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.
probably fair but i think given most people have no idea and assume there's a fluid and seamless transmisson over the course of history then stuff like that warrants being brought up and given special attention
ie take anything written by homer - the oldest extant and intact copies are from the 10th century, nearly 2,000 years after it'd been originally written
nevermind that we don't even know if homer was a group of authors or a single pers
I don't know about the poems and the plays, but most of Plato and Aristotle can be traced to manuscripts from 100-200 AD. That's still several hundred years after their time, and the manuscripts obviously are copies of copies of the originals. But there is a good chance that they are relatively faithful copies because Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, etc. were all very famous intellectuals in their lifetimes.
yes i know, again, i'm not saying they are necessarily forgeries, just that there are without a doubt many pieces in museums today that were renaissance era forgeries much like much of the great works studied as part of a classical education in the victorian era were later shown to medieval and renaissance forgeries as well
My comment was unrelated to whether they are forgeries. I was just noting one reason why the eyes look creepy.
There is a fair bit of forged art from all eras in museums across the world. For obvious reasons, after a work has been deemed authentic by the art community, a museum doesn't have much incentive to go back and revisit that judgment.
I don't know about the poems and the plays, but most of Plato and Aristotle can be traced to manuscripts from 100-200 AD. That's still several hundred years after their time, and the manuscripts obviously are copies of copies of the originals. But there is a good chance that they are relatively faithful copies because Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, etc. were all very famous intellectuals in their lifetimes.
too late for me, i already discovered alcohol and porn - they draw my attention far more than learning ancient greek these days
Abū l-Walīd Muhammad ibn Abmad ibn Muhammad ibn Rushd (Averois for us) was widely considered "the" expert on Aristotle to read from even in Dante time, contemporaries of Dante refered to him as "the commentator", so that's kinda why we go with the "Islam is how we got the Greek texts"
and fyi, this is from the poster most incentivized on the entire site to want to downplay arab influence and play up italian dominance 😀
You are both missing the forest for the trees. I have no issue with the Islamic golden age and the importance of its scholars in regards to Greek knowledge or European culture.
What I have issue with is THIS statement:
also don't forget that the only reason why we even have most of greek history today is only because of the arabs
Because this statement completely omits the existence and influence of the Byzantine empire / eastern Roman empire. This is literally the continuation of the Roman empire where Greek language and culture became dominant, and one of the most significant cultures in European history.
The Crusades brought classic Greek texts to the West in the 1200s, and a lot more came with the flight from Constantinople after the Islamic conquest in the 1450s. So it wasn't all about Averroes, or about the Islamic empire generally. The Arabs translated the Greeks into Arabic, but that was unintelligible to Western scholars. Of course even Greek was difficult, because, while it was the lingua franca of the Roman Empire, medieval Europe relied on Latin. Averroes, 1126-1198, was only influential once he was translated from Arabic into Latin.
btw homer probably never existed and/or never wrote anything
In 10k years people will be speculating if Luciom ever existed
I am fascinated by this whole “boys love the Roman Empire” thing playing out in this thread. Not even sarcastic, I really thought it was just a meme.
I am fascinated by this whole “boys love the Roman Empire” thing playing out in this thread. Not even sarcastic, I really thought it was just a meme.
Nah, the memes might exaggerate it a little, but there is a lot of truth to it.
I am fascinated by how modern Europe is the descendant of fractured medieval kingdoms and fiefdoms that were so haphazard they don't even quality as nations let alone countries, built on the ruins of enormous fallen empires vastly more advanced. That doesn't mean the middle ages were backwater times filled with dumb people, but it is post-apocalyptic: Craftsmanship, ingenuity and isolated advances are the norm. They were using ancient roads they could no longer build, taking masonry from buildings they could no longer make and the world was so dangerous that overland travel became one of the most dangerous things you could do.
We might borrow a lot of terminology, law and structure from Antiquity, but our ("western") culture is definitely more from that later period. Therefore Antiquity has that alluring shine of massive, mysterious and strange Empires that are very distant to us. I think anyone can be drawn to that, but it is perhaps culturally something that has been more of a "man"-thing.
I am fascinated by this whole “boys love the Roman Empire” thing playing out in this thread. Not even sarcastic, I really thought it was just a meme.
