If you ever wonder why people stop coming here, one reason could be the fact this has turned into an echo chamber where unpopular opinions are told to take their hat and leave. And, worse, it is enforced by uneven modding.
I’ve been around here a while. Lately I find myself with opinions and thoughts that differ from the most popular ones and when I discuss those opinions the mods come down on me if I take any steps over a line.
This admonishment was idiotic for several reasons, not the least of which Chronos said he didn’t want to read through the wall of posts I was making when, in fact, he was given a direct response to his own post in that thread which explained my position. He posted, I responded directly to him, and he still couldn’t be arsed to understand the argument I was making.
Here I was issued a warning that is truly a board violation. It is technically correct I broke the rules. A warning? Well, one moderator thinks that is an asshole thing to do. Here, another moderator found a rule violation and instead of warning he noted it is an emotional topic and told him to not do it again.
When I pointed out to Jonathan Chance the uneveness of the moderation he told me I could take it here saying, “I do not think it will go well for you.” And he’s right. I’ll be pointed to the door, told to take my opinions elsewhere, and that will be that.
There is a reason people with differing opinions are loathe to post here. It is one thing to argue against the popular opinions, it is another to realize the mods have put a target on your back and are encouraging you to not post anymore.
is the only one you have any quibble with, apparently. And your quibble is based on a similar bit of rulebreaking not being modded in the Pit, four years ago.
The obvious explanation is that mods are enforcing an echo chamber. It’s just Occam’s, innit?
never should have happened. I wouldn’t have a beef with it if Chronos hadn’t been given a direct response in that thread. Instead, in the ATMB thread he claimed he missed one line in the walls of text.
I’m not going to try to read through all the threads to find other examples of that rule violation that weren’t met with a warning. Another mod agrees it is an asshole thing to do. Why would that change in 4 years? In an emotional topic I wasn’t being a jerk. It was a very technical violation met with the most severe of punishments that could be given at the time.
Whatever, dude. People make mistakes, and it’s not ideologically driven.
I was warned once for adding, in brackets, the antecedent to a pronoun in a quote-box, and it took a couple of pages of ATMB before I got that reversed, and I was STILL scolded at the end of the process by a different mod. Had I been warned for giving an insulting summary of the other poster’s quote instead of an accurate reference to the antecedent, I would have agreed with the warning. Summarizing someone’s words as “nonsense” in the quote box is pretty jerkish, IMO, and your disagreement on this point tells a lot about how you communicate with other people.
You and I are…not exactly on the same end of the ideological spectrum. It’s a convenient bit of martyrdom that other conservatives have engaged in before, here, claiming that their misbehavior is unfairly treated because of their ideology.
Your N=3 would have been too small to show bias against you, even if they were all undeserved. Modding is uneven because it is not a game of absolutes. Lots of other people will have the same experience, although rarely in such a short span of time, so finding examples where someone wasn’t warned for similar behaviour doesn’t mean you were singled out unless you can show that you are unique in having been warned, which is doubtful looking at your examples.
None of your warnings were based on “unpopular opinions.” In fact, I as I told you when you complained by PM, I had no idea who you were or what your opinions were when I issued you that warning. You accused me of being “after you” also just becauseI edited a thread title of yours in order to clarify it.
It appears to me that you are looking for reasons to feel you are being unfairly persecuted. We would be much less popular I’m sure if we didn’t moderate people for jerkish behavior, which you acknowledge you’ve been guilty of.
I’m as left leaning as you. Not even close to conservative.
I’ve provided examples of the uneveness of the moding. I’m telling you, in no uncertain terms, having been on this side of the moding, that it has all the feel of being ideologically driven.
It is no big loss to either of us. But this board will continue to cull opposing voices and keep shrugging and saying, “They were just too sensitive, I guess.” Pretty soon you end up here. No one holding an opposing view and willing to defend it will post, rightfully or wrongly fearing severe punishment for the slightest of violations.
Had I been a jerk I would understand. The heavy handedness for such a ticky-tack rule violation is not so easily dismissed.
The OP has never been on my radar until now, and his complaints here seem silly. He references three examples. He says one was clearly a fair warning. Then he complains about getting warned for altering text in a quote box — “lots of nonsense snipped” — which is clearly a warnable offense, but the OP is unhappy that sometimes people get notes instead of warnings. I’m not the least bit sympathetic.
