ISTM that pundits broadly agree that this was a major factor in that election. Why would a moderator declare this to be a hijack in a P&E discussion of that election and ban all mention of it?
Because it actually became a hijack of the thread. It took over the discussion.
To be fair, mostly because of one poster who makes a habit of hijacking threads with CRT. So I’m talking with the other Mods to ban him from CRT discussions altogether.
In fairness I banned him from the thread, so maybe I can remove the CRT restriction. Let me check with others or at least think it over.
The responses to my complaints about the moderation here invariably fall on deaf ears, but I do feel compelled to yet again raise such a complaint. Here we have this:
Now, ZS repeatedly ignored mod instructions, warning deserved (and considering he wants to talk about CRT in many / most threads, a topic ban could even be appropriate), but I’m deeply confused about @What_Exit “topic moderation” here. This is a thread about the election in Virginia this week. I’m a Virginian, and a fairly political involved/active one. CRT was the dominant issue in terms of attention received and talked about during this election, both locally and nationally. [Note it was not the “most important issue” as polled by voters–“education” typically ran 2nd or 3rd in most such polls, I’m talking about coverage / dialogue around the election though.]
I certainly agree the thread shouldn’t totally abandon the topic of the Virginia election, but I think the moderation essentially ends the thread as it stands, how are we supposed to discuss the election without mentioning and wading into the particulars on the actual policy issue that completely dominated all coverage of the election? It’d be like banning a mention of the coronavirus pandemic in discussing the 2020 Presidential election. I can understand wanting to keep something on topic, but CRT isn’t totally divergent from the topic, it was one of the chief controversies of the election itself.
I merged your thread into the existing one. As I said above, I’m thinking it over right now.
Actually, I’m going to relent. Consider the CRT discussion allowed again. [Done]
Sorry I didn’t notice the dupe thread.
No problem at all. I just thought a merge would work best and you are both right.
While trying to take care of one problem; I caused another as I’m not up on the Virginia election. Just the New Jersey one.
Because Hari Seldon wasn’t enough, we need two moderators who view their job as “banning any discussion that makes Democrats look bad.” Even if this leads to absurdities such as labeling discussion of the main issue in the Virginia election a “hijack” of the Virginia election thread, or telling me I’ve violated a (ludicrous, partisan) rule against discussing CRT with a post that didn’t mention CRT.
Of course don’t let the fact I’m not a Dem stand in the way of your diatribe.
You hijack threads with your pet peeve. This will probably be ending shortly.
Being cute about not mentioning CRT while talking about CRT does not get you clear of a modnote. In fact in many ways it makes it worse.
Also note, I already allowed everyone but you to talk about it in that thread.
FTR: I am a former Republican who has been officially Unaffiliated since 2008.
I’m strongly Green and was a Teddy Roosevelt or Rockefeller Republican so I now end up voting mostly Dem but I’m not a Democrat. I don’t really care about CRT and don’t know a lot about it.
Perhaps you are not qualified to be making judgments as to the topicality of CRT to the Virginia election, who should be allowed to discuss CRT, or which posts in the Virginia election thread that do not mention CRT at all are nonetheless magically in violation of the “no discussing CRT” rule that you have passed despite your blissful unawareness of the Virginia election and CRT.
But I am qualified to see when a poster that has a habit of hijacking threads about one issue is once again hijacking another thread with that issue. More importantly I can see when you ignore a modnote. That is the biggest issue at this point.
ZS, if you object to a CRT restriction in the thread, an appropriate response is NOT ignoring all the mod notes until you catch a warning. It’s come to ATMB to object to it.
Great. Some followup questions:
Since I’ve only posted in two threads in the past 3 months, one of which is in the BBQ Pit where none of these rules apply, what “threads” plural do I have a “habit” of doing anything whatsoever in?
Is my “habit” of discussing CRT in the one politics thread I’ve posted in during that time still a “hijack” despite the above reversal of course stating specifically that discussing CRT is not a hijack of that thread?
Does the fact that the post I was warned for doesn’t mention CRT at all perhaps cast doubt on whether your ability to “see when I ignore” a note about discussing CRT is as reliable as you think it is? Or are you talking about “seeing” in some more mystical sense?
As mentioned, the hijacking of threads by ZosterSandstorm is ending. The mods have agreed.