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.
when people say that Jordan won 6 titles or beat the Suns or whoever, do you jump into the thread and tell them that they are wrong bc Kerr and Pippen and whoever hit some shots too?
this analogy would only work if not only Jordan but all his teammates and coaches insisted that Jordan was just a role player and they couldn't have won without the contributions of Kerr and Pippen and the one person claiming that Jordan was the person who won the titles without their contribution was the grand nephew of the long deceased uniform manager who had access to his great uncles diary which provided those insights
this analogy would only work if not only Jordan but all his teammates and coaches insisted that Jordan was just a role player and they couldn't have won without the contributions of Kerr and Pippen and the one person claiming that Jordan was the person who won the titles without their contribution was the grand nephew of the long deceased uniform manager who had access to his great uncles diary which provided those insights
thats not the analogy. its the semantics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Churc...
this is the actual jordan of ww2
Nicknamed "Fighting Jack Churchill" and "Mad Jack", he fought in the Second World War with a longbow, a basket-hilted Scottish broadsword, and a set of bagpipes.
Churchill was second in command of No. 3 Commando in Operation Archery, a raid on the German garrison at Vågsøy, Norway. As the ramps fell on the first landing craft, he leapt forward from his position playing "March of the Cameron Men" on his bagpipes, before throwing a grenade and charging into battle.
In July 1943, as commanding officer, he led No. 2 Commando from their landing site at Catania, in Sicily, with his trademark Scottish broadsword slung around his waist, a longbow and arrows around his neck and his bagpipes under his arm, which he also did in the landings at Salerno.
Leading 2 Commando, Churchill was ordered to capture a German observation post outside the town of Molina, controlling a pass leading down to the Salerno beachhead. With the help of a corporal, he infiltrated the town, captured the post and took 42 prisoners including a mortar squad.
Churchill later walked back to the town to retrieve his sword, which he had lost in hand-to-hand combat with the German regiment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Churc...
this is the actual jordan of ww2
I think his uncle Winston contributed some bits and bobs to the war effort around that time as well.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Churc...
this is the actual jordan of ww2
Because I'll never miss a chance to post a relevant citation needed episode:
Also, let's not forget that Stalin and Hitler had a non-aggression pact, so it's not like Stalin went to war with Hitler out of some sort of principle to rid the world of Nazism. Hitler stabbed Stalin in the back (couldn't have happened to a nicer guy) and attacked Russia; everything Russia did in the war was out of self defence.
It's a little much to call the discussion here "trolling." There is a poster that is making wildly exaggerated, even patently ridiculous statements. When that happens, people will counter those arguments the way those arguments are always countered: aggressively. If a single mod insists that even debating with Victor is trolling, then you may as well just shut this entire forum down, as political debate is the stated purpose of this place, and you are effectively disallowing it.
It's a little much to call the discussion here "trolling." There is a poster that is making wildly exaggerated, even patently ridiculous statements. When that happens, people will counter those arguments the way those arguments are always countered: aggressively. If a single mod insists that even debating with Victor is trolling, then you may as well just shut this entire forum down, as political debate is the stated purpose of this place
While I obviously agree with the general sentiment, I don't think I saw anyone say that it was trolling, although I might have missed it.
i think bullying was the term used
Yeah, just realised that was probably DonkJr meant. That claim was just ridiculous, and implied that if you take controversial and/or dumb positions that everyone is obviously going to disagree with then everyone telling you you're wrong is tantamount to bullying.
There are other posters here who routinely say a lot of dumb stuff, but at least they don't complain when they get dogpiled for saying dumb stuff. Victor is the special snowflake who should apparently be able to say dumb stuff with impunity.
It's a little much to call the discussion here "trolling." There is a poster that is making wildly exaggerated, even patently ridiculous statements. When that happens, people will counter those arguments the way those arguments are always countered: aggressively. If a single mod insists that even debating with Victor is trolling, then you may as well just shut this entire forum down, as political debate is the stated purpose of this place
Again, Soviets killed 76% of the Nazis. So I think the onus is on you guys to show how they weren't by far the most important.
While I obviously agree with the general sentiment, I don't think I saw anyone say that it was trolling, although I might have missed it.
This is what I am referring to.
Now then. To the rest of you, Victor has recently served a lengthy sentence and he has been on good behavior since returning.
