Moderation Questions and General Chat Thread

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.

30 January 2024 at 05:27 AM
Reply...

6491 Replies

i
a

by ganstaman P

:( I'm not even 40 just yet.

Lol. I probably shouldn't' be ribbing someone younger than I am for being old then...


My birthday was yesterday. I am well beyond 40.


Solid research. rickroll, and the findings are entirely unsurprising.

On a tangential note, yes, prefaces like "respectfully", "no offense but" and "not being racist but" are usually followed by the exact opposite.


Woeful attempt at doxing.


by jalfrezi P

Woeful attempt at doxing.

Lol wat


I dont have any opinions on Talleyrand or Circassian genocide. not sure why you are talking about those.

I do have opinions on WW2 and it looks like the guy cites a few other notable authors that agree with Glantz.

ofc he is biased. so are you.


by Victor P

I stated 2 facts and didnt attack anyone. I was subsequently personally attacked by 3 posters and then you came along to chastise me and attack me.

all 4 of these posters know that I am not allowed to respond at even a fraction of their vitriol and are desperately hoping that I do.

Lol, when countered with solid arguments, Victor the victimized always appears.


There is only one way to resolve this issue... ask ChatGPT.

how would the soviet union fared in world war 2 if the United States did not enter the war?


If the United States had not entered World War II, the Soviet Union's fate in the conflict would likely have been significantly different, though it is difficult to predict the exact outcome. Several key factors would have influenced the Soviet Union's ability to withstand and ultimately defeat Nazi Germany:

Economic and Military Aid: The United States provided the Soviet Union with substantial economic and military aid through the Lend-Lease program. This included food, trucks, tanks, aircraft, and other essential supplies that significantly bolstered the Soviet war effort. Without this aid, the Soviet Union would have faced severe shortages in critical supplies, potentially weakening their ability to sustain prolonged military operations.

Second Front: The opening of the Western Front by the United States and its allies in 1944 with the D-Day invasion (Operation Overlord) relieved significant pressure on the Soviet Union. It forced Germany to divert resources and troops to fight on multiple fronts. Without this second front, the full force of the German military would have remained concentrated on the Eastern Front, making the Soviet Union's task of pushing back the invaders considerably more difficult.

Strategic Bombing: The United States, alongside the United Kingdom, conducted extensive strategic bombing campaigns against Germany, targeting industrial centers, transportation networks, and oil refineries. These bombings weakened Germany's war production capabilities and its overall ability to sustain the war effort. Without the American contribution to these campaigns, Germany would have had more resources available to focus on the Eastern Front.

Moral and Psychological Impact: The entry of the United States into the war provided a significant morale boost to the Allies, including the Soviet Union. The knowledge that they were not fighting alone and had powerful allies would have bolstered Soviet resolve and determination. Without American involvement, the Soviet Union might have faced greater challenges in maintaining morale and national unity.

Diplomatic and Strategic Support: The United States played a crucial role in coordinating Allied strategy and diplomacy. The cooperation between the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union helped to create a united front against the Axis powers. Without the United States, the coordination and cooperation between the remaining Allies would likely have been less effective.

War Duration and Casualties: The absence of the United States could have prolonged the war, leading to even higher casualties and destruction in the Soviet Union. The extended duration of the conflict would have placed immense strain on Soviet resources and population, potentially leading to a different post-war outcome.

In summary, while the Soviet Union demonstrated remarkable resilience and strategic capability during World War II, the absence of American involvement would have likely made their struggle much harder. The Soviet Union might have still managed to survive and potentially defeat Germany, but at a much greater cost and with an uncertain outcome. The overall balance of power and the geopolitical landscape of post-war Europe would have been dramatically different.


by d2_e4 P

And we've reached the Victim phase of the discussion. Too predictable.

What is the best way to handle a poster on an Internet forum that constantly plays the victim card?

Handling a poster on an Internet forum who constantly plays the victim card requires a balanced approach to maintain a healthy and constructive community atmosphere. Here are some strategies:
1. Set Clear Community Guidelines

Ensure that the forum has clear rules and guidelines about acceptable behavior. These guidelines should address the importance of constructive dialogue and discourage manipulative tactics, such as playing the victim.
2. Encourage Positive Engagement

Promote a culture of positive engagement and constructive criticism. Encourage members to support each other and focus on solutions rather than blame.
3. Private Messaging

If a specific user consistently plays the victim, consider sending them a private message. Approach them with empathy and explain how their behavior is affecting the community. Offer support and suggest alternative ways to express their concerns.
4. Public Response

Respond to victim-playing behavior publicly but tactfully. Address the issues they raise without validating the victim mentality. Redirect the conversation to constructive solutions and encourage other members to do the same.
5. Moderation

Use moderation tools to manage disruptive behavior. This can include temporarily muting the user, limiting their posting frequency, or, in extreme cases, banning them if they repeatedly violate community guidelines.
6. Promote Self-Reflection

