# Define "political". This moderation is bullshit. **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [October 24, 2019, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244 "2019-10-24T16:55:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![CairoCarol](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cairocarol/32/3825_2.png) [@CairoCarol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CairoCarol)\ **Post date:** [October 24, 2019, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/41 "2019-10-24T23:31:16Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > But this wasn’t a poll. It was a thread title openly critical of the moderation, and negative threads tend to attract like responses. That doesn’t really respond to what I said. I did note that self-reporting can be an issue, and that this was “a little (not exactly, of course) like CNN polling.” No analogy is perfect, but this one stands - especially in an argumentative environment like the Dope, where people just love to take issue with stuff. In fact, given that **SamuelA** is not, as evidenced by several comments in this thread, a widely beloved poster, his thread might initiatlly attract posters looking to disagree with him. I for one had a negative reaction when I read his thread title; it’s overly combative and just begs for refutation. However, a look at the situation revealed to nine or more of us (not sure what the count is as I type) that, setting his belligerence aside, he had a point. . ---
**Author:** ![Isosleepy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/isosleepy/32/479_2.png) [@Isosleepy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isosleepy)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/42 "2019-10-25T03:07:21Z")
> [@Joey\_P](#): > > Also this “you don’t get to define “best”” is wrong as well. When creating a test, you have to define the variables. They can be defined however you choose, typically in such a way to make the results easy to interpret. It’s you’re opinion that he didn’t define ‘best’ correctly. They can not be defined however you choose. They should be defined in furtherance if answering the question. So, when the op question is “How can you actually get to do something legal if the police stop you from doing it?” then defining “best” as whatever keeps you going on living is ridiculously inapplicable. Also the answer “just move away” is not a factual answer to “How can you actually get to do something legal if the police stop you from doing it?” Especially if the rest of the op makes it clear that the answer looked for is in the realm of legal action etc. ---
**Author:** ![Roderick\_Femm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/roderick_femm/32/14875_2.png) [@Roderick\_Femm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Roderick_Femm)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/43 "2019-10-25T04:02:17Z")
> [@SamuelA](#): > > 9 separate posters as of this post. So far the only posts in support of the moderation decision is you plus the moderators. > > I am not saying that, if you turn your head sideways and read the post from a certain slant and are Colibri, you couldn’t perceive politics in it somehow. Just that so far most other human posters in here don’t see politics, myself included, and so there is no way to avoid breaking the rules given most human beings cannot perceive a violation of the quoted rule. > [@Czarcasm](#): > > One Moderator and myself. Nine isn’t a lot, and it doesn’t even approach “most”. He said “most other human posters in here” which I sensibly took to mean in this thread. > [@Czarcasm](#): > > But this wasn’t a poll. It was a thread title openly critical of the moderation, and negative threads tend to attract like responses. Patently false in ATMB. Or perhaps you have accumulated statistics that support your assertion. In the context and considering how the thread was moved immediately after, I think the warning is at best borderline and probably over the line towards unnecessarily punitive. Not a fan of the OP of this thread, but fair is fair. ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/44 "2019-10-25T04:24:43Z")
> [@Isosleepy](#): > > They can not be defined however you choose. They should be defined in furtherance if answering the question. So, when the op question is “How can you actually get to do something legal if the police stop you from doing it?” then defining “best” as whatever keeps you going on living is ridiculously inapplicable. > > Also the answer “just move away” is not a factual answer to “How can you actually get to do something legal if the police stop you from doing it?” Especially if the rest of the op makes it clear that the answer looked for is in the realm of legal action etc. It’s too late for me to rehash what I said earlier, but I stand by everything I said in that post. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 7:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/45 "2019-10-25T07:36:21Z")
> [@TriPolar](#): > > The title was **What Options Do You Have If The Police Are Breaking The Law**. That’s pretty general. Is there a rule that says some questions in the OP can be answered and others can’t? The title is not the post. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 7:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/46 "2019-10-25T07:38:32Z")
> [@Joey\_P](#): > > And the answer to “what must one do to get to do the thing” was “You keep your head down. Don’t stand out, don’t make a target of yourself. And you vote with your feet.” Errm, no? That is answering the question “What steps can I take to do the thing” with “You can’t do the thing. Deal”. That’s not an answer. That’s the answer to a general “How can I respond”, not a specific “how can I get what I want” ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 7:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/47 "2019-10-25T07:41:35Z")
> [@Joey\_P](#): > > But if the question was “I want a PC and my parents won’t let me get one, what are my options?”, “Get a Mac” wouldn’t be frowned upon. It _would if the full question was "What are my options_ for getting a PC\*\*", which is what the post in question was. ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 12:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/48 "2019-10-25T12:06:16Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > The title is not the post. You’re right, and we all understand that the OP really didn’t mean to ask what you can do when the police are breaking the law. No one is referring to that. However, one of the questions asked by the OP is “What options does one have if you know that something is legal and the police try to prohibit it?” > [@MrDibble](#): > > Errm, no? That is answering the question “What steps can I take to do the thing” with “You can’t do the thing. Deal”. That’s not an answer. That’s the answer to a general “How can I respond”, not a specific “how can I get what I want” So, when the question is “What options does one have if you know that something is legal and the police try to prohibit it?”, not doing it is unquestionably a factual answer. > [@MrDibble](#): > > It _would if the full question was "What are my options_ for getting a PC\*\*", which is what the post in question was. You’re right, but there was more than one question in the OP. A poster should not be held responsible for lacking the ability to read the OP’s mind and answer the question the OP wanted answered when he asked multiple questions. Again, the OP asked two questions: What options does one have if you know that something is legal and the police try to prohibit it? AND How can you actually get to do something legal if the police stop you from doing it? Why is Sam the one who gets a warning because the OP asked a question he didn’t mean to ask, ask shown in post 15? ---