You are all welcome to challenge the content he posts, but the personal comments need to stop right now. It’s not productive to our community and does nothing to foster community engagement.
It should also be considered that anyone who intentionally attempts to troll someone to their tipping point is going to get the
D2, you yourself admitted at the top of this page that you are engaging in mockery.
This isn’t a debate. I’m telling you to stop.
What she is telling us is not 100% clear. When she said "I'm telling you to stop", I am not exactly sure to what she is referring. What it looks like to me is that if you disagree enough with Victor that he starts misbehaving, you are deemed to have been "trolling" and will be moderated.
Victor is a grown-ass man. He doesn't need constant babysitting or protection from anybody. Frankly, the only thing that has been said today that I would be personally insulted by if I were him, is the notion that he needs some special protection against the mean posters, because he just can't control himself. Victor has many controversial opinions, but that doesn't mean that he is anything but reasonably intelligent and in control of himself.
Killed 76% of the total killed?
Yes
I'd say the onus is on you to demonstrate that this proves your statement that "Stalin defeated Hitler". It's a statistic devoid of all context. Maybe others destroyed more infrastructure that enabled the German war effort in the first place, for example. Or prevailed in battles which were strategically important, like the D-Day landings. Or gathered strategically important intelligence, like cracking the Enigma machine. Or provided money and weapons. Or designed and built the first functional nuclear bomb. Or a million other things that went into winning that war other than killing enemy soldiers.
But you understand all this, so the fact it seemingly needs to be explained makes me think you are being disingenuous when making your claim. When Donk is back in the GPT streets, perhaps he can relay some pointers on how to deal with disingenuous posters without giving the appearance of bullying or trolling.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yang_Kyoun...
here's another jordan
korean dude who was forcibly conscripted into into the japanese army in the mid 1930s, then captured by the soviets at khalkhin gol in 1939 and focibly conscripted into the red army, then captured by the germans at kharkov in 1943 and conscripted into the wehrmacht, and then finally captured by the allies at normandy which brought his varied military career to an end. somehow jorfdan'd his way into surviving the whole thing
sadly he may not have existed, but i choose to believe
gotta admit stalin masterfully freerolled the taking of poland, incredible that they do it at same time as germany and we name one an enemy and the other an ally
Victor is purposely using statistics in a misleading manner to make his point. It is not that different than the whole "communism is better because life expectancy went up after communism" points he was making a few months ago. Even if the Soviets killed such a huge percentage of the Nazis, there is more to a war than just killing soldiers. You have to be reasonably industrialized to be able to continue killing your enemies. You have to be able to defend your position at home with war material. You have to be able to maintain supply lines when you conquer new territory. You have to defend precious resources such as oil.
Germany was having trouble with that throughout the war. The Soviet Union would have had serious issues with those without the help of the Western Allies.
Would the Germans have won the war if the Soviets weren't in it? I doubt it, but it would have been a much bloodier affair for the Western Allies. Would the Germans have won the war against the Soviets if there wasn't a western front? Probably not, just due to the Soviet's overwhelming advantage when it came to manpower, but it again would have been a much bloodier outcome for the USSR.
Stating that the Soviet Union won the war single-handedly is not just incorrect, but it is insulting to all reasonably-minded people that read such nonsense. That is why people react to Victor aggressively, and I am pretty sure it is the response that he is trying to elicit in the first-place, so that he can make himself out to be a victim.
People talked about Messi destroying teams despite him not being the GK, four defenders, three midfielders and three strikers all at the same time.
I think you're all bored and looking to create trouble.
This is what I am referring to.
What she is telling us is not 100% clear. When she said "I'm telling you to stop", I am not exactly sure to what she is referring. What it looks like to me is that if you disagree enough with Victor that he starts misbehaving, you are deemed to have been "trolling" and will be moderated.
Victor is a grown-ass man. He doesn't need constant babysitting or protection from anybody. Frankly, the only thing tha
From what I’ve seen this is basically how it goes. Better to just not engage then to engage and get moderated.
Would the Germans have won the war if the Soviets weren't in it? I doubt it, but it would have been a much bloodier affair for the Western Allies. Would the Germans have won the war against the Soviets if there wasn't a western front? Probably not, just due to the Soviet's overwhelming advantage when it came to manpower, but it again would have been a much bloodier outcome for the USSR.
Stating that the Soviet Union won the war single-ha
well stated