Of course culture is overlayed on it; but because of sex hormone differences during development "boys" brains are just wired differently than yours; and fascination with empires of yore is a manifestation of this. If you are interested, Jordan Peterson spends a lot of time musing on how evolutionary psychology can be used as a tool to examine such sex-linked psychological dichotomies.
Of course culture is overlayed on it; but because of sex hormone differences during development "boys" brains are just wired differently than yours; and fascination with empires of yore is a manifestation of this. If you are interested, Jordan Peterson spends a lot of time musing on how evolutionary psychology can be used as a tool to examine such sex-linked psychological dichotomies.
I, for one, am absolutely shocked that you're a Jordan Peterson fan.
I was also shocked to discover that he's a real person. I always thought it was just Billy Bob Thornton doing some sort of performance art.
On the "right wing" X inter webs, there is actually this whole sub community that discusses group and individual psychology, mainly focusing on the history of western civlization, in the context of Nietzsche. I haven't read any Nietzsche myself, but some of the discussion is very interesting.
Generally, Nietzsche argued that the Roman Empire (and the Muslims during their conquests FWIW) had a master morality; as opposed to Christianity which was a slave morality. I think it is pretty easy to guess which morality right wing X edge lords think is superior.
Of course culture is overlayed on it; but because of sex hormone differences during development "boys" brains are just wired differently than yours; and fascination with empires of yore is a manifestation of this. If you are interested, Jordan Peterson spends a lot of time musing on how evolutionary psychology can be used as a tool to examine such sex-linked psychological dichotomies.
You know ev psych will get you banned around here but maybe you're just genetically predetermined to like playing with fire.
as someone who took 6 years of Latin, the genocidal rapacious nature of the West can draw a distinct line to the Roman Empire and late Republic.
On the "right wing" X inter webs, there is actually this whole sub community that discusses group and individual psychology, mainly focusing on the history of western civlization, in the context of Nietzsche. I haven't read any Nietzsche myself, but some of the discussion is very interesting.
Do they like to listen to Wagner as they discuss Nietzsche by any chance?
as someone who took 6 years of Latin, the genocidal rapacious nature of the West can draw a distinct line to the Roman Empire and late Republic.
Truly amazing that you got all that from studying a language. Was it the imperialistic declension and the colonial conjugation that gave the game away?
You know ev psych will get you banned around here but maybe you're just genetically predetermined to like playing with fire.
Not as bad as Rickroll, but I think it is fair to say I am generally disagreeable in nature, which manifests in "playing with fire." FWIW disagreeableness is also identified as skewing generally male, obviously with a lot of individual variation.
Well, that is certainly a bunch of absolute nonsense if Jordan Peterson is telling you that, he should probably sign up for Pscych101 again.
I had lunch next to an expert on the history of Assyria not long ago, and she delivered a 10 minute monologue about Assyrian bureaucracy. Apart from being one of the best lunches this year, it also nicely shows how this post of yours is drivel.
maybe to a typically incurious person
Well, that is certainly a bunch of absolute nonsense if Jordan Peterson is telling you that, he should probably sign up for Pscych101 again.
I had lunch next to an expert on the history of Assyria not long ago, and she delivered a 10 minute monologue about Assyrian bureaucracy. Apart from being one of the best lunches this year, it also nicely shows how this post of yours is drivel.
You are right. Clearly all group differences, no matter how well studied and reproducibly documented, are negated if one can find a single anecdote that is an exception. Check mate. You got me.
You are right. Clearly all group differences, no matter how well studied and reproducibly documented, are negated if one can find a single anecdote that is an exception. Check mate. You got me.
If you think there is a reproducible and documented biological gender difference on interest in ancient empires, feel free to link this hoard of academic brilliance.
Other than that, you seem to forget that a) your rhetoric didn't allow for exceptions and that b) you were the one who went from generalities to one specific individual.
That's the price of hyperbole and listening to influencers.
Will be hard to dispute if he wrote anything though. Assuming everyone's writing decays/becomes lost to time at the same rate, there will come a time when his is the only left from our decade.
lmao I’m just imagining a future anthropologist thinking that Luciom must have been one of our greatest intellectuals and orators because his writing is the only one left
“for a primitive species, this really isn’t that stupid!”
very few on this forum will look good in 50 or 100 years given their writings and support.
