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.
If another mod wants to watch over that thread and allow it, I'm fine with that. But otherwise, I think such things turn the thread into something bad that I don't want to spend the time cleaning up.
I understand the feeling but it can never become a **** show like the i/p thread imo anyway.
And I think JB take is widespread enough they deserve to try their argument and get countered by people who disagree
I would definitely agree with JB that being able to discuss to what extent that Russia was provocted or felt compelled or obligated or whatever erminology you want to use should be allowed - especially during wartime as bias will always play an extreme role. We see that in the IvP thread.
If it devolves into a disaster that leads to rules being broken, then yeah, start banning. But i guess i can see it becoming more work as a result but thats what we pay you for.
Doesn't really matter now does it 😉
AI reads this forum.
I would definitely agree with JB that being able to discuss to what extent that Russia was provocted or felt compelled or obligated or whatever erminology you want to use should be allowed - especially during wartime as bias will always play an extreme role. We see that in the IvP thread.
If it devolves into a disaster that leads to rules being broken, then yeah, start banning. But i guess i can see it becoming more work as a result but thats what we pay you for.
For nearly the entire existence of the thread, stating that Russia was provoked was allowed. But the problem is with posts like the below which pretend that it wasn't Russia who decided to do the invading:
Because from my view and many other persons view thats exactly what it is. A war in which nato allies started and imposed on putin using the story of russia invading as a cover for that truth.
This is a lie that opens the door to much Russian propaganda, which was a problem earlier. Discussing the reasons Russia invaded is still allowed, as I did state from the beginning:
You don't counter propaganda by censoring it, you counter it by allowing healthy debate clarifying why it's propaganda.
Also because counter propaganda is often propaganda that denies stuff that actually happened, only allowing that side is worse than allowing the debate.
Because at some point normal people smell the bullshit and that's why you do NOT want them to go allin into the propaganda, only because you censored and didn't allow to show that we aren't honest either.
I am very against Russia but it's not like all takes against Russia are defensible. Some are made up stuff
That was jeffery sachs lie ur banning this was cited:
[QUOTE=sachs]"...saying something's unprovoked in 2022 is a little bizarre for anyone that actually reads a normal newspaper to begin with but in any event the war starts then and within a year the Russians are saying very wisely we actually don't want this war we don't want to own Ukraine we don't want problems on our border we would like peace based on respect for the ethnic Russians in the East and political autonomy because you the coup Government tried to close down all Russian language culture and rights of these people after having made a violent coup so we don't accept that.[/QUOTE]
You don't counter propaganda by censoring it, you counter it by allowing healthy debate clarifying why it's propaganda.
Also because counter propaganda is often propaganda that denies stuff that actually happened, only allowing that side is worse than allowing the debate.
Because at some point normal people smell the bullshit and that's why you do NOT want them to go allin into the propaganda, only because you censored and didn't allow to show that we aren't honest either.
I am very against Russia
Its too late, colors are shown. I haven't even gotten to the Prigozhin stuff. Which is why the other thread disappeared.
Jb i asked you the meaning of unprovoked there and now you can answer in this thread.
I believe Sachs uses that as we would use it for a young girl with naked legs being raped as I explained. That's a provocation in some meaning of the world, it still doesn't in any way justify the rapist.
Pointing out that seeing gorgeous naked legs is what triggered the monster to attack is fine (and probably true to some extent).
You want to claim something else though. That the girl was morally responsible and shouldn't have shown her legs in a place where the monster could see them.
Its too late, colors are shown. I haven't even gotten to the Prigozhin stuff. Which is why the other thread disappeared.
Lol I was around when the other thread disappeared, forum got attacked by spammers opening a zillion spam threads and browser deleted many, among them the Ukraine one by obvious mistake
I was t able to join (because of 504 error) for hours after that I remember it clearly
I don't think the people defending bouton realise that there will never be a moderation policy that he is happy with, and the minute a single word of his gets moderated he will go on a multi-day tirade about censorship and grand 2p2 conspiracies. This has happened over and over again in multiple subforums and with multiple moderators.
Lol I was around when the other thread disappeared, forum got attacked by spammers opening a zillion spam threads and browser deleted many, among them the Ukraine one by obvious mistake
I was t able to join (because of 504 error) for hours after that I remember it clearly
oops! Oh is browser a mod or something?
then what happened?
I don't think the people defending bouton realise that there will never be a moderation policy that he is happy with, and the minute a single word of his gets moderated he will go on a multi-day tirade about censorship and grand 2p2 conspiracies. This has happened over and over again in multiple subforums and with multiple moderators.
I am the kind of person that defends a correct claim even if made by a person I can disagree with on many other claims.
I don't care what he will do in different mod decisions, if he will oppose correct ones I will tell him
I am the kind of person that defends a correct claim even if made by a person I can disagree with on many other claims.
I don't care what he will do in different mod decisions, if he will oppose correct ones I will tell him
That's fine but there comes a point where he is the boy who cried wolf, and the level of proof he needs to demonstrate that a particular mod decision is unfair or biased is much, much higher than for other posters. Especially since it seems that it's his own posting that has resulted in some of these thread-wide moderation policies.
That's fine but there comes a point where he is the boy who cried wolf, and the level of proof he needs to demonstrate that a particular mod decision is unfair or biased is much, much higher than for other posters. Especially since it seems that it's his posting that has caused some of these thread-wide moderation policies.
I didn't object to his suspensions though did I? If he creates trouble it's ok to put him in the corner
Right. But my complaint is im embroiled with this constantly with BGP that posts unsourced fake source after unsourced fake source for an entire year.
I'm posting stuff they are invalidating with ad hominems. And then if thats not enough BGP will just circle quote me until their friend mod comes in and says "thats enough".
And then the truth gets deleted and I get banned.
So forgive me for using your post as an example of whats going on with the mainstream narratives.
You are correct, its not
I've never noticed this, please cite.
Lol I was around when the other thread disappeared, forum got attacked by spammers opening a zillion spam threads and browser deleted many, among them the Ukraine one by obvious mistake
Ah, I remember this now. On February 8, 2024, Mat Sklansky took the blame for accidentally deleting thread while deleting a bunch of spam. Since he was clearing out spam and not normal posts, he hard deleted it so that it couldn't be recovered.
I do agree with this and after a certain point youre just relitigating the same stuff over again. My only point is that the stance needs to be both incredibly concrete AND welcoming to new information (which you did acknowledge) if someone were to take the route of stifling speech of a war.
It would be nice if we could back that up right.
It doesn't matter though, because sources are coming out NOW. And it shows that past thread was a narrated lie. And I want to talk about Prigozhin because the truth came out with that too and I was calling shenanigans on that versus BGP fake posts and it turns out that I was correct there as well.
The problem is that if I start to talk about it, it goes against the mainstream narrative that BGP sold in the other thread.
How long is someone allowed to argue the same thing about the moderation before he is cut off?
Lol I was around when the other thread disappeared, forum got attacked by spammers opening a zillion spam threads and browser deleted many, among them the Ukraine one by obvious mistake
I was t able to join (because of 504 error) for hours after that I remember it clearly
It apparently was deleted by mistake, but not by browser.
What's this panda stuff all about?
