# moderation of poster that take unpopular positions. **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [July 6, 2016, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251 "2016-07-06T19:32:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**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:** [July 7, 2016, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/21 "2016-07-07T06:16:46Z")
I realise this is now moot but : > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Well I’m appealing on two fronts. > > A) Ignorance that a moderator note existed. > > B) Reasonable failure to understand what I was being instructed to refrain from. > > I didn’t see the moderator note until after I had posted the offending post and I misunderstood the instruction to mean something else when I did. This is classic kettle logic - either you didn’t see it, OR you didn’t understand what you did see. Both can’t be true at the same time. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/22 "2016-07-07T07:16:58Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > It may not be “fair,” but if you’re going to argue an unpopular position here, you must take care to be exceptionally polite, proper, and correct. > > We will engage in debate with flat-earthers. But rude flat-earthers can go to blazes. The combination of an unpopular viewpoint with rudeness is worse than either pedcadillo, alone, would be. > > This means that someone arguing an unpopular opinion has to accept rudeness, without descending into its use himself. Again, patently unfair, but it’s a social reality. > [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > And a reason for this is that people who argue unpopular positions with rudeness raise the suspicion that they are doing so “just to be confrontational or to raise hackles,” which is the [definition of trolling](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1764/what-is-a-troll). > > I’m not saying that everyone who rudely espouses unpopular positions is a troll. Some are sincere, and either naturally abrasive or made tetchy from having to defend their unpopular opinions. But it is the kind of thing that trolls do. Which in practice means it’s allowed to be a troll, as long as you are trolling for a “popular” position. And that people with unpopular options will be called trolls whether they are or not. That sort of thing is why I long since stopped taking the term troll very seriously, here and elsewhere. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 10:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/23 "2016-07-07T10:37:30Z")
No, trolling is not allowed on any position, and sincere arguments are allowed on any position. It’s just that enforcement is tricky and asymmetric, because it’s not generally possible to directly determine sincerity. But if, for instance, a poster says “Nah, I was just saying that to get a rise out of you”, then they’re going to get moderated for trolling regardless of the position or their level of politeness. Though, of course, someone who is attempting to troll by making a polite argument on a popular position is doing a very poor job of it. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/24 "2016-07-07T12:49:37Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > I realise this is now moot but : > > This is classic kettle logic - either you didn’t see it, OR you didn’t understand what you did see. Both can’t be true at the same time. They don’t have to be true at the same time. At the time he made the offending post he hadn’t seen it, but he eventually did see it and at that point he didn’t understand it. Pretty straightforward. The significance of the second point is that even if “didn’t see it” is not accepted as an excuse, “didn’t understand it” might be, as turned out to be the case. If I could make a suggestion to the OP, it might be a good idea to read all posts before responding to any of them. Not just because of the possibility of missing some mod instructions, but because many times the thread has moved on by that point, and he (she?) ends up making a lot of posts which have already been addressed and/or duplicating points others have made. (This happens a lot.) ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/25 "2016-07-07T12:59:15Z")
I want to also offer here that not seeing moderator guidance is not generally a defensible argument. Were that the case it would be difficult to moderate at all. Posters are responsible for reading the posts in the threads in which they participate. If they choose not to do so and run afoul of moderation the fault is, in general, theirs. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/26 "2016-07-07T14:13:54Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > As noted in the other thread, I think Tom’s instruction was - and still is - very unclear. In addition, as CA noted here, the fact that Tom was himself participating in that thread, and that the guy he was moderating was taking a position that he particularly opposed, makes it even more dubious. (Note: the first issue also relates to JC’s warning, while the second is just about Tom.) I generally find Tomndebb to be pretty objective and able to separate his moderator hat from his participant hat in a thread. Sure, it might look bad but upon reflection, its not an out of bounds moderator instruction, I don’t like but its not out of bounds, and as Trinopus points out, I have to be willing to be subjected to a higher standard of behaviour if I am going to take an unpopular position. I am not pleading bias just good faith ignorance, both of the existence of the moderation note and of its meaning. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/27 "2016-07-07T14:15:13Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I think those points deserves consideration by the moderators. > > However, you lose points for the tortured coding of the quotes in the OP… 😉 I couldn’t figure out how to use the quote function in a different thread. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/28 "2016-07-07T14:16:14Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > Tom and I have spent some time discussing it and he agrees that he was not clear in his guidance. Because of that, I am reversing the warning for Damuri Ajashi. > > This does not mean that we wish posters to consider ‘I didn’t understand it so it shouldn’t count’ as an overall viable approach to getting around moderation. Such has a low probability of having a positive outcome and I’d advise against it. Thanks. The infraction was an error made in good faith. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/29 "2016-07-07T14:52:13Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Thanks. The infraction was an error made in good faith. Faith based moderation and posting? 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/30 "2016-07-07T17:46:56Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Chance](#): > > I want to also offer here that not seeing moderator guidance is not generally a defensible argument. Were that the case it would be difficult to moderate at all. > > Posters are responsible for reading the posts in the threads in which they participate. If they choose not to do so and run afoul of moderation the fault is, in general, theirs. I agree generally but imagine a near simulpost. Surely that would be one of those, “it depends” 🙂 ---
