Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
Reminds me of an interaction I had at my local a few years back. A reg I used to chat to and play pool with a bit asked me "It's weird, I see you knocking back glass after glass of wine in here all the time, and I've never seen you drunk". I said "No, dude. You've never seen me sober". He was like "Oh.... I see."
Reminds me of an interaction I had at my local a few years back. A reg I used to chat to and play pool with a bit asked me "It's weird, I see you knocking back glass after glass of wine in here all the time, and I've never seen you drunk". I said "No, dude. You've never seen me sober". He was like "Oh...."
What's your BAC on average when you answer my posts?
Teetotallers are more often ill than people who drink sometimes
No, it is a study that says in some countries they are off work more.
The very article you link to also refers to a study that says any amount of alcohol is worse for your health than no alcohol.
You didn't notice either, because you don't read your own claimed evidence, you just use whichever headline you think support your cause.
[QUOTE=Luciom;58687022[...]
[...]It isn't settled but tamedeuce actually claimed it is, and the reason some people still think the opposite is because of big business lol. [...][/QUOTE]
No, I said studies that claimed health benefits from alcoholic drinks are largely being abandoned these days.
If you bothered to read people's posts, you would perhaps notice the difference, but is of course easier to conduct the debates in your own mind against imaginary versions of people.
Regardless of your error, this trend was made very clear when WHO early in 2023 release a statement which stated that no level of alcohol consumption is safe. Many national health agencies also followed suit and changed their public health advice as well.
No, it is a study that says in some countries they are off work more.The very article you link to also refers to a study that says any amount of alcohol is worse for your health than no alcohol. You didn't notice either, because you don't read your own claimed evidence, you just use whichever headline you think support your cause. No, I said studies that claimed health benef
Life itself is not safe, and never can be, and we're all going to die as a result, but the well-attested statistical ill-health of some non-drinkers may be in many cases because they became non-drinkers due to health problems, which in some cases may have been due to previous heavy drinking.
Life itself is not safe, and never can be, and we're all going to die as a result, but the well-attested statistical ill-health of some non-drinkers may be in many cases because they became non-drinkers due to health problems, which in some cases may have been due to previous heavy drinking.
life is a sexually transmitted disease
Death is more powerful than life???
Life itself is not safe, and never can be, and we're all going to die as a result, but the well-attested statistical ill-health of some non-drinkers may be in many cases because they became non-drinkers due to health problems, which in some cases may have been due to previous heavy drinking.
Perhaps, I suspect they didn't study very detailed medical backgrounds in a study of this type. The most probable link is in given in the article, which is simply that the abstainers come from poorer backgrounds, whereas the "one glass of wine a day"-thing was more prevalent in wealthier people. Socio-economic status is strongly linked to health.
Though it isn't said in the article, based on my own experience in life, those with poorer backgrounds might also on average have tougher jobs or jobs where home office isn't a thing, causing mild sickness to be more of an issue.
And let's be honest, in **** jobs there is more absenteeism.
please don't ban checkraise
i'd rather be waterboarded than watch this
Friends. We are having a problem here in this forum that needs to be addressed.
The personal attacks in the elections threads and the trans thread need to stop. It is totally acceptable to attack and/or characterize an *argument*; it is NOT acceptable to attack and/or characterize the poster making the argument.
These are the Rules for this forum
The Don’t Do This Section
We have a bunch of rules and guidelines, site-wide as well as forum specific, that are oriented towards DON’T DO THIS or DON’T SAY THAT. They are listed in detail in the website rules as well as below in this post. Don’t view those rules as goals to see how far you can go in disrupting our forum before you get bounced; rather view them as things to be avoided as they are counterproductive to achieving our goals of an enjoyable venue to talk politics.
(a) No-content posting. No-content posting is not permitted. Please make sure that your posts contribute positively. Examples of a no content post are “Duh!”; “LOLOLOL” or many of the other memes you may find in other forums on the site (inb4….; about 350). If you are posting a video, twitter or article headline, don’t just post it alone. Provide a comment summarizing the video or giving your take on the topic.
(b) Posts that attack another poster rather than address the issue of the thread. This includes rude, insulting, or snarky comments that add nothing to the discussion but rather seek to ridicule, demean or embarrass another poster. Accusing a poster of lying, gaslighting, trolling or other terms indicating a deliberate bad faith action will be avoided. We will assume posters are posting in good faith unless there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary. If you believe this is the case, report the post to the moderators; do not accuse the poster in the thread. Likewise, if you feel you have been unjustly accused of such an action, report the post; after an initial denial of the accusation, do not respond further in the thread.
(c) Racist posts and other bigoted statements that target a particular group or individuals of such groups (such as members of the LGBTQ community or African Americans) with derogatory comments are not allowed.
Specific guidelines for Transgender Topics.
The following guidelines will be enforced on all threads and posts related to transgender topics. It is recognized that some people may have very strong beliefs concerning transgender persons that are diametrically opposed to these guidelines. Nonetheless, the following guidelines are in effect and posters who violate these guidelines will be subject to the same disciplinary procedures as other violators of forum rules and guidelines.
It is the policy of this forum that we support the major Medical Organizations positions that unequivocally state that transgender people are NOT mentally ill, and do not suffer from a mental disorder. The leading reference works for mental disorders, the DSM-5 of the American Psychiatric Association made that clear over 10 years ago, and maintained that position in the recent DSM-5-TR revision. The World Health Organization also moved gender incongruence out of the mental illness category in ICD-11. As more and more research is done, the idea that transgender persons have a mental disorder fades more and more into the past. Therefore, that is not a matter that will be put up for debate in the forum. It will be treated as a given that transgender people do not have any form of mental health disorder or illness.
