EPTOn July 21 2014 03:10 Zealously wrote:
Actually, I've read something like 90+% of the thread.
Actually, I've read something like 90+% of the thread.
Yup^^
MH17 Thread - Page 5
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
KadaverBB
Germany25649 Posts
Yup^^ | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
We know this is of Russian origin because Russian propaganda channels report it. Examples: Itar-Tass, RT, Voice of Russia, etc. There are some articles that debunk such fabrications such as the best one on Stopfake.org. As I suspected, and a mod confirmed, Stopfake.org is not allowed in the thread. Yet, it has the best (only truly thorough) article regarding the Spanish air traffic controller fake. Here's the article I had in mind. Now, the problem is that apparently discussion of the Russian fabrication is allowed, but the debunking of it is not. Please advise how to proceed. | ||
|
Jormundr
United States1678 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
On July 21 2014 04:52 Jormundr wrote: Quit trying to debunk a dead horse? If only it were dead... Yet, it keeps being discussed.- which tends to happen in a situation with scarce information. | ||
|
Jormundr
United States1678 Posts
On July 21 2014 04:58 Ghanburighan wrote: If only it were dead... Yet, it keeps being discussed.- which tends to happen in a situation with scarce information. Yall revived zeo's dead horse so you could beat it again and now you're complaining that you need bigger sticks to beat it with? | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
also, I feel zeo should be removed from the thread, as a major source of problems. It's really annoying when he posts stuff like asking for higher quality reporting, then proceeds to use his usual dump of trashy reporting with provably false stuff. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6267 Posts
I would just like to know patience for what? Obviously mods have seen the post, mods have banned other users since. What is taking so long? Maybe a mod can pm me if they can't talk about it here? Meanwhile the thread is still being shitted up with opinion pieces. | ||
|
Deleted User 137586
7859 Posts
| ||
|
zeo
Serbia6267 Posts
If you cannot refrain from bias please do not kid yourselves that you are in any way unbiased, it is very clear that there is only one side to the story on this website. Admit that you cannot in any way refrain yourselves from taking sides and allowing manipulation of dialog so that it suites some members of the moderation team and I will never post in any thread to do with the situation in Ukraine again. I will not take part in any discussion in which shit-tier propaganda is allowed, where I am consistently attacked by immature brats that cannot handle other people's opinions, all the while given pats on the back by moderation staff who refuse to even warn users that resort to pathetic accusations of actually being paid to post. Not to mention the appalling amounts of back-seat moderating. Actually fuck it, I won't post in that thread again. Have fun with your circlejerk, actual discussion died in the General forum a long time ago. | ||
zatic
Zurich15313 Posts
On July 21 2014 17:53 zeo wrote: Actually fuck it, I won't post in that thread again. Have fun with your circlejerk, actual discussion died in the General forum a long time ago. Thanks a lot, this will make it really easier for everyone involved. Cheers. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
zeo- People like you are the reason gen discussion had issues; as you degrade the quality of truth-finding with a great deal of nonsense; and cry circle-jerk when people call you on it. Don't complain about the quality of posts when you're one of the main sources of shit-posts in those threads. You do have some legitimate points, but you bring up too many bad ones which makes people ignore you: a la the boy who cried wolf. Do not kid yourself, you are hugely biased, and not interested in the truth. seconding zatic as well. | ||
|
zeo
Serbia6267 Posts
On July 21 2014 17:57 zatic wrote: Thanks a lot, this will make it really easier for everyone involved. Cheers. Do I get a forum star because I helped? @zlefin People will see whatever they want to see. Anyway, whatever, I'm done. At least I can say I tried to balance an unbalanceable discussion on this forum. If hearing one side of the story and a complete blanket ban on the other side is your thing... well then you have come to the right place. I truly believe some mods did the best they could. At least until it all went to shit with this thread. | ||
Falling
Canada11279 Posts
Not to mention the appalling amounts of back-seat moderating. That would be your last post in the thread, I believe. | ||
|
5unrise
New Zealand646 Posts
This puts me off from contributing in this thread, and I suspect others may have done the same. I am no more inclined to post anything as I would on a Russian extremist nationalist website, for example. This moderation rule and the moderators are responsible for hindering the quality of discussion on this website, and discussion is what ultimately keeps a forum alive. Moderators, please consider that before your own personal bias gets in the way of reason. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On July 20 2014 21:04 zeo wrote: So let me get this straight... Legallord was banned for personal theories... and yet there are countless opinion pieces posted on every page (including using blogs as sources). So its alright to link to clearly biased opinion pieces who state fog as fact yet giving your own opinion gets you banned? I completely agree with this, and the only reason I didn't dispute the ban was because I wanted to leave the thread alone for good. It seems that the moderation is more concerned with making sure information comes from a western media outlet than that it has any form of substance. There was one offhand comment I wanted to respond to, but other than that I am done with this topic. If a constant stream of speculative Twitter posts and sensational media is easier to moderate than opposing opinions, then so be it. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
Spoonfed stupidity doesn't enhance the quality of that thread, which even though only neutral media is allowed, is still quite high. Not much gets disregarded pointlessly, just look at how long the ominous SU-25 was discussed. If you remember, that was a claim made by the "opposition", russia. So far nothing is missed in the thread except bullshit like the corpsestory etc - so i don't really see the problem. edit: not to mention, stuff from russian sources still gets posted after it got reposted by neutral medias. So at worst, you're losing a day before you can discuss something. While i agree that the way the thread is moderated might not be the best way, it's far better than the clusterfuck the ukraine-thread became after russian trolls and tinfoilhat-theories derailed over and over. I think the moderation rule regarding a "neutral" media source is itself biased and ridiculous. It also represents a self-centered view of the world in believing that the Western view must be necessarily right (not that I'm saying it is wrong in this case). If you're not saying the western view is wrong in this case, than i don't understand why you're here arguing. This rule applies to no other thread afaik, so in this case the rule makes for a better discussion. | ||
|
Cheerio
Ukraine3178 Posts
| ||
Zealously
East Gorteau22261 Posts
On July 28 2014 02:42 Cheerio wrote: MH17 thread has worked pretty well so far. Have you considered reopening the Ukrainian crisis thread (or having a fresh start) under the similar regulations? No | ||
|
2primenumbers
United States144 Posts
Best Regards, RG | ||
|
5unrise
New Zealand646 Posts
On July 23 2014 11:28 m4ini wrote: If you're not saying the western view is wrong in this case, than i don't understand why you're here arguing. This rule applies to no other thread afaik, so in this case the rule makes for a better discussion. You miss the point of having a debate. I don't know for sure if the Western view is right or wrong, nor do I know if the Russian view is right or wrong. I intend to use the evidence and analysis in this discussion to form an educated conclusion. To do that, I must be presented with evidence from both sides, and the ridiculous rule prevents this from happening. I have no idea why you believe the rule makes for a better discussion. For people with no preconceived self-centered opinion on this issue, unlike yourself, this rule is garbage. | ||
| ||
