Ornlu
Banned
Good Lord, take the L and move on.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
- Status
Good Lord, take the L and move on.
Schrödinger's cat
Banned
IMPORTANT UPDATE:
I'm nearly ready to move onto Step 4. Hold on to your butts!
-Arcadia-
Banned
Imagine having the entire internet to do your particular insane, bereft-of-morals thing, but slamming your fists down and demanding that Gaf, one of the few places for sane discourse, change to serve you.
If you want to call people pedophiles, incels, racists, etc., instead of ever actually discussing, if you don't want to be exposed to anything that you don't like, there's a phenomenal website called Resetera.
Fuck off, leave us alone, and go to it.
Is that too much for me to say? I can't speak for the people in charge. The general population here though? I'd presume I do.
If you want to call people pedophiles, incels, racists, etc., instead of ever actually discussing, if you don't want to be exposed to anything that you don't like, there's a phenomenal website called Resetera.
Fuck off, leave us alone, and go to it.
Is that too much for me to say? I can't speak for the people in charge. The general population here though? I'd presume I do.
ThatGamingDude
I am a virgin
Soapy Wooder
Why not show what amount of data the mods have to go through to maintain a forum?
Daily post count, daily thread creation count, daily report count, etc
I think E-Daddy posts some traffic stats here and there; wonder if he'd be cool with you guys posting that??
Used to shut people up on private server and "Modified data," forums quickly back when, and that was just small fry shit compared to this
Also has E-Daddy assigned you your escort pricing yet?
Fuck that
I'll 0 day your git repos and hv's
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
E-Daddy is cringe as fuck
Why not show what amount of data the mods have to go through to maintain a forum?
Daily post count, daily thread creation count, daily report count, etc
I think E-Daddy posts some traffic stats here and there; wonder if he'd be cool with you guys posting that??
Used to shut people up on private server and "Modified data," forums quickly back when, and that was just small fry shit compared to this
Also has E-Daddy assigned you your escort pricing yet?
Fuck that
I'll 0 day your git repos and hv's
haxan7
Volunteered as Tribute
Because she was taking a drag
Soapy Wooder
Member
I don't see how that would have eased the concern for the user.
He/She asked why comment A was actioned and comment B wasn't.
Comment A was from less than 24 hours ago and had been reported (and thru looking at the comment and reading over the thread, I found a unreported comment that was also actioned).
Comment B was from early May, and was never reported once. Comment B wasn't even reported by the user it was replied to. Engagement with the comment was almost Zero (4 reactions... including 1 from the user it was replying to), in a fast moving thread when it was made.
So regardless of how busy we are at any point, the idea that bias came into play was 100% untrue. The community didn't care about Comment B, except for the user who made it and the user who placed it in the "for later" folder.
brap
Banned
Mods, you heard her!!!
-Arcadia-
Banned
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
And so have I
-Arcadia-
Banned
Musky_Cheese
Banned
Soapy Wooder
Member
I have now. I don’t watch sports except for Boxing and UFC highlights on YouTube lol.
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
ThatGamingDude
I am a virgin
It's a joke referencing when I was trying to bait EvilLore into giving me a custom sub name and him giving escort ratings as a reply
I dunno, inside jokes and puns aside, some jokes fall and some jokes rise
Refer to my avatar if you need any assistance on understanding my personality
Grand Theft Scratchy
Banned
Hey, we haven't had a "Let's welcome back" post in a while. That's your cue, boss.
Kagey K
Banned
But you told me to report and when I started reporting every post I don’t like, you took it away.
Last edited:
Happosai
Hold onto your panties
Kagey K
Banned
It’s not the same if it doesn’t have the Matt kiss of death attached to it.
Grand Theft Scratchy
Banned
No, I meant EviLore welcoming back an old member in this thread who was banned by bishopt.
Sometimes it happens when this thread starts to read more like Meta GAF.
