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.
Your claim is that if the 3 people described run a 23andme , the 2 white people won't be found having more common ancestors? really?
Europeans sharing more genes with random Africans than with each other is a well-known expectation of genetic science, and it has been tested on random samples of Europeans and found to be true.
You learned something important today.
This is exactly why ethnicity has a much broader definition than simply genes. Genetic science has shown us that Europeans have a geographically wide spread of genes from all over the place, but the average European is overwhelmingly genetically African, and that includes you.
Europeans sharing more genes with random Africans than with each other is a well-known expectation of genetic science, and it has been tested on random samples of Europeans and found to be true.
You learned something important today.
This is exactly why ethnicity has a much broader definition than simply genes. Genetic science has shown us that Europeans have a geographically wide spread of genes from all over the place, but the average Europ
You didn't say europeans, you said my neighbour which isn't a random european.
It's possible that the genetic distance between the average italian and the average african is smaller than the genetic distance between the average italian and the average finnish person yes. Plausible actually. Nothing to do with the example you provided though as my neighbours aren't random europeans rather italian citizens with 4 italian grandparents.
Italy in particular is a melting pot so genetics here is very mixed (Which is why it's absurd to claim italian ethnicity meaningfully), that doesn't mean other groups mixed the same. Some didn't much and ethnicity in those cases is a clear defining word.
That said people don't use ethnicity to mean what you want it to me *and you know that*. In particular in the USA. Culture has nothing to do with ethnicity and a white claiming black ethnicity because he "behaves like a black" is vilified a lot when he tries that.
sighhhhhhhhh ok let's try again.
Your neighbours with four Italian grandparents have more genes in common with a random African than they do with you.
Happy now?
I used the definition of ethnicity you provided, and another from wiki which also agreed.
Please stop posting nonsensical posts.
The definition i provided *included history* which requires common ancestors.
But keep going with the claim that blacks cease to be black if they are raised in a different culture and become that culture ethnicity.
How is this bet realisable without the possibility of you cheating?
The definition i provided *included history* which requires common ancestors.
But keep going with the claim that blacks cease to be black if they are raised in a different culture and become that culture ethnicity.
This is just too much now. Don't you have any work to do?
"Shared history" is one reason to be called an ethnicity
So is "shared culture"
Nowhere have I ever said or even intimated or hinted that black people cease to be black.
This is just too much now. Don't you have any work to do?
"Shared history" is one reason to be called an ethnicity
So is "shared culture"
Nowhere have I ever said that black people cease to be black.
You did, the moment sharing a culture is ethnicity, a black can become of japanese, han, madagascar etc ethnicity just by being adopted and raised there.
Instead, normal people don't consider ethnicity something that can change during your lifetime in any way, rather something that is 100% inherited
Commas don't mean OR lol
Commas don't always mean or, but the word "or" does actually mean or:
Here's a screen shot from the source you cited as a definition of ethnicity with the relevant part highlighted in easy-to-read yellow for you.
Hope that helps you.
You did, the moment sharing a culture is ethnicity, a black can become of japanese, han, madagascar etc ethnicity just by being adopted and raised there.
Instead, normal people don't consider ethnicity something that can change during your lifetime in any way, rather something that is 100% inherited
But there is cultural inheritance as well as genetic inheritance. And as jalf mentioned, but I'm not sure you quite took on board, genetic variation between individuals of the same ethnic group tends to be bigger than the variation between ethnic groups. The variations that we most notice and totemise, mainly to do with appearance, account for a tiny proportion of the genome.
Commas don't always mean or, but the word "or" does actually mean or:
Here's a screen shot from the source you cited as a definition of ethnicity with the relevant part highlighted in easy-to-read yellow for you.
Hope that helps you.
At this point I am not sure you are an English speaker.
That OR is because ethnicity is used both in "han is an ethnicity" and "Xi ethnicity is han"
I always get a chuckle when Luciom opines on how English works.
Well I know for a fact you aren't.
If that's not clear enough for you then the wiki definition I linked to should be:
An ethnicity or ethnic group is a group of people who identify with each other on the basis of perceived shared attributes that distinguish them from other groups. Those attributes can include a common nation of origin, or common sets of ancestry, traditions, language, history, society, religion, or social treatment.
Because you pooh-poohed citing wiki, here's the definition from britannica.com:
A social group or category of the population that, in a larger society, is set apart and bound together by common ties of race, language, nationality, or culture.
and yet another, from dictionary.com:
An ethnic group; a social group that shares a common and distinctive culture, religion, language, or the like
In all cases I've bolded the word "or" that you seem to struggle with so much.
Feel free to find a reliable source that defines ethnicity the way you want.
People really love ignoring words
I think that everyone alive today is related to everyone that was alive 2,000 years ago. Other than that, I don't much care about this silly argument. I just find it amusing when you comment on others grasp of English.
We can still make fun of sky daddy, right guys? You can call me an antisemite and an islamaphobe and a christanphobe or whatever it's called if you like. I'm an equal opportunity sky daddy hater.
I think that everyone alive today is related to everyone that was alive 2,000 years ago. Other than that, I don't much care about this silly argument. I just find it amusing when you comment on others grasp of English.
Not using the one drop rule here, but yes let's disregard any quantitative approach to anything what could go wrong
I was just tonight arguing with a friend about the definition of a sandwich. It came down to me saying that it's not something precise, with some fuzziness around the edges, and he was saying that it was precisely defined. I expected us to debate about edge cases, not about whether the edge cases were debatable.
Anyway, he was obviously wrong in his approach. As are some of you.
Pizza is not just an open-faced sandwich. You can draw the line exactly there. Once you start baking the dough with the rest of it then it no longer becomes a sandwich. Otherwise yes you're correct that there can be plenty of room for latitude.
