EPTUS Politics Feedback Thread - Page 245
| Forum Index > Website Feedback |
|
ZerOCoolSC2
8927 Posts
| ||
|
Jealous
10098 Posts
On July 20 2019 07:04 Seeker wrote: I already would of if it I knew where you lived... Irregardless, I will just keep things to myself so I can calm down. What grinds my gears is "irregardless." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On July 21 2019 14:43 Jealous wrote: What grinds my gears is "irregardless." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irregardless This word is infuriating. Once you get past the part of the conversation where you had to convince someone it's actually a word, then you need to explain how it's meaning in colloquial use is the opposite of what it would mean if you just take it piece by piece, as a word. It's simultaneously in a state of having two different functional meanings, making it Schrodinger's Word Nobody Cares About. Why even. It's probably why people say it's not a word, because it's just dumb. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On July 21 2019 13:26 EvilTeletubby wrote: Oh. Honestly, I didn't temp ban him for that post. That was just the linked post from the report that brought him to my attention. You guys may have read way too much into that. :-P This is an interesting ban because it became a total ban on the basis of that post, and specifically the last sentence. I believe that Donald Trump should be ridiculed, humiliated, and marginalized. I believe that because of the type of politician he is. It seems to me this ban is not adequately justified. If racism is the justification, I don't think racism is necessarily implied from his post. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21362 Posts
On July 21 2019 23:44 Doodsmack wrote: Don't look at posts in isolation, the pages of mod notes he will have had likely have a lot to do with it.This is an interesting ban because it became a total ban on the basis of that post, and specifically the last sentence. I believe that Donald Trump should be ridiculed, humiliated, and marginalized. I believe that because of the type of politician he is. It seems to me this ban is not adequately justified. If racism is the justification, I don't think racism is necessarily implied from his post. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18818 Posts
On July 21 2019 23:44 Doodsmack wrote: This is an interesting ban because it became a total ban on the basis of that post, and specifically the last sentence. I believe that Donald Trump should be ridiculed, humiliated, and marginalized. I believe that because of the type of politician he is. It seems to me this ban is not adequately justified. If racism is the justification, I don't think racism is necessarily implied from his post. Why is ridiculing and attempting to marginalize Trump and his ideas called for? | ||
KadaverBB
Germany25649 Posts
Needless to say, the mod team thinks that Xdaunt is a negative influence on the forums and the Politics thread in general. Almost every mod action given to him resulted in a "If I am not allowed to speak my mind, you might as well nuke/perm me right now" conversation, so basically we just did what he asked of us. The ban reason might as well read "by request". | ||
KwarK
United States41984 Posts
| ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
Oh but of course, there is always the convenient excuse of user history to fall back on in such cases Perusing the cesspit that is the USPOL thread, I find many other posts that could be called "toxic" and "unconducive to worthwhile discussion" from a subjective view, most of them aimed at posters opining from a right-wing perspective Both ban messages were abusive and contemptuous in tone, as is expected from TL moderation in bans of this nature The rules are an open invitation to abuse, as what is "toxic" and "not conducive to worthwhile discussion" are terrible, terrible subjective standards and obviously their manner of application has failed at producing worthwhile discussion, considering the repeated mod notes and bans and drama regarding these political discussions, a tide of failure that ebbs and flows as it has for 10+ years. It was certainly not a triumph that blogs of a political nature were recently proscribed You're dismissive of any other point of view without actually having a discussion around why. The "I'm right, you're wrong" mentality is not what we care to see around here. You're actively discouraging critical thinking. This is seriously given as a reason for banning xD. I stand in amazement at this kind of reasoning. Perhaps EvilTeletubby can explain how farvacola's post encouraged critical thinking, or was not dismissive of xD's view, or was not an example of the "I'm right, you're wrong" mentality? Just how are these ridiculous standards applied? I would be equally unhappy if it were farvacola instead who had got the hammer. I think both he and xD are (were, now, for xD) part of the remnant of posters who were capable of having excellent discussion, even if at times they got rough around the edges, or in the center. Most of the rest have been banned or simply departed, which has done very little to achieve the stated goal, worthwhile discussion, critical thinking, and whatever other buzz words and phrases moderation uses to justify itself Your recent posting and moderation history here is complete trash. This quote is entirely typical and is essentially an act of dick-waving. People who see this depressingly common kind of remark from staff are not likely to find themselves endeared to staff, and its depressing commonality is not just for permanent bans. Put your dicks away please, or whatever you may possess that you feel the need to display because you can How Kafkaesque. I eagerly await the implied threats, contemptuously arrogant tone, statements that I don't have the information (ie I am ignorant), and other typical TL moderation nonsense given when someone criticizes this kind of ban On July 22 2019 02:22 KadaverBB wrote: I simply did not feel like writing several paragraphs of explanation that would then get disected over dozens of pages. Needless to say, the mod team thinks that Xdaunt is a negative influence on the forums and the Politics thread in general. Almost every mod action given to him resulted in a "If I am not allowed to speak my mind, you might as well nuke/perm me right now" conversation, so basically we just did what he asked of us. The ban reason might as well read "by request". Is there a thread in the staff forum where they teach you how to frame every ban in this fashion? This is even more of the logic in the same remarkable vein as displayed by EvilTeletubby. User was warned for this post. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18818 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland11926 Posts
