2024 ELECTION THREAD
The next presidential race will be here soon! Please see current Bovada odds. Thoughts?
You care enough to come in and circle the wagons any time I'm critical of you guys.
Look, I'm not trying to upset you, I'm wondering if it's wise to provide a soapbox for the kind of racist demagoguery that's leading to schools in my area getting bomb threats. That kind of thing should upset you more than my (admittedly annoying) complaining?
Rococo question is still interesting, which place online do you think is properly moderated? any subreddit you think got the balance right? any social media? what's your "go to" example of how a political forum should be moderated?
You care enough to come in and circle the wagons any time I'm critical of you guys.
Look, I'm not trying to upset you, I'm wondering if it's wise to provide a soapbox for the kind of racist demagoguery that's leading to schools in my area getting bomb threats. That kind of thing should upset you more than my (admittedly annoying) complaining?
I don't recall anyone here actually propagating that rumour, nor claiming it is true, only discussing the fact that Trump said it as a current event that is relevant in politics. So, the soapboxes for racist demagoguery being provided here are limited only by your imagination.
he prefers the forum where they think the "empathy has been bred out of Russians" and the most liked poster gets irate that trans (he did not use this term it was lets just say "someone with something") high schoolers may beat their daughter at track.
Lol. That's pretty funny if true. I guess by the same logic, I'm not attracted to supermodels since they are not attracted to me.
yeah just like all overweight low income people i know out there claiming "i like my girls with a little meat on them" is not copium in the slightest
this guy clearly not attracted to supermodels either
I am not sure where the reverse groucho marx theory of sexual attraction developed but i don't think it's true
One party wants to decide when, where, and how women have agency over their reproductive rights. But yeah, the other party is fascist.
I don't recall anyone here actually propagating that rumour, nor claiming it is true, only discussing the fact that Trump said it as a current event that is relevant in politics,. So, the soapboxes for racist demagoguery being provided here are limited only by your imagination.
yeah but the thread isn't a circle jerk of people taking turns condemning it
maybe if it were, those poor haitians in his neighborhood could go to school again - so we are the problem!
I have never put anyone on ignore, and if I were to start now, he wouldn't be close to the top of my personal list. It's best to ignore his comments about how the forum is run, but there is no way to automate that process.
gun to your head, you need to put 10 users on the ignore list
time is a construct so it doesn't matter if they don't post anymore
can we get a roc ignore list power rankings?
here's what i'm packin
groucho marx most famous quote is:
/I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member./
Here you guys are discussing a theory of sexual attraction based on the opposite (what i dubbed "the reverse groucho marx")
You care enough to come in and circle the wagons any time I'm critical of you guys.
Look, I'm not trying to upset you, I'm wondering if it's wise to provide a soapbox for the kind of racist demagoguery that's leading to schools in my area getting bomb threats. That kind of thing should upset you more than my (admittedly annoying) complaining?
I care about the forum to a degree. If the forum ever turned into a place where I was embarrassed to post, I would leave. I assume you would do the same. That's different than caring about whether you think I did a good job as moderator. As I said, every person who ever agrees to moderate this forum knows that you will complain that they are doing a terrible job. That's already baked into the market price, so to speak. I am not upset. I'm just explaining how I see things.
I am curious about what political forum you would point to as a standard for good moderation.
One party wants to decide when, where, and how women have agency over their reproductive rights. But yeah, the other party is fascist.
abortion is orthogonal to fascism.
You can have an exceptionally authoritarian country which allows abortion (China under Mao), and a very libertarian leaning one which doesn't (a lot of the USA in the 19th century)
Abortion is about when the thing inside the womb becomes a person with rights. That's what the disagreement is about. Once it has rights you can't kill it freely, until it does you can.
It's not about agency about reproductive rights if you don't mandate sex against the will of the person.
groucho marx most famous quote is:
/I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member./
Here you guys are discussing a theory of sexual attraction based on the opposite (what i dubbed "the reverse groucho marx")
oh man, i've always attributed that to rodney dangerfield, could have sworn that was his
gun to your head, you need to put 10 users on the ignore list
time is a construct so it doesn't matter if they don't post anymore
can we get a roc ignore list power rankings?
here's what i'm packin
LOL. I don't even know who half these people are. I'm going to decline your invitation other than to say that my personal list would not necessarily skew in the direction of people with whom I disagree frequently.
oh man, i've always attributed that to rodney dangerfield, could have sworn that was his
I've actually used a variation of that here before, when there was a slight danger of my joking around about throwing my hat into the ring for mod being taken seriously. "I don't think I would want to post on a forum that would have me as a moderator."
