The thread has experienced some drift, and there have been repeated mod instructions to stay on-topic.
MikeF posted a protest song written in 1969 having no connection to the recent ICE shootings, and was given a warning for it.
I posted a protest song . The song I posted IS about the current situation and specifically references the killings. As far as I can see, this really is on-topic.
Nevertheless, I was given a warning. I do not think this warning is justified.
Smapti replied to my post, and was also given a warning. This is even less justified. I do not think his mention of Liam Ramos warrants a warning either, and I suspect it would have gone unnoticed without the first warning.
As I explained to you in the PMs we exchanged, we had a discussion among P&E mods about how to proceed with your post. Yes, your song was about the shootings. But it was apparently generated by AI, wasn’t an original thought by you and added nothing to the discussion about the shootings themselves. And that’s what the thread is about: The shootings themselves.
We had already just warned another poster for posting a protest song. We felt yours was also a hijack for the reasons stated above.
As for @Smapti’s posts, again, the fact that it involved ICE and Minneapolis does not make his post about the shootings of Renee Good and Alec Pretti by ICE agents. That’s what the subject thread is about. We tried to make that clear with many, many mod notes to stay on topic.
No you didn’t. You warned them for posting a protest song that had nothing to do with the topic. You did not indicate that protest songs per se are forbidden.
I understand you don’t get the distinction I’m making, but nothing you’ve said persuades me your post should be treated differently than it was. And again, the action was discussed among three P&E mods.
We have spent far too much time on that thread trying to keep it on track. Your post was just an invitation to hijack further – which immediately happened, when @Smapti commented about it being AI-generated.
You have selectively quoted yourself there. Let’s quote the whole thing, with the post you were responding to for context.
It looks to me very much that the issue there was that it was protesting something very different, many years ago. I agree that it was off topic, though a Warning is somewhat harsh.
You didn’t give clear instructions against posting songs per se. If that’s what you meant you didn’t express it very well.
I’m not one to second-guess the mods around here, but personally I think that getting a warning for merely commenting on a tangential post is a bit much, and with there not being a general “ICE in Minneapolis” thread in existence to discuss topics not directly related to the shootings, ISTM that it’s fair to bring up Liam Ramos in the discussion since it’s another case of ICE overreach in the area.
If there is a better thread for the post I made on that topic, it also seems to me that it could have just been moved to that thread instead.
@Peter_Morris, for whatever reason, posters have been unable to stop themselves from going off topic in that thread. I actually got tired trying to count from the beginning when there were over 10 in the first 100 posts (mostly Noem’s HAT of all things!).
We also had doxxing, trolling, suggestions for illegal actions, personal attacks as well as multiple cases in-thread of moderation disputes.
Threads spun off to to KEEP the topic from going off topic:
As for moderator notes and or warnings for just going off topic?
[note - this is where @What_Exit made it clear that further off topic poster would invite Warnings]
[that’s three more hijacks after we said Warnings were coming, without actually giving one]
[this is where we get our First ATMB thread on the subject, admittedly after too much moderation discussion in thread, and NOT for the first time, and I modified the guidance slightly to be a bit more open, which was possibly a mistake in hindsight]
And there’s, what 2.5 ATMB topics from this thread, not counting this one?
And then we get to the warnings for @MikeF, @Peter_Morris, and @Smapti, because after ALL of the above, the hijacks continued. We kept offering notes in hope the posters would, if nothing else, follow the suggestions in the ATMB threads about the “reply as linked topic”, a parallel thread in a less restrictive forum (IMHO or the Pit), or just flag rather than contribute to the hijacks. I even linked the existing Pit thread on ICE and their actions, but…
For whatever individual reasons, different posters don’t want to stay on topic, and don’t want to spin off their own threads (oh wait, that’s another ATMB thread from this one spark!), and in many forums (see paragraph immediately above) it’s fine and even enjoyed. But P&E/GD is specifically low tolerance for hijacks.
We’ve sadly used all the available tolerance for it up, and at some point I’m wondering if we’ll just have to close the entire thread. Which would be a shame, there’s a ton of useful information as the investigation and efforts to thwart it continued, not to mention the additional killing and blatant legal overstep.
Seems to me it’d be easier to change the title of the thread to something more general than spend this much time chiding and warning people for not sticking to a very narrow discussion topic about such a wide-ranging current issue.
I’d like, if I may, to interject a humble opinion on a larger perspective here.
There is a sticky at the top of the P&E forum written by the late Colibri which among many other things makes the following statement:
“Hijacks. This is, perhaps, the single largest and most important change to the rules in Great Debates and Politics and Elections made in 2020. Staying on topic is a strong goal of Great Debates and Politics and Elections moving forward.”
I don’t know if this came from Colibri or directly from Ed, but regardless, I would like to humbly suggest that this inflexible strictness has been the cause of a lot of grief lately. Of course we want all threads, everywhere, to stay reasonably on topic, out of respect for the OP, if nothing else, who obviously started their thread about some specific thing they wanted to discuss. But IMHO the “staying on topic” rule has become an obsession in P&E, causing frustration for both moderators and posters that would be relieved if things were loosened up just a bit, and would not detract from the usefulness of the conversation.
Again, I appreciate that staying on topic is a reasonable goal everywhere, but I see no reason that P&E should be singled out for specially strict enforcement.
This is a good example of how a strict and inflexible interpretation of the “no hijack” rule can be directly counterproductive. Rather than tolerating some posts that drift off topic, we’ll just close down the whole discussion. How does this make sense? How does it serve the interests of the OP?
It’s not the specific subject of this immediate thread (and should be taken up further elsewhere), but I would vehemently oppose any loosening of the rigorous no-hijack standard. It’s the only reason discussions in P&E are tolerable. Otherwise every single thread would inevitably drift back to the black hole of debating Trump’s psychology, the motivations of his followers, and the likelihood of America’s fascistic future.
@Smapti - you’re frustrated, because you’re seeing a (I’ll give you) a fairly minor offense, but two off topic comments back to back, in such close proximately to the last actual Warning? And I’m pretty sure talking about your feelings about how AI work is automatically a fail to use is about as far from topical as I can imagine. Even so, I considered letting it go ( again ) but that’s exactly what I did after the last long ATMB thread, and this is where we are today. I’m not saying we’re ready for zero tolerance, but I don’t see what else we can do other than ask the OP to throw it in the Pit, or close it, which I’m extremely hesitant to do so.
Because it did seem like leaving the post you commented on open to view would attract even more off-topic posts, I did hide it and yours after the flag to prevent it from happening again.
@wolfpup, you’ll note that I specifically quoted the section in question in one of the other 3+ ATMB threads, and even linked to an earlier thread exactly discussing the point if the rules should be relaxed. I personally (modhat off) am part of the significant faction that wants news, analysis and updates with minimal (not no) joking around in “serious” forums (FQ, P&E, GD).
And as a moderator (modhat back on) I often let a few off-topic posts go by.
But this thread is way past that. A dozen or so off-topic posts initial posts most of which had many replies? It’s not sustainable.
I mean, the easier option would be to consolidate into a more Pit-like everything goes option. We have TONS of productive conversations in the Pit, but I somehow doubt (!!!) people want that either. It’s like people want to post in whatever thread they like sometimes and there were a LOT of personal attacks in that very thread that would have been better in the Pit.
Anyway, as I said, I’m exhausted and I’m going to get some sleep before I respond unprofessionally, and I’ll even promise to log back in tomorrow.