Nope.
That is Construct arguing self defence.
As for the ridiculous argument about what some historic Marxists regimes have done, it has no bearing - I’m personally a pacifist and I follow Marx’s teachings (not as much as I follow Proudhon’s, but I still count myself as a Marxist), so what have I personally done to deserve going up against the wall? What have the Marxist state governments in India done?
Collective punishment is a war crime for a reason, but hey, advocate for it if you like.
Actually one week is long after the fact, insofar as the conversation has moved on after that point. This isn’t a law court: it’s a message board. Tom is a moderator at a panel discussion, not a thought crime enforcer.
If Construct behaves moving forwards, I see no reason for a banning. If he does not, he should receive notes and warnings. If posters wish to express their displeasure with posts made over a couple of days ago, they can do so in the pit. As a member, I advocate accountability (up to the point of harassment of course).
Calibration
More generally racism remains one of the great issues of the day. Provided this place isn’t inundated with trolls a certain level of unpleasantness is superior to none at all. Though admittedly that’s easier for this white hetero male to say. As an example, I might point to our discussions of the Armenian Genocide. Admittedly that thread lacked buffoonish commentary.
So the statute of limitations is, at most, 1 week. Good to know.
No, It is whatever the whims of the moderator in question is.
If they want to issue a warning, they will find a reason 6 months down the line. If they don’t, you will find an excuse a minute.
You mean this conversation, right here in this thread? Moved on? :dubious:
Ok, ok, it’s been 5 days since Tom made the post referenced in the OP.
And has there been a pause in the conversation since?
Well, what’s the date of the last objectionable comment by Construct?
That’s irrelevant as to whether the conversation about it has moved on or not.
If you’d let it go - it would move on -
Why should I let it go?
The moderators have answered your question(s) as to why the post(s) were not moderated - you’ve stated why you feel this is in error and your dissatisfaction with it.
Simply put - at this point you’re beating a dead horse and are not going to change the outcome.
I still haven’t had a mod say that yes, 5 days is long enough to get a pass. Only MfM. As for beating a dead horse - this is the forum for complaining about moderation, I’m complaining. My last complaint was after tom’s last reply to me, so I don’t consider my complaint answered yet. And when it is, I might have more to say about that response if the thread isn’t closed.
So quite frankly, I don’t find any non-mod calls telling me to shut up all that helpful or welcome.
I was told by a mod, who is no longer here, saying they would not go back a mod a post that was two days old.
He’s not trying to get outcomes changed - he’s trying to get straight answers to his questions.
I apologize coming in a few days late. But, since I’m the one who said you should Warn people if you expect them to change, I shall respond to this, too.
Neither. The first is a rather ridiculous strawman that you keep bringing up. No one believes your goal is to try and ban people. The second is, at best, incomplete and, at worst, a polite fiction.
A Warning is essentially the board’s equivalent of an official reprimand at a job or a censure in politics. It’s a way of saying that your behavior is so out of line that it needs to be officially documented. This documentation is then what is used should the need arise as evidence that someone warrants a suspension or banning.
Whenever you issue a suspension or banning, you always cite the Warnings that person has received. You don’t cite, for example, the times the poster was one of many who got a thread closed. You can’t, because those aren’t documented.
An Official Warning is, like an official reprimand or censure, effectively a punishment in its own right. By not giving someone a Warning, you are effectively saying “we’ll let this one slide.”
It’s not merely a means to catch the poster’s attention. You have PMs for that, should the need arise.
It has the latter utility, yes. But I disagree entirely about your view of the purpose of Official Warnings[sup]tm[/sup].
An example:
I registered in 1999. With some breaks, I’ve been posting in GD for nearly 16 years. I just received my first warning. I deserved it, because I broke the rules of the forum. It was, for me at least, an effective way to catch my attention and remind me to pay attention to my words. That it was made publicly also serves to remind others to pay attention to their words.
If I go off the rails and get my ass banned, certainly that warning and any other I accumulate in the process will be offered as evidence that I was not booted without cause. But IMO that’s not the purpose of a warning.
That is regrettable, but the important thing is that you’re here now.
Well, Idle Thoughts just modded a 5 day old post. He gave a very sternly worded note to Emiliana in IMHO for calling this awesome dude I know an “asshole.” And I’m talking a whole mod note, not a quarter note, or a half note, but a whole note. So the statute is longer than 2 days, apparently.
Of course I would. Let me rephrase the question: a different poster, not me.
“All those (ethnic slurs) in ISIS should be bombed and burned.” Is this ok?
“All of ISIS should be bombed and burned.” Is this ok?
Again, I’m not asking for myself, I’m asking if a DIFFERENT poster posted the above, would either, or both, be a rules violation?