I’m baffled by your instruction. Pointing out potential constitutional violations is not “reasoned critiques”? Disagreeing with platform proposals is threadshitting?
WTF?
I think my instructions were quite clear:
Posting “First Amendment” over and over (usually with no other details) isn’t very useful because of the lack of discussion but it’s at least on topic. That’s why I didn’t single it out. “Boo hiss” and “Don’t you teach civics? Or did at one time?” is merely obnoxious.
The First Amendment objections are blatantly obvious to anyone that has passed high school civics.
“Boo Hiss” is merely a shorthand way of saying “I disagree with this idea”.
I violated no rules in that thread. I note that you ignored the rule violation I reported.
You are being unfair, and moderating according to your own political and personal bias. Again.
Turn it around. Do you genuinely think that your post comprised “reasoned critiques” of the ideas offered?
Our main rule here is “don’t be a jerk,” and I felt some of your comments (the ones I quoted) were becoming kind of jerkish. I asked you to stop doing that and specifically explained what the problem was and what was acceptable.
It wasn’t a rules violation.
Allow me to demonstrate the sort of “reasoned critique” that I bet wouldn’t have been moderated:
If you’d said something like that, dollars to doughnuts the moderation wouldn’t have happened. It wasn’t about the content of your post, it was about the lack thereof.
Well, I thought Marley’s instruction was blatantly obvious to anyone who passed first grade so clearly even great minds can differ.
A rude, less constructive shorthand. But even without the shorthand, going into a thread soliciting people’s opinions on political platforms and saying “I disagree with this idea” to every idea you disagree with is not exactly a valuable contribution to the thread.
I think the bias is your own here. You were not contributing to the thread, you were throwing rocks at the posts of those who did contribute. Rather than examining your own behavior in light of Marley’s request, you immediately assumed you were being persecuted and ran to ATMB.
Eh, sounds like Oak’s posts were moderated because Marley didn’t like them. Are we modding content-free posts now, or posts deemed to contain insufficient content, because then we’d have to note half the board. “Boo hiss” is shorthand for “I find this idea distasteful,” which as far as I know we’re allowed to do without further explanation. Does he need to give a detailed breakdown of his disapproval to go unwarned?
Yes, I do. Every post I made it that thread, other than the parody remark to BobLibDem was substantive. I challenged the merits of the proposals offered. I’m not going to post a “wall’o’text” with multiple citations to authority for something like that, but I did raise reasonable objections on a variety of grounds.
Marley, maybe you shouldn’t have included […] in your note. I assumed you were only talking about ‘boo hiss’ and the civics teacher comment, some seem to think it included the whole post.
Even the ‘boo hiss’ and civics teacher thing are kind of mild though.
:rolleyes:
Sure it wasn’t. The fact that it was made by a friend of yours, with a history of doing that kind of thing, and who just happens to agree with your radical leftist agenda had absolutely nothing to do with that determination.
And then what–everyone’s forced to put some actual thought and content into their posts? I don’t see this as an apocalyptic vision of the future.
Marley23 has a radical leftist agenda?
The thread topic is “What Would Your Ideal Political Party Platform Be?” and Czarcasm asked, since you had taken time to post several “substantive” rejoinders to other people’s platforms, if you were going to post a platform of your own. You didn’t do that, but you did report his post and accuse him of junior moderating, and then you started an ATMB thread to complain that I’d discouraged you from saying “boo hiss” and challenging people’s legal and teaching credentials. The gist of my note was clear: some of your behavior in that thread was kind of obnoxious, so I asked you to stop. Have you stopped to consider the possibility that you’re turning this into a personal thing unnecessarily?
One, I think you just violated board policy by revealing the content of a post report.
Two, have you considered that you probably would not have moderated anyone else for that, and definitely would not have moderated a lefty for it?
Well he should post it in that thread if he does.
Marley, isn’t ‘boo hiss’ traditional commentary at real debates? It doesn’t contribute much to the argument, but it pretty much just means ‘I disagree’. I understand you only gave a note, but that point may need some clarification for future debates.
The post you announced you reported, you mean?
No, because I’ve modded plenty of lefties for irritating or rude behavior. It comes with the territory.
It would be nice if everyone did, but I didn’t realize that creating thoughtful posts was an enforced rule around here. If so, I suppose I missed that in the sea of +1s, QFTs, posts by folks who have admittedly not even bothered to read the thread, posts whose sole content is a reference to a 10 year old board meme.
He reported me for junior modding for that? Is innocuous shit like this is the reason why people claim I “junior moderate”?
I didn’t say which post, who posted it, or what I reported it for. You did. And you should not have done that.