. No question about it. My moderator decision about the post in question had nothing to do with my personal opinions of Palestinians.
But Trollys point about having wonderful Palestinians living in various communities in the US has nothing to do with my post or decision either. I specifically addressed that when I wrote that while the negative adjectives were mentioned irt the Palestinian people, it is clear from the context of the post and the discussion that it was referring to the Palestinians living in Gaza, not the worldwide Palestinian population.
As to the racist term, Palestinians are not a race. Arab is not a race. So if someone wants to raise the issue of whether other categories of people should not be stereotyped that's fine. But calling someone a racist clown for the sentence in the quoted post is just a misuse of the term. That's all I was pointing out irt to race. But as I said, that wasnt really the major point in my post.
The issue, from a moderation perspective, is that the first response to someone who you believe makes an extreme statement about a group of people is to rebut the statement rather than to call someone racist, a bigot, a transphobe, etc. Are the Palestinian people in Gaza too radicalized to peacefully accept a governing force from another country? Are they radicalized at all? Does believing Israel should be eliminated as a country mean you are radicalized? If a civilian population has done nothing to overthrow a terrorist group that controls them, are they in anyway complicit in their violence? Is any population that elects a government thereby complicit in that governments actions if they dont take extreme measures to stop them? Is the population of Israel in any way complicit in the massive number of deaths caused by their government and military?
These are sensitive topics that would make for spirited discussions that could likely get heated. But those discussions should take place, in the topic threads. And the response to a comment you disagree with should never be calling someone a racist, nazi, transphobe, etc. That adds nothing at all to the discussion.
Trolly's ban was simply for violating forum rules by calling someone a racist clown, within a day of me highlighting that such comments were not allowed. It doesnt matter if you believe that person is a racist clown, any more than you believe someone is a ****ing moron, or the stupidest person on earth, etc. attack the argument not the person.
And Trolly, you are very mistaken to think I don't like you. Though if you continue to call me bowser I might change my mind. I welcome everyones feedback, whether positive or negative, and I consider it all. I don't categorize posters into those I like or don't like; those who like my modding style or not; or whether someone is left or right on the political spectrum.
Sure, I have my own personal political leanings, but it doesnt affect my mod decisions at all. I don't care who wins our forum fights; I just want a fight that follows the rules of our game.
very balanced - browser was a purple gunner
we should ban the people who love that babies are being killed daily. oh wait, then I would be talking to myself.
lol, more completely unhinged racist lies, great stuff:
From the day they are born Palestinians are radicalized to believe this. In Gaza almost every house has a map of "Palestine from the river to the sea" prominently displayed. Many have copies of Mein Kampf prominently displayed.
Is there anything more unhinged than literally only posting about how bigoted other people are? Why can't you just address this in that thread?
Since you have trouble comprehending even the shortest posts, let me break it down for you.
The first question was a rhetorical question. You see, the purpose of a rhetorical question is to make a point rather than ask for an answer. In this case, I am using this rhetorical device to call you unhinged due to your obsessive compulsion to constantly post about other people's supposedly bigoted posts, to the point that you do not post anything else of substance in this forum . The word "unhinged" is defined as "highly disturbed, unstable, or distraught." So to summarize, your incessant need to point out that you don't like other people's posts, and no other forum activity on your part, points to a highly disturbed and/or unstable state of mind.
The second question was not a rhetorical question. I am asking why you have to bring drama from another thread into this thread. You clearly could have addressed this in the other thread, but chose to bring it here. Obviously the reason is because you are calling for bans of people that do not hold the same opinions as you. Still, seeing as you just came off a ban for the same exact behavior, and then doubled down immediately, it is strange behavior for a long-time poster to continue the offending behavior that got him banned just a few days ago.
Have a nice day! 😀
I'm not really convinced that accusing people of being unhinged, disturbed, and unstable is much better than accusing people of being racists.
Or transphobes. 😃