He defended the crowd that chants to send the brown people back He talked about how the people protesting at Ferguson were vermin He discussed the link between race and IQ on this forum He approvingly linked us some text by some nazi (I want to say Vox1488 or something?) and then defended he couldn't be a nazi because he was mexican (white mexican)? (This one is old, I might be misremembering slightly). I am 100% sure that farva or KwarK can bring up any number of other instances. See here's the thing, at the core racism isn't an insult, it's a set of beliefs about the world. If conservatives are so triggered by the word "racist" that they require some other, more politically correct, word, to describe these attitudes, then they should let us know. But in the meantime we're left with the tools we have. (and of course we come back to the difference between disliking being called a racist and disliking racism, which is evergreen) | ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
On July 22 2019 03:04 farvacola wrote: Ignorance of the history behind the language of deAmericanization is no excuse and what I posted is entirely accurate. That you take offense to it (as ridiculous as that might be) is of no moment, folks can’t tread down well-worn paths as though they’re pioneers if they don’t want to be reminded of who walked them before. But don’t let that stop you from dropping by with paragraphs of feigned victimhood, it’s a ploy folks like you and Legallord have honed well these past years and you are quite good at it, I’ll admit. So your assertion that xD would have walked side by side with the KKK for a Prohibition rally is entirely accurate. There can be no doubt whatsoever that he would have done so (in the 1900s or 1910s, not the 1930s. Pro-Prohibition rallies were quite rare by the small portion of the 1930s Prohibition was still in effect. "Entirely accurate" indeed.) I see. Well, there is certainly nothing toxic in your disdain and accusations of bad faith on my part. I still would not like it if you were banned from this community that you have participated in for years based on reasoning alike to xD's | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28558 Posts
We do have a thread where we discuss higher profile bans (like this one) and then there is indeed a discussion, not on how to frame it, but on how to make the ban part of a coherent site / thread policy (or, to not ban/action in the event where we feel the ban can't be made part of a coherent site/ thread policy. ) In this case, there is certainly an argument to be made that other posters should also get banned for similar infractions - this is also something we have discussed in said thread. If people want to point to other specific posts, that helps us out. It is definitely a 'totality of actions' and not a singular post - although his PM stating that we might as well nuke him if we're gonna keep temping him for 'defending himself' (in a way we don't accept from other posters either) might be the single most important one. If he had stated something to the effect of 'I am sorry, I sometimes lose my temper and it makes me lash out', I'd feel entirely differently about it. But xDaunt does not admit mistake, does not retract, and quite frankly, is someone I cannot perceive as a genuine actor anymore. While people group him with Danglars or other conservative posters, I think this is a big disservice to them, because none of the other conservative posters are faulty in this manner. | ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
On July 22 2019 03:10 Nebuchad wrote: What is it about racism that, in your view, xDaunt doesn't like? He defended the crowd that chants to send the brown people back He talked about how the people protesting at Ferguson were vermin He discussed the link between race and IQ on this forum He approvingly linked us some text by some nazi (I want to say Vox1488 or something?) and then defended he couldn't be a nazi because he was mexican (white mexican)? (This one is old, I might be misremembering slightly). I am 100% sure that farva or KwarK can bring up any number of other instances. See here's the thing, at the core racism isn't an insult, it's a set of beliefs about the world. If conservatives are so triggered by the word "racist" that they require some other, more politically correct, word, to describe these attitudes, then they should let us know. But in the meantime we're left with the tools we have. (and of course we come back to the difference between disliking being called a racist and disliking racism, which is evergreen) Then ban him for approvingly quoting a Nazi, not for saying that two politicians should be ridiculed, humiliated, and whatevered. As both of them should be. If you believe Donald Trump is a racist, divisive authoritarian, Ilhan Omar and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are the same thing from the other side If this litany of allegations were accurate, and there are allegedly so many, many more, then I am amazed that xD wasn't banned long, long ago and the question must be asked, why wasn't he? The link between race and IQ (which can be entirely explained by differences in quality of education and nutrition)? One of the various creeps with Vox in their username that populate alt-right internet circles? More examples can be provided? Amazing. I suspect your characterization may not be entirely accurate But... White Mexican? What? No, I don't think I want to get into that kind of discussion, weighing proportions of "blood" or whatever to make classifications of race. No thanks I could easily make the argument that the political left has said similar things about conservatives for years, including the governor of New York stating that those who are pro-life are "not welcome" in his state, those who already reside in it should leave, etc., and that this hatred for conservatives has been, for the last three years, been returned with the same intensity and thoughtlessness. You reap what you sow. The 15 years of dehumanizing hatred aimed at the political right since Bush beat Gore has blown back. There's a lesson there, hate begets hate no matter who started it What I take away when I read your post is that a double standard is acceptable because the people it is being applied to deserve it, in your opinion. That road doesn't go anywhere | ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
