You make slee’s point for him. A poster who said the kinds of things about liberals or atheists or pro-abortionists that the poster in question said would be banned - not suspended after persisting in the behavior for years, multiple ATMB threads, rulings that the behavior was OK as long as it only happened once per thread, receiving multiple Warnings, issuing a pleading Mod Note (not a Warning, a Mod Note) practically begging to give the mods an excuse not to suspend him.
Regards,
Shodan
Once again, an example to prove your point would be nice.
I find it funny.
EVERYBODY but me is biased…sure right…
Yeah, I see bias (often on both sides here)…or at least I think I do…
But at least I have the meta sense to realise that if everybody ELSE has some bias they ain’t seeing…most very likely so do I.
Note this aimed towards BOTH posters AND mods.
Well, not really. To make his point for him, I’d need to not only point out that Der Trihs has not been banned, but that he is also uniquely obnoxious in a way that we do not allow any conservative poster to behave. I’m not sure what metric you’d use to demonstrate that, though. I’d argue that we have a couple of conservative posters who’s behavior is comparable to Der Trihs, and who have not been banned. Do I think they’re comparable because I have a liberal bias? Could be. Does sleestak not think they’re comparable, because he has a conservative bias? Seems equally likely, to me.
Moderators ARE biased against jerks and trolls. And it doesn’t make them angels either. Those two things are consistent.
Since you do not participate in the majority of threads in which posters on the Left or Right are prominent, you are unaware of this obvious fact. What my claim sounds like to you is pretty much irrelevant.
Nah. One poster who engaged in that sort of behavior from the Right was only banned after hanging around for 16 or 17 years. Another poster who engages in the same behavior from the Right, but posts a bit less often, is still posting.
Based on Reported posts, posters on the Left have been simply a bit more tolerant of such behavior from the Right, choosing not to hover their cursor over the Report icon whenever they see either of those posters’ names.
What happens when we do that? Does it have any actual effect? I’m confused.
How about the ones I mentioned - a pattern of hate speech over many years, multiple ATMB threads documenting the behavior, rulings from the mods that the behavior, although obnoxious, would be tolerated if it occurred only once per thread and only every few weeks, multiple warnings, then a reversion to a Mod Note pleading with the poster in question to back off, then a suspension instead of a banning?
Regards,
Shodan
I took it as a metaphor for “being so eager to click ‘report’ that their mouse hovers over the button in anticipation of finding something worthwhile of clicking it.”
In general, but not specifically, Liberals are better read, informed and consistent in their philosophy than are Conservatives. That means that SD is a good place for Liberals to express themselves, and, since well read, informed and solidly based people tend to gravitate toward Liberalism, that is why there are more Liberal posters than Conservatives here. Indeed, when a Conservative posts a cogent argument, it is cause for everyone to applaud.
and, I say again, political speech is protected, even on a message board. No message board can legally forbid women, Islams, African Americans, or disabled people – why would they feel is is legal for them to censure political speech.?
That may have worked better, but the result would probably have been the same, given how polarizing the subject is.
I think the point was that Shodan’s claim that moderation is one sided because reports are one sided is untrue (though intuitively it makes sense).
Can you cite the law or court case(s) that support that claim (emphasis added)?
Freedom of speech, in this case, belongs to the publisher, i.e., The Straight Dope Message Board, owned by Sun-Times Media LLC. No governmental entity can force SDMB to publish - or refuse to publish - anything it wants.
Because it’s a private forum and they can do whatever the fuck they want, for the most part.
The online sites where you think free speech is protected, often required you to limit your free speech rights pursuant to their membership agreement or terms of service policies. The same thing you agreed to when you signed up here. Failure to follow the rules earns you a revocation of your posting privileged.
Oh! That works!
(Failing to understand metaphors is the only thing I have in common with Drax the Destroyer.)
I think Bone’s point is that pure numbers don’t tell the whole story.
If there are 200 liberals on the board and 10 conservatives, and you have 20 liberals reporting attacks on conservatives, and 2 conservatives reporting attacks on liberals, how do you assess that?
There are 18 more liberals reporting their own side than conservatives, but…
there is only 10% of the liberals, whereas there is 20% of the conservatives.
So, who is “more likely” to report attacks against their opponents?
While I appreciate that you are trying not to point fingers, your example is meaningless unless we can evaluate it ourselves, and we can only do that if you actually name the names.