Moderation Questions

Is that post that Mets made to get banned still extant or was it deleted? Can we see it?

It was actually a few posts but (and I'm guessing here) was probably this one
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showp...

I dont think there is much to gleam from any single post.

Bowser said not to talk about Palestinian fecundity being used as a demographic weapon against Israel, and Mets made a post along these lines right after.

So if one is inclined to challenge the decision, the only real question is whether Bowser should be making such a demand; especially considering he routinely lets Victor dehumanize Israelis/Zionists by calling them ghouls, monsters, genocide lovers, etc.

FYI, 2+2 pro tip: "bullshit", "horseshit", "dipshit", etc. are fine for some reason, only "****" itself is censored.

Banned for two weeks for posting a Dailykos article?

C'mon Browser...

Browser, your ban durations are draconian. I know you're a rules guy, can you direct me to where the ban durations are prescribed in the rules?

So does everyone think it’s workable for a moderator to define parameters for posting and posters to then say “lol what a ****ing joke!” and willfully ignore those parameters? Because that’s what happened here.

Mets has behavioral issues when it comes to authority and following boundaries he doesn’t agree with. A short break for posters who can’t follow rules is an easy way to modify those behaviors. Some people are more resistant than others. We’ll see if it works.

How is 2 weeks a short break? Other mods would have given 3 days max.

Only when the parameters are ****ing jokes.... although I think we're now seeing why the ban was for two weeks.

There is literally no set of circumstances where literally copy/pasting a Dailykos article should result in a two week ban. It's ****ing Dailykos not Stormfront.

There are ways to go about disagreeing with a ruling. Saying “lol what a ****ing joke” and then immediately disregarding the warning got him banned, not posting a specific article, and I think you know that.

I think in general many of you are unfair in your summations and treatment of Browser. I’ve said my piece, I’ll bow out of this discussion for the sake of not clogging the thread further while the mod is out of commission- something maybe some of you ought to consider doing as well.

The article was posted to illustrate the joke of the policy.

And if a policy is a joke then it's a joke. We shouldn't be expected to pussyfoot around inane policies-- exactly because we're not children.

-----
Again, the fact that there is no set of circumstances where posting a Daily Kos article deserves a two week ban, is why it was completely appropriate for Mets to post an article from there-- to illustrate why the policy is so bad.

I love how Luckbox is the self-appointed Monday morning quarterbacking expert on all banning decisions, as if his opinions carry any weight around here.

And we're once again in a position where what is mainstream thinking is being banned here.

I don’t know how some of you meaningfully navigate the adult world

They might not carry much weight but certainly better than the trash you post.

I'm in a hostel in the jungle about to play some Chinese poker, or shoot some pool, or take a dip in an actual pool. I had my first beer before noon. Is that meaningfully navigating?

And posting on 2+2, so probably not

Depends. Can you run a 9 ball rack? If no, then not really.

I've done it twice in my life. So yes but barely.

1-9 combo?

no I understand what the term "running a rack" means. You think you're the only person who likes chess, poker, and pool? My parents got a table sometime when i was around 15. I moved out at 17 but was around enough to get some use out of it.

Reposting what resulted in someone else's banning because the banning was a joke is a strong move.