oh man, i've always attributed that to rodney dangerfield, could have sworn that was his
I think details are fuzzy but it's definitely by G Marx
LOL. I don't even know who half these people are. I'm going to decline your invitation other than to say that my personal list would not necessarily skew in the direction of people with whom I disagree frequently.
yeah looking at it now, i too have no idea who half of them are, they must have stopped posting years ago
i do not put people on ignore if i disagree or even if i dislike them
it takes a lot bad trolling (i'm a big fan of good trolling but bad trolling is just cringe), repeated bad faithed posting, or just constant mind numbingly stupid takes for me to take that step
worst part is you still end up seeing half their posts anyway (because bad posts get quote responded to so often) and you can't put a mod on ignore which wasn't so much an issue for me but why i made that atf thread about a mod doing nothing but troll a mentally unwell poster who couldn't physically put that person on ignore
i used to feel the same way until i tried it and it was a game changer to just never be exposed to their stuff
Yep you are actually always allowed to criticize bizzare behavior in other ethnicities/cultures, or never, there is no in between.
Surely you can find examples of many posters around today saying things like "covid was caused by bat eating chinese"
Should be straight forward and simple?
Otherwise it seems like you are making things up to justify a view point
Surely you can find examples of many posters around today saying things like "covid was caused by bat eating chinese"
Should be straight forward and simple?
Otherwise it seems like you are making things up to justify a view point
My point is that claiming chineses eating bats caused covid damages that ethnicity a lot more than claiming haitians eat cats.
Whether it's true or not, if the threshold to decide whether to make a statement about a behaviour connected with an ethnicity is "racism", in the expansive leftist definition, ie the idea that ethnicity will suffer negative repercussions from that claim (again, regardless of the truth of that claim), then people who went with "chinese eat bats that's how we got covid" CANNOT criticize the "haitians eat cats" claim under racist grounds.
abortion is orthogonal to fascism.
You can have an exceptionally authoritarian country which allows abortion (China under Mao), and a very libertarian leaning one which doesn't (a lot of the USA in the 19th century)
Abortion is about when the thing inside the womb becomes a person with rights. That's what the disagreement is about. Once it has rights you can't kill it freely, until it does you can.
It's not about agency about reproductive rights if you don't mandate sex against the will of the per
We get it - it's only fascism when rights you care about are taken away.
Supremacy of the state over the individual, significant state ownership of assets (at least "strategic ones"), low-level economic freedoms allowed (can own a bar a restaurant, a smallish company and so on), unions are state controlled, big enough companies have to kiss the ring to the state every step of the way, censorship of anti-gvmnt ideas if they become dangerous enough for the regime, very strict private gun ownership, strong nationalism with a dislike of international trade (unless it is
it is inherently, supremacy of the state over the individual is the core essence of leftism.
You are only rightwing if you start with "there is no US", only people obligated to live togheter against their will and move from there.
The duality of Luciom. From bazzzzzed to criiiiiinge in the span of two posts.
abortion isn't a right in the human declaration of rights, and isn't a right in the charter of fundamental rights of the european union, it isn't a right under the federal american constitution either.
It was never a right, at most it's something that is tolerated with some limits, because of the inherent balancing of 2 rights, freedom of the woman vs the life of the thing that's going to get killed.
Normal people get it that a 1 month fetus is insignificant compared to a 7 months one, then among them they find some balance.
That said, "rights" isn't the way to frame fascism at all. A whole lot of ideologies drastically limit rights, can't use fascism to mean that, fascism must means something that didn't exist before Mussolini, and existed under Mussolini. Any violation of "rights" that happened before in that framework isn't fascism, you don't need a word created in the 1920 to describe things that always happened among human beings right?
Fascism is a specific set of concurrent uses of state power to specific aims. Those i listed and a few minor ones. Not "everything i dislike when the state does it".
for ex i hated lockdowns but lockdowns aren't marxism, no matter how much i hate marxism. Lockdowns are horrific utilitarianism
My point is that claiming chineses eating bats caused covid damages that ethnicity a lot more than claiming haitians eat cats.
Whether it's true or not, if the threshold to decide whether to make a statement about a behaviour connected with an ethnicity is "racism", in the expansive leftist definition, ie the idea that ethnicity will suffer negative repercussions from that claim (again, regardless of the truth of that claim), then people who went with "chinese eat bats that's how we got covid" CA
The chinese eating random animals in live markets and the origins of sars-cov in animals are both extremely well-documented. Whereas some epidemic of Haitian immigrants eating cats and dogs is not. This is both an epistemic issue and also a normative one, because we are talking about how you OUGHT to report certain claims under what thresholds.
If Haitians are going around eating people’s pets they should obviously be condemned, but where is the evidence?
