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.
Having wandered around SF at night I'd be an order of magnitude more worried about my safety in most US cities than in most European cities.
Keep in mind that the baseline would be Japan, not LA for us.
In italy our domestic demographic for natives with 4 italian grandparents is almost identical to the Japanese one.
Given street, violent, petty crime is overwhelmingly a phenomenon caused almost exclusively by poor, uneducated, 15-40 men, and in the center north we have basically 0 native (4 grandparents italian) such cases (absolute poverty among native italians in many area of the north is less than 2%, and even that tiny portion is a
LOOL
This kind of proves that it's not about immigration.
Luciom,
I'm not like you. If there are groups of poor people in the world who are less educated and more likely to become criminals, I want to invite them to live where I live in a place that has more opportunity even if it increases my personal risk, I think it lowers the risks to humans generally.
But, also, I love freedom and I don't tell other people what streets they can walk down and what they can do unless they specifically and not some general class of people that I think they belong to have threatened me.
And Japan seems great. I really want to go there and could see retiring there if possible. And the no crime thing is very attractive. But it's on me as a freedom lover, to go where I like and not to tell other people where they are allowed to be.
It is not about immigration, it is specifically about allowing any immigration of young uneducated men in fact. Which should be at a very clear 0.
We can take in as many women as we want and that's only a gain, we can take in as many older men as we want to, or young skilled men (especially with rich relatives) as we want to with no risk
It is not about immigration, it is specifically about allowing any immigration of young uneducated men in fact. Which should be at a very clear 0.
We can take in as many women as we want and that's only a gain, we can take in as many older men as we want to, or young skilled men (especially with rich relatives) as we want to with no risk
What’s stopping us from taking in these young men and integrating and educating them if the problem is their poverty?
Luciom,
I'm not like you. If there are groups of poor people in the world who are less educated and more likely to become criminals, I want to invite them to live where I live in a place that has more opportunity even if it increases my personal risk, I think it lowers the risks to humans generally.
But, also, I love freedom and I don't tell other people what streets they can walk down and what they can do unless they specifically and not some general class of people that I think they belong to h
Not if in their own original country law enforcement is much stricter because they don't have the luxury of treating "human rights" the same way we do no. You increase risk worldwide.
I love freedom and that includes property rights. Everything in Italy exists because of what our ancestors did, and it's not like people who don't share our ancestors have ANY claim at enjoying anything at all that exists in italy, same as you don't think you have a right to use the condo pool of a building you don't rent in or own a piece of , do you?
Walking by the colosseum (or any other thing in Italy of value) is exactly the same privilege as accessing a private park, except the owners are the italian people, and we have all rights to decide who can access our property.
The studies don't support your bullshiit thesis I'm afraid.
Having wandered around SF at night I'd be an order of magnitude more worried about my safety in most US cities than in most European cities.
Fair point even though SF is like the 30th most dangerous city in the US with a population over 200k.
Not if in their own original country law enforcement is much stricter because they don't have the luxury of treating "human rights" the same way we do no. You increase risk worldwide.
I love freedom and that includes property rights. Everything in Italy exists because of what our ancestors did, and it's not like people who don't share our ancestors have ANY claim at enjoying anything at all that exists in italy, same as you don't think you have a right to use the condo pool of a building you don'
No, I don't think like that at all or respect it. I'm not a nationalist.
And I don't think you love freedom at all.
What’s stopping us from taking in these young men and integrating and educating them if the problem is their poverty?
It costs a ton of money which we don't have? and why should you even think of spending a single eur on anyone who isn't a citizen to begin with, as long as at least a single citizen has an unmet need? that should be actually fully unconstitutional and treasonous.
I mean i am also against spending my money on other citizens over a very very basic threshold, why would i ever agree to spend on others as well?
Btw it's absolutely not a given that you can fix a 19y old with a terrible past and 0 education at all, other than waiting for him to become much older.
