|
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 February 12 2017 03:54 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2017 18:51 Dapper_Cad wrote:On February 10 2017 18:41 xM(Z wrote:On February 10 2017 18:38 Dapper_Cad wrote:On February 10 2017 17:48 xM(Z wrote:
a note here - you people are comparing crimes of refugees vs crimes of natives and i think that's wrong. you should compare crimes of refugees with 0 because they're on top of.
native crimes would've happen regardless but refugee crimes are forced upon, are an added bonus. It is for this reason that I am against human pro-creation. Sure, new borns can't commit crimes, but that's a short sighted view. Many, many babies grow up to commit crimes later in life. i don't get it; or rather, how does it relates to what i said?. I don't get how you don't get it. Immigrants commit crimes as soon as their barbarous feet stumble onto sacred European soil. Babies, of any and all extractions, are exactly the same, it just takes longer. As we oppose unregulated immigration -and should oppose it until the immigration rate reaches zero as they are effectively walking additions to criminal behaviour- so we should oppose any and all pro-creation -and should oppose it until the number of babies born reaches zero as they are effectively crawling additions to criminal behaviour. User was temp banned for this post. Show nested quote +Dapper_Cad was just temp banned for 1 week by tofucake.
That account was created on 2010-07-09 06:50:40 and had 890 posts.
Reason: At first this was going to be a warning, but then you posted terribly again.
So then it was going to be a 2 day, but then you posted again.
So now it's a week. You should know better, considering your previous warns and bans, that terrible posts like these are neither wanted nor tolerated.
to see the rest of the posts http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/general/471672-european-politico-economics-qa-mega-thread?page=664
His posts are pretty funny.
On February 12 2017 04:19 Simberto wrote:
Why exactly is that post terrible? (Considering the context. It was obviously not serious)
Posts like this do get rather wearisome and derail conversation when you post a lot of them. I'd assume that's why.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
dapper cad's post was one of the best in thread history. the graphic aid one i mean
|
Wth. Dapper_cad was banned for that? Are the mods mad? That was obviously (1) not serious and (2) the best damn response I have seen anybody give xMZ ever. It was amazing.
|
Hyrule19152 Posts
Political threads get moderated much more strictly than most other threads
|
In his case though, he brought the quality of discourse upwards.
|
On February 12 2017 08:00 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
In his case though, he brought the quality of discourse upwards.
This. Well, it's in website feedback, so let's hope this is soon rectified.
#freeDapper!
|
Estonia4504 Posts
Having read the entire exchange, and having laughed, I regardless commend the mods for doing their job and banning Dapper. His posts were only really funny because posts like his were uncommon in the thread, they distract rather than adding value in most cases, and should be heavily discouraged. Just my 2 cents.
|
I wobder if the increasingly high number of banned Politics users who end up in Website Feedback because people feel the ban is unfair/stupid/etc is a symptom of all that growing anti-establishment mentality or is the expression of something else
|
People are banned far less in political threads than they used to be, so I don't think that's it.
|
On February 12 2017 20:43 farvacola wrote:
People are banned far less in political threads than they used to be, so I don't think that's it.
We've mannered the f... up if I remember correctly the tone of those discussions a few years ago (or maybe was it simply me being a bit younger/more of a douche).
|
On February 12 2017 23:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 20:43 farvacola wrote:
People are banned far less in political threads than they used to be, so I don't think that's it. We've mannered the f... up if I remember correctly the tone of those discussions a few years ago (or maybe was it simply me being a bit younger/more of a douche).
Since at least some election bans are ending (i already saw kwark getting people worked up in us pol), the tone might shift a little 
|
On February 12 2017 20:43 farvacola wrote:
People are banned far less in political threads than they used to be, so I don't think that's it.
I'm not talking about the fact that there are more or less bans in political threads, though, but the fact that the proportion of bans that people (outside of opisska) qualify as "wrong bans" is pretty high
|
On February 13 2017 01:44 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 20:43 farvacola wrote:
People are banned far less in political threads than they used to be, so I don't think that's it. I'm not talking about the fact that there are more or less bans in political threads, though, but the fact that the proportion of bans that people (outside of opisska) qualify as "wrong bans" is pretty high
To prevent any allegations of canibalism, id like to make it clear that all people are at the moment located outside of me.
|
I dunno man, the ukraine and rape threads brought out way more hollering than I've seen lately.
|
On February 12 2017 23:19 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2017 20:43 farvacola wrote:
People are banned far less in political threads than they used to be, so I don't think that's it. We've mannered the f... up if I remember correctly the tone of those discussions a few years ago (or maybe was it simply me being a bit younger/more of a douche).
Clear sign of adulthood! Welcome to the dark side, the one where you remember how dumb you used to be (+ Show Spoiler +is this not a clear symptom of slipping surreptitiously out of "teenhood" status .. to more and more reflect on what has gone before (as opposed to teens being "emerged in the now" because of hormonal irrigation issues)), does this not signal more introspection and allow for more perspective in things to come?
Sounds like a sith process don't it? 
On February 13 2017 02:12 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2017 01:44 OtherWorld wrote:On February 12 2017 20:43 farvacola wrote:
People are banned far less in political threads than they used to be, so I don't think that's it. I'm not talking about the fact that there are more or less bans in political threads, though, but the fact that the proportion of bans that people (outside of opisska) qualify as "wrong bans" is pretty high To prevent any allegations of canibalism, id like to make it clear that all people are at the moment located outside of me.
All your insides are belong to us 
|
On February 13 2017 02:18 farvacola wrote:
I dunno man, the ukraine and rape threads brought out way more hollering than I've seen lately. I see the ukraine thread as when "fake news" became widespread and the utter shock of people who had to counter such fake news, and expected TL.net to ban obvious falsehoods. Even now, there are people who beleive that Russia didn't invade Ukraine, but that's another issue.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
mods would obviously operate on both bad-vs-good content and bad-vs-good formal behavior. it's just that these categories do overlap. there are good but insulting content, bad but very mannered content and so on. crossing this boundary is experimental though, a range reserved for people who are conscious of the choice of breaking norms for effect.
personally, i think formal decorum and adulthood etc are overrated and boring. the whole purpose of political threads is to point and laugh at stupid things or people. you have to do so artfully of course, but this too is a range of humanity.
i also don't expect everyone to subscribe to this view but it seems very basic and obvious for me, so i don't feel like advocating for it.
|
On February 14 2017 01:47 oneofthem wrote:
mods would obviously operate on both bad-vs-good content and bad-vs-good formal behavior. it's just that these categories do overlap. there are good but insulting content, bad but very mannered content and so on. crossing this boundary is experimental though, a range reserved for people who are conscious of the choice of breaking norms for effect.
personally, i think formal decorum and adulthood etc are overrated and boring. the whole purpose of political threads is to point and laugh at stupid things or people. you have to do so artfully of course, but this too is a range of humanity.
i also don't expect everyone to subscribe to this view but it seems very basic and obvious for me, so i don't feel like advocating for it.
Except that different people think that different "things or people" will be stupid. And then, the whole thread is just everyone laughing at each other for being stupid.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
there's usually a level of communal belonging that generates cordiality, with exception to the rare outcast type.
but sure, you are basically describing the world outside of safe spaces.
|
On February 12 2017 20:43 farvacola wrote:
People are banned far less in political threads than they used to be, so I don't think that's it.
I guess you could save we've made a yuuuuuge improvement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
