US Politics Feedback Thread - Page 319

On July 10 2024 14:03 BlackJack wrote:


Didn’t you once ban LegalLord because you were triggered by him calling Joe Biden Brandon?

On July 10 2024 13:19 KwarK wrote:

+ Show Spoiler +

We all know the moral issues with the status quo. It’s not that I can’t rebut them, it’s that I don’t wish to rebut them, I accept those points, they’re evident to the point of being beneath commenting on. Where you lose me is when you attempt to hand wave away all the complexity that resulted in the status quo with a Pepsi.

On July 10 2024 14:14 Fleetfeet wrote:
Broken beyond repair so far that you can never vote your way into it being fixed.

Different than "system is broken".

On July 10 2024 14:24 GreenHorizons wrote:

As far as I can tell you're the only one doing any hand waving by turning 100+ years of socialist struggle into "pepsi" and hand waving away years of hard earned growth and significant contributions from many members over the years as "so evident" as to be "beneath" your commentary.

Clearly everyone hasn't known all the moral issues with the status quo. Many of us have witnessed TL learn them as a community over the years. Homophobia, racism, sexism, transphobia, ableism (some arguably still works in progress, but all objectively better than they were 10+ years ago) to name a few.

I believe a lot of people deserve credit for speaking up about the moral issues and various other problems with the status quo, and it'd be fair to argue I should be included in that group, but I'm not after recognition.

What I would expect, is for you to acknowledge that we're all still learning about the implications and consequences of things we're accustomed to in one way or another that are actually more harmful/sustained/cruel/etc than we ever thought or fully appreciated.

On July 10 2024 14:32 KwarK wrote:

Buddy you’re not doing any of that.

You’re not a part of the long history of socialist struggle, you’re not challenging discrimination in gaming communities, you’re not Lenin, you’re Kendall.

It’s exactly this kind of thing that annoys me. You can’t just declare that class struggle exists and therefore you were involved. That global warming exists, and therefore you deserve credit for speaking up. That the two party system is failing us, and therefore you deserve recognition.

I’ll get around to properly lauding you for your sacrifices once I’m done appreciating Kendall. I’m sure you’ll understand given how big of an issue racism is.

On July 10 2024 14:52 tofucake wrote:
This is more of an argument than feedback, and it's looking very much like a continuation of the pointless back and forth fights from the US Politics thread except without 98% of the politics.

On July 10 2024 14:45 GreenHorizons wrote:
Not actually being a socialist outside of this website based on his imaginary caricature of me offline.

On July 10 2024 14:25 Introvert wrote:
I seem to recall some dust up over "Brandon" but don't quite remember.

KwarK is an ass and sometimes you have to wonder if he didn't have the hammer would he have been actioned into oblivion by now... but at the same time, so what? You can be snide back. While not my skillset, I've done it (though sometimes I edit those parts out later when I'm less annoyed). I don't know the last time I saw someone actioned for replying to him in kind, and I assume this is not just good luck (feel free to provide receipts). He's not one to keep a conversation going if someone else stops replying, like some people we've seen, though he doesn't forget either.

I think it's fair to ask if he was some other user with his behavior if he would still be here. But bitching about his posting is odd, idk how a thread full of so many people here for so many years still has people complaining instead of ignoring. Maybe I've just never received a level 10 KwarK attack.

I say all this as someone who finds his style grating and counter-productive to civilized discussion (in that sense he will be about as useful in changing hearts and minds as GH is, though somehow I don't think that's his goal).

On July 10 2024 17:14 Nebuchad wrote:
It's important to not misunderstand the meta role that GH plays on this forum.

There is virtually no chance that in the future society continues to run as it does now. We have ample evidence for that. It is in all likelihood going to be much worse to live on this planet in, say, 30 years, than it is right now. When someone thinks about it a little too much, it might make them want to do something about it. But also doing things is hard, they have their own life to live too. So they probably aren't doing as much as they think they should, and that annoys them.

And then there are people like GH who tell them to do things, and this reminds them of their own annoyance. But also, GH is flawed, he's not a perfect unrivaled idol! Therefore we get to talk about this instead of talking about the things that we aren't doing, and that's an easier conversation.

On July 10 2024 17:14 Nebuchad wrote:
It's important to not misunderstand the meta role that GH plays on this forum.

There is virtually no chance that in the future society continues to run as it does now. We have ample evidence for that. It is in all likelihood going to be much worse to live on this planet in, say, 30 years, than it is right now. When someone thinks about it a little too much, it might make them want to do something about it. But also doing things is hard, they have their own life to live too. So they probably aren't doing as much as they think they should, and that annoys them.