And he also rails against Chronos for not understanding his arguments in a thread on whether males should be allowed to play in female athletic leagues. I read through the thread and the OP doesn’t come off well.
His point was (roughly) “why are women getting special treatment, when there are many men that also can’t compete athletically at the highest level?” His point was answered clearly (women have been subjected to clear discrimination in the US for centuries, and compared to other less-than-highest-level athletic people, women are a very clear grouping.) However, the OP rambled on and on, not being concise, ignoring good rebuttals to focus on small misunderstandings. His argument was tangentially related to the thread topic, but was dragging down the discussion through volume and fog.
Eventually Chronos banned him from the thread, and then lifted the ban a day later. However the thread ended there — presumably because everything had been said.
Funny about that, isn’t it? I pointed out how if felt like I was being watched closely and shortly thereafter I’m warned for a really technical violation. Huh. Just coincidence, I guess.
You and the other mods do a great job keeping the jerkish behavior under control. It is one of the great things about this place. I obviously violated a rule (jerk??? Not sure about that) so of course I get the most severe punishment available. No, no chance that wasn’t ideologically driven. None at all.
cmosdes, I have no doubt you feel it’s ideologically driven. What in question isn’t your feelings, what’s in question is whether there’s any evidence to back them up. It seems much likelier to me that you have this feeling because it feels bad to get a warning, and if you can come up with a reason for the warning that’s not your fault, you’ll feel anger instead of shame, and anger’s a more pleasant thing to feel.
But that puts the locus of control outside of you. You messed up, unambiguously, and you can stop getting these bad feelings by changing your behavior.
If the board wants to invite more diverse opinions, maybe instead of just saying all these other people have a persecution complex, the people here can reflect for a moment and try to realize that this isn’t just one person saying it, it is a common theme for MANY with differing opinions here.
So, again… try to listen to what is being told to you. This board is getting exactly what it is setting out to do, purposely or no. If this is the type of board you want, keep at it. If you want to invite differing opinions, I suggest you and the mods and the rest of the board realize the consequences of these actions.
I have not brought you up in the mod loop, even after your very strange PMs, nor has there been any other discussion of you there. I have not discussed you with Jonathan Chance or Chronos at any point. So unless JC is telepathic, his warning had absolutely no relation to mine.
With all due respect, your PMs to me and your complaint here appear to be due to some kind of paranoia or a persecution complex. There is no conspiracy against you on the part of the mods. Like me, I doubt most of us have had any idea who you were before your complaints.
We’re more often accused of being biased against conservative posters, so I guess a complaint by someone who says they’re left-leaning is a change of pace. But as I said, I had absolutely no idea what your politics were when I warned you.
You’ve been listened to. Your argument is lacking. Having a different opinion doesn’t mean that people have to agree with it.
You got a Warning for modifying a quote box by adding insulting language. Your evidence that you were moderated unfairly is:
[ol]
[li]A post about how Miller moderates things in the Pit. Of course, in the Pit, no one cares about insulting language. Pit rules are different from the rest of the board. [/li]
[li]Moderation of a completely different violation about a completely different topic in a completely different forum by a completely different moderator. There are so many different variables there.[/li][/ol]
You have no evidence that you are being treated differently because of your views. Hell, you say you are as much to the left as other posters. That means you largely have the same views that other left-leaning posters have. If you were being unfairly modded for your views, they would be, too.
You have your opinion of what happened. It is a poorly backed one. None of us accept it. That’s why “it would not go well for you.”
And I do sympathize–I get why such language would only make you angrier and more likely to do it. It’s a challenge, the worst thing to say to a certain type of angry person. It’s why I advocate for non-escalating language in moderation.
Okay, I’ll spell it out for you. It was the most severe punishment available under the circumstances. Didn’t think I’d need to fully qualify it and most people would understand that.
So, you acknowledge that it was a punishment available under the circumstances?
And even if, for the sake of argument, it were the case that you’ve been moderated more harshly than the typical board member, that still doesn’t prove that it’s because of your opinions, or because the mods have specifically targeted you, or for any other particular reason.
It wasn’t really a minor “technical violation” either. If you had made a small alteration to the text, that would have been a technical violation. But you changed the text in a way that insulted the poster. You could just have well been warned for insults or being a jerk, even if we didn’t have a rule against modifying quotes. That post violated multiple rules.