|
United Kingdom10021 Posts
On May 15 2018 23:24 LegalLord wrote:
The best bet at this point is zlefin, who has proven to be a very devoted and consistent candidate for the role. His contribution would certainly shake things up and give the thread a new face. Given its current sorry state it might be the best approach available.
There is absolutely no way I could ever possibly disagree with something more than this.
(No personal offense is meant by this post)
|
On May 16 2018 01:26 Jockmcplop wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2018 23:24 LegalLord wrote:
The best bet at this point is zlefin, who has proven to be a very devoted and consistent candidate for the role. His contribution would certainly shake things up and give the thread a new face. Given its current sorry state it might be the best approach available. There is absolutely no way I could ever possibly disagree with something more than this. (No personal offense is meant by this post)
That's fair. But he does have a high standard for posting and is nothing if not dedicated to the abstract idea of fixing the thread through more effective moderation.
|
People need to remember that in the absence of a clear best solution, LL likes to advocate for the thing that will be the most entertaining for him. He is very consistent.
|
I laughed at LL's troll comment, and I'm a little ashamed of myself.
Hell, if the mods would create a second thread with guest moderators capable of only thread tempbans, it would be a huge gain for discussion. You wouldn't even have to run that experiment longer than 2 weeks to see the improvement. Right now, you only get the other perspective on the rare times Introvert or mozoku are posting.
The current result is only pleasing to the contingent that think the American right are wrong and way too radical for honest discussion.
It would also helpfully answer the question, "Could you do any better than the current moderators have done since the new thread?"
|
United States7684 Posts
did you stop posting out of choice danglars or are you still thread banned?
|
On May 16 2018 02:34 IgnE wrote:
did you stop posting out of choice danglars or are you still thread banned?
I'm still thread banned. If you want to know in the future if this is still the case, the first spoiler on the first post of the thread shows everybody. At the moment, the temps consist of myself and StealthBlue.
|
Flayer was on there as well for a short time but no one mentioned it.
|
Flayer lacks the persecution complex. I disagree with him a lot, but he has always been willing to eat a ban to say what he wants to say.
|
Original Message From Seeker:
I am removing your access to the USPMT temporarily. No matter how strongly you feel about it, saying that a bunch of people deserved what they got and that they can go fuck themselves is not appropriate.
I don't know whether I should laugh or cry about this. Here's what I wrote:
Clearly this guy wanted to meet Allah, so he should be thankful that the IDF obliged him. Same with all of the other people that the IDF killed. It's pretty reasonable to expect that mass protesting and attacking enemy soldiers at a militarized border is only going to end one way. Hamas and the Palestinians wanted a massacre for propaganda purposes, and the IDF gave it to them. This is why Haley needed to walk out of the UN when the Palestinians got up to speak. The Palestinians wanted this, so they can go fuck themselves if they're now going to complain about the logical result of sending tens of thousands of civilians to stir shit up at an enemy, militarized border. They're a bunch of hypocrites.
|
Sorry Daunt, you 100% asked for that. You might as well have signed off with 'see you guys after my ban's over!'
|
Also, I'll note that this post from TheDwf was not actioned:
Most likely this guy simply wanted to have his basic rights recognized and a normal life. Unfortunately he lived in a violent world full of morally bankrupt people like you
Certainly looks like a positive contribution to the thread to me!
|
Well, there goes my theory that xdaunt was not posting in the US pol thread because he was smart enough to realise that he would be banned if he posts as normal. LL on the other hand is smart enough.
You should be happy that you simply wasn't temp banned from the entire site as normal.
|
Original Message From Seeker:
I am removing your access to the USPMT temporarily. No matter how strongly you feel about it, saying that a bunch of people deserved what they got and that they can go fuck themselves is not appropriate.
My question is if Seeker/others are judging on "they can go fuck themselves" almost entirely. Like, do they want to make a contextless rule that It is never appropriate in the thread to say it about anyone or any group ever? I understand why they could want a red line on the tone, so that an appropriate response would not include "The Israelis can go fuck themselves if they think they can stop future casualties from terror" or whatever.