We didn't fix italian domestic native criminality by "integrating and educating them", we fixed it by having fewer kids and through generations of slow improvement (in the center-north).
I should take in uneducated young men, spend money on them for 2 generations, so that MAYBE if everything goes well in 2100 their grandkids aren't a problem anymore for us?
No, I don't think like that at all or respect it. I'm not a nationalist.
And I don't think you love freedom at all.
So you think a group of people spends money for generations to build something, upkeep and improve it, and if it is "public" (shared by the people who built it, their heirs, and others they explicitly allowed in) in that area it is public for the world? that's the idea?
There is no freedom if strong , enforceable property rights don't exist
I should take in uneducated young men, spend money on them for 2 generations, so that MAYBE if everything goes well in 2100 their grandkids aren't a problem anymore for us?
Aside from the most correct answer being you should just love freedom...
Yes, you should. The point of life is to be good and noble. Read some of your countryman Marcus Aurelius.
I think you need a reminder of what Europeans' ancestors did, including slavery and the widespread theft of colonialism.
Colonialism was an immense benefit for the colonized countries, all countries did slavery (and catholic countries where those that stopped doing it sooner than everyone else in the world) so that is irrelevant as a criticism.
Oh and btw EVEN IF for some reasons Italy specifically had "done wrong things in the past" in aggregate (something i deeply disagree with) that wouldn't inform my evaluation in any way or form in the slightest, my only moral imperative is to do my rational self interest and nothing else.
I mean...Italy was doing industrial-scale slavery long before most other countries so there's not much to brag about there.
So you think a group of people spends money for generations to build something, upkeep and improve it, and if it is "public" (shared by the people who built it, their heirs, and others they explicitly allowed in) in that area it is public for the world? that's the idea?
There is no freedom if strong , enforceable property rights don't exist
You're probably no closer a relation to the people who built the Colosseum than the people on the boats you revile. I do not respect your inheritance from 1/2^100 genetic relations. About 1/4 is about as far as I respect.
Colonialism was an immense benefit for the colonized countries, all countries did slavery (and catholic countries where those that stopped doing it sooner than everyone else in the world) so that is irrelevant as a criticism.
I did have an interesting chat with some Indian colleagues once. Being educated and in good jobs here they were very much in favour of the Raj despite the huge theft it involved, while I was very much against it on the grounds of self-determination or what microbet would call freedom.
Some of you have never been mugged by children and it shows
In Baltimore back in the early aughts, it was a rite of passage lol
Aside from the most correct answer being you should just love freedom...
Yes, you should. The point of life is to be good and noble. Read some of your countryman Marcus Aurelius.
That's the same as telling me i have some obligation to charity, it has nothing to do with freedom at all though.
You're probably no closer a relation to the people who built the Colosseum than the people on the boats you revile. I do not respect your inheritance from 1/2^100 genetic relations. About 1/4 is about as far as I respect.
He has more genes in common with a random African than he does with the European living next door to him, a fact I like to remind him of from time to time.
You're probably no closer a relation to the people who built the Colosseum than the people on the boats you revile. I do not respect your inheritance from 1/2^100 genetic relations. About 1/4 is about as far as I respect.
Colosseum is still there only because of decisions made every generation after it was built by people who lived in the area.
I might not be close ancestor-wise to the actual builders than people from Mali (although i am pretty sure that's false) but i am certainly closer to those who in 1800, 1825, 1850, 1875, 1900 and so on kept deciding on not demolishing it.
Not if in their own original country law enforcement is much stricter because they don't have the luxury of treating "human rights" the same way we do no. You increase risk worldwide.
I love freedom and that includes property rights. Everything in Italy exists because of what our ancestors did, and
These things are not at all alike. People with Italian citizenship have the same claim to things in Italy, regardless of their ancestry. Just as a condo owner has rights of ownership based on a contract, not their relationship to who built the condo. Citizenship is the defining characteristic, not ancestry.