Last edited:
Happosai
Hold onto your panties
I'm sure it's in the works right now. Just read through the storm of users banned during that time. Gotta be at least 30 or more worth unbanning. We'll see soon
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
Kagey K
Banned
Sorry I misunderstood.
Punished Miku
Gold Member
So, is this the admission that you just want political uniformity on this site then? Because you're not making any kind of appeal to the rules here, but basically trying to just bully people off the forum explicitly on political grounds. Referencing the "entire internet" doesn't even mean anything. Everyone has the entire internet. Are you implying that people with certain political views should have less of a say on here because they have "the entire internet"? Because that's what it seems like. That's exactly why I wanted the rules to be updated to reflect that so it's actually transparent.
Is this a new rule, that you get off the site if you call someone a pedophile, racist or incel? Because I can sure point to a ton of people who do at least some of that.
And you claiming to speak for the entire forum is ridiculous. I guess those political compass tests don't mean much. You're the representative of everyone. That's fairly presumptuous. I can't believe anyone endorsed this post. I lose my temper sometimes, but damn, you do too. So much for sanity and discussion. At least you were transparent about your intentions, since everyone else masks it or lies to themselves about it.
And what change is anyone demanding? All I've personally asked for is for clarification on the rules. I don't really see anyone demanding the site to change, so not sure what that part of the rant is about.
And you guys wonder why some people don't refer to themselves as "part of GAF." You laid it out in crystal clear detail. Lots of people aren't welcomed as equal members here depending on where they land politically. It's definitely not because they call people pedophiles, because tons of people do that and never once get singled out for it like here.
Explosive Zombie
Banned
People get perm'd for blatant racism, pro-pedo stances and shit like that. I think what Arcadia is referring to is the current phenom with the left where you call pretty much anyone who disagrees with you shit like this without the need for proof of such a claim. Also a mod said why they haven't changed the rules, though they're considering it, it's because when you set something as a rule people find loopholes in it and such, basically there are ways to have more clarity through observed behavior than strict language.
Punished Miku
Gold Member
Yes, it's very clear she is singling out one side politically and telling them to fall in line or get the fuck off the forum. There's not really any other way to interpret it.
Right. The mod I got a response from calmly explained his current thinking on it. He didn't say "how dare you demand GAF change when you have the entire internet." Seemed like they were kind of 50/50 on updating it already, meaning it clearly wasn't some ridiculous request since they already considered it themselves. I think the only other thing people have asked for is just fair enforcement of existing rules the mods made themselves.
I don't know how anyone can say with a straight face that these current rules are enforced in the Politics forum. So if there's a new set of rules, I'd just like to know what they are someday, because it's not these.
What will get your post attention by the moderation team is when you are doing one of the following:
- Making blatant and direct attacks against other users or people (racism, sexist, xenophobia, user insults, etc)
- Intentionally trolling people by either not engaging honestly or making antagonistic claims without any intention to defend them
- Making duplicate threads that already have an active discussion going for the same subject
- Making the same lazy rhetorical driveby comments as your primary contribution to threads
- Dogpiling. This is not a word of 'sanctuary' you can claim when you come in and make a highly contentious point that lacks substance. If you say something stupid and you get called out by multiple posters, this is your own fault. However, moderator's may intervene where a user with an alternate, credible standpoint is being drowned out or suffocated by a number of posts that repeat the same throwaway comment/empty rhetoric.
Last edited:
Explosive Zombie
Banned
It'd probably be fair to just have separate rules for separate sub-forums, I always assumed politics was simply it's own animal.
Punished Miku
Gold Member
If we have no rules at all, then they should just delete the post. I'm just asking for clarification. I thought the entire point of this thread was transparency and clarification.
But I keep getting accused of "lawyering." I'm not doing that. The mod said yesterday my record is totally clear. I always try to honestly debate people and don't insult others. I don't break any of these rules.
nush
Member
"If there isn't and actual specific detailed rule cited within the rules, then I haven't broken a rule and I can post what I like"
You're not the first.
You're not original.
Take the L.
