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.
The debate is not disallowed. Making white supremacist posts is disallowed. If you can't separate the 2, or if you feel you can't understand how the mods are separating the 2, then I'd suggest just not posting on the subject.
This. When I first started modding here, the topic of what is and isnt racism came up a lot irt posters calling each other racists. So I started a thread titled What is your definition of racism. It ran about a year with just over 800 posts. But it wasnt a collection of racist posts, with people then debating whether or not whites were superior to other groups, and other such things.
There are websites that not only allow, but encourage discussions as to why whites are superior to other races. They are filled with pseudo science bs trying to justify their hateful positions. Others use bible quotes. Others just plain disinformation.
Not every website forum wants to be associated with that stuff. This is one of those.
It's posts like this btw that cause people to give you crap about your modding. What he said was super benign-- so benign that after you deleted and went back and requoted it so that people could see it. It was basically "The Cultural Marixsts hate white people even though they contribute the most to GDP"-- which isn't anything close to what you're implying he's trying to say. People here (myself included) wouldn't even agree that contributing the most to GDP is some virtue.
You guys are essentially off in some fantasy world where Luciom says something and you're interpreting it to fit some weird agenda of seeing monsters under the bed.
It's posts like this btw that cause people to give you crap about your modding. What he said was super benign-- so benign that after you deleted and went back and requoted it so that people could see it. It was basically "The Cultural Marixsts hate white people even though they contribute the most to GDP"-- which isn't anything close to what you're implying he's trying to say. People here (myself included) wouldn't even agree that contribut
Is this what he actually wrote or at least the gist of it?
Browser deleted the full post but then excerpted out this part here, but yes that is the gist of it-- it was a long rant about cultural Marxism.
[quote=Luciom]The idea "whites" (as loosely defined currently in the west) aren't one of the best ethnic groups that every existed as measured by their net aggregate contributions to human welfare
The idea genetics isn't paramount in understanding human societies, behaviour, and differences among sexes.
you seem to ignore western technology is what makes everyone who lives better than an animal do so.
they see blacks do worse than other ethnic groups and according to cultural Marxism that is proof of oppression, and so violence is justified.
[/quote]
I suppose "net aggregate contributions to human welfare" isn't exactly GDP but that was my take.
Your version of what he wrote and what was quoted is not quite the same, IMO. I am not going to say that it is full-blown racist, but the phrasing isn't exactly not racist either.l
There are websites that not only allow, but encourage discussions as to why whites are superior to other races. They are filled with pseudo science bs trying to justify their hateful positions. Others use bible quotes. Others just plain disinformation.
Not every website forum wants to be associated with that stuff. This is one of those. You are free to go express your opinion that if it werent for western (aka white) technology that everyon
You know they're never going to stop.
Your version of what he wrote and what was quoted is not quite the same, IMO. I am not going to say that it is full-blown racist, but the phrasing isn't exactly not racist either.l
It's only the first line that means anything-- if you think some of the others are racist then ok but it is true that I'm in Colombia right now posting on an Apple computer and using electricity. I'm not going to give white people all the credit for that because probably without them I'd be doing something better.
Browser deleted the full post but then excerpted out this part here, but yes that is the gist of it-- it was a long rant about cultural Marxism.
I suppose "net aggregate contributions to human welfare" isn't exactly GDP but that was my take.
It isn't current gdp because it's mostly about the past.
They did things that then and now allow people to live better than they would otherwise.
An antibiotic in many countries is 3 euros or equivalent, and it can save a child. That's not 3 euros of contribution to human welfare, rather a "tad more".
Some for electricity, you pay 100 or whatever a month, your benefit is a "tad" higher than that.
Good grief. His Marxist rants that everything he considers wrong in the world somehow ties back to cultural Marxism had nothing to do with the racist warning. That's why I didn't quote that part. I don't selectively edit posts after all the feedback I got about either leaving a post up entirely or deleting it. I only quoted those lines when OP said he didn't think any were racists.
There are websites that not only allow, but encourage discussions as to why whites are superior to other races. They are filled with pseudo science bs trying to justify their hateful positions. Others use bible quotes. Others just plain disinformation.
Not every website forum wants to be associated with that stuff. This is one of those. You are free to go express your opinion that if it werent for western (aka white) technology that everyon
yes, we are aware.
the problem with those websites/forums is that they are largely populated by morons, whereas here there is a minor filtering process by virtue of the site being (or at least was) largely a strategy site for a complex game. that makes the discussion more stimulating.
i've been around long enough to have seen the goalposts moved on what is and what isn't racist. it used to be slurs were what got you in trouble. now its gotten to sacred cow territory where you have to tiptoe around issues to the degree where its basically impossible to have discourse on the subject unless you only talk with extremists. which sucks.
i will say that i have found that the more protected a certain subject is the more i think that the truth is what's being stifled and not racism/sexism/anti fill in the blank.
