Allegations of Thread Hijacks

About This Message Board
1

It should be obvious but an accusation of a thread hijack doesn’t actually make it so. It’s a bit unfair to use a mod note on an on topic aspect of an election to set up a warning. Sure, if a person is spamming dozens of threads with barely tangential and obsessive points I could see the utility of some form of communication to mitigate the behavior.

But the discussion of CRT is going to be relevant to several political and educational threads. And regardless of arguing about a topic in the Pit, which is irrelevant, arguing about a topic where it is relevant is not obsessive behavior. If it were, we’d had 100s of folks topic banned from Trump during his administration.

Now I get the warning for failure to follow mod instructions and this would have been the more appropriate place to argue that. But it’s bizarre that the note and prohibition were every issued. I suppose folks have figured flagging for trolling isn’t quite as effective as flagging for hijacking.

2

Linky?

3

FWIW if you’re talking about the Virginia election thread @What_Exit agreed after consideration that prohibiting discussion of CRT didn’t make sense for that thread and rescinded that mod note after a brief time.

4

Yeah this is the third thread in this subject, which is moot at this point.

5

No really. It was an inappropriate note with condescending editorializing. The only mistake Zoster made was not taking it to this part of the forum. A mistake that led to a warning, suspension, and board wide topic ban. The topic was relevant to the thread and the fact that he was also posting on the same subject in the pit is completely pointless and irrelevant.

6

That’s just insanely false. Water is dry kind of bonkers.

7

My apologies on thinking talking about an on topic topic in a thread was not a mistake.

8

Now you have confused me. Could you re-phrase your suggestion to be more straightforward, such as

  • here is what happened (with link)
  • here is what should happen instead
  • here is why

~Max

9

Well, you’re right - when I complained about the ridiculous handling of the situation here, the warning turned into a suspension, as this post no doubt will also.

3 of the 5 warnings in question were:

*being told that “making a caricature of CRT” (i.e. disagreeing with CRT proponents over what CRT is) is against the rules, which of course it is not, but is part of Hari Seldon’s usual policy of disciplining people for arguing against leftist positions and the general tolerance of/desire for that style of moderation by the most active users of this board

*posting about CRT in a thread started by someone else called “Another Critical Race Theory Thread,” which somehow earned a warning for being a “hijack” of that thread

*posting about CRT in a thread about the Virginia gubernatorial election - which was largely fought over CRT and in which a moderator specifically posted that discussing CRT is not a hijack- which was again labeled a “hijack” of that thread; or more precisely, being told that I, specifically, was no longer allowed to post about CRT in a thread about CRT because that is a “hijack,” and then being warned for breaking that note with a subsequent post that didn’t mention CRT

It’s pretty obvious that “hijack” is the new “trolling” or “being a jerk” - just a catch-all for “you’re allowed to agree with everything the MSNBC wing of the Democratic Party says, or be a dancing clown who posts incoherent MAGA rants for people to throw fruit at, but making good arguments against leftist orthodoxy is simply not going to be tolerated for any length of time.”

It’s also not a good idea to make warnings cumulative and incentivize arguing about every single one. All the warnings I’ve received were unnecessary examples of tendentious partisan moderating, but I didn’t realize that by not posting a thread in ATMB about every single one I was accepting them as part of a larger case being built.

As I’ve said before, it would behoove this board to stop pretending that it has, or desires to have, a forum in which “political discussion” takes place as opposed to a clubhouse for the small group of elderboomer people who are allowed to be here to congratulate each other about how correct all of their pre-existing opinions are. Just delete the politics forums and ban all political discussion if you expect anyone new to sign up and keep your community viable into the future.

10

For what it is worth, I agree. You posted about CRT in a thread where many others were posting about CRT because it was very relevant in a thread about the VA election. A moderator singled you out with an insulting moderation note dismissing your arguments and somehow implied that it was bad that you have discussed CRT in a few other threads calling it “pet” obsession or some such thing. Well shame on your for being interested in a topic.

But then, it was realized by this moderator that CRT was on topic after all (the subject is still be debated in that thread) but nonetheless you have a lifetime topic ban regarding CRT in every thread on the board because reasons.

I am confused as to what merits the ruling that you are not permitted to talk about CRT anymore on the board.

11

The one-trick pony is dead.

12

I’m not seeing your point. He was arguing about CRT in a thread where many others were arguing the same thing. The off-topic moderation was rescinded. So what that he is particularly interested in the issue and posts about it more than other issues? Is that a rules violation? One’s interests must be more or less divided amongst a variety of topics?

13

That ZS should not be arguing CRT at all after the notification about being on thin ice back in May.

14

There was a period where the moderator said, Drop the discussion of CRT. ZS didn’t drop the discussion, and since they were already on thin ice about that subject, they drew a warning. Then, the moderator thought better of the original directive to drop it and removed that note. That doesn’t change the fact that ZS ignored moderator instructions at the time they were warned.

15

That’s even worse then because he was modded in May for something something about an “old and tired” argument about CRT that was supposedly off topic in a thread entitled “Another Critical Race Theory thread.”

What is he doing in these threads that is actionable, because I’m not seeing it?

16

I get that, and I agree with a mod warning for ignoring moderator instructions. But since the discussion of CRT ended up being kosher, why a complete topic ban on that issue for all time?

17

Because ZS seems to have an obsession with it and drags other, unrelated, threads off into discussions of that (and other topics related to education, such as advanced classes, testing requirements, etc.). Threads that have nothing to do with CRT or advanced classes somehow end up getting derailed by that poster onto those topics.

18

It should be obvious that lobbying and befriending the mods here and elsewhere is part of the meta. And it is beyond obvious that ‘hijack’ is the new pre-emptive accusation used to establish a pattern to act upon.

19

Or, and I’m just spitballing here, follow mod instructions, post in good faith, cite your claims, etc., especially when outside the Pit.

20

Do you ever have anything constructive to say?