Posts moved from existing threads that are good examples of how NOT to have civil discourse

Status
Not open for further replies.

aloyouis

at least generally aware
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
9,327
Reaction score
3,330
Points
113
Location
Michigan
OP
Mr NFLfan

Mr NFLfan

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 23, 2003
Messages
4,767
Reaction score
363
Points
83
Age
66
Location
I live where the men are men and the sheep are ner

imapig

Conspiracy theorist.
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
30,400
Reaction score
6,241
Points
113
Location
On the beach
🙂
 

Attachments

  • 6105340F-08C6-41F7-B252-8A8644C2FB7C.jpeg
    6105340F-08C6-41F7-B252-8A8644C2FB7C.jpeg
    87 KB · Views: 6

imapig

Conspiracy theorist.
Joined
Aug 26, 2008
Messages
30,400
Reaction score
6,241
Points
113
Location
On the beach
Today I learned why people get banned. Antagonizing the moderators is probably not a good Idea. Oh by the way I don’t even have to say this but I’ve been asked to take stuff down and remove it. So you guys theory about special treatment to one group versus the other just went right out the fucking window. ☕️
 
Last edited:

Providence Colt

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
6,390
Reaction score
866
Points
113
Location
Boston, MA
lol

Under “The New System” there have been, my count, three personal, public warnings. All three have been directed at left-wingers.

Nah, you’re right, must be a coincidence.
 

patswin

WTF
Political Forum Moderator
Joined
Jan 18, 2004
Messages
12,538
Reaction score
3,270
Points
113
Location
Gelatinous, Mass
lol

Under “The New System” there have been, my count, three personal, public warnings. All three have been directed at left-wingers.

Nah, you’re right, must be a coincidence.
I am unaware of any public warnings to anyone not even once. We do point out situations where we will take action when a thread gets sideways.
In fact I’ve discussed with UT that concern, and we’ve agreed there is no desire to embarrass or call out anyone publicly. . As far as your allegation about left leaners being singled out, that’s most certainly untrue. In fact, I’ve personally issued only one warning to what would be considered a left-inclined poster and quite a few to those on the right. And there are numerous examples where me or UT just deleted posts instead of warning people because frankly we sometimes don’t have time to deal with some of it.
If people devoted the same effort to civility that they do to keeping score on silly pointless exchanges of snark we’d all benefit.
UT laid out the guidelines, feel free to read it as many times as necessary.
Neither you or anyone here has any idea how much UT and I discuss actions we should or should not take on threads.
 

patswin

WTF
Political Forum Moderator
Joined
Jan 18, 2004
Messages
12,538
Reaction score
3,270
Points
113
Location
Gelatinous, Mass
No, its better to let the posters call out people individually over and over instead and then step in if said poster replies or tries to defend themselves. Yeah deleted posts...raping said person with a monkey. Good. Replying with something way less impactful, grounds for removal.
 

Providence Colt

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
6,390
Reaction score
866
Points
113
Location
Boston, MA
I am unaware of any public warnings to anyone not even once. We do point out situations where we will take action when a thread gets sideways.
In fact I’ve discussed with UT that concern, and we’ve agreed there is no desire to embarrass or call out anyone publicly. . As far as your allegation about left leaners being singled out, that’s most certainly untrue. In fact, I’ve personally issued only one warning to what would be considered a left-inclined poster and quite a few to those on the right. And there are numerous examples where me or UT just deleted posts instead of warning people because frankly we sometimes don’t have time to deal with some of it.
If people devoted the same effort to civility that they do to keeping score on silly pointless exchanges of snark we’d all benefit.
UT laid out the guidelines, feel free to read it as many times as necessary.
Neither you or anyone here has any idea how much UT and I discuss actions we should or should not take on threads.
Here's been the three public, personal warnings that I referenced that I have seen:




All of which were directed toward left-leaners. The second post wasn't in any way inflammatory or rule-breaking at all. There's plenty of stuff here that goes directly against the spirit of the rules that you outlined in the above post that don't receive public warnings. Singling these out as being the ones that received public reprimand is baffling. Well, it isn't when you take into account the political lean of the three posters that got warned.

The bottom line is that this place has long suffered from a lack of balance due to a mob majority "self-policing" that mocks/baits left-leaners until they finally react, which is then dealt with, while all of the previous baiting is ignored and glossed over. This results in the unbalanced, unanimous echo chamber that this board often is and is its ultimate equilibrium. If you want something different, you need to do something different and nothing has changed. All of the “changes” have been the equivalent of rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

There are right-wingers here that OPENLY flaunt that they’re issuing ad-hominem (as they have no fear of any mod discipline), if ever you want to achieve both a modicum of civility and balance on this place, there needs to be the willingness to administer to discipline to anyone.
 

patswin

WTF
Political Forum Moderator
Joined
Jan 18, 2004
Messages
12,538
Reaction score
3,270
Points
113
Location
Gelatinous, Mass
No, its better to let the posters call out people individually over and over instead and then step in if said poster replies or tries to defend themselves. Yeah deleted posts...raping said person with a monkey. Good. Replying with something way less impactful, grounds for removal.
Here's been the three public, personal warnings that I referenced that I have seen:




All of which were directed toward left-leaners. The second post wasn't in any way inflammatory or rule-breaking at all. There's plenty of stuff here that goes directly against the spirit of the rules that you outlined in the above post that don't receive public warnings. Singling these out as being the ones that received public reprimand is baffling. Well, it isn't when you take into account the political lean of the three posters that got warned.

