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.
Fat people *are a group* defined by their BMI.
Group doesnt have to mean ethnic group as i repeatedly tried to tell you guys. It's the american obsession about race that makes every discourse about groups a discourse about ethnic groups.
Fat people are a group and one discussed under the lens of personal responsibility vs innateness a lot.
And there the left realizes fairly easy that the less it's about choice, the more fat people can be hel
I still fail to see how it helps anything to criticize a group, including the group of "fat people". You are the one concentrating on the definition of a group, not me.
I'm concentrating on the fact that it doesn't help fix anything to criticize a group. Certainly not this group - people who are overweight know that it is generally unhealthy. And I think it is obvious (to me, and to most people) that obesity is affected by a number of factors, both genetic and environmental, just like nearly every physical trait.
I still fail to see how it helps anything to criticize a group, including the group of "fat people". You are the one concentrating on the definition of a group, not me.
I'm concentrating on the fact that it doesn't help fix anything to criticize a group. Certainly not this group - people who are overweight know that it is generally unhealthy. And I think it is obvious (to me, and to most people) that obesity is affected by a number of fac
if they know why do they keep eating **** lol.
and if they can't control themselves for the most basic functions, why do we allow them to be parents, to vote, to enter legally binding contracts?
Because no one is willing to put *******s like you in charge of anything.
if they know why do they keep eating **** lol.
and if they can't control themselves for the most basic functions, why do we allow them to be parents, to vote, to enter legally binding contracts?
Hang on. Now you think there's something with being fat?
You going to have a go at drinking properly next?
Hang on. Now you think there's something with being fat?
You going to have a go at drinking properly next?
I am for freedom, I am against subsidizing other people mistakes though.
so free eating and drinking (in the "free to do" at your expenses), no taxes on both, and absolutely no public healthcare in any way or form.
pretty easy and coherent.
health is always and only a private matter anyway
You're entitled to believe all that. I totally disagree and am also quite happy to 'subsidize' the skinny folk
I'm not overly familiar with that but I don't mind a few pence of my pint helping people like you.
Chez, lemme find out you are a professional salad dodger.
I love salad. yum nau is awesome
shut the **** up, chez
Hi trolly. How are you mate? Not a fan of thai food?
if they know why do they keep eating **** lol.
and if they can't control themselves for the most basic functions, why do we allow them to be parents, to vote, to enter legally binding contracts?
Seriously? They eat because they're hungry, like everyone else. Do you think no one does anything they know is bad for them?
Do you seriously think overweight people shouldn't have standard rights of citizens? Nearly everyone has something they find difficult to control themselves with.
I think excuses for alcoholism and drug addiction are mostly stupid, because both are easily avoided. But you can't just avoid eating.
Seriously? They eat because they're hungry, like everyone else. Do you think no one does anything they know is bad for them?
Do you seriously think overweight people shouldn't have standard rights of citizens? Nearly everyone has something they find difficult to control themselves with.
I think excuses for alcoholism and drug addiction are mostly stupid, because both are easily avoided. But you can't just avoid eating.
You can eat less same as you can drink one glass instead of two bottles.
Very hard to think you can't excuse drinking 2 bottles but you can excuse eating 5k calories per day.
Anyway, my take is they have a complete right to do what they want, just, no one else has to subsidize it.
Public healthcare shouldn't exist and everyone should pay for his own care, simple as that.
If someone wants insurance and a private market for it happens, good for them, that's no one else business.
There's no need cure anyone to drink one glass or any bottles of alcohol.
There are many people with a propensity to overindulge in anything.
Do you think it is easy for a drug addict to pass on using more drugs?
And yes, we all know your thoughts about public Healthcare. I ask you questions and you reply with things we already know that don't answer the question.
I don't think I should have to subsidize anything for others' children, but that's the way society works. I imagine you take advantage of the benefits given to you in your country.
There's no need cure anyone to drink one glass or any bottles of alcohol.
There are many people with a propensity to overindulge in anything.
Do you think it is easy for a drug addict to pass on using more drugs?
And yes, we all know your thoughts about public Healthcare. I ask you questions and you reply with things we already know that don't answer the question.
I don't think I should have to subsidize anything for others' children, but that'
I take full advantage of anything I can because that's a moral imperative in my moral system, what advantages me, my family and the people I care about is what is moral, and viceversa.
I don't understand the rest of your post.
If you drink two bottles per day you will cost more in healthcare than someone who doesn't ( on average).
Which is one of the many reasons why everyone should pay for his own healthcare
I take full advantage of anything I can because that's a moral imperative in my moral system, what advantages me, my family and the people I care about is what is moral, and viceversa.
I don't understand the rest of your post.
If you drink two bottles per day you will cost more in healthcare than someone who doesn't ( on average).
Which is one of the many reasons why everyone should pay for his own healthcare
You really didn't understand this question?
"Do you think it is easy for a drug addict to pass on using more drugs?"
You have just proven that either you're extremely stupid or you're a liar.
You really didn't understand this question?
"Do you think it is easy for a drug addict to pass on using more drugs?"
You have just proven that either you're extremely stupid or you're a liar.
So you are of the opinion that people cannot control what and how much they eat in any way.
Everyone overeating is like an addict who can't control himself.
Ok let's say you are right.
We usually remove other rights from addicts because they have shown a lack of force of Will necessary to be normal functioning adults.
Would you agree about that for obese people then? Treating them like addicts legally?
I take full advantage of anything I can because that's a moral imperative in my moral system, what advantages me, my family and the people I care about is what is moral, and viceversa.
I don't understand the rest of your post.
If you drink two bottles per day you will cost more in healthcare than someone who doesn't ( on average).
Which is one of the many reasons why everyone should pay for his own healthcare
If this argument has any force for you then what changes if the two bottles a day were cheaper?
So you are of the opinion that people cannot control what and how much they eat in any way.
Everyone overeating is like an addict who can't control himself.
Ok let's say you are right.
We usually remove other rights from addicts because they have shown a lack of force of Will necessary to be normal functioning adults.
Would you agree about that for obese people then? Treating them like addicts legally?
What rights do we remove from addicts?
So you are of the opinion that people cannot control what and how much they eat in any way.
Everyone overeating is like an addict who can't control himself.
Ok let's say you are right.
We usually remove other rights from addicts because they have shown a lack of force of Will necessary to be normal functioning adults.
Would you agree about that for obese people then? Treating them like addicts legally?
You still didn't answer my simple yes or no question. Obviously you're not intelligent enough to have a conversation.
