Moderation Questions

Would you like to volunteer to test this theory?

You want a mallet weighing competition?

Hoow are we going to judge whether they qualify as light or heavy?

The classification is part of the experiment. You start talking and I hit you on the head with increasingly heavier mallets until you start making sense. The first one to achieve this objective is "heavy".

No hitting required. 'Making sense to you' - I'd be dead long before that. Which may be very satisfying and worthy but wont help with the experiment

No

nice, i guess it wouldn't be the first time i've beat it to your work afterall

Yes it is. I posted content. You commented on the speaker not the content.

This is wrong for a mod to be doing. And if bluegrass replies "I don't mod that sub" Its double wrong. Its a double lie.

We know you don't mod. You aren't being accused of modding it. Ur guarding it and the other mods are doing your dirty work.

Its a simple request. And BGP keeps changing the subject.

Are we allowed to post about how the Russia invading provoked was a mainstream lie?

There is also something else I want to point out that was nuked in the first version of the thread, but not while I keep getting banned every 20 posts.

There is no reason it shouldn't be allowed to be discussed in that thread. There is evidence and testimony about it coming out now.

does bluegrassplayer know what an ad hominem is? if not, i may have just done some good here today

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 wrong JUST BECAUSE ITS CNN. BUT its PROBABLY a mainstream media lie. I was more making a point about my stuff atm.

Jb i don't understand. I might be one of the people receptive to some of your thinking processes , but when you claim BGP uses shitty sources I really don't understand. he uses very vanilla mainstream ones.

If you want to get angry at anyone using mainstream sources you waste your time.

I often link the most mainstream source I can find for a claim to avoid source debate. BGP is probably doing the same

Last post was 21st May, so not long to wait.

We should throw him a little homecoming party to celebrate his return. Does anyone know where I could buy a bunch of pillow cases and bars of soap?

Maybe a small mullet?

I was thinking more of remission for good behaviour (not creating alt accounts etc).

How do you feel about remission in general?

BGPs sources are mostly twitter randoms. They aren't sources.

And most of them would claim that FOR SURE ...TONIGHT is the night that the russians will be bombing the nuclear plant.

FOR SURE. These tweets would say. And I would be like 'how is this allowed?"

It was PURE propaganda. And now we have reputable western leaders and world leaders saying this was a lie an russia was defending the plant from ukraine.

I wasn't around in this platform when the nuclear plant thing happened so I can't comment on that specifically.

But I have been reading BGP in the Ukrainian thread regularly and he doesn't make up bullshit.

Ofc I agree with him overall on Russia being an enemy (and you probably don't?) but I disagreed with him on Georgia, we had a somewhat heated exchange on that, in the thread, but it was the kind of exchange you have with another poster, he never even hinted at him being mod used against me at all. He is one of the good guys

Not sure I follow, am I missing some sort of reference?

Edit: oh it means a reduction in sentence. Seems like that's a British term, which I ironically did not know lol.

I didn't say the bold, you inserted that.

Thats nice of you to endorse them. I'm more speaking to my complaint. My main one being it doesn't seem we are allowed make the counter argument that russia didn't invade unprovoked.

I just want to make sure the counter argument is allowed in the thread officially.

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 do like and respect BGP, but we are certainly not friends. I've done nearly none of the modding he's wanted. None of my mod decisions towards you were done with BGP, or any other poster, in mind.

Character evidence. Goes to the witness's credibility, your honour.

There we go. Thats clear. I'll stay out of it then. So we banned covid talk, and counter mainstream narrative russia/ukraine talk.

Noted. (its probably easiest this way)

I believe you. I don't think you are a panda u see.

Some small part for sure. But also if there is a 'your honor' then there certainly has been great consideration of the presentation of the context of the mod (that IS mod but not of this sub) going around and invalidating my posts WITHOUT ANY CONSIDERATION of the content.

The content was NEVER discussed. And its SUPER relevant to multiple threads.

Its the same point I made about using AI for targeting in gaza. Who is legally and morally responsible?

Its a very relevant and important philosophical point/question and applies to both threads. (although ganstaman just banned it from the one)

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.