**Author:** ![Jasmine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jasmine/32/2964_2.png) [@Jasmine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jasmine)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/49 "2019-10-25T12:15:41Z")
I sympathize with SamuelA in this particular instance but, as I’ve said before, it would help if people would stop posting highly debatable issues in “General Questions”. “What makes the sky look blue?” That is a general question. The question you posted is obviously a hot topic and subject to much debate. My “run-ins with the law” on this site have been in General Questions for just that reason. The result is that I’ve learned how to avoid that kind of pitfall. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/50 "2019-10-25T14:21:44Z")
> [@Joey\_P](#): > > So, when the question is “What options does one have if you know that something is legal and the police try to prohibit it?”, not doing it is unquestionably a factual answer. “What options” _to what_? From context, it’s clear that they mean “…to get to do the thing”. not “…to go on in life”. You can’t just chop the question out of its context like that. So no, “don’t do it” is \*not \*a factual answer to the question as posed in that thread. Because it’s a question asked in a particular context. ---
**Author:** ![Joey\_P](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/919ad9/32.png) [@Joey\_P](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Joey_P)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/51 "2019-10-25T14:27:18Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > “What options” _to what_? From context, it’s clear that they mean “…to get to do the thing”. not “…to go on in life”. You can’t just chop the question out of its context like that. > > So no, “don’t do it” is \*not \*a factual answer to the question as posed in that thread. Because it’s a question asked in a particular context. ok ---
**Author:** ![Isosleepy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/isosleepy/32/479_2.png) [@Isosleepy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Isosleepy)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/52 "2019-10-25T15:31:44Z")
While to me the answer was non-factual, and given that it was the first answer, likely to contribute to derailing the thread, clearly others feel it was in fact factual. I already thought the warning was harsh, but since there seems real ambiguity, I would ask to change it to a mod-note, with clear instructions to poster to consider holding off answering in GQ threads until factual answers have been provided by others, in cases where the poster’s answer is not unambiguously factual. ---
**Author:** ![divemaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/divemaster/32/78_2.png) [@divemaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/divemaster)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/53 "2019-10-25T16:03:22Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > But if you actually read the OP you understand that he is looking for a way to accomplish a task, not run away from it. But sometimes, as was the case here, running away is a viable option. Q: “I’m going camping next week. What’s the best way of fighting off a bear?” A1: “Run away from the bear.” A2: “Pick a spot with (different/friendly/no) bears.” Sure, A1 and A2 don’t answer the specific question that was asked (fighting off a bear), but it hardly seems fair to consider them non-responsive or warnable offenses. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2019, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/54 "2019-10-25T16:18:15Z")
> [@divemaster](#): > > Sure, A1 and A2 don’t answer the specific question that was asked (fighting off a bear), but it hardly seems fair to consider them non-responsive or warnable offenses. Except they \*are \*non-responsive to the specific question. It was “best way to fight off a bear”, not “best way to survive a bear attack” or “best way to not get attacked by a bear”. Personally, I agree they’re not warnable-level. But as the mods like to point out, any offence they note, they could just as easily warn too, at their own discretion. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2019, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/55 "2019-10-26T05:42:06Z")
My opinion mayn’t mattert much. :o > [@SamuelA](#): > > 9 separate posters as of this post. Make it 10. Your response was the correct, factual answer. Some answers might be ambiguous enough that a political jab could be inferred. Yours ain’t it. ---
**Author:** ![Irishman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/b487fb/32.png) [@Irishman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Irishman)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2019, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244/56 "2019-10-31T13:32:49Z")
Returning to this thread to voice my confusion over this act of moderation. > [@Colibri](#): > > Yes, I acknowledge that police in the US have sometimes been corrupt, now and in the past, and have engaged in unacceptable actions such as extrajudicial killings. But since it was made in relation to a specific case in the US, your post implied that this was a general condition, which is a political statement, and was made in a especially over-the-top manner. In addition, as your personal opinion, your post wasn’t appropriate as a first response in GQ. It appears the word that is getting all the attention is his use of the word “corrupt” to describe situations like the one in Tulsa. I would certainly argue against him that police can be wrong, even as a department, without being corrupt. Corrupt indicates a level of maliciousness, criminal intent, either monetary or power gain, or both. Trying to maintain safety at an outdoor event does not fit that description, IMO. However, I don’t see how his remark deserved a warning. Also, I think his remark did essentially address part of the question being asked, which was “how do you get do to the legal thing?” His answer was “go somewhere where they will let you do the legal thing”. Now that interpretation of the question may not be what **ishamael69** had in mind. It looks like he wants more of an immediate method of remedy, i.e. on the spot. But misinterpreting a question or answering it obliquely is not a reason for moderation, and **Colibri** didn’t warn him for being off topic. He warned him for political commentary. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/define-political-this-moderation-is-bullshit/842244.md?page=2)