I think the point is if you believ a post, even an OP, in this forum is overly political, report it. There is no excuse to respond in kind.
That’s totally specious. Remember how the Dope slants politically.
You might also remember that I am not American.
It shows. If you think this would get the Secret Service’s attention, you know jackshit about U.S. law. Seriously, what is it with your little crush on Trump? Disappear the thread? Overkill much? This has got to be one of the most retarded suggestions I’ve seen yet.
I’d say this thread was pretty similar. Note mod instruction in post #11. Thread close when OP did not return with a fleshed out debate.
Moderator Note
This isn’t the Pit. Posts in ATMB are expected to be a lot more respectful towards other posters than this.
Sorry. I still say though that the idea of disappearing the thread is completely asinine.
9000 thumbs up.
Quartz, over in Great Debates there’s an active thread in which someone is, and I’m not exaggerating, denying the Holocaust. Like, “Zyklon B was used for delousing” level arguments.
And you’re worried that someone is speculating about a Trump goon squad? THAT’s what ou think needs a warning?
I’ve never understood the idea that one should not complain about X because Y exists, and Y is worse than X. You can always find something that is worse than Y, too. Each thing stands on its own.
So using comparisons aren’t valid to determine standards here aren’t valid?
Do the mods usually issue a Warning when they do that, though, like the OP wants? Or disappear the thread rather than closing, again like Quartz wants?
I don’t have a ton of interest in explaining this to you, but I’ll give it one try.
Here’s the thing. Quartz thinks posts in GD that are insufficiently cited should be
warned and disappeared, but his example is a mild wild-ass speculation about Trump, rather than genuine holocaust denial, even though they’re happening concurrently. I’m not super-clear on what it is he wants banned. This looks a bit like what he’s actually wanting is a higher standard of proof applied to claims about Trump than the standard applied to the MF Holocaust. I ask my question to clarify if this is really what he’s saying, or if there’s some other difference that I’m not seeing.
There is another thread in the pit right now that was moved there. It is discussing how the ADA resulted in the removal of free online course content and this is a great tragedy, and how the liberals are to blame. There is impressive well poisoning in the OP. should it also be disappeared?
I think the OP just needs to report the offending thread and move on … if the moderators don’t do anything about the report, well that’s their business … focusing on just one moderator is unfair since we know they work in collusion …
One Rule to mind them all, One Rule to find them,
One Rule to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
I disagree. I don’t think the HD thread in the Pit was an example of anything other than the OP taking a position on an issue, and I highly doubt if something comparable would have been moved to the Pit if it were started by a liberal and aimed at conservatives.
[FTR, I don’t agree with the OP of this (ATMB) thread.]
This is perhaps the worst complaint about moderation that I have seen in this forum. The idea that threads critical of Trump need to pass an extra level of scrutiny, otherwise the OPs are punished for saying not-nice things, is so patently absurd that I would think it is a joke if the post were not written so earnestly.
Here’s one. Started by a liberal, aimed at conservatives, and moved to the Pit within a few hours. Ironically it’s actually a lot more innocuous than either the HD thread or the one the OP is complaining about, but into the Pit it went anyway, in the process tearing your accusation to shreds. Here’s another. I’m sure there are dozens if one wanted to browse the history just a few more months.
You might want to rethink this allegation that the board suffers from nefariously biased moderation. I’ve yet to see any evidence for it. And yes, the OP’s complaint is absurd.
I disagree, especially about the first. But probably too subjective an issue to fruitfully discuss.
I’m curious if you have any basis for this suggestion.