I think if you are having that much trouble figuring out what’s going on, you should sit out the rest of the thread. I’m much more interested in answering the OP’s questions than answering yours. butterfiles is asking how the system works here, not for a list of everybody’s objections to various bannings.
“How the system works” is that conservative posters are often held to a different standard than liberal ones. I assume that examples are not appropriate; however, I will say that if butterfiles reads enough in GD, he or she will see what is meant.
Regards,
Shodan
Basically, you just happened to pick a time when someone fairly new had arrived who would take a position in a thread and then take on all comers.
Not by word wizardry, not by cogent reasoning but by simple repetition of his position and saying things like “not an argument” in response to others
over and over and over, for hundreds of posts, in at least one thread.
Also someone else, not as new, made a very cruel and hurtful remark - completely out of the blue- in another thread that had a poll in it.
This had people coming here to ATMB, wondering why he was not at least warned.
That’s true. Being a conservative, alone, does not generate any particular flak.
Having the temerity to post in support of your conservative opinions, however, does.
Conservative posters certainly do whine a lot more about the moderation 
Multiple mod notes for magellan with no warnings? Typical coddling of the board’s conservatives, I see. Why don’t we just change the name from the SDMB to the NROCommentsSectionBoard?
In other words, pick on the unpopular people and don’t disagree with those who are popular or powerful. Sounds like school.
I get that this advice is well-intentioned, and to some extent that is how things work here, but it’s not how it should be. If a mod posts some nonsensical crap then it should be disputed. And just because you saw half the board jumping on someone in one thread, it doesn’t mean it’s appropriate to be extra rude or resort to ad hominem attacks the next time you see that person post.
I suppose that’s true - simply being a conservative, I mean.
But Og help us if we dare to actually express ourselves and post anything of a conservative nature on this board.
I’m going to go with the truth being found somewhere in between all of these posts and not in any one in particular
I think I just happened to join at the time of this persecution debate and the vermin comment. Wacky times it seems.
So the bottom line seems to be no personal attacks except in the Pit? All other gray areas (like off jokes, redundant comments, quibbling over semantics, etc.) are up for interpretation, right?
Also, exactly what is trolling considered on here? New word for me. Thanks.
Hello butterfiles and welcome to the Straight Dope Message Board.
Roughly speaking it’s expressing yourself in a purposefully inflammatory manner. As you may have gathered some of this is a matter of degree. But there exist some on the internet who post things that they don’t really believe: they just like winding people up. Those are classic trolls and they play cat and mouse games with moderators across the internet.
Problem: the mods here are volunteers. So creating work for them is really pretty rude.
Here are some links:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet
As for politics, the board has evolved in a leftward direction since about, oh, 2002. The remaining conservatives here feel a little put-upon as a result, with varying degrees of justification.
ETA
Another odd aspect of this board is that it tends to air its dirty laundry. Mod decisions are subjected to endless commentary in ATMB. That can make for some fascinating discussion, but in most places the administrators have recognized that it sits uneasily with getting stuff done.
There’s never been a time on the SDMB where someone hasn’t been pushing the persecution button. We’re special like that. IMO, it’s a sign that the moderators are doing their jobs. 
Best of times, worst of times.
Aren’t you worried people will confuse you for that troublemaker, margarineportfolios?
Nah, it’s been going on for years. Some whines seem to improve with age.
Yes. I wouldn’t call any of that typical.
Yes.
People make jokes all the time, and there are no specific limits on jokes except in General Questions (where people are asked to refrain from making jokes at the start of the thread). There’s no rule against redundancy either. But we reserve the right to moderate jokes that are really distasteful or distracting on the grounds that they could take the thread off-subject or because they’re just gross. That’s rare, but we do it sometimes. And the same pretty much goes for quibbling over semantics: it’s part of a lot of debates and that’s fine, but if it derails the discussion we may step in.
The registration agreement, which you can read here if you like, defines it as “purposely inflammatory remarks.” That is, trying to piss people off for its own sake.
For the record, just disagreeing with posters who have “Moderator” under their names won’t get you in any trouble at all. I’ve done it many times, in GQ and Cafe Society, without getting warned for it. Sometimes, I ended up winning the argument, sometimes the moderator did, and sometimes we agreed to disagree. One thing about the culture of this board is that the moderators are posters, too, and have just as wide a range of interests and knowledge as any other poster. But they’re pretty good about keeping their posts as a poster separate from their jobs as moderators. Arguing with the moderators about their moderating should be done with care (though it can still be done, if you keep a level head).
…it should be done with care and only in the proper forum: About This Message Board.
This took me way too long to get.
The underlining (mine*) is so frequently mentioned with regard to trolling that I used to think it was required… it isn’t is it?
The key thing is “purposefully inflaming”, correct?
Next question… how extensive is the mod class on devining that ?
*…at least the little u-thingy’s are mine even if they didn’t work.
You need to use [square brackets], not <angle brackets>. Like this.