EPTOn July 07 2018 05:55 Sermokala wrote:
but doodsmack is also temp banned
but doodsmack is also temp banned
Oh good, I just saw his latest posts and thought “wtf why isn’t he banned?”
US Politics Feedback Thread - Page 157
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Oh good, I just saw his latest posts and thought “wtf why isn’t he banned?” | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On July 07 2018 05:55 Sermokala wrote: It hackels me a bit about the whole "conservatives are defending themselves too aggressively." but doodsmack is also temp banned so at least I know theres reason included this time around. You could create a special "USPMT" account that specifically makes these statements. I admit I don't know how hard this is but I think it would work to make a quick. "mods decided this person needs a temp ban because x" has the reason been stated yet? I didn't see it but maybe I missed. I don't think the issue is/would be conservatives defending themselves too aggressively per se. (unless the aggression goes way too far ofc) | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
On July 07 2018 02:20 Danglars wrote: These are faith-based crisis pregnancy centers and religious business owners that are compelled to pay fines and write placards that have to appeal all the way up to the Supreme Court to get their rights restored. Five justices or more said prior rulings got it wrong. Prima facie evidence that religious freedoms and free speech freedoms hang in the balance for certain faiths. If fines, jail, deprived livelihood, compelled speech don’t equal threat, I’m very surprised at what definitions you’re using. just think of faith-based pregnancy centers as analogous to sharia law courts. surely you wouldnt say that a sign at sharia law courts indicating that all citizens have the right to avail themselves before civil law courts before they entered into sharia law adjudication would be a violation of religious freedom? we need a strong national culture w a strong legal consensus on individual rights (to abortion/privacy). country before god | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On July 07 2018 05:55 Sermokala wrote: It hackels me a bit about the whole "conservatives are defending themselves too aggressively." but doodsmack is also temp banned so at least I know theres reason included this time around. You could create a special "USPMT" account that specifically makes these statements. I admit I don't know how hard this is but I think it would work to make a quick. "mods decided this person needs a temp ban because x" Just subjective enforcement of the tweet rules. Two sentences should be sufficient really. For example when a tweet is relevant to immigration and common sense tells you that, there's no point in me saying "this is relevant to immigration." Instead of using the tweet I could briefly say "so and so just happened" and then make the same post and it would be okay. | ||
micronesia
United States24676 Posts
Temporarily locking. | ||
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37023 Posts
Feel free to discuss thread bans within this thread. It is in Website Feedback so discussing thread bans is the logical thing to do in this thread. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On July 07 2018 07:27 Doodsmack wrote: Just subjective enforcement of the tweet rules. Two sentences should be sufficient really. For example when a tweet is relevant to immigration and common sense tells you that, there's no point in me saying "this is relevant to immigration." Instead of using the tweet I could briefly say "so and so just happened" and then make the same post and it would be okay. You can just add more doodsmack. How about what you view as hypocrisy by Trump. Maybe something like how tariffs and america first only apply to other businesses not his own. there is more you can add rather than just venting. You don't need to play thisgame of "just how little I can add before it cen be considered a discussion" one word at a time. That said, random cheering for and against respective political parties in the thread should also be cracked down as harshly as it is on random tweets. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18825 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23221 Posts
I know we've been told the standard ban system has pretty rigid time structures, while the US politics bans seem to be on the opposite side in that they are completely at mods discretion. | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Good boy ban duration: 1 week Bad boy ban duration: 30 days | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
| ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On July 11 2018 22:43 ticklishmusic wrote: i have to say this is a nice change of pace from left vs right and trump is bad. it's everyone united against the soviets! feels more like replacing one set of nonsense with another. but I suppose it is a bit of a change. maybe meandering a bit off topic though, even if some of the posts are interesting. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 11 2018 22:43 ticklishmusic wrote: i have to say this is a nice change of pace from left vs right and trump is bad. it's everyone united against the soviets! We so rarely get to talk about collective farming and why it killed 8 million people. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
| ||
|
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
On July 12 2018 00:24 Danglars wrote: I get the boot and then there's literally hundreds of posts on leninism and the soviet union. Ok, US Politics, you do you rofl. The 2 events are completely unrelated | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
Really? I was quite certain that there was an unwritten understanding of, "ok, Danglars is gone, let's talk communism!" among all USPOL regulars. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8072 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On July 12 2018 00:36 LegalLord wrote: Really? I was quite certain that there was an unwritten understanding of, "ok, Danglars is gone, let's talk communism!" among all USPOL regulars. Too much is held in agreement if xDaunt, Introvert, and Sermokala aren't posting. So it's always back to GH's views on Chavez/Maduro, Lenin, and socialism. | ||
| ||
