Moderation Questions

I don't want to talk anymore without a lawyer present.

Because you are to trolling what I am to bigotry. First name that pops into their heads.

I don’t think any serious lawyer would take up your “case”

I suspect CN would agree with this as well.

Puke in mouth!

I guess I better call Saul.

Also, no comment.

Could be. All I can go by is what you say about men in your posts.

You should probably let me speak for myself

I DO NOT believe the following sentence to be true, but I'm posing it as a preamble to a moderation question:

I've never met a man as pathologically selfish, narcissistic, emotionally unintelligent, and stupid as the average woman. Every exceptional woman is just an average man.

Would the above hypothetical post lead to a temp-ban? Serious moderation question.

Fair enough. I did say "I suspect...."

We’re back to this again?

I asked a serious moderation question.

was there any thing in the book about calling women seperate species and labeling many women “issues” in an office setting?

You asked a variation of it just a day ago and it was answered

What point are you trying to make that wasn’t already covered here?

1. Rocco ain't a moderator no more.

2. You are.

3. I would like to read an answer to my question from a current moderator in their own words.

4. Thank you!

Obviously there is some extreme hyperbole going on. But Crossnerd's observations are generally consistent with the argument females (large gametes) generally are hardwired to have different psychological profiles from men (small gametes), as they are optimized to caring for small children at home while men are hardwired to be providers.

Rococo gave a fine answer, but it was very general in nature.

My latest question is about a specific hypothetical post and whether or not such a post would result in a temp-ban:

I've never met a man as pathologically selfish, narcissistic, emotionally unintelligent, and stupid as the average woman. Every exceptional woman is just an average man.

It's not a trick question.

It either would result in a ban, or it wouldn't.

I’m probably just going to ignore you rather than engage in whatever game this is tbh

If you have a point, make it

This is the moderation thread.

I am asking a serious moderation question.

I have to admit, a moderator choosing to ignore a straight-forward "yes" or "no" moderation question in the Moderation Questions thread is amusing.

Maybe my question won't be as baffling for Coordi or KingSpew.

Have a good knight!!

@coordi

You are arguing against your ban for misogyny. Phrasing it a different way than yesterday will not change the answer, which Rococo gave you and I agree with.

So again, what is your point? That you didn’t deserve your ban? I think that’s been adequately covered.

Wow...this is amazing.

I'm not arguing for or against anything.

I deserved the temp-ban you handed out to me.

I'm asking a simple "yes" or "no" question.

As a noted before, Rococo's answer was very general in nature and basically said you can do what you want as the mod. (Which is of course, true.)

Astounding that so many words are required to elicit a "yes" or "no" answer about what specifically YOU would do with respect to my hypothetical post.

Oh well, it is what it is.

You do a great job here, and I'm grateful for that.

Have a great knight!

My position is that I deserved the ban.

The point of a hypothetical is to prove something, so just tell me what you’re trying to prove here and we can have a discussion

I’m not going to spend time writing out a thoughtful rationale for a hypothetical situation just so satisfy some vague point you’re trying to make. Just make it and I’ll address it

The moderation thread is for real, not imaginary, moderation issues, so if you have one please go ahead.

I feel like I'm trapped in a Twilight Zone episode.

This is beyond NutterButterVille.

Bye for now!