Moderation Questions
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.
Careful or "someone" will yet again accuse you of victimhood despite the veracity of what you've said.
The veracity is questionable at best, and those things are not mutually exclusive.
Love, someone.
We should all try to avoid talking negatively about temp banned posters, because they have no right of reply. I know I've fallen short in this regard.
I concur. Something of a goalpost shift from your post to which I originally replied, though, which was regarding a certain poster telling half truths and playing victim all the time.
ya the only person lying here is you.
we can make a bet on it if you want.
You guys are like super angry all the time. From an outsiders pov that reads most threads here without posting, I have to say, that in my opinion most of you regs seem like somewhat intelligent people, but at the same time behave like idiots. Calm the **** down, dumbasses!
As usual, you've made your claim sufficiently ambiguous that there's nothing to disprove. So, to be more specific:
Were people talking about you after your ban? Yes.
Did the mods eventually put a stop to it? Yes.
Does bringing this up now when nobody was talking about you and making every conversation about how you've been wronged by the big bad posters and mods here smack of perpetual victimhood? Yes.
Which of these would you like bet on?
you are the one who questioned the veracity of my statement. seems like you are, as the kids say, copping deuces. I accept your forfeit.
you are the one who questioned the veracity of my statement. seems like you are, as the kids say, copping deuces. I accept your forfeit.
Not copping ****, boss. I said they stopped it eventually. So, your statement is ambiguous enough to be correct in that they allowed it to go on for some nonzero amount of time. That could be 10 seconds or 10 days. As I said, sufficiently ambiguous that there's nothing to disprove. Or, as I put it before, a half truth.
Mods have a fine line to tread. If we want to be able to discuss and dispute bans, then by necessity, that involves discussing and debating the behaviour of the banned poster, or at least the behaviour that led to the ban. The alternative is a blanket prohibition on discussing/disputing bans, which will of course lead to accusations of authoritarianism. Not sure that's what anyone wants, so be careful what you wish for.
I said "weeks on end". seems fairly specific despite the idiomatic phrase.
We should all try to avoid talking negatively about temp banned posters, because they have no right of reply. I know I've fallen short in this regard.
Wow things have changed around these parts. And for the better
Even arguing that banned poster shouldn't be atatcked used to be responded to with outrage. The idea of a right to reply was nonsense.
Mods have a fine line to tread. If we want to be able to discuss and dispute bans, then by necessity, that involves discussing and debating the behaviour of the banned poster, or at least the behaviour that led to the ban. The alternative is a blanket prohibition on discussing/disputing bans, which will of course lead to accusations of authoritarianism. Not sure that's what anyone wants, so be careful what you wish for.
i am curious have you ever been banned ? in the last month ?
would think that making fun of the "temp-banned" should be encouraged if the point is to effectively shame/embarrass/virtually bludgeon the banned into not posting so bad upon their return.
unless the point is that your SN had to be the right color to mete out any of the approved sort of venom. then ofc, carry on.
There wont need to be. For good or bad, he has shown he is not able to follow the proscribed rules (I admit I have similar issues) and the mods will eventually reach their limit and permaban him. And I am saying this as someone who enjoys his posting and wishes he was capable of staying within the rules. But I just dont think he is wired that way.
Luciom isn't one of your alter egos?
mussolini tho
I am back from the ban but i am not sure i will be around much at this point tbh. Being banned for antisemitism after reporting antisemites for months and defending jews right to exist for months against people who actually side with Hamas actions and requests is kinda absurd, with radical leftist moderation i am not able to say something very simple and not particularly controversial among normal (ie non-leftists people) too many times.
The fact that ideas shared by many people in many western countries (and in some, by the majority) are causes for ban in this forum (like the idea that the radical right is exceptionally less dangerous to jews than the radical left for many reasons, not even comparable, or that western culture is preferable to the culture of many other countries) makes it basically impossible to discuss politics. It's like the core cultural tenets of what makes someone be from the right are unacceptable.
Which i know is the norm on the left, but what's the point of having a politics forum if expressing ideas that represent large chunks of the electorate (and in some countries, the actual majority of voting people) is enough to get banned? and yes that includes the leftist definition of racism, according to it majorities in most countries are racist, so it shouldn't be used to ban in a politics forum.
And being international, most countries in the world have majorities which adamantly profess an inherent cultural superiority of their own country. How can country-suprematism be a bannable offense , being so common in the totality of history of human kind, including the present?