Or are they establishing a rule that in conflicts, you simply aren't able to say deaths/killings were justifiable? Frankly, if my border had a bunch of lunatic invaders cutting fences and seeking harm on my fellow citizens, it's entirely within scope to consider their deaths merited. Even in low level conflicts, you have to be willing to debate if side A or side B got what they had coming. And then somebody can come in and argue that a nonviolent response would somehow not jeopardize Israeli lives and would be preferable.
Yes, it is entirely appropriate to criticize Hamas for wanting to sacrifice as many of their group as they can in front of cameras. Their actions on a suicide-based PR campaign are deplorable. Their thirst for death, particularly of Israelis while disregarding the toll on their own, is a massive issue in the middle east.
|
Lets be serious it's "Clearly this guy wanted to meet Allah, so he should be thankful that the IDF obliged him." that got him banned.
Is there any need for a reference to Allah, except as an obvious and overt case of nudge nudge wink wink racism? (Or anti religion whatever.)
Imagine the case was reversed and it was "Clearly this guy wanted to meet JHVH, so he should be thankful that the wehrmacht obliged him." It's inexcusable, and it's really puzzling that you would defend him.
|
Hamas is a very special case since their charter literally says it’s the religion of Islam that will bring about the destruction of Israel. The organization makes repeated reference to the religion in achieving their goals, so calling this some religion-bashing exercise is tantamount to saying Christianity within the crusades is religion bashing.
|
Hamas appreciates your craven and lazy conflation of their organization with Islam as a whole, I'm sure.
|
On May 16 2018 04:57 Danglars wrote:
Hamas is a very special case since their charter literally says it’s the religion of Islam that will bring about the destruction of Israel. The organization makes repeated reference to the religion in achieving their goals, so calling this some religion-bashing exercise is tantamount to saying Christianity within the crusades is religion bashing.
It's quite obviously the tone Daunt used to say it. I've expressed that exact sentiment in the thread with no repercussions. And I know I'm not 'special' because I've been warned before.
|
On May 16 2018 04:26 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +Original Message From Seeker:
I am removing your access to the USPMT temporarily. No matter how strongly you feel about it, saying that a bunch of people deserved what they got and that they can go fuck themselves is not appropriate. I don't know whether I should laugh or cry about this. Here's what I wrote: Show nested quote +Clearly this guy wanted to meet Allah, so he should be thankful that the IDF obliged him. Same with all of the other people that the IDF killed. It's pretty reasonable to expect that mass protesting and attacking enemy soldiers at a militarized border is only going to end one way. Hamas and the Palestinians wanted a massacre for propaganda purposes, and the IDF gave it to them. This is why Haley needed to walk out of the UN when the Palestinians got up to speak. The Palestinians wanted this, so they can go fuck themselves if they're now going to complain about the logical result of sending tens of thousands of civilians to stir shit up at an enemy, militarized border. They're a bunch of hypocrites.
You could at least show the spine of the Palestinians you criticized and know actions have consequences.
And again, you have to be a real peice of shit to order your men to fire on people throwing rocks.
|
On May 16 2018 05:01 farvacola wrote:
Hamas appreciates your craven and lazy conflation of their organization with Islam as a whole, I'm sure.
This would be true if I made the statement that every Muslim death is justified based on Hamas’s interpretation and cause. I make no attempt to say all deaths are justified, so don’t pretend I refer to more than Hamas-inspired religious and political violence against Israel.
|
Norway28917 Posts
While I've staunchly been on the 'less moderation is better and be careful not to alienate one side of the discussion', I'm 100% supportive of that xdaunt ban. That's a complete piece of shit thing to say, 'wanting to equalize the narrative' or whatever notwithstanding. I did not see leftists argue that the jews deserve to or want to die. This is you being worse than the other side, not equal. And you can do better. If this is how you want to post, then good riddance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
