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.
Ah, qualifications to be president. Remind me again the qualifications that Trump has to be president, will ya? Is this the part where you tell us how smart, funny and physically fit he is, mong? Or maybe you can tell us more about how a second Trump presidency is going to usher in a new era of morality and family values.
He has experience being President.
lol
Lol mong, does it not tell you something that the people who worked for and with him while he was president all say that he is incompetent to be president? All disgruntled employees?
jimmy carter it is then
So what are the rules when talking about people who self identify as trans/nobbinary? Is it mandatory to verify which pronouns they prefer and use them when talking about them in this forum?
What about the fact that they can change at any moment, multiple times, according to gender theory? Is it mandated in this forum to keep track of the latest decision by every one of them about how they prefer to be talked about, and to follow that?
Or can we just go with biological sex as most of humanity did for all human history?
Moreover, when in the rules of these forums can I find definitive answers to these questions? I have been pushed by a mod because I purportedly "deny trans existence" because I refer to a biological woman who is allowed to participate in woman sports as a woman, given she identifies as trans (unknown pronouns, probably "non binary" of some sort) and she is DEFINED as a woman, by being allowed to participate in women sports.
Is gender theory mandated here?
Whenever I struggle with such questions I find a useful guide is to ask oneself "would Robocop be able to shoot her in the dick?"
Treat people with respect for their basic identity and humanity, and I’m sure you won’t have any problems
Very uncomplicated
Treat people with respect for their basic identity and humanity, and I’m sure you won’t have any problems
Very uncomplicated
Given that is not the rules used for anyone with rightwing values on this forum, I didn't expect those to be the rules.
Moreover, gender identity is a politically charged topic and I would lack of respect toward myself if I indulged in using words in the warped way gender identity uses them.
For me (and the vast majority of humanity for all human history) pronouns and sex are not something people can choose for themselves, and a distinct gender separated from biological sex doesn't exist. Someone can feel to be of the opposite gender (IE being trans) but that's not my issue.
Would you enforce as "basic respect" for everyone to call me "Jedi" if I was an official cleric of a church that gave me that title? Would that change if 30% of voters in my country used that routinely?
The idea that in order to respect someone you have to agree with his political theology that warped the meaning of words other people used forever in different ways is insane.
It is very complicated when "respect" is defined using horribly controversial theories heavily disagreed upon by large swathes of humanity.
In normal cases, it is obvious to all adults what is respectful and what is not.
The moment it becomes very controversial, denying that is an issue is weird.
For example for me calling someone a communist is exceptionally disrespectful, akin to claim someone is a pedo rapist. For other people it isn't.
I worry this forum may not be the best fit for you, friend.
For me (and the vast majority of humanity for all human history) pronouns and sex are not something people can choose for themselves, and a distinct gender separated from biological sex doesn't exist. Someone can feel to be of the opposite gender (IE being trans) but that's not my issue.
We are here in this form right now, and you have been told what the rules are for this context. You can choose to abide by them, break them and get banned, or not post on the topic. The choice is yours.
If it isnt too much, could we move the 911 talk from the chocolates thread to either a 911 thread if there is one (start one) or whatever conapiracy thread it would fit into?
Id like to point out some things but its an lc thread
If it isnt too much, could we move the 911 talk from the chocolates thread to either a 911 thread if there is one (start one) or whatever conapiracy thread it would fit into?
Id like to point out some things but its an lc thread
I'm afraid to give that topic life again but I guess if it's what the forum wants, it could be moved to its own thread.
So what are the rules when talking about people who self identify as trans/nobbinary? Is it mandatory to verify which pronouns they prefer and use them when talking about them in this forum?
What about the fact that they can change at any moment, multiple times, according to gender theory? Is it mandated in this forum to keep track of the latest decision by every one of them about how they prefer to be talked about, and to follow that?
Or can
When in doubt use "they/them"
It's not that hard
Aside from the fact that it sounds a lot worse for foreigners speaking English than to natives, perhaps because many languages don't have the singular they (and English had basically abandoned it by the time we got to learn it, so we weren't taught about it) , i am not sure if you get the idea that the hard part is being forced to comply to marxist ideology and to learn it well enough to know that you need to default to they if in doubt.
