December banning

Sam your next, here is how they will do it.

  1. You are a right of center and don’t hate america and yet you seem smart.
  2. You must be trolling because you can’t be that smart and not get it.
  3. Ban the troll.
    These people think you are jerking their chain because they don’t see how anyone could be smart and yet not aggree with them. I know I only have 3 or 4 posts but I have seen it on other message boards for years. I am new to this message board and like you see many of these people really to need have their minds changed for the good of america.

december did, I think, exaggerate the extent to which criticism of Israel in general is motivated by anti-Semitism.

But to state that “he implied that anyone who criticized Israel was violently anti-Semitic” is a much worse exaggeration - unless you have some cites of which I am unaware (I have not tortured myself by reading every december thread, after all).

In several years here I have never, ever seen any poster, even the most casually trolling loony, suggest that criticizing Israel automatically makes one anti-Semitic. Occasional claims to the contrary not withstanding.

I’m afraid that you are supporting the SDMB equivalent of urban legend.

At which point you jumped into bed and cried your eyes out, right? No. There are always gadflies that attack sources in inapproriate ways. And there are always people around to defend them and reject the tactic. The fact that you’ve faced lousy criticism doesn’t make you unique, or even singled out. Can you demonstrate that the Nation has been universally treated with serious gravity?

Cites to opinions and characterizations are different from cites to facts. Many of decembers cites were not sources to facts, they were sources to extended diatribes.

That’ll happen immediately at FR. December worked long and hard to build up bad faith. Not the same thing at all.

Gee, Sam, you must be happy having this brain surgeon on your side. With friends like this on the right, who needs liberal enemies?

This is not an American board, its an international one.

And yet you just joined this month! That’s interesting.

Well, I’m sure looking forward to my time at the re-education camp, comrade.

I’m confused, though, so maybe you can help clear this up for me. Are you new to this message board or, from 27 post above where you posted that there is this:

So which is it? Have you seen many conservative members get banned at SDMB or are you new here?

But statements like this put you in the same camp. You think their minds have to be changed ‘for the good of America’. That means you automatically think they are wrong.

That’s not what I’m all about at all. I’m about hanging in a place where there is a vigorous debate from all sides. My problem with this board is that there is a chilling effect on the conservative viewpoint. From Collounsbury’s abusive behaviour, to the December pile-on parties, and now the banning of december himself, the message here is, “conservatives are on notice. We’ll only tolerate you if you play very, very nice.”

Yes, december made mistakes. Many of the charges levelled at him here are accurate. That’s not the point. The point is that similar behaviour on the other side goes unnoticed.

Wander over to Great Debates right now, and have a look at the threads started by Aldebaraan or Reeder. They are far worse than anything December did. December could at least be counted on to offer cites with his opinions. Those two just publish rants. Sure, some posters are getting on their case for it, but to nowhere near the degree that December got slammed.

Go do a thread search for my buddy ElvisL1ves, and get a feel for just how much he contributes around here. Yet I’m sure most people would consider him a ‘respected’ poster. He’s more gadfly than contributor, dropping into threads to take cheap shots at people he disagrees with. See, this is how bias works - it’s not that the mods are biased, but that behaviour by people who agree with the majority flies under the radar while behaviour from those who don’t gets noticed. If I followed ElvisL1ves around and attacked him continually like he does to me or did to december, a dozen posters would come to his defense. I’d be smacked down quickly. If I persisted, I’d be in the pit, I’d be warned by the mods, and eventually I’d be out of here. But he’s been doing his schtick for years with impugnity.

Bias is not something overt. It’s not a cabal of liberals going, “Which conservative can we get rid of next??” The mods aren’t going, “Oh, man, I just need an excuse to dump those rotten Republicans!”. It’s the same way with bias in the media. It’s not a conspiracy - it’s a culture that feeds on itself and is blind to its own faults. When you’re slightly to the left, extreme viewpoints on the left are moderately extreme, but with a grain of truth to them. The same extremism on the right is just nutty. A troll. Baiting. And the same goes for the right. If you’re already over somewhere on the right, the extremists are just a bit over the top. But the extremists on the left are insane, and need to be shut down ‘for the good of America’.

