You are not sure if the claim you made is relevant? There is an easy solution to this conundrum: Withdraw the claim.
If you’re compelled to say that something is manufactured, then surely you thought your comment was relevant. Is there a problem with you saying who, exactly, manufactured the thing?
Dude, you just checkmated yourself.
What is this kindergarten? Nobody here lacks agency. Nobody here is obligated to answer any question or provide a cite or engage with someone they don’t want to. It’s really that simple.
Complaining about politeness, cite requests, and pedantry is not the real concern. The real concern is that people are frustrated that they can’t get rid of certain posters that they don’t like.
Did I just hear a five-part whoosh?
As I said earlier, I’m unsure of the identity of the person or persons who manufactured Sealioning. Do you think that the fact I can’t name them means the claim is unfounded. If so, why?
No, the real concern is that one moderator is doing jack shit about someone clearly flouting another moderator’s instructions. Moderators are supposed to be on the same page, FFS.
Maybe such a poorly used and undefined word has different meanings to different people. Maybe there is no bright sealioning line to cross. That’s a feature.
How can something be “manufactured” and not real at the same time?
No, earlier you said:
It’s right there for us to see.
You did not mention that you were “unsure of the identity of the persons”. This is a new thing. That you just stated now. Not anything you “said earlier”. And now you’re accusing someone that they think that “the fact I can’t name them means the claim is unfounded”. Which is just a silly thing to claim on your part.
What you’re doing here is obvious.
It’s a message board with rules. If you want anarchy, go somewhere else. If you want to complain about how poorly you’re treated, I will email you a tissue.
Certain people like to push the rules here to the breaking point. They actively employ tactics designed to shift debate. They actively try to goad others. They do not debate in good faith. They ignore or deliberately misinterpret other posters. They destroy any value in discussion.
And your comment is that we should simply ignore them? And maybe the asshole will go away? Don’t point out the asshole behaviour, because… reasons.
No.
Assholes will continue to be assholes as long as good people do nothing.
And this thread is pointing out the need for moderators to … do their jobs properly.
Again, if you want anarchy where anything goes - this is not the place for you. I’m sure there are places on the net where this is the case. They must be paradise.
Why the excluded middle fallacy? I disagree with one particular, subjective, poorly defined, and selectively applied ‘rule’ therefore I desire anarchy? Oh, c’mon now.
I’m going to go cry in a corner now. I’m like 10% concerned about whether sealioning is being moderated, and 90% concerned that moderators shouldn’t be threatening to shut down entire conversations because of a few people breaking rules. Can we maybe wind down the infinite sealion recursion, and get a reassurance that whole-class detention is not on the table?
If it helps, I’ve decided to take a break from the impeachment inquiry thread. I’ll try to avoid posting there for a while. Maybe things will cool off a bit.
Well, that’s a tautology. People are complaining about a small number of people because of the dishonest debate tactics that they are using.
N/m
The term “sealioning” has been quite popular recently, overused a bit and I think that’s partly because of previous instruction I gave. Can’t change that.
All the moderators communicate about actions they take, and if there are new things, general directives, we communicate about that too. Of course, being different people we are not in perfect agreement on all things, but we directionaly align on virtually everything.
It’s almost a given that one of the most important issues of the day will be discussed on the boards, and all over the boards. I don’t think you have a lot to worry about not having that avenue for discussion.
The piece of the direction that’s especially concerning–coming across as vindictive and petty–is the “I won’t let you open another one for several days.” Am I to take it that that piece carries no weight?
Is it the same as Harbor Sealing? I spent the night in the San Francisco jail over that.