Politics and Society Moderation Discussion Only Fans Thread

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

and sack

Aww Mets.

Thanks I'm back. I'll have some things to say about my banning and the discussion that led to it but I'm in Guatemala and hiking up a 13000 ft volcano today so that will need to wait until at least tomorrow.

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 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 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.

should be fine so long as he isnt a Joe Biden supporter or Zionist.

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 people who call defending your nation genocide

we should ban the people who love that babies are being killed daily. oh wait, then I would be talking to myself.

Basically what you already do all day on these forums.

lol, more completely unhinged racist lies, great stuff:

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?

What are you asking us here? Collect your thoughts and try again.

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. 😃