Many (not all) liberals stereotype conservatives, feeling that all of them are the absolute worst possible combination of Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. In reality, of course, conservatives cover a broad range of ages, experience, debating skills, intelligence, religious beliefs, compassion, and wealth, but since these liberals get their news only from generally-liberal news sources that they agree with, they get no counter-examples to help them break the stereotype.
Many (not all) conservatives stereotype liberals, feeling that all of them are the absolute worst possible combination of Michael Moore and Ronnie Lee. In reality, of course, liberals cover a broad range of ages, experience, debating skills, intelligence, religious beliefs, compassion, and wealth, but since these conservatives get their news only from generally-conservative news sources that they agree with, they get no counter-examples to help them break the stereotype.
Your post is a perfect example of this unfounded and unreasonable stereotyping.
If you think I was not aware of the irony inherent in the generalizations in my post (you’ll note there are at least no absolutes), you obviously think I’m pretty stupid. Which, granted; subtlety and irony work way better in the real world than on an internet discussion board. Still, as far as general doper behavior goes, I stand behind the general point that’s embedded somewhere in my post: 90% of the charges of “bias”–if not an outright 100%–are made by conservatives losing a debate. I personally would be ashamed to pull that whine in a debate; I’d feel like I would thus be portraying myself as petty and cowardly. But that’s just me.
I have noted that Tomndebb often goes the second mile in his attempts to be fair in weighing in on posts that involve political or religious issues that differ from his own. On the otherhand, it seems to me that he is incapable of posting anything about Shodan’s criticisms, be they accurate or not, without resorting to punitive language. I am not an authority on Tom’s motives, but given the pattern, I suspect it has little to do with Shodan’s religious affiliation or conservative political positions.
On another note, I see the posts of Der Trihs to be too inconsistent to be classified as liberal or conservative. I believe that he thinks of himself as a liberal, but his comments are too hostile, intolerant, and simplistic regarding such things as Freedom of Religion. There are other examples. His beliefs are tolerated and I’m fine with that most of the time. When I’m not, that’s my problem.
Collounsbury was banned for losing his patience with a bigot in Great Debates. Satan was banned for reasons entirely unclear to me. One guy even had to defend himself in the pit against accusations of trollery*: he was banned for satirizing conservatives. Clearly the mods have a far-rightist, Christianist, jack-booted bias.
Luckily, they have a soft spot for whiners. Whiners are rarely if ever banned. Those with twisted recollections are also looked upon kindly.
This is hilarious. Der Trihs just can’t really be liberal because he’s too hostile, intolerant, and simplistic? That’s some comical shit right there. I congratulate you one if the most partisan statements ever made on the SDMB. The fact that you didn’t/don’t see the partisanship in it makes it all the much more comedy gold.
Definitely in the running for The Most Partisan Statement Made On The SDMB—Ever.
Banned and reinstated either once or twice, IIRC. Likewise for lissener, also IIRC. I am not aware of any instance where a conservative poster has ever been reinstated, although I am open to correction.
This HAS to be a whoosh. He can’t be liberal because 'his comments are too hostile, intolerant, and simplistic"? Wow.
ETA: On second thought, what Shodan said.
I think it depends on whether they’re one-trick ponies or not. For example, Der Trihs is, like me, a devotee of The Order of The Stick, and he has contributed in the various threads.
I agree with you. I don’t think that mods are more harsh over RW wingnuttery than LW wingnuttery. They are far more likely to be hard on newbie wingnuts of either party than ones of longer standing.
If there’s a preponderance of LW wingnuts who are around after ticking posters off for a long while, I feel that says more about the type of people who are committed to making just-this-side-of-actionable inflammatory comments than it does about modding.
I think some moderators have personal issues with certain conservative posters and are unable to keep their feelings completely out of their moderating tasks. This gives an aura of bias to the whole system that way.
Don’t know that Collounsbury would be all that pleased to be lumped in with “the left.” Or “the right” for that matter, but Col sure wasn’t all that enthusiastic about the “Left blithering idiots” to choose a quote. He’s probably closest to a classical liberal, if anything.