It's very hard to give any space to marxism in my mind for routine behavior, it would be like being forced to say that there is inherent exploitation in capitalism when a worker is hired and being banned if I refuse to start every conversation about the topic which "the exploited worker class".
It's an humiliation ritual for everyone who despises Marxism, masked by a "duty to respect others", truly maoist
I can barely begin to grasp just how awful it must be for you, you poor thing, but instead of whining incessantly about it you can always spare yourself the abject humiliation that goes with posting on a Marxist forum.
Aside from the fact that it sounds a lot worse for foreigners speaking English than to natives, perhaps because many languages don't have the singular they (and English had basically abandoned it by the time we got to learn it, so we weren't taught about it) , i am not sure if you get the idea that the hard part is being forced to comply to marxist ideology and to learn it well enough to know that you need to default to they if in doubt.
It'
I don't want to see you go, personally I enjoy reading your extreme views but if it's so difficult to figure out how a person identifies or purposely misgender them it's going to be quite a short leash around these parts.
Since you came back from your vacation I'm getting flashbacks of cupee at times, just making mountains out of molehills.
More confirmation that the right wing characterisation of the left as snowflakes claiming victimhood was mere projection.
Given that is not the rules used for anyone with rightwing values on this forum, I didn't expect those to be the rules.
Moreover, gender identity is a politically charged topic and I would lack of respect toward myself if I indulged in using words in the warped way gender identity uses them.
For me (and the vast majority of humanity for all human history) pronouns and sex are not something people can choose for themselves, and a distinct gend
To the bolded:
For the vast majority of history we couldn't fly, had no tv and couldn't fathom going in space.
When you use this phrase to further your point, it just completely destroys it and how shortsighted your view is.
To the bolded:
For the vast majority of history we couldn't fly, had no tv and couldn't fathom going in space.
When you use this phrase to further your point, it just completely destroys it and how shortsighted your view is.
Unlike flying and other tech stuff, we did have societies and sexes and sexual preferences and we did use language to refer to those, so there is nothing shortsighted in my view.
If gender identity exists in humans in the sense gender theory activists believe it does, it always existed in all **** sapiens.
Which btw is why some "gender studies" "experts" make up narratives about how some obscure human groups centuries ago purportedly had words to describe gender identities ("2 spirits" in american natives and other such made up identities).
So my claim is that purportedly, this core element of human identity always existed, yet the vast majority of human groups for the vast majority of human history didn't use pronouns based on it (and still don't today, in the present). It took "experts" in "gender studies" with marxist theorists to make up that, against the consolidated wisdom of every other human being that ever lived basically.
The probability that marxists for the first time in human history are right about something, and everyone else who ever lived was wrong, is basically 0. That btw is true for any marxist claim, and any claim in general by any "theorist" about social nature: if you can't find a foundation of your claims about social nature in ancient literature and cultures (or at least in shakespear ffs), you are inventing stuff that doesn't exist and never existed.
For the last decade, a “tweet” has been a method of electronic communication between a moron president and his cult of followers. For the vast majority of human history it was a sound a bird made. I guess you can live and learn to adapt or go elsewhere.
It’s not that difficult.
That would be an answer about the definition of what a woman is, which as for every word, can change in time and it's a different topic. What's marxist about the issue of the definition of woman is the attempt to violently force a change in semantics (through legislation), instead of accepting what society organically does (lke for what a tweet is, or what "googling" means: we didn't mandate the meaning through state violence).
That's not unique of marxism though. Culturally dominant systems try to enforce the meaning of words at least since the establishment of organized religion (from which marxism coopted most of it's most nefarious practices).
I am talking about the use of pronouns when talking about someone who isn't even there, based on the self-identification of the person being discussed and not based on EXTERNAL elements that are objective.
That's unique of current radical leftism, and it has nothing to do with semantic drifts/shifts
