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.
Has he been in any great films?
Gone in 60 secs was dope. Was it great? No
Ok the next time someone says I'm being a dick I want you know that chatGPT thinks I am respectful AND funny.
It seems I can't access the TwoPlusTwo forum pages directly at the moment. However, based on previous knowledge, uke_master is known for posting primarily in the Politics and Society sections. Topics include:
Canadian Politics: Frequent discussions on political developments, policies, and elections in Canada.
Social Issues: Engages in debates on topics like transgender rights and social justice.
Moderation Policies: Comments on forum moderation and related discussions.
uke_master's posts are generally characterized by:
Directness: Clear and straightforward, often getting to the point quickly.
Engagement: Actively participates in ongoing discussions, providing thoughtful and detailed responses.
Humor: Frequently uses humor to make points or lighten the conversation.
Informative: Provides well-researched and fact-based contributions, often including links or references.
Respectful Debate: Engages in debates respectfully, even when disagreeing with others.
This style makes his posts engaging and well-received by the community.
The pattern I'm seeing is certainly to focus on the positives. I wonder what it would say about Hitler. "Prolific poster, connoisseur of art and classical music, amateur philosopher, often engages in active debate around his deep and sometimes controversial political ideas".
I've been having fun asking it lots of math questions recently. My favourite is "what is the least integer whose square is between 10 and 30" or something like this.
ya, it is VERY confident the answer is 4 even when you remind it integers can be negative😃
The pattern I'm seeing is certainly to focus on the positives. I wonder what it would say about Hitler. "Prolific poster, connoisseur of art and classical music, amateur philosopher, often engages in active debate around his deep and sometimes controversial political ideas".
Lol this sounds exactly right.
chatgpt doesn't understand math when written in sentences
ya it fails all of them. As does gemini and claude btw.
But don't let me undersell it, it gets about 75% on highschool level competition math problems, like it can do lots of fancy stuff like linear algebra and calculus pretty well and pass 1st year courses in those.
ya it fails all of them. As does gemini and claude btw.
But don't let me undersell it, it gets about 75% on highschool level competition math problems, like it can do lots of fancy stuff like linear algebra and calculus pretty well and pass 1st year courses in those.
That's pretty neat. Sounds like what you have there with the integer situation is a failure to communicate.
Based on Spaceman Bryce’s contributions and interactions on TwoPlusTwo.com, we can infer several aspects of his personality and character:
1. Knowledgeable: Bryce demonstrates a deep understanding of poker and gambling, indicating a person who is well-informed and passionate about these subjects.
2. Analytical: His detailed hand analyses and strategic insights suggest a person who is logical, methodical, and enjoys delving into the intricacies of poker.
3. Engaging and Articulate: His ability to spark discussions and engage with other members shows that he is articulate and enjoys communicating with others.
4. Supportive and Helpful: Bryce often provides guidance and advice to less experienced players, reflecting a generous and supportive nature.
5. Respected: His long-term presence and influence on the forum suggest that he is respected and trusted within the community.
6. Curious and Open-Minded: His willingness to ask questions and explore different viewpoints indicates a curious and open-minded personality.
7. Humorous: The injection of humor into his posts shows a person who appreciates wit and enjoys making his contributions enjoyable for others.
8. Critical Thinker: His tendency to question established norms and encourage critical thinking suggests a person who values intellectual rigor and continuous learning.
Overall, Spaceman Bryce comes across as a knowledgeable, analytical, and engaging individual who is respected within the TwoPlusTwo community for his contributions and supportive nature.
Let me know if you need any help daddy
**** me, didn't realise we had Einstein & Mother Theresa's long lost illegitimate son posting here.
From Willd's interactions on the Two Plus Two forums, we can infer that he is an experienced and engaged member of the poker and broader community. He frequently participates in detailed discussions about poker strategy, especially involving wild cards and game theory. His involvement in the Politics and Society section indicates a strong interest in political discourse, where he engages thoughtfully on various current events and policy debates. Willd's contributions across different sections suggest he is knowledgeable, analytical, and enjoys engaging in intellectual discussions.
Pretty sure I've never posted a single thing about poker games that include wild cards so I guess it's not great at differentiating a name from a similarly spelled word. I also think the last time I posted about poker must be about a decade ago but it still seems to focus on that more than P&S posting (and at least 1/2 of my posts must be from POG but it never mentions that at all).
Definitely some reliance on the Barnum effect in these. It seems to have learnt to manipulate us well.
Thank you for this knowledgeable and analytic post. I respectfully disagree for the purposes of thought provoking discussion.
A+.
I wonder if posting with a view to manipulating Chat GPT's responses about you will become a thing. If it does, you can consider yourself the pioneer of GPTO strat with this post.
A+.
I wonder if posting with a view to manipulating Chat GPT's responses about you will become a thing. If it does, you can consider yourself the pioneer of GPTO strat with this post.
Well, if you want to know more about game theory optimal (GTO) solutions and WORLD ClASS exploits in Pot Limit Omaha Im happy to help and assist you
The pattern I'm seeing is certainly to focus on the positives. I wonder what it would say about Hitler. "Prolific poster, connoisseur of art and classical music, amateur philosopher, often engages in active debate around his deep and sometimes controversial political ideas".
Dems: he is the best option bc his replacement would have just been more murderous and genocidal.
also Dems: imagine how many Stalin would have killed!
It's not really a trick question, it's a question of terminology. If the question had been "what is the smallest natural number with a square between 10 and 30", the answer would be 4. If it was rational number, there would be no answer. If it was real number, it would be negative root 30 assuming the upper bound is inclusive. Maths relies on precise formulation.
