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.
FWIW, when I put myself in there, it makes a point of saying that I am generally a dickhead, especially in regards to my interaction with moderation. I didn't see anybody else on the forum, even users that have eaten long bans, have a section specifically devoted to "friction between him and the moderation team." 
Maybe Rococo logged in and "supplemented" its training.
FWIW, when I put myself in there, it makes a point of saying that I am generally a dickhead, especially in regards to my interaction with moderation. I didn't see anybody else on the forum, even users that have eaten long bans, have a section specifically devoted to "friction between him and the moderation team."
I seem to recall that you or someone else put me in there and it said nothing of consequence.
I seem to recall that you or someone else put me in there and it said nothing of consequence.
I've noticed that it does better with specific questions than general ones. A few weeks ago, when tensions were running red hot in this thread, I put in "can you explain the issues between users "crossnerd" and "metsandfinsfan" on the twoplustwo forums?" You would probably be shocked at how much the computer overlords understood the dynamics of the situation. I decided not to post it because people were already very upset and in a rare moment of self-reflection for myself, decided not to continue pouring gasoline on the burning fire. The ChatGPT site saves some responses and not others, for some reason, and that one is deleted.
That same day I did ask the below, but decided not to post it since the moment had passed and I though it would be pretty tacky to post it hours after the discussion had ended. I am putting it here to give an example of what kind of insight ChatGPT is capable of if you ask something specific and at the right time of day, and for entertainment value. I am not trying to create beef here! I swear I am copy-pasting this directly from the site, without editing anything myself:
can you explain the issues between users "chillrob" and "trolly mctrollson" on the twoplustwo forums?
The interactions between Chillrob and Trolly McTrollson on the Two Plus Two forums are characterized by significant conflict, stemming primarily from their differing posting styles and perspectives.
Key Issues:
Conflict of Styles:
Chillrob: Known for thoughtful and measured posts, Chillrob often engages in discussions with a focus on constructive dialogue and detailed arguments.
Trolly McTrollson: In contrast, Trolly McTrollson’s posts are often provocative, sarcastic, and designed to elicit strong reactions. This trolling behavior can derail threads and shift discussions from constructive debate to contentious arguments.
Political and Ideological Differences:
Their disagreements often arise in politically charged threads, where they hold differing views on key issues. Chillrob may present well-reasoned arguments, while Trolly McTrollson’s responses can be dismissive or mocking, leading to frustration and escalating conflict.
Moderation Interventions:
The contentious interactions between the two users may have required moderator intervention to maintain order and civility in the forum. Moderators likely had to step in to manage the conflicts, issue warnings, or edit/remove posts to prevent further escalation.
Community Perception:
Support and Opposition:
Some users may side with Chillrob, appreciating his constructive contributions and detailed arguments.
Others might find Trolly McTrollson’s humor and provocative style entertaining, even if disruptive.
Impact on Forum Dynamics:
The ongoing conflict between Chillrob and Trolly McTrollson can impact the overall tone of the forum, particularly in threads where they frequently clash. This can create a polarized environment where discussions become less about the issues and more about the personalities involved.
Specific Examples:
Debate Escalations:
In threads where Chillrob and Trolly McTrollson engage, debates can quickly escalate from reasoned discussions to personal attacks and sarcasm. This shift often disrupts the thread’s original purpose and can frustrate other participants.
Thread Derailments:
Trolly McTrollson’s trolling behavior can derail threads, making it difficult for users like Chillrob to maintain a focused and constructive discussion. This can lead to threads being closed or heavily moderated.
Summary:
The issues between Chillrob and Trolly McTrollson on the Two Plus Two forums reflect a broader clash of styles and ideologies. Chillrob’s reasoned and constructive approach often conflicts with Trolly McTrollson’s provocative and trolling behavior, leading to frequent conflicts and requiring moderation to maintain order. The dynamic between these two users exemplifies the challenges of balancing diverse personalities and maintaining constructive dialogue in an online community.
There are two realities and a spectrum. The reality of the past and the reality of the future. The reality of being (the destination) and the reality of becoming (the journey). In Christian language, the world of the past / present and the world to come.
Did you get these ideas from the Bible or is this your creation or somewhere else?
You should ask ChatGPT whether moderating the politics forum on 2+2 is a rewarding experience.
donk what version of gpt is that, is that the paid one? when i try that stuff it gives this
Hey I finally got around to watching Monkey Man, it was better than I expected.
donk what version of gpt is that, is that the paid one? when i try that stuff it gives this
4.0, which you have to sign in to use, but it is still free. You get like 10 free questions every six hours or so. I got that kind of response when I first tried it out, but without signing in, which only let me use 3.5.
Homeslice used the wrong version and got reality checked right in the kisser.
Ok, so your weird posting style is a direct result of a belief in an omnipresent invisible super being with magical powers. That explains it.
Truth - that which brings you more in accordance with reality / the good. Does a reality check do this? Yes.
As I said:
So a reality check can make someone come to realize a truth, but the reality check itself isn't one.
But I'm done going around in circles with you on this. If you want to keep using words incorrectly, that's your prerogative, but don't be surprised when you spend most of your time explaining to and/or arguing with others about what you actually meant when you could have saved yourself (and the forum) a lot of trouble by simply posting clearly in the first place.
No. A thing or an action can not be a truth or falsehood, but an idea can.
I'm sure others might find holes in this, or find better ways to phrase it, but I'd suggest that if it can't be a sentence, it can't be a truth or falsehood.
Reality Check.
Banana.
Long walk.
Those aren't sentences, and they also can't be truths.
Murder is wrong.
That is a sentence, and can be a truth.
As I said:
But I'm done going around in circles with you on this. If you want to keep using words incorrectly, that's your prerogative, but don't be surprised when you spend most of your time explaining to and/or arguing with others about what you actually meant when you could have saved yourself (and the forum) a lot of trouble by simply posting clearly in the first place.
I’m saying exactly what I mean, and I’m telling the truth. The realization from the reality check is a truth and the reality check itself is a truth. Even a person can be a truth. Two thousand years ago, someone said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.”
It’s possible that some people know things that you don’t know.
Someone only 55 years ago also told people he was the way, the truth and the life. And following his path they went on to stab people to death in Beverly Hills.
well someone got the Nobel prize for peace then extra-judiciarily executed 300+ people with drones
I’m saying exactly what I mean, and I’m telling the truth. The realization from the reality check is a truth and the reality check itself is a truth. Even a person can be a truth. Two thousand years ago, someone said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life.”
It’s possible that some people know things that you don’t know.
Ironic, really. You keep banging on about reality checks and self awareness and you clearly spend a lot of time thinking about these things, yet you have amply demonstrated ITT that you are probably one of the least self aware and introspective posters here.
I wonder what goes through someone's mind when literally everyone around them is giving them the same criticism, mostly in a constructive manner, and they pig-headedly refuse to accept the feedback. I can sort of get deluding yourself into thinking that one or two specific people have it out for you, but we're up to like a dozen people saying exactly the same thing in slightly different ways.
It's like a real life version of this meme.
I mean, pigheadedly refusing to listen to someone is pretty much the backbone of politics.
Some, um, interesting new posters with similar views have appeared.
I have a strong suspicion that one of them might be our old chum washoe.
None of these are as incoherent as washoe.