And then there are people like GH who tell them to do things, and this reminds them of their own annoyance. But also, GH is flawed, he's not a perfect unrivaled idol! Therefore we get to talk about this instead of talking about the things that we aren't doing, and that's an easier conversation.

On July 10 2024 14:10 KwarK wrote:

Don’t recall but it sounds like I banned him because he was dumb? People who say Drumpf are dumb too. It’s not the nicknames that annoy me, it’s the implication that people might be annoyed by something as utterly childish as a nickname. It’s such low tier comedy performed with so little self awareness that it rubs me the wrong way. Like watching Ricky Gervais try to be funny in the UK Office.

On July 07 2022 14:31 KwarK wrote:

Well if I gave him less then he might not consider me owned. The longer the ban, the more owned the libs. A week seemed enough to let him to know he’d successfully triggered me with his clever code where he says Brandon but actually means Biden.

On July 10 2024 19:37 Magic Powers wrote:


There were several instances in recent times where, if KwarK wasn't a mod, both he and I would've gotten banned or at the very least received a warning for our behavior. That would be the preferable scenario. I'm very happy to know that I get banned when I cross a line. I want the same thing to be true for everyone who engages in discussion, including KwarK. If we both got banned because of our heated exchanges, that would be a massive improvement.
The times that I got banned, it was always either justified or at the very least I had little reason to complain. Most importantly, people getting banned always results in a more productive and less toxic general atmosphere in the forum. It's a good thing that people get banned.
The fact that KwarK can't get banned drags everyone else down. In every discussion he's involved, if he dislikes someone strongly enough that he finds himself going to town with them instead of engaging with their argumentation, he will start his usual routine (ad hominems, strawmen, snappy one-liners, etc.) If his target has enough and returns the favor, he'll attack them personally. This doesn't result in a ban (due to obvious hypocrisy if it did), but it is toxic and abusive. As a side effect is also destroys every chance at a productive, meaningful discussion about the topic, because only KwarK-approved people get to laugh at the toxic exchange from the sidelines. No one who disagrees with KwarK gets to argue in peace.
And KwarK doesn't realize that this is entirely his doing. He doesn't even realize there's a problem because he can't face consequences. And since this has been going on for years, he now thinks this is normal. When someone points out his toxic and abusive behavior, he acts surprised (perhaps because he is actually surprised after years of normalization).
He's a perfect example of someone who's gotten so used to his privileges that he doesn't even notice them anymore. When he says he'd be fine not having mod powers, I don't believe a word. That's literally what he accuses GH of all the time when he says he's not a real revolutionist. I don't believe KwarK when he says he can handle being stripped of his privileges. I think it's 100% a bluff.

On July 10 2024 18:34 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I think Kwark is being dumb as fuck in all of this tbh. Attacking GH for being a revolutionary yet to start a socialist revolution is like attacking people who believe in electoralism but who think Trump and Biden are terrible choices for not running for (or even becoming) president.

Now, being annoyed at GH for reiterating the same point/making the same post a triple digit+ number of times is fair game, but trying to prove how annoying that is through reiterating the same point/making the same post a triple digit+ number of times is stupid. The characterization of a good forum is one where people make their point and move on. Reply to clarify and elaborate as needed.

As far as the moderation discussion is concerned, there are two separate points as far as 'kwark is a mod' is concerned. He really doesn't have a history of banning people for disagreeing with him/for being rude towards him (and people are generally given a lot of leeway when responding to Kwark, or even for moderating any of the political threads (even if you can point to a couple instances of this happening over several years of foruming). But it's definitely true that a non-moderator posting in a similar manner would on some occasions be actioned. Pretending otherwise would be totally dishonest.

That said we're a pretty small tightly knit community and we all have our established personalities and ways of being. Kwark is frequently overly aggressive and has a real issue with not walking away from a discussion. He's also very knowledgeable, smart and witty and sometimes contributes with posts/insight that he is the only forumer capable of contributing with. I'm happy to take the bad with the good. But as a moderator I can also chime in to say that yeah his posting can rub me the wrong way and I'd be delighted if he sometimes went 'hm maybe I should just be happy having made my point' and not go on. His previous tangent about 'you are pepsi kendall not lenin' is the type of thing that he could have written in one post and I guess it'd be a fair attempt at being funny, but he then goes on to repeat it in 5 more posts after.