|
This thread is for discussing recent bans. Don't discuss other topics here. Take it to website feedback if you disagree with a ban or want to raise an issue. Keep it civil.NOTE: For those of you who want to find the actual ABL thread where the bans are posted. Please look in here: https://tl.net/forum/closed-threads/ |
On November 11 2016 13:52 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2016 14:14 dAPhREAk wrote:i'll admit. i laughed. seeker did not. GreenHorizons was just temp banned for 2 days by Seeker.
That account was created on 2011-04-16 10:56:04 and had 8699 posts.
Reason: If you thought posting that was a good idea... It was not. On November 09 2016 13:38 GreenHorizons wrote:On November 09 2016 13:32 LegalLord wrote:
32% reporting, Washington favors Trump.
Well GH, I have to say that regardless of who wins Washington in the end, even I didn't believe you this far. This general election has thoroughly vindicated you - though I'm not sure that we're all happy with what that will cost us all. Live drone shot of Kwizach's election party + Show Spoiler +User was temp banned for this post. Worth Curious who actually reported it though and whether it was because they found it overly offensive, just wanted the stats, just wanted to stick it to me, or what? No pressure, and not looking to pick a fight, just curious (I'll remove this if it's not okay).
didnt even think to report it myself. i was amused. but years of video games (especially diablo) has desensitized me to stuff like this. i didnt even realize what it was until someone posted it was the jonestown massacre a few pages later.
|
but it being jonestown is the context for how funny it is.
i guess the visual is a bit rough tho.
|
the thread that keeps on giving
On November 11 2016 10:18 RealityIsKing wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 10:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2016 09:59 IgnE wrote:On November 11 2016 09:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? It's more like the fact that young adults (and older adults, for that matter) who identify with pretty much any of the persecuted minorities are deathly afraid of their situation over the next four years, and are having trouble understanding why people would vote to disenfranchise them. It's the jeopardized rights, safety, and well-being of those minorities vs. the mere discomfort felt by conservatives getting backlash. It's very hard to empathize with conservatives getting their feelings hurt when other people are worried for their actual lives. is this qualitatively different from trumpkins gathering after a hypothetical hillary win to protest because they feel like their gun rights and freedoms were being taken away? I would say yes, because nothing Hillary (or Obama over the past 8 years, for that matter) has said would actually imply that she/ he wanted to take away people's guns/ repeal the 2nd Amendment. Background checks and closing loopholes on gun purchases are things that the majority of Americans, gun owners, and NRA members all support, and that's not the same as taking away guns/ killing the 2nd Amendment. On the other hand, Trump has explicitly promised to screw over plenty of minorities. People are scared that Trump and Pence will do what they promised they'd do, so it's not just fabrication or fearmongering. Minorities aka illegal immigrants and radical Islamist terrorists. User was temp banned for this post.
|
On November 12 2016 03:14 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:the thread that keeps on giving Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 10:18 RealityIsKing wrote:On November 11 2016 10:12 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2016 09:59 IgnE wrote:On November 11 2016 09:26 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On November 11 2016 09:19 Sbrubbles wrote:On November 11 2016 09:10 Kickstart wrote:
The emotional attachment you are describing is due to demonizing candidates for the 4 years until the election. This time it was no secret that Hillary would be the nominee, so it was easy to figure out whose name to drag through the mud for 4 years. If there weren't a thousand republicans in their primary the same would have happened to them, as it did once it was Trump. So, kids are emotionally attached to Hillary because she's been demonized for the 4 years until election? It's more like the fact that young adults (and older adults, for that matter) who identify with pretty much any of the persecuted minorities are deathly afraid of their situation over the next four years, and are having trouble understanding why people would vote to disenfranchise them. It's the jeopardized rights, safety, and well-being of those minorities vs. the mere discomfort felt by conservatives getting backlash. It's very hard to empathize with conservatives getting their feelings hurt when other people are worried for their actual lives. is this qualitatively different from trumpkins gathering after a hypothetical hillary win to protest because they feel like their gun rights and freedoms were being taken away? I would say yes, because nothing Hillary (or Obama over the past 8 years, for that matter) has said would actually imply that she/ he wanted to take away people's guns/ repeal the 2nd Amendment. Background checks and closing loopholes on gun purchases are things that the majority of Americans, gun owners, and NRA members all support, and that's not the same as taking away guns/ killing the 2nd Amendment. On the other hand, Trump has explicitly promised to screw over plenty of minorities. People are scared that Trump and Pence will do what they promised they'd do, so it's not just fabrication or fearmongering. Minorities aka illegal immigrants and radical Islamist terrorists. User was temp banned for this post.
I feel the moderation winds of change on US Pol. I actually expect the next racists & sexists oneline crusader to get the same result.
