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 only you just watched....
It's amusing that so many people have lost their wigs over this particular temp-ban. FWIW, I suspect that nate himself would agree that he was asking for a temp-ban with that comment.
No, no. It’s when she openly admitted to having a low opinion of men. Before that, she could be given the benefit of the doubt.
Why does someone who openly demonizes men want to moderate a political forum where it’s almost all men posting? It’s because she is so selfless, right?
No, no. It’s when she openly admitted to having a low opinion of men. Before that, she could be given the benefit of the doubt.
Why does someone who openly demonizes men want to moderate a political forum where it’s almost all men posting? It’s because she is so selfless, right?
**** me, it's detective dipshit in the house. Did you remember to bring your magnifying glass?
No, no. It’s when she openly admitted to having a low opinion of men. Before that, she could be given the benefit of the doubt.
Why does someone who openly demonizes men want to moderate a political forum where it’s almost all men posting? It’s because she is so selfless, right?
Someone's fragile ego has deflated.
White knights ITT. The point remains. Address the point.
You want someone to address the point that notable misandrist Crossnerd finagled her way to the lofty, coveted position of moderating a dying forum where the majority of the posting consists of a few of middle aged men calling one another idiots for... exactly what nefarious purpose? You're gonna need to go ahead and spell it out for us there, champ.
You want someone to address the point that notable misandrist Crossnerd finagled her way to the lofty, coveted position of moderating a dying forum where the majority of the posting consists of a few of middle aged men calling one another idiots for... exactly what nefarious purpose? You're gonna need to go ahead and spell it out for us there, champ.
If this forum doesn’t matter to you at all, then your opinion should be considered irrelevant.
If this forum doesn’t matter to you at all, then your opinion should be considered irrelevant.
Oh good, another non sequitur from the wizard of word salad. Who said that the forum doesn't matter to me at all? Do you think that my pointing out that your point and your posting is idiotic means that this forum doesn't matter to me at all?
No, no. It’s when she openly admitted to having a low opinion of men. Before that, she could be given the benefit of the doubt.
Why does someone who openly demonizes men want to moderate a political forum where it’s almost all men posting? It’s because she is so selfless, right?
It sounds like you have a theory. I can't wait to hear it. Do share.
Last thing: A dying forum with such low traffic should have a bare minimum level of moderation.
Still, if you just want a cliquey social club, then you wouldn’t care about such things.
Last thing: A dying forum with such low traffic should have a bare minimum level of moderation.
Still, if you just want a cliquey social club, then you wouldn’t care about such things.
You should let the admins know. Also, I have great news for you: all you need to do is splash out a mill or two on buying a forum like this, and then you can run it however you like.
Is this the guy who pretended to be a doctor and referred to suicides as "offing themselves" and then lost an argument with Ganstaman? Kinda obsessed with the trans issue?
tbf gansta said he believed him to be a doctor on the virtue that he knew the correct name for the licensing stuff that most normies would have never heard of nor been able to casually google the name of
he never confirmed he was a doctor despite being dm'd a photo of the license, only confirming that he received a photo of a license that looked legit
the "you're not a real doctor" was more of the others doing and they were simply basing it on his personality
tbf gansta said he believed him to be a doctor on the virtue that he knew the correct name for the licensing stuff that most normies would have never heard of nor been able to casually google the name of
he never confirmed he was a doctor despite being dm'd a photo of the license, only confirming that he received a photo of a license that looked legit
the "you're not a real doctor" was more of the others doing and they were simply basing it on his personality
Ah. Thanks for the clarifications and heads up.😉
Well unfortunately for you factors other than the purity of human souls make the world a less than perfect place, and much (though not all) of that is down to male psychology.
Females fall some way short of perfect too.
Well unfortunately for you factors other than the purity of human souls make the world a less than perfect place, and much (though not all) of that is down to male psychology.
Females fall some way short of perfect too.
There are implications to the soul other than purity and perfection.
The soul has entitlements, but only if there is an advocate taking a stand on its behalf. This is a masculine move.
There are implications to the soul other than purity and perfection.
The soul has entitlements, but only if there is an advocate taking a stand on its behalf. This is a masculine move.
I assume that these sentences are supposed to have some meaning. But that meaning is completely lost on me. Is anyone here able to crack the code on the post above?
It would be very masculine to move on… (?)
