By opponents, I meant in general and not specifically aimed at board members. He does it, others have done it and I’ve done it. He does it a lot, which is why we are here. There isn’t a rule about expressing negative opinions about republicans and democrats, and if it’s not “being a jerk” for doing it once, then it’s not “being a jerk” doing it all day. What are the mods supposed to do?
As for GD, if it’s supposed to be a place with an elevated level of decorum, then restrict all bashing in that forum.
So then if you don’t think that making constant misogynistic comments doesn’t violate the “being a jerk” rule, would you also say the same for racist comments, I.E. “the typical black American is constantly fantasizing about raping white women”?
Do you also think it was correct to mod people for references to “libtards” and “gun-grabbers” or do you think those were terms clearly designed to stir up controversy as opposed to expressing a point?
Ibn, do you have an example of a misogynistic quote he’s made that equals “the typical black American is constantly fantasizing about raping white women”? I know the ‘if it was a black thing’ example is often trotted out in these kinds of discussions, so let’s start backing it up.
IMO: The issue is “Poster X was Mod Noted monthly for the same behavior, over and over again…” (The fact that the notes themselves are for inflamatory comments is a little bit of a red herring.)
If I got mod noted for [insert minor rule violation here], to multiple threads, at a rate of once a month, how many times can I expect to get away with it?
A lot of people seem to be giving mod notes a great deal more importance than they deserve. I was always under the impression that mod notes weren’t really for rules violations, just to try and head off rules violations or to try and keep threads on topic and other stuff like that. I would presume you could pick up any number of them.
P.S Nzinga - I agree with you about Dio. And DT FWIW. Even though I rarely read his posts anymore.
Certainly that does appear to be the way Der Trihs feels.
Per his own comments in this thread, #26, he seems to be under the impression that so long as he “doesn’t get in the mod’s face” and temporarily “backs down” and doesn’t explicitly insult people he’ll simply receive a mod note telling him to “knock it off”, then just wait a few days, and then start making identical arguments in a completely different thread.
I’ll certainly agree that if the point of mod notes saying “knock it off” is “knock it off in this thread” then the policy per Der Trihs is fine, but if it’s supposed to mean “knock off that behavior” then Der Trihs seems to be blatantly defying the mods and it seems ridiculous for there not to be a certain point at which the mod notes should start becoming warnings.
That’s pretty much right, yes. There are always borderline cases and sometimes repeating the same “iffy” behavior will cause the mods to take a harsher tack.
It doesn’t bother me when people are ridiculed for their ideas, so I can’t get worked up about terms like “libtards” or “gun-grabbers” or even negatve terms for religious beliefs. So no, I don’t really care if that stuff is modded.
Racist and misogynistic language attacks people for what they are and I’m glad that it’s not allowed. That said, I haven’t come across misogynist posts made by Der Trihs. I heard about the video-taping thing, but that sounded more like weird paranoia than hating women.
Didn’t you claim earlier that a formal warning had been give at some point? If so, why doesn’t repeated, similar behavior within a short period of time generate the same level of moderation? Again, see post #51 for further clarification.
You’re talking about a guy who insists that men should secretly videotape all their sexual encounters with women because women are so prone to falsely accuse them of rape and he also has repeatedly insisted that “the typical American woman” view all men as monsters and rapists. He also explicitly claimed that this was the case with “plenty of women on the board” and even claimed he came to believe that do to his experience with the women on this board.
So yes, he has rather severe issues with women and is a misogynist.
Incidentally, I’m not calling him that as an insult, but because it’s an accurate description of his attitude towards women in general.
Also, I have a difficult time believing for two seconds that if someone who started spouting off racist remarks about blacks started saying that this was also true of “plenty of the black posters on the board” that it would have been shrugged off.
So then, by your standards it wouldn’t be racist to argue that all black men and all Muslim men should be kept under constant police surveillance to make sure they weren’t raping white women or engaging in terrorist attacks, since this would sound more like "weird paranoia about blacks and Muslims more than about hating them?
Respectfully, if that is how you feel then you and I have dramatically different understandings of what does and doesn’t constitute bigotry.
I’m neither, and while I’m not necessarily on a “crusade to get him banned”, I AM surprised he’s never been suspended. He gets away with a hell of a lot of shit, and when people call him on it, well, damn, I guess we’re just a bunch of right-wing fundy bigots! :dubious:
I’ve noticed that he’s always careful to stay within the letter of the law. You can’t fault the mods for it. If anyone on the other side of the spectrum could do a similar shtick and keep it up, I’m pretty sure they would get away with it too.
I didn’t claim it; it’s true, as both Der Trihs and I have already said and explained at some length. He has two warnings, one from late 2011 and one from late 2012. Der Trihs and I discussed some of the details of the 2011 warning: it was the same kind of post people have complained about in this thread except that instead of just saying Republicans are crazy and unscrupulous, he said (paraphrasing a little) ‘Republicans are crazy and unscrupulous and so are you if you support them, or else you’re stupid or ignorant for not knowing it.’ The more recent warning (from December) was similar but unmistakeably an insult (“Of course not; he’s a right winger, and will therefore support anything that hurts ordinary people and oppose anything that helps them.”).
You know what- you’re right. That statement was just too broad. Mod notes are usually used to head off potential violations and problems, but sometimes they’re issued for rules violations that either seem mild in context or in a ‘in case you’re not aware, this is against the rules’ situation.