Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic fa
lol I just saw trump and biden are debating in like 4 hours? Im usually late to the game for this stuff but I would have imagined a thread for that.
Edit: There could be and I didnt even bother to check. I am definitely not asking for one.
...Completely ignore this post.
nope, too late. post seen & thread will be started. and it will be glorious
Much appreciated Rob
That is what gets me in trouble. I'm accused of loving genocide, being racist, supporting the killing of babies and I get so annoyed I hit back super hard and get a timeout or a ban.
It's like the kid in school who gets jumped fights back and gets suspended. I see it happen all the time and try to defend the kid who gets jumped from getting punished
I’m sorry but this is just not based in reality. You have more personal attacks against others than anyone else in that thread since I’ve started moderating and it’s not close.
I don't expect you to be convinced, but here's my explanation:1) I think being called a rapist is worse than being called a racist.2) You made a post about race (which I thought was fine and appropriate):And he responded with this:Which isn't the same as just calling him a rapist baselessly.3) He only continued to explain himself when you pushed back:On the other hand, you call
you don't see how this rewards the op's original baseless insult
if you must ban one, ban both
I’m sorry but this is just not based in reality. You have more personal attacks against others than anyone else in that thread since I’ve started moderating and it’s not close.
I mean mets is an easy person to correct because he posts so many things that are wrong
I think his post was pretty spot on. Theres nothing wrong with going back and forth as long as we arent lying and attacking one another
like calling people whiners or bullies
is it possible to know precisely which time-stamp is used for bans? I was banned till 6pm of 27/06 but I was only able to join in the last couple of minutes ehichs means something weird like UTC -5, not eastern not western time
Pw, your issue with oppositional defiance to any form of authority is noted, thank you
Victor posted that or isn't possible for Israel to show compassion and you were fine with it but not my reply Victor is infuriated that anyone could believe that isreal could treat anyone with compassion and no issueBut No issue with Victor but my post isn't okayYou really see no bias there? Alright thenRegarding my posts to trolly:I'm not surprised I got a timeout for repl
Apparently mentioning or responding to Victor is against the rules now, too. Don't see how anybody could possibly say that Mets' response is inappropriate, unless of course if you just want to find any flimsy excuse to punish a poster you don't like.
Also, lol at asking for "stats" of your biases. As if people around here are keeping an Excel spreadsheet of your mod actions.
Don't see how anybody could possibly say that Mets' response is inappropriate, unless of course if you just want to find any flimsy excuse to punish a poster you don't like.
Doesn't prove I'm right but at least I know others see it too
is it possible to know precisely which time-stamp is used for bans? I was banned till 6pm of 27/06 but I was only able to join in the last couple of minutes ehichs means something weird like UTC -5, not eastern not western time
It does appear to be UTC-5, which is the default time zone of the east coast of the US except during DST, which is stupidly more than half the year.
Mets. I’m not going to do this with you every single time you are moderated. Apparently you learned nothing from the last time we did this.
The conversation is over. Go take your timeout.
Don't see how anybody could possibly say that Mets' response is inappropriate, unless of course if you just want to find any flimsy excuse to punish a poster you don't like.
Doesn't prove I'm right but at least I know others see it too
It’s bizzare. As mostly just an objective observer who reads the threads, I have no idea why you are suddenly getting singled out. You so overreact, but it’s clearly in response to garbage that two posters in particular are directing to you. I mean if someone was allowed to post that my people were raping people with dogs, I’d be pretty upset too.
It’s bizzare. As mostly just an objective observer who reads the threads, I have no idea why you are suddenly getting singled out. You so overreact, but it’s clearly in response to garbage that two posters in particular are directing to you. I mean if someone was allowed to post that my people were raping people with dogs, I’d be pretty upset too.
How would you feel if your people were getting raped by said dogs?
It’s bizzare. As mostly just an objective observer who reads the threads, I have no idea why you are suddenly getting singled out. You so overreact, but it’s clearly in response to garbage that two posters in particular are directing to you. I mean if someone was allowed to post that my people were raping people with dogs, I’d be pretty upset too.
She doesn't like me or my opinions.
Mets. I’m not going to do this with you every single time you are moderated. Apparently you learned nothing from the last time we did this.
The conversation is over. Go take your timeout.
I don't tell anyone to defend me
Every time you ban me people come out of the woodwork to defend me. People who i don't even know. Maybe I am not the problem
Alright. Then I will ask King Spew to take over moderating you since that is apparently what you want. You are the problem, but at least you won’t be *my* problem anymore.
Maybe you should consider all the regulars that don't ever come to your defense who thinks you are the problem. I certainly fall into that group.
ye I mean we wouldn't expect extreme radical leftists to come for the defense of someone who is clearly on the very right at least on one pivotal topic of the day (I/p).
if anything we do expect you, as a radical leftist, to be in favour of violence against people you disagree with, which you clearly are (you just mentioned my recent ban happily)
Apparently mentioning or responding to Victor is against the rules now, too. Don't see how anybody could possibly say that Mets' response is inappropriate, unless of course if you just want to find any flimsy excuse to punish a poster you don't like.
Also, lol at asking for "stats" of your biases. As if people around here are keeping an Excel spreadsheet of your mod actions.
fwiw, I almost never report posts and I didnt report this one. nor do I really have a problem with it. however, if I made a similar post I would probably expect to be banned.
ye I mean we wouldn't expect extreme radical leftists to come for the defense of someone who is clearly on the very right at least on one pivotal topic of the day (I/p).
if anything we do expect you, as a radical leftist, to be in favour of violence against people you disagree with, which you clearly are (you just mentioned my recent ban happily)
Thanks for babbling nonsense about me again. I'm starting to feel important to you.
If mets wants us to believe one person coming out of the woodwork to defend him has significance, why wouldn't we also consider all the people that don't defend his conduct.
It’s bizzare. As mostly just an objective observer who reads the threads, I have no idea why you are suddenly getting singled out. You so overreact, but it’s clearly in response to garbage that two posters in particular are directing to you. I mean if someone was allowed to post that my people were raping people with dogs, I’d be pretty upset too.
afaik, there is no rule against posting interviews from Al Jazeera. maybe there will be now.
fwiw, I almost never report posts and I didnt report this one. nor do I really have a problem with it. however, if I made a similar post I would probably expect to be banned.
I know you didn't and didn't mean to imply that you lodged any complaint regarding Mets' response. We all know that isn't your style.
I/P Moderation ^
