Moderation Questions

Sure. But no one here is arguing that moderators don't have the right to moderate how they see fit, browser. People are arguing for more lenient moderation.

This is a forum with a couple of dozen of regular posters, not hundreds. It doesn't require heavy handed moderation, and your attempt to mod in this fashion is what's causing many of the problems, just as it has on other online politics forums, as well as a lot of extra work for you.

"valenzuela - defending the 2022 Qatar World Cup bid"

Harsh but fair.

Just think about how much time you would have if you weren't busy defending your unreasonableness in this thread.

I don't know how you even have the time to do all this moderation, much less defending the moderation decisions. Just posting complaints in this thread takes a lot of time and gets exhausting!

It's almost as if there aren't enough new posts to occupy ourselves with or for moderators to scan with a fine toothcomb for any hint of rule breaches.

Sure but the way to prevent a race to the bottom is decent, non overbearing moderation and that's what's been lacking.

I don’t understand what the issue is here. Moderation seems standard.

You addressed literally nothing I said in the longer post of which I’m curious what your response is, so no you didn’t respond to both

Just flatly reply with ‘whatever I do what I want!’ and we can call it a day

I delete posts where I feel a direct personal attack is improper.

If you don't want it deleted, don't call someone an moran, idiot, stupid-as-schith etc. Simply leave that language out of a post!

Easy Peasy.

Dictatorship...... lololololol

Let's back up a bit first. Are you arguing that calling another poster ****ing pathetic, being warned, and then calling him an idiot are not violations of the site rules, that you do not consider those personal attacks or insults? Or are you arguing that yes, they are, but because you have determined by his answers (that you consider unsatisfactory) that he is, in fact, ****ing pathetic and an idiot, and therefore that you should have immunity from mod action for those comments? Or is it your position that yes, your comments warranted a ban, but because some other poster may have insulted a poster and not got banned that therefore you should not have been banned either?

So is it your position that you didnt break the rules; that you did but it's OK; or that you did but someone else did too and didnt get banned, so you shouldnt have either?

You'll save time if you quit posting the same thing over and over. 😉

no u

I very clearly said fine, I got banned

I’m now asking you to defend why lozen et al get a pass to be deliberately engaging in bad faith and provable lies when what you seem to be asking for of me in response to that is civil discourse that legitimizes them trolling the people they insist on lying about

The post that you banned me for was preceded by boba correctly calling lozen out for being a liar just saying **** just to say it and lozen responding by coming up with brand new lies and not owning or addressing the lies he was called out on

I, exasperated by reading this nonsense lozen chose to spew about a state I live in, called him ****ing pathetic for pivoting from one lie to another without owning that his first was unsubstantiated bile

I, in turn, got banned for a week

Lozen exists without issue or deterrence

Defend yourself or admit you just don’t care. It’s fine if you don’t care, I just want to read you say it

I have never seen lozen lie.

whenever someone said lozen was lying, actually they were lying.
(somewhat)

so there is that. libtards gonna lib (and lie)

donk is consistently trolling and being unreasonable. the other posters are unreasonable too. all they have are baseless accusations, without ever pinpointing to an actual example or at anything. this is pathetic.

check this out there are dozens of people banned for trolling, probably more like hundreds. https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showp...
the current mods dont ban anybody for trolling, not for anything other than blatantly disrespecting the mods and rules.
if you were a mod you would do the exact same. all hypocrites as per usual.

Lozen gave answers you didnt like. That you thought were untrue. Bobo managed to respond to those without any personal attacks or name calling. You, instead, chose to just call him names. You attacked the person, not the argument. It's not against policy to state opinions that arent backed up by facts. There is no requirement for posters to provide answers that you find satisfactory.

Well your back I am as well from a self imposed ban for my comment to Bobo . I would have accepted a ban if it was given

May I ask what lie I made about the state you live in ?

Also I would assume the reason you were suspended was because it was your second violation after being warned . I also received a warning from the mod for a first offence

So ya, ****posts like this seem to be a-ok

Lol my god

Whatever this is pointless and you are a piece of work

Later bro

FYP. 😉

Later.

Because the mods only care about tone and not about substance, this is why the forum has degraded into a shitshow of bad faith trolling and racist garbage. Dozens of regs have explained this problem to them, nothing will come of it.

You would prefer people being banned for expressing opinions you dislike if they go over some artificial threshold you have in mind, is that the point of contention with browser style? Even if it's opinions shared by significant minorities of the population, or even majorities in some countries?

Why?

It's the point of contention he's had with every moderator since his buddies were demodded and the former politics forum shut down.