About Moderation (old original thread)

[anon46488499]

@prana

I can’t believe you guys post this much about this stuff.

These are my favorite types of post online

[FakeJbro]

I tried posting about bottle toss and you tore me a new asshole.

[anon46488499]

If someone is not looking for a discussion it is probably better not to respond. I don’t think I have had any interaction with V even under my old account.

I don’t mind a heated debate online. I actually think it’s fun. But I try to remind myself to be compassionate and not assume the worst intentions with peoples post. I fall short more often than not though.

[clovis8]

We are discussing these issues over here if you are interested.

https://unstuckpolitics.com/t/changing-the-style-of-debate-at-up/5121/239

[whosnext]

Yes, the community has expressed a general desire to limit forum toxicity, even if not everyone has the same definition of toxicity or agrees on what should be done. So PC (and the other mods) are trying to mod with that general community desire in mind.

Although an occasional misstep may occur (perhaps the RM temp-ban was one), the community has the ability to react and the misstep can be rectified (thanks PC and others).

Bottom line: all of us should continue to strive to limit forum toxicity and support community posting (including mod actions) that attempts to do so. I recommend people read/post in the Sabo/Clovis thread linked above that touches on some of these issues among many others.

[Jalfrezi]

@tabbaker

He’s taken multiple shots at Victor over the last couple months. It’s a 1 day thing.

Ruling stands.

If that’s true then this…

@Riverman

Just ban the handful of repeat offenders.

means the 1 day ban should probably stay.

[j8i3h289dn3x7]

@jmakin

Hard not to notice the people usually screeching about “biased” modding have no problem with this one

I’m gonna be honest guys/gals/nonbinaries the amount of energy I want to contribute to this site is rapidly waning. I’m not threatening to quit or anything but seriously a question I constantly ask myself is what the fuck is the point of this?

We don’t have any real rules. A solid contributor like riverman who probably singlehandedly provides a large chunk of the content here can and should get leeway for minor things like this. If I were him I’d quit. Like, what is the point of contributing to this site in such a high quality volume when you can’t even point out when someone’s posting is shit?

To be absolutely fucking clear here I don’t agree with all of riverman’s politics. But I am capable of seeing a solid contributor over a long period of time and a no warning ban is ridiculous here.

That’s all I really have to say, feel free to put me on ignore

This was a really good post.

[j8i3h289dn3x7]

@marmot

Don’t quit RM, I love your posts!

Just to be clear, I think Riverman is the best poster on this site, easily. Losing him over Victoar with support in this thread from the clique would be a fucking travesty.

[Jalfrezi]

Yeah this.

One day it’s ‘lol at all the people whining about being banned for a day, suck it up leftists’

The next day it’s ‘oh noes you must unban our Riverman’

[j8i3h289dn3x7]

@zarapochka

I like Vic.

I think that he adds value. And pay attention that me and him have VERY different political views. And I think that your statement about objectively awful poster is … how should I say… pretty subjective and stated with mind blowing certainty.

Regardless of how you feel about Vic the post in question wasn’t even much of an attack, if any, of Vic. It was a fucking backhanded compliment. I mean he did it for extra emphasis, as in “this is a guy who I think is terrible and he was right all along.” That’s why it was a silly silly ban.

[Jalfrezi]

When polled, a few lurkers said forum drama is their guilty pleasure.

[j8i3h289dn3x7]

@eyebooger

Would someone be banned if he/she said “Churchill, an objectively horrible poster, has posted quite a lot of nonsense in the COVID thread today”? I assume not, since people call him similar things in that thread all the time.

That’s not even the correct analogy. The correct analogy would be posting something like “Churchill, an objectively horrible poster in the covid thread, was right about covid all along.” That’s the equivalent of what he got banned for.

Edit:

You need to wait 4 hours between posts in this topic

Lol.

[FakeJbro]

I also noticed that many complaining about this ban are the usual mod nut huggers. But that is not hypocritical, no sir.

[FakeJbro]

Stop whining.

[j8i3h289dn3x7]

@Churchill

or post under a gimmick whilst banned? used to be a perma unless you’re called cuse

Oh please, this is quite dishonest. He’s not posting under a gimmick. He’s complaining in the ATF thread. He’s not circumventing the ban.

[clovis8]

Moving the rehashing to Bbv and slowing the chat for a bit was A+.

More good chad work!

[Yuv]

Too many cliques to keep track of

[MrWookie]

@MimosaDef

Victur go around calling people vile scum

@Vict0ar

So this is the part where we lie?

Well,

@Vict0ar

he is a toxic thin skinned elitist.

[FakeJbro]

He said “outside of Clovis,” who was the target of your quote.

[Yuv]

I’m not sure if it’s obvious or not, but this is the other side of the constant fear of “tone policing”. Everyone wants the okay to be assholes to those who “deserve” it.