Good grief. His Marxist rants that everything he considers wrong in the world somehow ties back to cultural Marxism had nothing to do with the racist warning. That's why I didn't quote that part. I don't selectively edit posts after all the feedback I got about either leaving a post up entirely or deleting it. I only quoted those lines when OP said he didn't think any were racists.
lol there are a lot of things that I think could be done better that have nothing to do with Marxism.
I don't consider pineapple pizza to be a Marxist concoction for example
No I don't think he would be happier if he sister died or if half of his nephews and nieces died at a young age.
I don't know what they use to fertilize here-- it could very well just be horse manure but the pesticides aren't organic although that is a thing.
It certainly isn't my claim that the white man's technology hasn't helped people in the developing world. It's more my claim that hasn't helped the white man himself.
do you think Europeans were better off when they were killing each other in large numbers because they disagreed on how to read the bible?
I have a topic I'd like to hear members input on. It's what, if any mod procedures should be involved with videos that are embedded in posts. It's impossible for mods to actually take the time to watch all the videos posted, whether they are 5 mins or 3 hours in length. So to date, Ive only gotten involved if the thumbnail showing in the post violates a rule, such as bypassing the profanity filter.
Otoh, members may view a video and find it contains very inappropriate material as it relates to our guidelines. Just to use an extreme example lets say someone links to a video from a white supremacy group filled with vile comments comparing nonwhites to animals.
Should posts like that be deleted? Require some sort of warning statement and spoilers? Or just left alone? Please leave any thoughts you have on the way you think these should be handled.
Thanks
A view reached by some previous mods was to ban links to extreme sites/etc entirely because it was unreasonable to expect us to check the links. Breitbart for example
It met a lot of opposition from an unexpected few but I still think it's correct.
A view reached by some previous mods was to ban links to extreme sites/etc entirely because it was unreasonable to expect us to check the links. Breitbart for example
It met a lot of opposition from an unexpected few but I still think it's correct.
I could understand actual extremism (like places where they train terrorists and so on) but lol at consider Breitbart one
Let me clarify my wording. I used an example of a link to an extreme site. But Im mainly concerned about things like a youtube video of things like a podcast or interview, where the people involve in the course of the video present the offensive material. So all a forum member has to do is hit the play button on the post. Its impossible to know what's in the video without watching it.
Let me clarify my wording. I used an example of a link to an extreme site. But Im mainly concerned about things like a youtube video of things like a podcast or interview, where the people involve in the course of the video present the offensive material. So all a forum member has to do is hit the play button on the post. Its impossible to know what's in the video without watching it.
content which is legal in the jurisdiction the forum is in shouldn't be banned.
but if you decide some content is banned then once someone reports to you a video containing bannable content you should delete it as you would with a long wall of text post that contains forbidden content.
It's tricky but the worst videos tend to come from the usual sites.
We have to be able to discuss things that people are discussing out there in the real world or this forum has no purpose, and if those things include youtubes that include offensive and even racist material I don't think they should be banned but ridiculed.
Let me clarify my wording. I used an example of a link to an extreme site. But Im mainly concerned about things like a youtube video of things like a podcast or interview, where the people involve in the course of the video present the offensive material. So all a forum member has to do is hit the play button on the post. Its impossible to know what's in the video without watching it.
I wouldnt worry about youtube in particular but for other sites/podcasts I dunno. many people on this forum find anything supportive of not murdering Palestinians to be antisemitic and deserving of censorship.
I have a topic I'd like to hear members input on. It's what, if any mod procedures should be involved with videos that are embedded in posts. It's impossible for mods to actually take the time to watch all the videos posted, whether they are 5 mins or 3 hours in length. So to date, Ive only gotten involved if the thumbnail showing in the post violates a rule, such as bypassing the profanity filter.
Otoh, members may view a video and find it
I'm not sure that I understand the question. If a poster is posting links or videos to overtly white supremacist propaganda, the poster should be banned and the post should be deleted. I think that has always been the procedure.
If the link or the video is to a legitimate news report of a race-charged event--for example, the Charlottesville "Unite the Right" event -- the link or video should remain and there should be no adverse consequences for the poster, even if there are a bunch of offensive statements in the comments. If you can't find a way to ignore trolls that post responses to youtube videos, then you probably shouldn't bother watching youtube videos, especially on political topics, because those sorts of comments are unavoidable.
Also, I don't think you have to watch every video in the first instance. If someone is posting videos that are clearly out of bounds, you will hear about it soon enough.