December’s posts never struck me as pure trolling. I recognized the arguments. I saw them as being something that a fair-sized chunk of conservatives took seriously. I was often surprised at the vehemence fired in his direction.

Take the OP about opposition for war helping terrorists. This is at least a debatable position. If the goal of terrorists is to break the will of America and cause it to back down, then it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that there might be something to the argument that marching against the war or criticizing your own government plays into that and may encourage them. Of course, you can make lots of counter-arguments as well, but the point is that the subject is worthy of debate. December’s OP just called for debate. He was even clear to say that he thought people had the right to protest, and that there could be other factors.

The response to that OP was essentially howls of outrage. Plenty of messages to the tune of, “How DARE you insinuate that I support terrorism!”. Much wailing and gnashing of teeth, interspersed with plenty of personal attacks on December himself.

Those responses were all in violation of the written rules of Great Debates. Yet, the mods chose to not go after the people hurling insults, but the guy who was the recipient of those insults.

There is no doubt a business question here. When a poster comes along that continually agitates 80% of your message board, it’s a pain in the ass. The decision may have been made that December was damaging the SDMB by continually riling up the people here. And it’s true in that the endless december-bashing threads created an awful lot of noise. So they made a decision to put the guy on a short leash, and cut him loose at first opportunity. That’s their right.

But let’s not pretend this is about fighting ignorance. It’s about getting rid of an irritant to the majority. That it will cause an even further skew to the left, and therefore make it even harder to fight ignorance (not because the left is ignorant, but because of lack of balance), seems to not matter.

The proper solution to the December ‘problem’ would have been for the mods to police the threads a little better. Pile-ons should have been dealt with quickly. The ‘don’t be a jerk’ rule should have been enforced on those who routinely personally attacked december. And in turn, december should have been asked to tone down at least the frequency of his posts, if not the content. I believe this whole mess could have been avoided.

It also could have been avoided if those who constantly attacked december would have opened their damned minds a little and acknowledged that december has a right to an opinion even if they disagree with it, and that civility is even more important when people with disparate viewpoints come together to debate each other.

How’d it get that way, Sam? How did a board strongly committed to rational argument and debate get to be so biased to the left? Subversion? Necromancy?

Conspiracy?

You really haven’t digested a single word you’ve read here, have you? Nothing that’s been said has made any impact on what you say or think. But thanks for so completely illustrating the point about your own behavior. If you had any examples of what you’re whining about, as has already been requested, no doubt you’d have provided them. But it’s more fun to whine like a damn baby about how the real world is so unfair, isn’t it?

Time to grow the fuck up, Sammy. Even a little honest acknowledgment to yourself that you might just not be perfect would help you immensely.

He was, just not publicly until Gaudere did so.

Apos said:

This is a fair point. Of course people who disagree with me are going to attack my cites, and their own cites are fair game for me to attack. That’s part of debate.

The problem is that when you are outnumbered five to one, and when you have a number of people who like to pile-on, it becomes very difficult. Now, I don’t mind that, but when you add abusive behaviour into the mix, it simply becomes very difficult to maintain a civil conversation. That’s why I characterized it as a ‘chilling effect’. There’s no censorship here, but when one side of a debate is greatly outnumbered, it becomes even more important to enforce rules of debate that give the minority point of view a fighting chance at being heard. In december’s case, the mods clearly failed. My suspicion is that if his behaviour got more extreme lately, it’s because he essentially gave up on this place. I’m shocked that he stayed civil and calm for as long as he did. But let’s face it - this place was very, very hostile to december. Not just to his arguments, but to the man himself. He couldn’t offer the time of day without being attacked. The mods should have come to his defense, and didn’t.

It also bothers me that December seems to have not gotten the kind of chances that were afforded to Collounsbury. Collounsbury blatantly, flagrantly violated the rules of this board for a long, long time. He was warned on numerous occasions. Even after he was banned, he was allowed back. And when he continued to violate clear rules, he got a number of warnings again before he was out of here.