I mean would you look at ABL page 1950? A mod on a warpath
|
i dont know realityisking or have much of context, but is he really saying that minorities are illegal immigrants and islamic terrorists, or is he saying that DPB's use of "minorities" is improper because trump has only threatened illegal immigrants and islamic terrorists? if the latter, its really not that bad, but still poorly worded that moderation was probably acceptable. if the former, he can go fuck himself.
edit: also, did tofucake draw the short stick, or is he just trying to up his ban stats? =)
|
TLADT24920 Posts
On November 12 2016 10:44 dAPhREAk wrote:
i dont know realityisking or have much of context, but is he really saying that minorities are illegal immigrants and islamic terrorists, or is he saying that DPB's use of "minorities" is improper because trump has only threatened illegal immigrants and islamic terrorists? if the latter, its really not that bad, but still poorly worded that moderation was probably acceptable. if the former, he can go fuck himself.
edit: also, did tofucake draw the short stick, or is he just trying to up his ban stats? =)
He just loves to moderate that thread so much 
|
Hyrule19203 Posts
I started handling a few reports and then I needed context so I had to keep up with the thread, and next thing you know I'm now "the US Politics mod" :|
|
On November 12 2016 12:07 tofucake wrote:
I started handling a few reports and then I needed context so I had to keep up with the thread, and next thing you know I'm now "the US Politics mod" :|
well as long as you can do it without going crazy. for me even reading that thread is like a drug. I don't want to but can't seem to help myself
|
On November 12 2016 10:44 dAPhREAk wrote:
i dont know realityisking or have much of context, but is he really saying that minorities are illegal immigrants and islamic terrorists, or is he saying that DPB's use of "minorities" is improper because trump has only threatened illegal immigrants and islamic terrorists? if the latter, its really not that bad, but still poorly worded that moderation was probably acceptable. if the former, he can go fuck himself.
edit: also, did tofucake draw the short stick, or is he just trying to up his ban stats? =)
It's just low content. Trump supporters will say of course Hillary was gunning for their guns, endorsing punitive taxes, targeting their ability to purchase ammo, gutting the PLCAA, deceiving on Heller, doing "assault weapons" double talk ... and Trump has kept his nose clean on minorities or spoken past his negotiating position with typical bravado. Hillary supporters say of course Hillary is fine on the second amendment and it's Trump clearly giving minorities reason to fear. It's in the mainstream vein but not complying with the new moderation rules.
|
On November 12 2016 12:07 tofucake wrote:
I started handling a few reports and then I needed context so I had to keep up with the thread, and next thing you know I'm now "the US Politics mod" :|
I'm sure getting stuck with that thread is what made Kwark so bitter in eve tofu, enjoy it
|
On November 12 2016 12:07 tofucake wrote:
I started handling a few reports and then I needed context so I had to keep up with the thread, and next thing you know I'm now "the US Politics mod" :|
I think the best mod for that thread is one that'd prefer to not read or post in it. 
|
So KwarK is now really banned from the whole of TL for three months? Anybody willing to start a discussion on the merits of rape?
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
He's not banned, he's just exercising self control and not posting.
|
Shall we make some attempts on the experimental determination of said self control? The possibilities are endless here
|
In proper ABL tradition, we should mock and insult the banned.
Kwark is a poopiehead and has really tiny hands!
|
He had a penchant for moderating the US politics megathread! What an irredeemable fool!
|
kwark stepped up. respect for that. we should be making fun of that loser who reneged on his bet that trump would win, then won the bet and now looks like a tool plus someone who has no confidence in his own opinions. in the words of kwark, that guy sounds pretty fucking stupid. 
|
Honestly I feel bad for all of tl. In 3 months we're gonna have two mods driven mad by having to handle that shit show of a thread.
|
Good for ABL, bad for mods? USPol has ended two long strings of boring advertising/Bad IP in the automated ban list and the flame-outs have been glorious.
|
Canada11496 Posts
On November 11 2016 17:06 Heartland wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2016 12:33 Cascade wrote:On November 11 2016 03:02 dAPhREAk wrote:
nothing worse than writing out a long argument addressing the various points and then have someone respond with one line trash. well deserved ban. Don't know about this case, but there are plenty of walls of text on TL that just doesn't make sense. Many words just means that someone spent time on it, not that the content of the post is complex. I think some walls of text can be perfectly well addressed by a sentence or two. Yeah, TL has been infested with this idea that if you write longer it's better. Particularly if you write it in a pseudo-academic style. I guess it's better than people just posting memes but I don't know how many threads I've opened, seen a wall of text, skimmed it and realized that it's just a bunch of fancy words without any deeper meaning.
Seems as I am/ have been one of those arguing for better/longer posting... I don't actually mean I want to regularly see giant walls of text, which I will admit to skimming as well if I don't feel like it would be worth the effort. But there is a happy medium between personal quips/ aggressive and dismissive one-liners and the treatises/essays. Ideally, long enough to give some nuance and evidence to your thoughts, but succinct enough that it is not regularly a chore to read your posts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i0.wp.com/www.whaleoil.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Jonestown-2.jpg)
