Would you mind pointing out who these people are?
Beautiful summary M4M
Agreed. Further, what does a wholesale hijack of a thread bring to GD? Take an abortion debate, for example. Many strong feelings on each side. I enjoy reading from posters on each side of the issues (and the subgroups on each side) to get a feel how and why people feel so strongly. The back and forth is interesting and helps each side really understand where the other is coming from.
But here comes DT and shits all over the place with his “anti-choice people hate women including their own mothers and wives” shtick which destroys the whole thread. Like you said, there is the Pit for those thoughts. There is no meaningful contribution by allowing such vitriol in GD. And since everyone knows what he’s doing, why allow it to continue?
- My point was if there a lot of problems in GD wouldn’t it make sense to attack the biggest ones first? I don’t post in GD much because, honestly, I can’t keep up with the pace of the posting. But I do read along and I think hateful, threadshitting screeds should be the first thing he cleans up if he is looking to make a difference. And as a woman there are some posts that are more offensive to me than others.
- By his Manhattan-like style, I was alluding to his “I’m the hall monitor - end of discussion” style of stating his position. That’s probably stated a tad to strongly but I get a hint of it. And I certainly did not mean it in a negative way. It’s refreshing really.
I know this wasn’t directed at me but for the record I’m not looking to get DT banned.
Maybe you should maybe read the thread-- i didn’t bring it up, I responded to someone who did. And once again, it’s not about “being nasty”. It’s about the tiresome threadshitting.
Racist jokes are against the board rules. You should report those people (I know exactly what you’re talking about, too) and if the jokes really are racist, that poster will get at least a mod note, if not a warning. If not, then maybe your racist meter needs to be recalibrated.
Wow. *“The back and forth is interesting and helps each side really understand where the other is coming from.” *In Abortion threads. Riiiight.:dubious:
So, to recap -
[ol][li]A bit ago, there was a thread asking if the Mod Notes chiding a certain poster for inflammatory hijacks would ever be escalated to Warnings.[/li][li]Over the course of several pages, the mods make it clear that[list=A][]No, they will not escalate providing that []the inflammatory hijacks only happen once per thread.[/ol][/li][li]In subsequent threads, more complaining about the same behavior.[/li][li]This time, the mods say that there was never any ruling that the poster in question could get away with one inflammatory hijack per thread.[/li][li]Much cutting and pasting and linking later, the mods simply repeat “no, we never said that” until the thread dies away.[/li][li]There is a new [del]sheriff in town[/del] mod in GD.[/li][li]He slaps down the poster in question, and states unequivocally that the Mod Notes are going to escalate if the hijinks continue.[/li][li]The poster in question (hereinafter referred to as the P-i-Q) then resists the moderation(in GD). [/li][li]Instead of telling the P-i-Q to start a thread in ATMB, as would be done for any other posters, the mods respond in GD. So that -[/li][li]It appears that the special exemption from sanction for posting inflammatory hijacks, which the mods at first said was going to continue because it was working (the P-i-Q only posted one inflammatory hijack per thread, and only every week or so), and then denied was there at all. has now been rescinded. Which, as far as I am concerned, is all to the good. However-[/li][li]Now there appears to be another special exemption allowing the P-i-Q to argue against moderation in GD.[/list]So essentially we have traded one special exemption for another.[/li]
I didn’t agree with the first exemption, but that was the decision of the mods, which I am bound to accept. I was rather irritated when the mods claimed they had not said that such an exemption was in place, because they clearly did. I thought the notion of putting a stop to the inflammatory hijacks was a good idea, but my thread congratulating the new mod on the action got locked almost at once. Now, despite the action in attempting to put a stop to the hijacks, we get another exemption almost equally as counter-productive, and equally liable to give the impression that the P-i-Q is getting special treatment.
At almost every turn, the mods seem to do the right thing, and then almost immediately do something to make their rulings look arbitrary.
Regards,
Shodan
I hope you’re well aware that I’m talking about you, and no, my racist meter does not need to be recalibrated. Racism is A-OK on this board, you contribute to it, and we even have Shodan who made a fool of himself in the same thread in question coming in here, too.
But keep complaining about people threadshitting in threads where the argument is that non-libertarians are inferior people because they’re more like women. That’s… that’s going really well for you, I’m sure.
Leaving aside your still as yet unproved claim of racism by John Mace (seriously?):
[QUOTE=Karrius]
But keep complaining about people threadshitting in threads where the argument is that non-libertarians are inferior people because they’re more like women. That’s… that’s going really well for you, I’m sure.
[/QUOTE]
So, you still don’t seem to get it. Or, maybe you do and I don’t, since it’s clear the Mods are in agreement with you. Apparently, in your mind, if someone starts a thread in GD with some ridiculous claim, that it’s open season on anyone who has a similar belief as the OP, even though the thread remained in GD and wasn’t moved to, say, the Pit. And to you, this is as it should be. To the Mods also, obviously, since no warning or even note was issued.
ETA: The caveat being, of course, that it has to be an attack on an unpopular group on the board, such as Libertarians or Conservatives…perhaps the religious. If it’s an attack on a popular group, say liberals or Democrats, well, then all bets are off. Ban those bastards, I’m sure. Does that about sum it up?
I was told it was about threadshitting, and not about being mean. But now you’re claiming it’s about being mean, but not threadshitting.
Can somebody please tell me what the actual position is that I’m supposed to argue against, rather than being argued against from two exclusive positions at once?