On July 22 2019 03:26 Liquid`Drone wrote: The main reason for the perm is indeed that daunt has no willingness or interest in changing his posting, and that there has been a downward spiral going for a pretty long time of him going some variant of 'inflammatory statement x', people predictably getting riled up, and him doing very little to clarify beyond stating 'you are too stupid to understand my point'. I think I actually used to be on his 'good' list of posters who to some degree understood his points of view (although igne has always been his favored leftist) but over the past two years, I've felt him go from 'possible to have productive discussions with' to 'does not care in the slightest and has a very hard time articulating a point without adding an insult. We do have a thread where we discuss higher profile bans (like this one) and then there is indeed a discussion, not on how to frame it, but on how to make the ban part of a coherent site / thread policy (or, to not ban/action in the event where we feel the ban can't be made part of a coherent site/ thread policy. ) In this case, there is certainly an argument to be made that other posters should also get banned for similar infractions - this is also something we have discussed in said thread. If people want to point to other specific posts, that helps us out. It is definitely a 'totality of actions' and not a singular post - although his PM stating that we might as well nuke him if we're gonna keep temping him for 'defending himself' (in a way we don't accept from other posters either) might be the single most important one. If he had stated something to the effect of 'I am sorry, I sometimes lose my temper and it makes me lash out', I'd feel entirely differently about it. But xDaunt does not admit mistake, does not retract, and quite frankly, is someone I cannot perceive as a genuine actor anymore. While people group him with Danglars or other conservative posters, I think this is a big disservice to them, because none of the other conservative posters are faulty in this manner. Thank you for this response. I could quibble around the edges of it, but I suspect that upon examination most of those quibbles would be misguided - and even if they were not, quibbling around the edges is essentially an admission of not really having a meaningful objection | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland11926 Posts
| ||
|
DeepElemBlues
United States5079 Posts
On July 22 2019 03:36 Nebuchad wrote: I don't think xDaunt should be banned for being a racist. I just think when people say he's a racist, that's not an insult, which is what you went with in your post. Well it most certainly is an insult in almost any context today, save ones like an Aryan Nation compound in Wyoming or an 8chan discord A place like TL, it most certainly is an insult, and is intended to shame and delegitimize and silence, or, alternatively, anger, the person being labeled with it. I don't see how you could not think it is an insult, that it is simply a term of classification or something. Calling someone a racist is not mere classification. It is supposed to be an insult. The insult is inherent. Racists are not nice people. The label describing them - racist - is not supposed to make them feel good about their character and judgment Like I said, in other company it comes with a different mileage. But polite company is thankfully still the majority of company, and thankfully we aren't living 150 years ago, when things would be reversed and calling someone a racist would simply be reaffirming their good character and judgment in polite company | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States22702 Posts
On July 22 2019 04:03 DeepElemBlues wrote: Well it most certainly is an insult in almost any context today, save ones like an Aryan Nation compound in Wyoming or an 8chan discord A place like TL, it most certainly is an insult, and is intended to shame and delegitimize and silence, or, alternatively, anger, the person being labeled with it. I don't see how you could not think it is an insult, that it is simply a term of classification or something. Calling someone a racist is not mere classification. It is supposed to be an insult. The insult is inherent. Racists are not nice people. The label describing them - racist - is not supposed to make them feel good about their character and judgment Like I said, in other company it comes with a different mileage. But polite company is thankfully still the majority of company, and thankfully we aren't living 150 years ago, when things would be reversed and calling someone a racist would simply be reaffirming their good character and judgment in polite company Would you call someone that advocates racist positions (let's imagine whether they are racist is not in dispute) racist? Personally I've taken the position that people aren't racist, actions, beliefs, policy, etc... are. So I wouldn't say xDaunt "is a racist" but I would absolutely say he advocates racist policy and believes racist ideas. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
On July 22 2019 04:03 DeepElemBlues wrote: Well it most certainly is an insult in almost any context today, save ones like an Aryan Nation compound in Wyoming or an 8chan discord A place like TL, it most certainly is an insult, and is intended to shame and delegitimize and silence, or, alternatively, anger, the person being labeled with it. I don't see how you could not think it is an insult, that it is simply a term of classification or something. Calling someone a racist is not mere classification. It is supposed to be an insult. The insult is inherent. Racists are not nice people. The label describing them - racist - is not supposed to make them feel good about their character and judgment Like I said, in other company it comes with a different mileage. But polite company is thankfully still the majority of company, and thankfully we aren't living 150 years ago, when things would be reversed and calling someone a racist would simply be reaffirming their good character and judgment in polite company Do you think we should be nice to people who say that Cortez, Omar, et al. are likely not going to remain Americans, should be sent back to where they came from, and deserve to be ridiculed and marginalized, all for the act of being duly elected US congresswomen? Is it an insult to call someone who can't read illiterate? And if it is, is it undeserved, is it slander? | ||
| ||
