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.
So the eyewitnesses and victims were lying? Have you people really gone this despicably low?
this isnt the place to relitigate claims covered in the i/p thread, but the fact that rape denial, and denial of terrorist activities is allowed in this subsection is undeniably a mod issue.
mods (crossnerd at least iirc) claimed she can't be the arbiter of what is true or not in the i/p situation so she allows all claims that aren't broadly against an entire ethnicity, and aren't about posters rather events in Israel Gaza and so on.
evidently for Sandy Hook mods decided they can be the arbiter of truth about that specific event
I expected as much from Victor, whose brief and tumultuous relationship with truth, facts, and reality ended in acrimonious break-up a long time ago, but not from others here.
there might have been.
the mass rape hoax has been laid out by far smarter and more articulate and more factual people than me. its very easy for you to look at the work done by these people.
You can see one girl was raped and was bleeding badly as she was taken away on a motorcycle
Was there mass rapes by Hamas ? I think the UN report said no
Just read this
There are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence — including rape and gang-rape — occurred across multiple locations of Israel and the Gaza periphery during the attacks on 7 October 2023, a senior United Nations official reported to the Security Council today, as she presented findings from her visit to Israel and the occupied West Bank.
SRM4mod
Spoiler
You can see one girl was raped and was bleeding badly as she was taken away on a motorcycle
Was there mass rapes by Hamas ? I think the UN report said no
Just read this
There are reasonable grounds to believe that conflict-related sexual violence — including rape and gang-rape — occurred across multiple locations of Israel and the Gaza periphery during the attacks on 7 October 2023, a senior United Nations official reported to the Security C
So what are you saying? That there was "rape" and "gang rape" but not "mass rape"? Be very, very specific in what you are claiming here.
Palestinian land was stolen by pre IDF forces and their land has been stolen from them little by little since then
Israel has mandatory conscription so the vast vast majority of its people are ex military. If combat is needed they will become combatants
A rave is a party. A war zone is a place where people are killed and weapons of wars are used. The areas around a border between two warring entities is called a war zone
I appreciate that O
Yeah, Luciom is hardly the worst actor we have on this forum. If you can tolerate PW's ridiculous world views about literally anything, you can live with Luciom posting 50 times a day.
Yeah I haven’t dug into it yet.
They also reviewed testimonies of rape, sexualized torture and genital mutilation but were unable "to independently verify such allegations" due to Israel's obstruction of its investigation.[31] It also found "no credible evidence" that Palestinian militants "received orders to commit sexual violence," and thus was unable to draw conclusions on the issue.[31]
A number of initial testimonies of sexual violence were discredited later.[
Patton did a report that said Russian soldiers were being fed Viagra to do rape in Ukraine.
and then oopsy...
Victor, if you found a claim somewhere that 7 million Jews died in the Holocaust, and then you subsequently discovered that it has been definitively shown to have been between 5 and 6 million, would you conclude that all claims about the Holocaust were false and it was in fact all a hoax? I'm just trying to get some insight into the thought process of someone who is both completely incapable of deductive reasoning and motivated towards finding evidence to support a certain belief, so I understand how best to proceed with the discussion.
thats not what is going here
Oh ok, glad we cleared that up then.
Well, this is the exact post that got me thinking about how conditional empathy is, and the clear double standards where intentionally malicious, insensitive posts like this are given a pass, but we get outraged by much less intentionally malicious moral transgressions coded with a different narrative.
And generally it seems persons who are the quickest to make moral judgements against their own tribe, are also the least sensitive and most malicious against other tribes.
But there is probably at least 100 posts of this variety sprinkled around the thread, so I dont want to get too bogged down by one post.
Just an interesting sociological phenomenon.
