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.
Maybe you could show us an example of this rule breaking?
All we hear is rule breaking!
You guys have been asked to show us many times and you never showed up with anything. If you couldnt show us what does that mean? You couldnt show us. If you cannot showdown now, you cant in 24 hours, which means never!
WTF???
here you go. lots to pick from.
pretty much every post in this forum violates several of those rules ¯\_(ツ😉_/¯
I don’t think Victor’s postings are any more offensive or deliberately provocative than many posters on the other side of a topic. I often don’t agree with him but he’s at least a good foil to people across a spectrum of politics here. He’s also less prone to personal attacks than most.
here you go. lots to pick from.
Thats lt?
Why is only Victor supposed to follow the rules? Did you even read any of this thread? Like...ever?
Youd have to ban every second poster.
I don’t think Victor’s postings are any more offensive or deliberately provocative than many posters on the other side of a topic. I often don’t agree with him but he’s at least a good foil to people across a spectrum of politics here. He’s also less prone to personal attacks than most.
I'd say "genocide lover" and "baby killer" are pretty personal.
I don’t think Victor’s postings are any more offensive or deliberately provocative than many posters on the other side of a topic. I often don’t agree with him but he’s at least a good foil to people across a spectrum of politics here. He’s also less prone to personal attacks than most.
I read this forum, barely post. I have a bunch of posters on ignore with Victor being one of them. So he's normally not an issue. And then someone quoted him in the I/P thread where he had posted a photo of a dead baby with limbs blown off everywhere. How he was allowed to post after that I'll never know.
I couldn't imagine ever caring about your opinion.
Thats lt?
Why is only Victor supposed to follow the rules? Did you even read any of this thread? Like...ever?
Youd have to ban every second poster.
I must have missed where Victor was the only one who has gotten "punished." You asked a question. I answered. Don't reply by changing the question.
One part incompetent moderation and one part guys who are willing to endlessly litigate even the most justifiable bans. Vic's ban will almost surely get commuted after a few days of badgering the mods.
well it should be permanent. and you posted in the I/P something like "just ban him already" and I think others were confused about who you meant but I "think" I know exactly what you meant even though we never agree on a god damn thing.
correct me if i'm wrong
well it should be permanent. and you posted in the I/P something like "just ban him already" and I think others were confused about who you meant but I "think" I know exactly what you meant even though we never agree on a god damn thing.
correct me if i'm wrong
You're correct, but no one ever listens to me; half the regs would be banned if they did. Obv posting photos of mutilated babies to get a rise out of people would be a snap-perma just about anywhere, the people arguing against it are operating in transparently bad faith.
I mean this honestly. What would Jesus say? Would he say Victor is wrong for sticking up for the victims of war? Or would he say you guys are wrong for silencing him? Or would he say Victor is in the wrong?
This has nothing to do with Victor's views of politics and everything to do with how he expresses them.
From a rules perspective , What’s worse, supporting the side that killed the babies or showing pics of the dead babies?
You're correct, but no one ever listens to me; half the regs would be banned if they did. Obv posting photos of mutilated babies to get a rise out of people would be a snap-perma just about anywhere, the people arguing against it are operating in transparently bad faith.
While I accept that this is a viewpoint many here share, I profoundly disagree on principle with the above. Wartime photography is the reality of conflict, and spreading the awareness of that reality is a moral undertaking. We can disagree on Victor's motivations, but sharing the images is not unethical. Seeing is believing. The Napalm Girl photo changed the course of the war in Vietnam. Yes it was violent and horrifying to see a 9 year old nude little girl covered in napalm screaming and running in terror. But people needed to see it to understand the truth of what was happening. War photos are the truth.
I have changed the rules in the I/P thread so that graphic images must be spoilered, largely because many here have vocalized their desire to look away. I have made that their prerogative. But Victor is not doing anything wrong by posting the images, IMHO. This solution should satisfy both sides.
You're correct, but no one ever listens to me; half the regs would be banned if they did. Obv posting photos of mutilated babies to get a rise out of people would be a snap-perma just about anywhere, the people arguing against it are operating in transparently bad faith.
Some of us don’t follow the forum that closely. I agree, that kind of bait is well over the line.
A+ solution
I mean this honestly. What would Jesus say? Would he say Victor is wrong for sticking up for the victims of war? Or would he say you guys are wrong for silencing him? Or would he say Victor is in the wrong?
He would probably go to Palestine in person to try to make peace, not stay home behind a keyboard accusing others or supporting genocide.
Maybe you could show us an example of this rule breaking?
All we hear is rule breaking!
Show us and then we could talk about it... but since you guys have been asked to show us many times for days and you never showed us anything. U probably got nothing.
You been asked for days now.
WTF???
I haven't been asked for days now, or even once that I know of.
The main thing I can think of from the top of my head is constantly saying others support genocide and baby murder, despite no one supporting those things, and him being told many times to stop doing that.