The bottom line is that this place has long suffered from a lack of balance due to a mob majority "self-policing" that mocks/baits left-leaners until they finally react, which is then dealt with, while all of the previous baiting is ignored and glossed over. This results in the unbalanced, unanimous echo chamber that this board often is and is its ultimate equilibrium. If you want something different, you need to do something different and nothing has changed. All of the “changes” have been the equivalent of rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

There are right-wingers here that OPENLY flaunt that they’re issuing ad-hominem (as they have no fear of any mod discipline), if ever you want to achieve both a modicum of civility and balance on this place, there needs to be the willingness to administer to discipline to anyone.
First off, you don't know who gets warned or how often, because we don't call people out publicly, as I said.

Secondly, either of us posting in a thread that we'd like to to get back on track is vastly preferable to formal warnings and suspensions, or locking a thread. If you want to take it personal, that's your call, but we don't like issuing warnings. If you want to take it personal when it's not even your post that was responded to, that's your call too. If we see a thread getting derailed and post that we'd like to get it back on track, well, that's what we want. It's not personal.

If we do that, and I go out of my way to politely ask it to stop, and within minutes it escalates further, then warnings get issued. I could provide examples of that if you want. :)

Warnings in our definition is your post gets flagged, and if you accumulate enough of those you get a vacation. We're not doing much of that, trust me, we talk daily about it. I've reached out to people on PM as opposed to either flagging their post or responding publicly as well, including in one your cherry picked examples. Because I DON'T WANT TO FLAG POSTS.
 

AkPatsFan

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2013
Messages
7,908
Reaction score
2,098
Points
113
Location
Eagle River, Ak
Here's been the three public, personal warnings that I referenced that I have seen:




All of which were directed toward left-leaners. The second post wasn't in any way inflammatory or rule-breaking at all. There's plenty of stuff here that goes directly against the spirit of the rules that you outlined in the above post that don't receive public warnings. Singling these out as being the ones that received public reprimand is baffling. Well, it isn't when you take into account the political lean of the three posters that got warned.

The bottom line is that this place has long suffered from a lack of balance due to a mob majority "self-policing" that mocks/baits left-leaners until they finally react, which is then dealt with, while all of the previous baiting is ignored and glossed over. This results in the unbalanced, unanimous echo chamber that this board often is and is its ultimate equilibrium. If you want something different, you need to do something different and nothing has changed. All of the “changes” have been the equivalent of rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

There are right-wingers here that OPENLY flaunt that they’re issuing ad-hominem (as they have no fear of any mod discipline), if ever you want to achieve both a modicum of civility and balance on this place, there needs to be the willingness to administer to discipline to anyone.
Lack of balance, funny how we never had this issue during the 2016 election but ever since the 2020 election this place has more bans/vacations handed out and threads closed, that speaks for itself. And I'd appreciate it if you'd take your personal complaints elsewhere and stop muddying up my thread. Thanks.
 

aloyouis

at least generally aware
Joined
May 27, 2006
Messages
9,327
Reaction score
3,330
Points
113
Location
Michigan
Considering you are one of the biggest contributors of said attacks, it is therfore not suprising to see you have an issue with something who voices concern for it. As long as the circle can stay in balance and nobody else voices an opinion that differs from the majority on this board, all is good. Again though....who got banned? People left on their own.


Have people been given a vaca? Yup. Has UT and Patswin sent PM's asking for things to be toned down? Yup.

Outright assclowning (banning) is ultra rare and almost exclusively used to exterminate trolls from other teams and spam. The only person I am aware around here now that has been banned (assclowned) is you. LINK---> Anybody Hear from Midgar?


So let's just TRY do what they are asking to the extent it can be done. No one is 100% guiltless except maybe a couple.
 
Last edited:

HSanders

omitted out of respect to Mrs.Jastremski
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Messages
27,662
Reaction score
6,700
Points
113
Location
on Pats Planet
Have people been given a vaca? Yup. Has UT and Patswin sent PM's asking for things to be toned down? Yup.

Outright assclowning (banning) is ultra rare and almost exclusively used to exterminate trolls from other teams and spam. The only person I am aware around here now that has been banned (assclowned) is you. Anybody Hear from Midgar?


So let's just TRY do what they are asking to the extent it can be done. No one is 100% guiltless except maybe a couple.
truth. i've been messaged.
sorry ak, trying to give people a reason to stfu and start posting about the topic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top