One thing that I think GAF is way too soft about is people thread shitting on debated with "XXXX defense force all over this thread". It never adds anything to the debate and only serves to try and rile up users. There is seriously hardly any discussions on here without defense force being thrown around.
Oh and 50 post per page is best.
I would imagine the mods do keep tabs on trends and memes that are being quasi-abused, debating whether or not something has gone over the line.
It can't be easy. It's a slippery slope into genuine opinion policing and censorship.
From what I can see, the general criteria for memes and conventions being banned is if they infringe on basic rights/respect for people, such as banning misogynistic stuff.
Hell, it's something to see how many people seem to be unhappy with even that; look at the passive-aggressive references to the effect of "don't go into a thread about a minority and say something honest". Think about that - "honest"? The only people who seem to get banned in threads like that are those that come in and repeat popular, derogatory misconceptions about gender, sexuality, or ethnicity. So if that's what a lot of people on GAF are upset you can't be "honest" about... yeah.
It seems relatively easy to come up with rules about that stuff. Other subjects, not so clear cut.
I haven't been here that long, but I get a little nervous when I have an opinion that differs slightly from the 'consensus', especially when instead of picking apart your post, people just post stuff like 'TROLL' or 'parachute account' or something like that. And it seems your justifications get lost in the mire while people just harp on certain aspects of your post.
That being said, I haven't seen any unjustified bans and maybe my paranoia is misplaced.
While some folks on GAF do seem to jump the gun with tossing around 'troll' accusations, by the same token there's a lot of exaggerated and trumped up claims about getting banned if you don't agree with the 'hive mind'. Which is malarkey. There are so many dissenting opinions in virtually every topic on GAF, that the popular opinion seems to go the
other way: that there should be more warnings about 'shitting up' threads by disrupting them.
If you have an opinion you think dissents against a perceived majority - and that can be an illusion given how big GAF is - you generally do not get into trouble if you can articulate your opinion in a way that's considerate of others. Even if you feel really strongly and get fired up.
The zones of lowest tolerance for shenanigans on GAF seem to involve threads where basic human respect could be offended, such as the aforementioned issues of gender, LGBT, or ethnic topics. On the whole, those are areas important enough that erring on the side of strictness is probably appropriate. Especially considering what a cesspool the bulk of the internet on those topics.