This thread is getting a bit off track, and I’d suggest that ATMB is probably a better place for us to discuss it, just in case the central question (such as it is) of the GD thread is still interesting to some.
Anyways, my idea is that Marley23 did just fine. The OP came right out and said that his purpose was, in large part, to post somewhere he was pretty much guaranteed to get an antagonist reaction. This isn’t the correct forum to discuss what I believe that behavior constitutes, but suffice it to say that it’s bad juju for any honest debate. As such, mods can (and should) do something to make sure that the debate proceeds honestly and fairly, or shut it down. Letting the OP know that he’s expected to do more than post with soundbytes and ruffle feathers with an ‘antagonistic’ crowd and actually has to contribute to his own thread is, in my view, a perfectly justified and even necessary execution of modly power.
It is my experience that when moderators do this they are steering the debate. It’s not appropriate, and it diminishes the quality of the debate.
I say that because the bias is more than palpable. A moderator shouldn’t be able to wear the hat of a poster and that of a moderator **in the same post.
**
And I understood KLR 650’s use of the word antagonistic even before he clarified it here in the first response. The board doesn’t lack for challenges for cites. It shouldn’t be coming from a moderator.
We think of this place as an online community, with rules of responsible conduct. It’s possible to agree to disagree here, sometimes quite emphatically. It’s not a place to come pick fights, or to incite other people to fight. If your purpose here is to be that kind of instigator you won’t have a long tenure here at the Dope.
I would also note that I have never posted to a ATMB or Pit thread that complained about the moderators. IMO, the moderators do a fine job here and keep the place running smoothly.
However, I have seen over the last year a trend where it appears that the line between poster and moderator has blurred at times. I don’t think thats healthy.
The problem is, the OP wasn’t contributing anything to crafting a quality debate. All he did was repeat silly talking points about tyrannical, hive-mind Liberals. That’s it. I’d also disagree with your take and his gloss on his use of the word antagonistic, as it seems that he deliberately sought out a left-leaning message board in order to post these content-free bits of snark and post them as a debate.
While I don’t have a problem with people seeking out disagreement (as it’s the source of debate, after all), I do think that seeking it out and then posting something that doesn’t even qualify as debate but only “Nyeh nyeh, y’all suck!” should draw down some moderator action.
I didn’t read Marley’s comment’s as a challenge to the validity of the OP’s claims so much as putting the OP on notice that he’d have to provide something of substance other than tweaking Liberals.
I think you’re reading the wrong thing into KLR’s post there. All he’s said is that he likes to post somewhere where the majority disagree with him. Sounds like a wise course to me; if you post where everyone agrees, then you’re not going to learn anything. Posting where people are going to disagree gives you the chance to refine your arguments and perhaps see things from another point of view.
Wanting to post where people disagree with you most certainly doesn’t imply posting things* in order to* inflame and instigate that or further disagreement. It doesn’t imply trolling at all.
It’s not the job of the moderator (imho) to arbitrate or determine what constitutes a “quality debate.”
That’s a dangerous idea. The board improves because of diversity of thought—even [what you or Marley23 consider to be] bad quality thoughts.
The community doesn’t need that kind of help, and doesn’t need to have any ideas squelched simply because of some subjective opinion by an individual in power.
Trolling, fighting and other miscreant behavior, yes. Intellectually anemic arguments, no. And let’s not kid ourselves. There is no shortage of far-left leaning regulars with intellectually anemic, hyperbolic and uncited posts. (who are rarely, if ever, admonished in the same fashion)
FTR, I am not a conservative, and would be equally concerned with any censorship------no matter where is comes from.
This is a disturbing trend. I see what I consider to be tons of silly, uncited comments and ideas. It is my job, and those of the other members, to take those ideas to task. (including the moderators when posting as posters)
That’s a dangerous idea, and taken to its logical extreme would cause the exodus of some people with valid things to say, and leave us with a chorus of back slappers.
Using Shodan’s example, I don’t believe I’ve ever read a single thing Der Trihs has posted that I agree with. His use of “the” I find dubious.
But it wouldn’t be appropriate for a moderator to debate him with his moderator hat on.
KLR 650’s OP was succinct and on point, as was his responses. The only reason its guaranteed is that he had the cojones to post on a MB that is heavily liberal, isn’t that right?
If he wants to come here and spar with liberals, let him be.
There are many ways to start that OP without doing that. So either KLR lacks the vocabularly to do so, doesn’t care, or is intentionally starting crap.
It is an exercise for the reader to decide which it is.
No. Not if he’s going to intentionally start fires.
Sure it is. That’s the reason that behaviors like trolling aren’t allowed and threads that are just rants get booted out of GD.
Nobody said they should be, and it wasn’t about a subjective opinion. The OP offered no support and only catchphrases. “Liberals are tyranical and want to control everything!” isn’t an argument, is a rant. I suppose Marley could’ve moved the thread to the Pit, or gone more in line with Tuba’s interpretation, but informing a new poster that in GD you actually have to do more than call people names is fine with me.
For the record, I also think that he should’ve been slapped down for flaming Liberals as “useless idiots”. Yes yes, even if other posters flame people (say, Christians) and get away with it. Those other posters shouldn’t be getting away with it, and them getting away with it doesn’t mean that others should, too. A lapse does not justify a crafting policy to extend those lapses.
Well… it depends on how that desire is expressed. It’s, at best, borderline if you go to a place you know will disagree with you in order to pick a fight, especially if you go there specifically because you know that you’ll get a fight out of it. If you do that without even the pretense of an actual discussion and just cast content-free barbs at people, then hell yeah you deserve a mod smackdown.
Imagine, if you will, you average pro-choicer finding an anti-abortion board and the difference between “I support abortion and these are the reasons why, who’s willing to discuss this with me?” and “I support abortion and you don’t because you hate women and want unwanted children to suffer because you’re evil. Let the thread begin!”
FWIW, I agree that it is the responsibility of the community to ask for cites for lame arguments. Also to stop listening to people who consistently fail to give them when asked. Neither is a moderator’s job.
And hurray! for people with unpopular ideas. Otherwise this is a support group, not a discussion board.
Then what exactly is a moderator’s job, other than catching socks? Since even trolls generally only operate by making shitty arguments in order to piss people off, even trolling becomes 100% legal. Why even have mods at that point rather than just some piece of software that checks for IP addresses?
And again, this isn’t about unpopular ideas. This is about someone coming to a site specifically because they know that their unpopular ideas will cause conflict, and then specifically refraining from doing anything other than ranting in a manner that can reasonably be expected to do nothing but piss off their targets while not providing a scrap of support for their position and flaming their targets.
Do not conflate a desire for decent discussion with the GD thread that I’ve linked to.