I am saying that the one making things up to bitch about is not me, as you claimed it was.
Read the linked thread, which gives an example of my bitching about something which is real, and outside my head.
Regards,
Shodan
I disagree. I think that the way certain posters acted in that thread - a thread started by a poster who’d had friends involved in the incident - was well over the “don’t be a jerk” line. Terr has been warned and suspended before, and his response to the mod note in the thread about keeping gun control out of it was to continue the hijack of what should have been a supportive and sympathetic discussion. It’s not like discussion of gun control is banned on the forum generally, and it’s not like there aren’t plenty of other current threads to go discuss it.
Other posters got warnings for the same thing, but in Terr’s case it happened to be the one that pushed him over the line. I wouldn’t support any “grassroots” movements to see him reinstated.
Fascinating.
Both Shodan and I have said that we feel constrained in what we can post, and believe that we run a greater risk of being moderated for functionally identical behavior than do our liberal brethern.
And you hold us up as examples of how to post without getting in trouble, as though that proves that the moderation is equal.
Do you not perceive any possibility that your thinking may be blinded here?
I was going to argue but instead I’m going to just admire the elegance of this retort.
Bravo or brava, sir or madam.
I think it’s good we are discussing feelings.
http://www.condenaststore.com/-sp/It-may-be-wrong-but-it-s-how-I-feel-New-Yorker-Cartoon-Prints_i8544229_.htm
Do you? You’re citing your personal belief as the source of your argument, despite extremely limited evidence to support it, and yet you wonder why we question whether your perception reflects reality? Would you tolerate this argument from an opposing viewpoint?
You’ve said that you feel constrained, but you haven’t demonstrated that those feelings are justified. Isn’t confirmation bias the most likely explanation?
My now (maybe, let’s not get into that) exgifriend is the soccer mom. I drive a Subaru which I’ve been told makes me a lesbian.
Feelings equal impression or a belief. A totality of the situation or circumstances, not any individual situation or occurrence.
Some people refuse to see, let alone acknowledge, the other side of an argument. Citations would be futile with respect to them. I’m betting that’s why a cite isn’t coming your way.
“Feelings” are not the totality of a situation. I can’t imagine where you got that idea from. Feelings are port of a situation, and sometimes they are justified and sometimes not. You’ve never mistakenly felt wronged when you misinterpreted what someone else said or did?
I recommend you not quit your day job.
So the mods wrote a rule specifically for you, to allow you to continue your signoff that adds nothing to discussions and serves only to piss some people off. It’s like they bent over backwards for a conservative poster.
It only pisses off people who choose to be pissed off. No ones’ sign off has ever bothered me.
Of all the things to be bothered by, this seems so trivial as to be laughable.
But… Did the mods actually do that?
They can’t say.
And I’m the one who gets told I am inventing things to bitch about.
Regards,
Shodan
I have considerable respect for both Bricker and Shodan, but, guys: the idea that you’re somehow persecuted here for being conservative is just laughable.
There is definitely a thing among right-wing Christians to seek martyrdom. Not to be martyred in fact, but rather to be able to claim the cloak of martyrdom. I know, I used to be one; I was once always on the lookout for perceived Anti-Christian actions or words. But it was all nonsense, trumped up outrage so some people can feel a smidgen of the righteousness of a true martyr: hence all of the “War on Christmas” idiocy.
I suspect, and evidence holds up, that the right wing politically has been contaminated with the same silliness. Hence the “Kim Davis is a martyr and hero”-style stupidity.
Frankly, it’s the same thing going on here. No moderating is ever going to be 100% fair. Not possible. Let’s say it’s 99.99% fair. That .01% unfairness is more than enough for some to cry, “Help! Help! I’m being oppressed!”
Have a sense of perspective, really. You’re no Solzhenitsyn.
Sort of like Bo’s catchphrase.
Neither bother me in the least.
Well, I certainly admit to the possibility of confirmation bias.
But I don’t agree it’s the most likely. Of course, one problem is that no two incidents are precisely identical, which makes a rigorous comparison all but impossible.
Still, why isn’t your confirmation bias an equally likely candidate? After allm this thread began with an undeniable metric: for two essentially identical infractions, the conservative poster is banned and the liberal poster merely suspended. Why is it more likely that my confirmation bias is it play?
Much like in this thread.
This actually confirms that you indeed have a confirmation bias. We’ve explained to you the differences in the timing and length of previous suspensions that led us to decide to ban Terr while suspending BrainGlutton. The fact that you ignore those differences, and fixiate solely on the political differences between them, suggests that you are biased towards seeing a bias against conservative posters despite alternative explanations.
And to add to that, BG got 5 full-on warnings after his suspension and is still given a pass. Even if you buy the silly “Oh, that suspension was just an “attention getter”” thing, it clearly didn’t get his attention if he racked up 5 more warnings afterwards.
Terr got 2 full-on warnings and was banned.
For anything approaching “equal treatment”, BG should have gotten a “thin edge” suspension after the “attention getter” didn’t work, and then been banned.
But like Der Trihs and a few others, they’re given lighter punishments for the same infractions as everyone else, and then those lighter punishments are used to justify milder treatement later (“That suspension was only an 'attention getter”)