EPTOn April 27 2018 03:49 Seeker wrote:
Pulling a Blizzard here. Sorry :/
Pulling a Blizzard here. Sorry :/
As long as you don't pull a Valve..
US Politics Feedback Thread - Page 129
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
Excludos
Norway8254 Posts
As long as you don't pull a Valve.. | ||
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37072 Posts
Enlighten me. What does "Pulling a Valve" mean? | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14107 Posts
On April 26 2018 19:50 Plansix wrote: The first post was barely an argument or even a topic. It is mostly twitter posts and youtube clips he found during that day supported by his minor commentary. It is low effort post that opens and hinges upon a disingenuous comparison to Obama, which is a bad way to open any argument. But as people challenge his opening premise, he gets more and more defense and never backs down. The Obama team asked people for their information and never used it to cultivate racists. And what are we supposed to do with that opening statement, argue against a guardian headline? How is the first post barely an argument or a topic? Its clearly commenting on what his opinion of the CA is and clearly lists his feelings on it before posting the twitter posts in evidence of them. Posting sources in support of your post is suppose to be the ideal of the thread and he does it in spades in that post. Hes not referencing obama as anything but a comparison to what CA did he feels like. He doesn't talk about obama again in the post. I think you and hunts both saw what you thought the post was and never took the time to try and understand what the post actually was. Hes saying that CA's operation was lightweight, as in a smaller scale then. Obama's operation in 2012. You're the one that is adding in that hes insisting that hes calling the 2012 operation racist when in reality hes just saying that CA used less data as it targeted the swing states instead of Obama targeting everyone. His admittance that what CA did was ethically wrong is completely ignored by you and hunts because it was right after that and you refused to continue reading the post probably. And to those wondering me and xdaunt quit posting in the thread because we feel that danglers ban was because of his political views and the info we've gotten from the mods so far (especially kwark) hasn't convinced us of it being anything other then that. We don't want to get banned from the site because of our beliefs and so we've decided to take the hint and leave while we can. That doesn't mean that we wouldn't come back or that we don't still care about what we've helped built. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22290 Posts
On April 27 2018 04:53 Seeker wrote: Enlighten me. What does "Pulling a Valve" mean? Halflife 3. Aka never. Tho you will make a lot of money selling hats Oo | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23899 Posts
On April 27 2018 05:00 Sermokala wrote: How is the first post barely an argument or a topic? Its clearly commenting on what his opinion of the CA is and clearly lists his feelings on it before posting the twitter posts in evidence of them. Posting sources in support of your post is suppose to be the ideal of the thread and he does it in spades in that post. Hes not referencing obama as anything but a comparison to what CA did he feels like. He doesn't talk about obama again in the post. I think you and hunts were clerically triggered by what you thought the post was and never took the time to try and understand what the post actually was. Hes saying that CA's operation was lightweight, as in a smaller scale then. Obama's operation in 2012. You're the one that is adding in that hes insisting that hes calling the 2012 operation racist when in reality hes just saying that CA used less data as it targeted the swing states instead of Obama targeting everyone. His admittance that what CA did was ethically wrong is completely ignored by you and hunts because it was right after that and you refused to continue reading the post probably. And to those wondering me and xdaunt quit posting in the thread because we feel that danglers ban was because of his political views and the info we've gotten from the mods so far (especially kwark) hasn't convinced us of it being anything other then that. We don't want to get banned from the site because of our beliefs and so we've decided to take the hint and leave while we can. That doesn't mean that we wouldn't come back or that we don't still care about what we've helped built. I think the biggest part you guys miss is that it's not because your right leaning or whatever, it's deviating from the neoliberal consensus with any significant fervor that triggers the dogpile posters, which triggers the mods to react to the person they pile on rather than the people piling on with shitposts. There's some posts and posters I think are habitually bad and unhelpful to the noble discussions they allude to when critiquing other posters, but I really don't want to get into it until I at least know under what logical construction I was banned already and ideally what in the world they are operating under now/in the future. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
| ||
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37072 Posts
On April 27 2018 05:20 zlefin wrote: gh, I doubt you'll ever get much detail from the mods on why. they don't follow a process too much (well, not by my standards of due process; I suppose by the standards of an internet forum with free moderation it's pretty good), and in particular aren't prone to explaining much; and the appeals system is generally pretty weak. Remember that TL staff DOES NOT get paid. Everyone that moderates on this site do it because they love the site and love StarCraft. We are all volunteers. Because of this, our system is not the best there is. You can keep complaining and making snide remarks all you want. but that's not going to magically change how we do things. Also, keep up this attitude and we'll just see where you land in the end. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On April 27 2018 05:49 Seeker wrote: Remember that TL staff DOES NOT get paid. Everyone that moderates on this site do it because they love the site and love StarCraft. We are all volunteers. Because of this, our system is not the best there is. You can keep complaining and making snide remarks all you want. but that's not going to magically change how we do things. Also, keep up this attitude and we'll just see where you land in the end. that's an odd remark; since I explicitly noted that. why note in all caps something that I already stated myself? but pushing a poor and rude attitude like you're using here doesn't help your credibility at all. it just means you're threatening people for pointing out problems. very rude, and poor conduct. i'm no tbein gsnide, i'm pointing out facts, which others have also pointed out. and while you are workin for free; there were other alternatives available which would've tkaen no effort on your part. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23899 Posts