Don't judge Nu Gaf by the way other forums work, it's an evolving work in progress that will never ever be perfect and never keep everyone happy but it's aiming to keep a steady through line for the majority of posters.
Schrödinger's cat
Banned
I Googled "What is common sense?" and it led me here.
Should I change to Duck Duck Go?
Should I change to Duck Duck Go?
H
hariseldon
Unconfirmed Member
Punished Miku
honestly it’s perfectly possible to favour left wing policies and not ree about it (case in point: Trump got a positive reception here for lowering the cost of medication and in general I can argue for universal tax-funded healthcare like the NHS and have people disagree with respect and integrity). Unfortunately when you look at the likes of NOLA for example he would actively go looking for fights posting barely-thought-through hot takes with zero substance and not much else of value. I wish we had better left wing representation here but we don’t, because the current state of the left is that much of it is in this ree state. The narrative on that side is that the world is ending and the nazis are winning - that kind of thing drives people mad and prevents rational discussion. This is true offline too. Until the state of thought on the left improves (and this will have to come from a massive realignment of The Guardian, the BBC and The New Statesman in the UK - presumably CNN and others in the US) we just won’t get quality in large numbers.
Last edited by a moderator:
Punished Miku
Gold Member
Of course it is.
Have you ever seen a conservative poster do something similar on here? I have. That's a huge amount of posts in almost every thread there, every day.
I appreciate the thoughtful post. But honestly, this isn't really what I'm talking about. I don't agree with SJWs anymore than you do. That's not really my point. I'm talking about consistent enforcement and/or clarification of the rules in the politics forum. I think lots of people on the left can contribute here just fine if they weren't constantly harassed with nothing stopping it.
Can you tell me honestly that any of these rules are currently enforced in the politics forum? Maybe rule number 3 and that's it. In the rare cases that they are enforced, it appears very lopsided in terms of who they decide to focus on, and who they ignore and cover for, over and over.
Read those and explain to me what's going on.
Last edited:
H
hariseldon
Unconfirmed Member
First up - conservative is not the same as ree. Far right racist is the same as ree, and those get banned. Conservative is the same as sane left, if you're looking at relative positions on the spectrum. In truth while the philosophies driving their opinions may be different, they both have the same goals to live their lives in peace and let their kids grow up and do well. At the far edges they're also the same in that they have some figure of hate they want to destroy, usually based on race. Horseshoe theory, which I'm sure you're familiar with.
So with that preamble, no I haven't seen conservatives post something similar but I have seen people posting far right stuff get banned. Racists get banned pretty much the second it becomes clear they're racists (the actual kind, not the SJW-defined kind). So, far-left ree-wankers get banned the same as far-right nutters. Consider the amount of grief people like
JordanN
(sorry for the tag - didn't want to talk about you behind your back but this isn't aimed at antagonising you) have had from mods and you'd have to say the right gets as much shit as the left.In terms of people on the left contributing, I already answered that. I am able to post content which is left wing, my own ideas are frankly a mix of left and right positions in that I believe in universal health care and believe that there are some jobs government should do because private enterprise just can't or won't, and in general I consider government to be more ethical than big business. You'll notice though that the right is becoming increasingly skeptical of corporate interests, which is in itself quite interesting as that's closer to a classic left position. You won't get banned for cleanly arguing left wing points, you will find lots of people disagreeing with you and you'll have to argue your case, but there's a difference between lots of people disagreeing with you and dogpiling. The latter is more about a bunch of people reading the first post and ignoring everything later, even after the issue may have been resolved, and just piling on to insult you. Generally so long as you haven't been an absolute REEtard that won't happen.
For me I'm happy that the rules are enforced as above, I'm curious to see where you think that isn't the case. Some of the insulting stuff for instance is banter between users, mods have a hard time knowing which is which but I think for the most part they get it. Trolling with dishonest or inaccurate claims - the covid thread sees plenty of pushback on those sorts of things on both sides so the community does a good job of policing that, while the mods will pull up the likes of NOLA etc for that behaviour. You're going to have to provide some receipts for people on the other side doing it and getting away with it (and remember NOLA had a looooong run of behaving like that and not being banned). Duplicate threads.. not sure where you've seen that happening - they usually get closed with people pointed to the primary thread. Drive by crap gets dealt with.