It is our desire in this forum to provide a welcoming environment for all people to discuss various topics free from personal attacks. There few attacks more personal and harmful and disrespectful than to state that a person has a mental illness when they do not. Therefore any posts or discussions stating such will be deleted, and appropriate action, including banning from the site, will be taken against posters who fail to adhere to these guidelines.
Other prohibited posts include the use of slur terms such as tranny or transformers, among others to refer to either individual posters or transgender persons as a group. Deliberately misgendering transgender people who publicly present themselves as one gender is considered rude and hurtful by many in the transgender community and is strongly discouraged. However, absence certain context, just the act of using the opposite pronoun in the course of a discussion will not in itself result in deletion or other mod actions. However, statements like "fixed your post " while changing she to he, or bolding a pronoun to emphasize that rather than simply making an on topic post will be considered trolling and removed.
The overriding principle in play here is that transgender people exist, are not mentally ill, and have the right to present themselves publicly as they see fit. And as a matter of simple respect that we accord to anyone, there is no place for the deliberate use of other terms to disrespect their gender identity.
There will be some to whom these guidelines will be unacceptable and in conflict with their personal beliefs. And that's fine. There are many other places on the internet where like-minded people gather to share those beliefs with one another. If you can't post on transgender topics without including those beliefs, by all means leave here and go there.
There will be no transgender catch all thread to discuss transgender issues just as we have no catch all threads to discuss other LGBTQ groups. There will be no threads or posts about whether transgender people exist, have mental illness, or deserve to be treated with the same respect as others. Rather, if there are specific issues that affect politics or society, such as participation of transgender people in sports, or issues concerning proposed laws about bathroom use or education curriculum, those are appropriate. But only as the discussion pertains to the thread topic and doesn't devolve back into direct and indirect references to mental illness or if transgenderism is real, or gets filled with anti-transgender slurs.
Though these guidelines are straightforward, if you have any questions about whether a post of yours is within the guidelines I encourage you to check with a mod before posting it.
(d) Extremist views well outside of the mainstream will not be allowed: offensive conspiracy theories, posts that glorify violence, call to arms etc. Do not post-election conspiracy theories without sources. Such posts go in the riggie containment thread. Due to the nature of the current health crisis, we will not allow conspiracy theories surrounding Covid-19 to be propagated, nor will we allow Covid-19 denial or posting that attempts to undermine the severity of the crisis.
*** Posts of the type that suggest certain people involved in recent unrest in the US deserved to be hurt or killed. Insofar as there is any point to talking about "sides" in this regard, these statements have not been limited to one side of the classic political axis. Such posts will not be accepted and this is not up for debate. Frankly, if anyone's political inclination has led them to a point where they think fellow citizens should be hurt / killed in vigilante actions, as targets of political violence or a result of unfortunate confrontations, then the person thinking that should take a deep breath, take a step back and do some serious introspection. Because whatever ideological path that person is on has taken them to a bad place. ***
(e) Critiquing other posters’ posting style. Inserting comments like “yeah, he never provides citations to back him up” into the middle of an ongoing discussion adds nothing and shifts focus from the topic to the poster personally.
(f) Rehashing old arguments in a new thread. Keep comments focused on today’s topic. Bringing up old arguments or positions that don’t affect the discussion today add nothing and shift the focus to the poster rather than the argument. If a poster says today he supports Trump, it doesn’t really matter if he said he didn’t two years ago. Let it go. Bringing up past posts from other threads or forums that don’t apply to the current topic is not allowed. E.g. “you said in NVG 6 months ago…”
With the election coming up soon, it must be emphasized that abusive posting will be moderated with infractions and bans. Thoughtful and moderate posting is always acceptable, regardless of which side of the political spectrum with which you associate.
PLEASE everyone, this forum only works with cooperative discussions and respectful debates. Edit yourselves where necessary. Thank you ♥
free Phresh
bro wut
My suggestion is that when you decide to ban someone for multiple offenses, then make it permanent. Definitely stop this new policy of letting people back in who have been permabanned under different accounts. Like Meisner, who is one of the people mucking up the Trans thread again, just shouldn’t be give another shot. And people like Luciom who just can’t help themselves from the hate speech etc just shouldn’t be here imo.
Friends. We are having a problem here in this forum that needs to be addressed. The personal attacks in the elections threads and the trans thread need to stop. It is totally acceptable to attack and/or characterize an *argument*; it is NOT acceptable to attack and/or characterize the poster making the argument. These are the Rules for this forumWith the election coming up soo
Hard disagree. IMO permas should be reserved for particularly egregious offences or offenders. Maybe we just have different views on what is "particularly egregious".
Yeah I think the problem is that if we permaban conservatives for being uncivil there would be no conservatives left lmao
yeah whenever i peruse old threads it always makes me really sad to see just how many old threads are full of banned accounts
people do one thing once and boom, an account that posted for years with 5k posts gets banned
i think those bans are major reason why this place is so dead
i'm sure if we looked at the numbers we'd see it's less than 200 people accounting for 90% of the traffic and probably 50 people accounting for over half
yeah whenever i peruse old threads it always makes me really sad to see just how many old threads are full of banned accountspeople do one thing once and boom, an account that posted for years with 5k posts gets bannedi think those bans are major reason why this place is so deadi'm sure if we looked at the numbers we'd see it's less than 200 people accounting for 90% of the tra
200? Are you crazy? Try 20.
if we go by posting then yes but there's a lot of lurkers