On April 27 2018 05:49 Seeker wrote: Remember that TL staff DOES NOT get paid. Everyone that moderates on this site do it because they love the site and love StarCraft. We are all volunteers. Because of this, our system is not the best there is. You can keep complaining and making snide remarks all you want. but that's not going to magically change how we do things. Also, keep up this attitude and we'll just see where you land in the end. I mean it's a bit snide but it's also pretty true. I mean I've been asking for 2 weeks for an example of the posts I was actioned for and expected to improve on and haven't gotten anything from the person responsible and none of the other mods able to or willing to step up and show me either. You guys can run things however you want, just don't pretend I was banned for the reasons listed with the stated desired outcome if you (collectively) can't/won't provide some basic and necessary components to that process. I'm a bit frustrated at this point and want to rail more, but I think we can establish this much at this point. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On April 27 2018 06:04 Plansix wrote: Don’t poke the bear, my guy. I'll be mindful, but I stand up for what is right. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On April 26 2018 21:35 ChristianS wrote: Well at least I entertained LL. It was all worth it after all ye | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 27 2018 06:10 LegalLord wrote: It might be time to take a second look at zlefin's campaign for dedicated US politics moderator. ye There is part of me that just wants to see that dumpster fire first hand. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9842 Posts
That probably says more about me than it does about moderating though. I just like a good ol' scrap I guess. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23899 Posts
On April 27 2018 06:23 Plansix wrote: There is part of me that just wants to see that dumpster fire first hand. There's a few different schemes I'd think worth further discussion while I'm waiting for a response from the mods regarding my questions. The first general thing is that mods complain about having to deal with the US politics thread and thread complains about the mods, why not give the US politics thread some autonomy (can't be worse than the essentially non-moderation period we had). There are a bunch of ways to go about that, some better than others, all with their own weaknesses. But I think if we're on the brink of some new paradigm in moderation we (as regular thread participants) should have at least a little agency in the process. zlefin being moderator is one of those such options, I'd go more for some sort of elected tribunal with some basic powers, like being able to warn/ban people for short periods (less than a week) But I got lots of fun ideas along these lines and think we could collectively come up with something better than the mods/Seeker will (no offense intended). On April 27 2018 06:38 Plansix wrote: We had a sort of fun one yesterday about how “the media” all decided to go after Trump. It was no barn burner, but was a little scrappy. I saw something a bit different, but I also saw the story he mentioned on the front page of the nyt website when it came out despite your assertion otherwise. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Edit: I tired to confirm if that story made it above the fold or not. I couldn’t find a copy office front page from the date that story ran. I believe it was in their nation section. But I don’t have a copy of that paper. I suppose I could buy one. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On April 27 2018 05:49 Seeker wrote: Remember that TL staff DOES NOT get paid. Everyone that moderates on this site do it because they love the site and love StarCraft. We are all volunteers. Because of this, our system is not the best there is. You can keep complaining and making snide remarks all you want. but that's not going to magically change how we do things. Also, keep up this attitude and we'll just see where you land in the end. I have some very specific thoughts on this, which I'll wait to share until after you post whatever it is that you're going to post. Speaking of which, why are you posting it and not tofu? For all of the shit that I have given the TL mods over the years, tofu was always very good. Why isn't he handling the politics thread anymore? | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23899 Posts
On April 27 2018 06:49 Plansix wrote: I don’t have a problem with the moderators. The folks who do mostly seem to not like being moderated by anyone, IMO. They let you get away with a lot of terrible posts, of course you would find that tolerable. I don't think any of the people complaining are actually complaining about being moderated by itself, it's that posts like many of yours and plenty of others, which are unarguably worse, but align with neoliberal orthodoxy, aren't as well. Let them both fly or mod them both, but you thinking your lack of getting many of your shitposts moderated reflects on the quality/substance and not the alignment with established political positions is a great example of why moderation has been problematic recently. Hell, I think most of us are fine with just admitting whatever the real underlying methodology is, what people are reacting to is the attempt to take us for fools with the other explanations we've been given. | ||
| ||