The other thing worth noting is that not all mod action is visible. Sometimes it'll be a PM telling the user to sort their shit out, sometimes it'll be a reply ban in a single thread or a thread creation ban. Sometimes it'll be a warning.
Punished Miku
Gold Member
The first rule is not enforced. This is pretty much the main issue with the politics forum. I honestly have no idea how you can say you're happy with it. You honestly are telling me that people who consistently insult other users are addressed by mods? That's flatly ridiculous. It's literally the main feature of the politics forum, and the whole shared culture of most of the frequent posters there. There are pages and pages of receipts.
Rule number 2 is virtually never enforced unless it's against a liberal. It's how they banned crowbrow as well. It's how most liberals on here get banned. Meanwhile, the forum gets flooded every single day by troll level threads that are never defended by the OP. Literally all day every day. Most posters are incapable of ever admitting they are mistaken on an issue, and just immediately switch to insults or dishonest arguments. Any actual exchange of ideas is extremely rare.
Rule number 4 is literally what 90% of the posts are. It's usually shocking when you get a well thought out reply, because it stands out so much from the other posts.
Ask
Nobody_Important
or other liberal posters how well rule number 5 gets enforced. I don't think I can even think of a conservative poster who has been dogpiled because there's so few liberal commenters over there that are active. It's basically a rule just for liberals at this point. I can't think of a single instance it's ever been invoked. If you read those rules, it has nothing to do with censorship. It's just about promoting quality conversations. I don't see that happening often. I see open hostility, dogpiling, and frequent insults as the norm. And then the few liberals that dive into the toxic culture of trading insults get banned while most of the regulars never get addressed.
Last edited:
Schrödinger's cat
Banned
This reads as an oxymoron to me.
Punished Miku
Gold Member
Yeah. I meant, it's a rule that would really only apply to liberals being dogpiled, because there aren't even enough liberals to dogpile a conservative. I just said it weird.
H
hariseldon
Unconfirmed Member
The first rule is not enforced. This is pretty much the main issue with the politics forum. I honestly have no idea how you can say you're happy with it. You honestly are telling me that people who consistently insult other users are addressed by mods? That's flatly ridiculous. It's literally the main feature of the politics forum, and the whole shared culture of most of the frequent posters there. There are pages and pages of receipts.
Rule number 2 is virtually never enforced unless it's against a liberal. It's how they banned crowbrow as well. It's how most liberals on here get banned. Meanwhile, the forum gets flooded every single day by troll level threads that are never defended by the OP. Literally all day every day. Most posters are incapable of ever admitting they are mistaken on an issue, and just immediately switch to insults or dishonest arguments. Any actual exchange of ideas is extremely rare.
Rule number 4 is literally what 90% of the posts are. It's usually shocking when you get a well thought out reply, because it stands out so much from the other posts.
Ask
If you read those rules, it has nothing to do with censorship. It's just about promoting quality conversations. I don't see that happening often. I see open hostility, dogpiling, and frequent insults as the norm. And then the few liberals that dive into the toxic culture of trading insults get banned while most of the regulars never get addressed.
It seems to me then that we've run to the limits of discussion as you're unwilling to provide receipts and we clearly have very different experiences. I've posted things that are pretty liberal and not suffered dogpiling and insults because I didn't ree about them. I'm sorry your experience wasn't the same. Btw
Nobody_Important
is not liberal, he's in that ree category I described earlier - his ideology is not so far removed from the far right, going back to my horseshoe theory point. That you cite him as a liberal perhaps illustrates why we are sadly not going to be able to reach an accord here. That he's still here despite breaking most of those rules rather makes a mockery of your assertion that 'liberal' posters are treated unequally.