Encourage self-reflection among forum members. Create posts or threads about effective communication, emotional intelligence, and constructive criticism. This can help users recognize and modify their behavior.
7. Ignore and Redirect

Sometimes the best approach is to ignore the victim-playing behavior and redirect the conversation to more productive topics. Avoid giving undue attention to the manipulative behavior.
8. Seek Input from the Community

Encourage other members to help in maintaining a positive environment. Peer pressure and community standards can be powerful in discouraging negative behavior.
9. Professional Help

If the behavior persists and significantly disrupts the community, suggest that the user seek professional help. Sometimes, constant victim-playing can be a sign of deeper personal issues that require professional intervention.
Example Approach

Public Response: "I understand that you’re feeling frustrated by this issue. Let’s try to focus on finding a solution together. How do you think we can address this problem effectively?"

Private Message: "Hi [User], I’ve noticed that you often feel victimized in our discussions. We value your participation, but it’s important to keep our conversations constructive. If you’re feeling overwhelmed, it might help to talk to someone who can provide professional support."

By combining these strategies, you can address the behavior without alienating the user, while also protecting the integrity and positivity of the forum community.


by Victor P

I dont have any opinions on Talleyrand or Circassian genocide. not sure why you are talking about those.

I do have opinions on WW2 and it looks like the guy cites a few other notable authors that agree with Glantz.

ofc he is biased. so are you.

I understand that you’re feeling frustrated by this issue. Let’s try to focus on finding a solution together. How do you think we can address this problem effectively


The Soviets and allies would have won the war in the end but Germany's defeat was hastened though US involvement, without which post war there wouldn't have been much resistance to the Soviets invading the rest of Europe...which let's face it was one of the main reasons the Americans entered the war.


I think that posters should address the topic and not the poster.


by jalfrezi P

The Soviets and allies would have won the war in the end but Germany's defeat was hastened though US involvement, without which post war there wouldn't have been much resistance to the Soviets invading the rest of Europe...which let's face it was one of the main reasons the Americans entered the war.

Right. So, not just the Soviets then, as Viktor would have us believe.


by Victor P

I think that posters should address the topic and not the poster.

Well, I am out of ideas. Let's discuss again when my ChatGPT limit is refreshed 😀


by Victor P

I think that posters should address the topic and not the poster.

Ok. Your views on this topic are commie propaganda and total horseshit. Fin.


Battle of Britain was a defensive win but a huge boost for the Allies and a blow to Germany. There's Bletchley Park of course but otherwise I'm not sure how much of the overall credit for Hitler's defeat goes to the UK. Montgomery in North Africa of course and some in parts of Europe but by far the biggest factor was the Soviets and Stalingrad.

We here are very aware that the Americans have been brought up conditioned by their lame education system and Hollywood to believe they won it.


by Didace P

My birthday was yesterday. I am well beyond 40.

I am 30 and a few months. About 150 months, to be precise.


by d2_e4 P

Ok. Your views on this topic are commie propaganda and total horseshit. Fin.

Soviets killed 76% of the Nazis and lost like 20m people but ya its totally Communist propaganda that they did by far the most to win the war.


by DonkJr P

Well, I am out of ideas. Let's discuss again when my ChatGPT limit is refreshed 😀

You didn’t even ask chat gpt what we were discussing


We should make a WW2 thread and battle it out there.

You guys keep changing the goal posts with Victor

First it’s lying about Vic saying only the Soviets won the war. Then you guys change it to mean oh the US helped and that’s the same as fighting lmao


Just post the casualty numbers. US lost like 250k-500k (I think 500k) and Russia lost 15-30million? I think in the middle

I’ll get the official numbers and then we can see who did what


It's just bullying, all the time, of the same person. It's not nice to see.


by Victor P

Soviets killed 76% of the Nazis and lost like 20m people but ya its totally Communist propaganda that they won the war.

Killing infantry is certainly a factor in winning wars, but I'm not convinced it's the decisive factor. In any case, your original phrasing was "Stalin defeated Hitler" which is where we started this discussion, and it's very propagandistic on its face.


by PointlessWords P


First it’s lying about Vic saying only the Soviets won the war.

The guy who spews commie propaganda at every opportunity says "Stalin defeated Hitler", and we're the ones lying? Ok, genius.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wa...

From wiki

These are military casualties

USA losses 400k

UK 383

SU 10m

Poland 300k

Japan 2m

Italy 300k

Germany 5m

China 3.5m


by PointlessWords P

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Wa...

From wiki

USA losses 400k

UK 383

SU 10m

Poland 300k

Japan 2m

Italy 300k

Germany 5m

China 3.5m

Yes, it's well known Russian leaders use their men as cannon fodder and have a no retreat policy. They're doing it now in Ukraine. What do you think the casualty count proves?


Happy birthday, gangsta, and belated happy birthday, didace


Reply...