EDIT: Also, did the person who made that thread get warned for attacking liberals and women? If not, does this at all change your position?
A Modest Proposal
Maybe the best solution is to keep – uhh – certain posters under wraps in Great Debates as secret weapons. Then, when the whackjob conspiracy theorists/holocaust deniers/Stormfront invaders/drive-by posters decide to spew their batshit crazy idea of the week, we send certain posters a PM urging them to come into the thread and do what needs to be done.
We can call them the Luca Brasi Brigade!
No, I’m not ‘now’ claiming any such thing. I claimed it from the first. Good grief…he called all Libertarians psychotic and their philosophy the philosophy of psychos. That’s not being mean, that’s fucking flaming. Seriously, can you not grasp that? Seems rather obvious to me. And, as I said, this was him being mild in GD.
As for what position you should argue against, obviously you’ve staked out one that means you are perfectly cool with DT flaming in GD, and that it’s all perfectly ok as long as the OP said something stupid to then attack whole groups (that are unpopular on the board of course…wouldn’t want to attack popular groups or anything, that might get you banned) because of a silly OP.
Oh, and that John Mace is a racist. That too.
Did the person who made this thread (a.k.a. John Mace) call liberals and women psychos, or something else that over the top? Feel free to post a link and quote freely.
There are repeatedly OPs in GD that attack huge groups of people, including “popular” ones. How long ago was it that we had a thread in GD arguing that all transgender people were mentally ill? How many people were warned from that?
I’m perfectly fine with a crackdown on flaming in GD. Let’s just make sure it includes all the problems.
Go back and read post 112. The point was not threadshitting in one thread, but in every thread on that subject. Every thread. Comprende?
Did anyone call transgender people psychos or the equivalent? If so, then were they warned? At a guess, if there were any, they were warned or a mod note was issued at the least. If not, then it’s not exactly on par, is it?
This thread wasn’t about all the problems in GD. It was about a single poster. Personally, I think leashing DT in GD WOULD fix a large number of problems in GD, though obviously it wouldn’t fix them all. But what it would do is take from many posters minds the thought that, for reasons unknown, the Mods on this board are cutting DT more slack than they do with anyone else and are holding back from warning or noting him when he flies off the handle.
It was claiming the transgendered were “mentally ill” and “mutilating” themselves, as well as claiming they were delusional like people who claimed to hear voices.
My point is - all sorts of stuff is allowed to go down in GD. Assuming it’s just one person who is the problem and mods are picking on poor little Christians is basically just an admittance of “We don’t care about all those other groups who are attacked - fuck em”.
[QUOTE=Karrius]
It was claiming the transgendered were “mentally ill” and “mutilating” themselves, as well as claiming they were delusional like people who claimed to hear voices.
[/QUOTE]
So, no…no one flamed in a similar way. What you are saying here, while distasteful (to me), does not rise to the level of calling someone AND EVERYONE WHO AGREES WITH THEM OR HAS A SIMILAR PHILOSOPHY psychopaths and psychopathic. I didn’t see the thread you are referring too, nor obviously did I participate in it, but as you describe it here it’s not remotely similar to what Der regularly does in GD.
No idea where you are getting the idea that the Mods are ‘picking on poor little Christians’…again, this thread is about DT and the Mods refusal to leash him in and muzzle him if needs be.
At this point basically nothing we say is going to cause us to agree, if you think this an acceptable level of discourse for GD while what DT says is completely out of line. Personally, I think it’s worse to go on about how minorities who are subject to extreme discrimination and violence are “mentally ill delusional people who mutilate themselves” than it is to call a Libertarians psychopaths in a thread where they’re claiming everyone who’s not a Libertarian is inferior, especially considering one of these forms of hate speech actually gets people killed on a fairly regular basis.
You are right. To me, your stance here is incredible. You feel, basically, that it’s ok for Der to flame in GD an entire group because an OP was an idiot, while you feel that, even though they are wrong, people shouldn’t be able to express their opinion and assertions about transgenders…and you feel that expressing an incorrect opinion that you happen to disagree with is worse than someone flaming an entire group of people by calling them psychopaths. All the while, as you surly must realize, this example was Der being MILD, and was merely one illustrations of his flying off the handle in GD.
There simply isn’t any common ground for you and I to discuss this from, to be honest. I’m honestly flabbergasted by your (and others), to me, sophistry on this, while you seem equally puzzled why it’s a big deal since, to you, everyone essentially does the same thing as Der in GD. Obviously you are backed up by the Mods, who seemingly feel the same way, so there doesn’t seem to be any benefit in continuing the discussion…which is obviously what the Mods also want. For the thread to die out and us to all go back to our own affairs, nothing to see here.
The fact that you can’t even use proper words to describe the people in question who are being attacked in ways you casually dismiss basically makes my point. There’s a heavy subset on the SDMB, generally white conservative Christians, who constantly feel like they are being attacked and persecuted while the mods specifically ignore their attackers, without realizing that everybody gets attacked, and the mods ignore everything.
In the very thread in question you’re complaining about, liberals, conservatives, and women were attacked as being “inferior”, and nobody was warned at all. Yet somehow this proves that Libertarians are being treated unfairly.
Calling a Libertarian a psycopath when they claims that emotion is proof of being an inferior person who’s like a woman = bad.
Calling a transgender person who has medical studies proving their condition is real a “delusional, mentally ill person mutilating themselves” = acceptable.
I don’t understand how these two match up, at all. I’d prefer they BOTH be unacceptable, but also that the libertarian in the first bit be warned, too.