Last edited by a moderator:
H
hariseldon
Unconfirmed Member
Indeed - if the rule is no dogpiling and liberals can't dogpile due to numbers, the rule presumably stands as extra protection for liberals. Still not enough apparently.
Punished Miku
Gold Member
Exactly. Can you think of a single time it's ever actually been enforced?
H
hariseldon
Unconfirmed Member
Can you point to a dogpiling? The rule state calling people out on bullshit is not dogpiling. Lots of people disagreeing with you is not dogpiling. Honestly I'm doing my best here but as per my previous post which you seem to have skipped, I don't believe there's much chance of us having a productive discussion because we disagree fundamentally on our experiences (and you have provided no receipts to back up your claims so I don't have the opportunity to change my view) and because we have fundamentally different views of what counts as liberal.
Honestly I wish you the best, you don't seem like a bad person, and apologies that I can't offer you something more helpful.
Last edited by a moderator:
Schrödinger's cat
Banned
If so, then I don't think that outcome is an observation of the rule, but of the environment the rule is being applied to.
Punished Miku
Gold Member
I've reported directly to the mods multiple times. And dozens and dozens of times I didn't report it, because I honestly assumed that it was obvious and that mods read most of the threads. I'm not going to dig through pages of threads for this discussion. You can just disagree with me and that's fine with me.
I just can't imagine you don't see what I'm talking about on that one. Follow any thread
TaySan
is in. It's ridiculous to claim you need receipts to believe that people frequently insults others on here with zero mod action. It happens virtually every time any of them show up in a thread at all. This is an important point of distinction between us here. If I understand you correctly, you're basically saying that because you disagree with someone's politics, then they are fair game and the normal rules don't apply? If so, that's literally exactly what I'm talking about, a political bias in moderation that is not listed in the rules anywhere.
Which specific positions make someone wear the scarlet letter on this site? Which political positions are off limits? We may finally be getting to some of the obvious bias. But if you don't want to talk further on it that's fine.
Last edited:
H
hariseldon
Unconfirmed Member
I've reported directly to the mods multiple times. And dozens and dozens of times I didn't report it, because I honestly assumed that it was obvious and that mods read most of the threads. I'm not going to dig through pages of threads for this discussion. You can just disagree with me and that's fine with me.
I just can't imagine you don't see what I'm talking about on that one. Follow any thread
This is an important point of distinction between us here. If I understand you correctly, you're basically saying that because you disagree with someone's politics, then they are fair game and the normal rules don't apply? If so, that's literally exactly what I'm talking about, a political bias in moderation that is not listed in the rules anywhere.
Which specific positions make someone wear the scarlet letter on this site? Which political positions are off limits? We may finally be getting to some of the obvious bias. But if you don't want to talk further on it that's fine.
So, you make a claim and won't follow up on it. Sounds a lot like "Making the same lazy rhetorical driveby comments as your primary contribution to threads". And again you choose someone who is NOT LIBERAL.
TaySan
has advocated for burning down the houses of people he finds politically objectionable. Is that liberal? That is the thing that leads to him getting shit on here. I personally give him shit for that because I find him to be a repulsive toerag who has a really shitty act but fundamentally wishes he'd be there stamping on the face of humanity forever but in reality would be first against the wall.Your second point is insanely disingenuous. No, I'm not saying that disagreeing with someone makes them fair game. That is either a deliberately poor misreading of my position or poor comprehension. I have pointed out that the far right get banned, and the far left get banned. We disagree on what is far left, and that makes it impossible for us to come to agreement.
Finally a passive-aggressive "but if you don't want to talk about it" after painting my views as making people wear the scarlet letter. Nope, at this point it's quite clear that you are not here for honest debate, and that's a shame because up til this point I've had no big issues with you, you seem decent enough, but honestly in this thread you are simply embarrassing yourself. I suggest rethinking your rhetorical techniques if you wish to engage further in this discussion.
- Status