Not at all. My concern is how thread hijack allegations which are inherently subjective get treated far more heavily handed than direct insults which are a lot more objective with the main criteria being who is doing the alleged hijacking and who is doing the insulting.
I made this post when I first noticed that farcical claims of hijacking were being used to establish a pattern of behavior to sanction more heavily. Allegations of Thread Hijacks Now, the note phase is skipped and warnings and threats of suspension are the first steps.
Wait, you expect the mods to always go through the same steps of note → warning with a poster who has already gone through that same rigamarole in previous threads?
No, if someone already has a pattern of thread hijacking to the point where they were warned for it, or noted for it multiple times, in the same forum, the mods should skip the note phase in the next thread where they start their bullshit. That’s not the mods “establishing a pattern”, that’s a troll having a pattern.
Sure, if consistent. But the notes and warnings and threats of suspensions for so-called hijacks are the exact opposite of consistent. Check practically any thread on politics and it’s not long before someone brings up something that is barely tangential and the vast majority of the time said tangents are understood to be natural thread drift. Even when the tangent is barely relevant it’s rarely noted much less warned.
The difference, typically, is who is perceived to be so-called hijacking a thread. If you are perceived to hold views that are consistently opposed to the overwhelming group think then your allegedly tangential posts are moderated much more severely. To the point where a response to a previous post is warned where a direct insult is just sternly (lol) noted.
I’ve seen what exit just straight up give up and lock a thread instead of noting or warning about hijacks in a gun debate thread. If the sanctity of threads and rules is so strong why the capitulation in that situation? It’s clear, it’s easy to deal with a poster he has an animus with than 4 or 5 people he doesn’t.
Ultimately, notes, warnings, and threats of suspension work when the signal is clear and consistent. They are tools used to modify behavior by restricting access to a desired medium of communication. The signal is severely distorted when one of the parameters is alignment with prevailing board sentiment, unless the goal is not modification of behavior to fit published rules but is instead an implicit goal of using social pressure to enforce homogeneity of thought.
I would expect the mods of a forum to have some interest in reading the threads to some extent of the forums they moderate. Especially when they can find time to gossip about said threads and posters…
But let’s say what you say is what’s exactly necessary. I’ve reported some posts as off topic. No notes. Of course it’s a judgement call but I do find it interesting that said judgement call is exercised quite severely when the so-called hijack is from a poster who is quite often a target of said gossip and other alleged hijacks aren’t noted much less warned or threatened with suspension.
Furthermore, and this is the most telling indicator of a presence of long existing and long denied double standards, direct, objective, no need to discern intent or mind read insults in the same thread were merely noted. If the rules were consistently enforced I would not have been in a position to have been warned much less warned or threatened with a farcical suspension.
They work the best when people stop whining about well-deserved notes etc. and instead change their behavior. Even if they’re inconsistent, you earned your warning here.
It’s almost as if the mods understand that tangents are understood to be natural thread drift. Friendly topic drift.
And they also seem to understand that hijacking, bringing up tangential topics with the intent of derailing a thread…
AIN’T THE SAME THING!
No matter how badly octopus wants them to be moderated the same way.
I looked back over the 5 posts you made in the Mar-A-Lago thread.
I stand by my warning. You were adding nothing and attempting to derail the thread.
You seem to be playing your normal game of trying to change the argument in this thread.
Did you know there is a feature where we can click on the username and click on # Posts in Topic button? This then shows us just the OP and user’s posts. It is especially handy for mods to review the actions of a poster in a thread.
Be aware, this is how P&E and GD are being modded.
Oh and as far as reading all the threads in the forums we moderate, I doubt any Mod spends more time reading the board than I do and there is no way what you suggest is remotely possible.
I’m going to guess that really, really, want to be warned for bringing up off board drama?
Really? You think folks, and more importantly the mods, don’t know exactly what you’re referring to?
You know… This is kinda true. But it’s also kinda true that if there’s a thread about foo, and everyone in the thread basically agrees that foo is good:
If someone posts about their car, in a way that’s tangential to foo, there will be one or two replies and the thread will move back to foo on its own. But if someone pops up to say “foo is terrible”, they will be jumped on by a dozen posters, and no one will be able to discuss foo itself because the thread will be overtaken by the fight about whether foo is good or terrible.
(You can trade good and terrible. It works both ways.)
So a person with a very contrary opinion is more likely to derail a thread, with no malicious intent. It just works that way.
Again, it’s subjective and the topic had drifted which is why I responded to it and you and I both know a direct insult is not all subjective and that got nothing but a note. That’s one of the main problems I have the inconsistency in modding so-called thread hijacks is another. Note for direct insult and warning for off topic is definitely different standards for different posters.
I guess being aware P&E and GD are being modded inconsistently is good knowledge…
And, more importantly, the contrary opinion is vastly more likely to be reported and have a history of being reported than folks who engage in the same sort of behavior but don’t trigger the diversity of flags. All of this is obvious and there is an incentive to do so because a long term campaign of said flags, even when marginal, create the appearance of disruption when the main cause is the highly disproportionate numbers of folks who share a particular ideology and dominate the political/debate forums.
It’s no accident that the majority of right of center posters racked up questionable notes and warnings when posting in the political forums.
It’s also no accident that you think that that is the case.
I won’t bother to ask for evidence 'cause we done ‘Shodan said nothing wrong!’ enough times.
I think it’s pretty clear that right wing posters are graded on a curve and not at all held to the same standard as the rest of us. Your attempt to derail conversations that you don’t like has worked well for you in the past and conservatives have been incredibly effective shutting down threads about women’s issues through high jacks. Historically, the whole thread will be closed down rather than the high jacker being modded. I welcome the change. Think of it as a chance to learn personal responsibility.