**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:** [July 7, 2016, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/31 "2016-07-07T20:02:33Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > They don’t have to be true at the same time. At the time he made the offending post he hadn’t seen it, but he eventually did see it and at that point he didn’t understand it That’s not the point - he can only appeal for leniency on one point or the other, not both at the same time. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/32 "2016-07-07T20:08:18Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > I agree generally but imagine a near simulpost. Surely that would be one of those, “it depends” 🙂 Indeed. I know for sure I’ve seen cases where moderators have forgiven a poster for not following mod directions when the offending posts were made very soon after the directive was issued. This case–five minutes later–seems to fall into that category. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/33 "2016-07-07T20:25:12Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > That’s not the point - he can only appeal for leniency on one point or the other, not both at the same time. No reason for that. Of course he could. As indeed he successfully did. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/34 "2016-07-07T21:18:20Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Well I’m appealing on two fronts. > > A) Ignorance that a moderator note existed. > > B) Reasonable failure to understand what I was being instructed to refrain from. > > I didn’t see the moderator note until after I had posted the offending post and I misunderstood the instruction to mean something else when I did. Respectfully, had you led with this in your OP I suspect you’d have generated more sympathy and your claim would have looked more credible. If I might suggest, you might next time just PMing JC say “I didn’t see the note at the time I was making my post and also the note is unclear for reasons XYZ”. I obviously won’t speak for JC but had you done so I suspect he’d have rescinded the warning or just modified it to a note. Obviously if you already did and he didn’t respond, what I said above should be disregarded. However, if you didn’t, then started up a thread like this without first PMing the mod particularly with an OP worded the way you did, doesn’t exactly inspire confidence in those of us reading it. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/35 "2016-07-07T21:23:45Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > I agree generally but imagine a near simulpost. Surely that would be one of those, “it depends” 🙂 I think that why he says “not generally a good argument” instead of “never” or even “rarely”. Again, from personal experience, I’d say sending a PM right away with a reasonable explanation is vastly more likely to get a positive response from a mod then just opening up a thread like this. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2016, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/36 "2016-07-08T15:48:33Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > …This is classic kettle logic - either you didn’t see it, OR you didn’t understand what you did see. Both can’t be true at the same time. 😕 “kettle” logic? Source? Explanation/connection to your definition “either you didn’t see it…” ? Never heard the word before. Good noun for type of common rhetorical get-around you point out. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2016, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/37 "2016-07-08T17:00:32Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > 😕 “kettle” logic? > > Source? Explanation/connection to your definition “either you didn’t see it…” ? > > Never heard the word before. Good noun for type of common rhetorical get-around you point out. wiki calls it: “argument in the alternative” \*Originating in the legal profession, argument in the alternative is a strategy in which a lawyer advances several competing (and possibly mutually exclusive) arguments in order to pre-empt objections by his adversary, with the goal of showing that regardless of interpretation there is no reasonable conclusion other than the advocate’s. Bart Simpson’s classic “I didn’t do it, no one saw me do it, you can’t prove anything!” could be considered a somewhat humorous example."\* “I didnt see the post and I misunderstood it anyway” is a classic. ---
**Author:** ![cochrane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cochrane/32/10441_2.png) [@cochrane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cochrane)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2016, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/38 "2016-07-08T17:15:31Z")
So, it’s like Johnny Cochran’s “Chewbacca defense,” then? ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2016, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/39 "2016-07-08T17:30:29Z")
> [@cochrane](#): > > So, it’s like Johnny Cochran’s “Chewbacca defense,” then? Nah, more like “I didn’t kill him, and it was self-defense if I did.” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2016, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251/40 "2016-07-08T19:55:54Z")
> [@gnoitall](#): > > Nah, more like “I didn’t kill him, and it was self-defense if I did.” No… not viable. Self-defense generally requires an admission that your action killed along with the claim that your action was taken in self-defense. I suppose we might find ourselves in this spot if there was some debate about which injury killed the victim, and the accused inflicted only one. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/moderation-of-poster-that-take-unpopular-positions/759251.md?page=3)