December seems to have been warned once, about a very nebulous crime, and then dumped. Frankly, when a poster has something like 10,000 posts and has been a member of this board for years, I would have expected a little more consideration than that. He has a huge investment in this place, just like Collounsbury. He seems to not have been given the same amount of time to change his ways.

Well seems to me ElvisL1ves
that you haven’t digested one thing that Sam Stone has said here or that it has made any impact on you. I can’t understand how you could possibly dispute Sam’s view of this message board wrt to the different treatment towards those who are vocal about conservative views. I’m not conservative, and its as clear as crystal to me.

You know Sam, I think you sell the board short. I agree that most of december’s threads degenerated into partisan sniping, but that’s what he was after. His OP’s (like Reeder’s) are deliberately and pointlessly inflammatory, crafted to stir up a brawl. And they rarely failed to deliver. In this thread, december posted an interesting OP without an axe to grind, and a reasonable conversation broke out. The one thing the board does consistently do, in my opinion, is give you back what you bring to it.

december brought up a lot of interesting topics, but I don’t for a minute believe he really want to talk about issues. He just wanted to score points for his ‘team’, and he was a magnet to other posters who just wanted to score points for their teams. december didn’t seem to care what anyone else thought, and he was an poor salesman of his own views, which was particularly sad to see when he had a reasonable point.

Generating noise and generating dialog are not the same thing.

And the idea that december’s POV has been silenced is kind of silly. It’s a big world, and someone will carry the torch. Likely they’ll do a better job of it than he did.

elucidator said:

Thanks for making my point. I know your position is that this board is skewed to the left because rational debate and argument are the domain of the left.

Hear that sound? It’s the sound of a mind slamming shut.

Piffle. And evasion. If, as you say, there is a distinct liberal bias to these boards, there must be come reason, no? Well, Sam, I pose the question again: how did it get to be that way. If, as you say, my position is “that this board is skewed to the left because rational debate and argument are the domain of the left”, and that position is wrong, then what’s the real skinny?

Hmmmmm?

Piffle. And evasion. If, as you say, there is a distinct liberal bias to these boards, there must be some reason, no? Well, Sam, I pose the question again: how did it get to be that way. If, as you say, my position is “that this board is skewed to the left because rational debate and argument are the domain of the left”, and that position is wrong, then what’s the real skinny?

Hmmmmm?

Sam, first off, december was warned at least twice. He was also told that his posts came across as shit-stirring and rabble-rousing by mods – which might not be direct warnings, but are at least indirect warnings.

Second, december was not polite. He made grievous accusations cloaked in polite language, threw out silver-plated turds. That’s no more polite than if I came up to you at a dinner party and said, “My dear! How good to see you! Have you kicked any puppies lately? Do tell!” It was vile and rude.

Third, december was dishonest. I’m happy to argue points honestly with conservatives; you’ll find me doing it often in great debates, and also here in the pit. December was dishonest. He lied, he distorted. He falsely claimed that I’d agreed with him on points where I’d clearly not agreed with him. He misrepresented his sources. That’s not honest debate.

Finally, I don’t refer to The Nation for cites, exactly because I know that my debating opponents will likely reject The Nation as a biased cite. I go to the NYT, the Washington Post, the AP, CNN, the London Times when I need cites. If you see me rejecting partisan right-wing cites, you can hardly accuse me of a double-standard, until you find me citing The Nation or similar sources.

I know you think you’re badly outnumbered and that the boards have a strong liberal bias. I don’t see any evidence of this. I do see that you relish being outnumbered, and I think it’s your own bias, your own love of fighting long odds, that makes you perceive long odds here.

Daniel

Welcome to the boards, BeatenDam! We hope you enjoy your stay.

Hang on - you just called the moderators of this board “more to the left than Stalin”, and now you’re suggesting people need to “have their minds changed”. Doesn’t that strike you as highly ironic, in the non-Alanis Morrisette way?

By the way, changing my mind wouldn’t really be “for the good of America”, as I don’t live in the United States, nor am I an American.

Do I get to keep my Stalinist convictions, then?

Well, yes, but only in a post-modernist way.