|
MP you made your case, and I do think you did a good job. Just the powers that be do not agree. No point continuing because all that does is lead to action against you.
I'm with Wombat in the not in the top 5. I'd say not close. I'd far rather deal with someone abrasive then someone inauthentic. The people constantly misrepresenting people, arguing in bad faith, derailing any conversation to make it about them, and so on are far worse.
The thing with KwarK is he is always ready to engage, so just be patient, pick your time and take the piss out of him when he screws up. Or if you can be better, just ignore him and move on.
This strategy is not going to work, he's not just a Mod, hes a forum veteran, plays BW (the game this is all based on) at a high level and lots of people like that he can take the piss out of people who they feel deserve it. Now do others who don't get it too, sure, but that list is different for everyone else.
Bottom line is it is a unwinnable battle and all you are accomplish is pain for yourself!
|
Northern Ireland25854 Posts
On October 09 2025 08:14 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2025 08:01 KwarK wrote:On October 09 2025 07:43 Magic Powers wrote:On October 09 2025 07:29 KwarK wrote:On October 09 2025 07:21 Magic Powers wrote:On October 09 2025 07:15 KwarK wrote:On October 09 2025 06:54 Magic Powers wrote:On October 09 2025 06:31 KwarK wrote:On October 09 2025 06:27 Magic Powers wrote:On October 09 2025 05:51 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
I could absolutely be warned or banned were others on the moderation team so inclined. If the powers that be were resolved to remove me I would have no more recourse than anyone else. I don’t know what mechanism you’re even thinking of that would prevent it. I’m not in the union, I’m not in a protected class, I don’t have the right to a tribunal. Technically I’m not even a full mod, I’m a subclass called banling, for a lot of stuff I’d have to message a full mod to do it because I don’t have the buttons.
Before a forum veteran is moderated there’s generally a quick chat between mods for look for consensus. In the event that another moderator wanted to moderate me the process would be no different and if the consensus was reached then there would be no barrier.
That’s part of why your protestations about my power are so strange. If, for example, eriador wanted me gone I’d have no more protection than you’d have. But I can understand your lack of familiarity with the process. If you're not protected, why are you not getting banned for breaking forum rules multiple times? Why are you currently not banned? It’s difficult to answer the question of why something hasn’t happened. I could say because no mod wants me banned, but that answer is circular and probably unsatisfactory. It follows that between theory and practice, there is no difference to my argument. You are not going to get banned no matter how often you break the rules. If you think you're not more powerful than other forum users, you're living in some alternate reality. That’s absolutely not what I said. You’re grandfathering in your conclusion. You asserted that banling status makes me immune. I explained that banling immunity is absolutely not a thing, moderators could moderate me if they wanted, same as anyone else. That doesn’t mean that we’re agreed that I’m immune, it means we’re disagreed on banling immunity. You’re starting with an assertion that I’m immune and trying to invent an explanation for it. If A is disproved then it must be B. If B is disproved then it doesn’t matter, it’s still true to you, it’s not relevant. For what it’s worth I don’t think I am immune. But given that you do I don’t understand what your end game is here. You’re trying to convince me that I have immunity? If I seem to think that I am staying on the right side of some kind of line then isn’t that good for you? If you successfully convince me that there is no line then I don’t think you get what you want out of that. Would other forum users get banned for breaking forum rules? Not by me. Except the rules against spambots etc. But the question isn’t really clear. You need to outline what framework you’re using. What do you mean by forum rules? I only kept saying "hurling insults at people" multiple times, but ok I guess I wasn't entirely 1000% clear on that. My bad. Is it now clear to you? Q: Do other forum users get banned for breaking forum rules? A: Yes (not literally always, but generally yes) Q: Are you banned? A: No. Q: Did you hurl insults at multiple forum users on multiple occasions? A: Yes Q: Are you protected? A: ... I don't agree with your assertions above. But in any case, you know that you can just test your theory, right? Like you can just go to the topic and call me a name and see if anything happens. Wouldn't that settle this? This feels a lot like the fable of trying to convince someone of the current weather where they argue around in circles forever instead of just looking out the window. I got banned a few times over the course of a few years for things less egregious than insulting other forum users. I have also seen other people get banned for insulting forum users. Are you denying that forum users get banned for insulting other forum users? Are you aware of the report -> reason selection that literally says "personal attack/insult"? Does it exist for shits and giggles? I think we're both aware that I'm right about people getting banned for that. Edit: Or, let me reconsider. Is your point that, since you have the privilege of insulting literally everyone, while others have the privilege of insulting only you but nobody else, therefore you're not protected?
I have called oBlade a sentient colostomy bag on at least three occasions. I stand by this incidentally.
I’ve insulted plenty of others, in total volume probably more than Kwark, although it’s probably pretty close either way,
Who fucking cares? He’s not even wrong half times.
Oh noes, poor me, Kwark was mean to me over the internet, please kiss my boo boo and make it all better.
Frankly pathetic, fucking hell grow a pair
|
Northern Ireland25854 Posts
And Magic half your problem is just stubbornly doubling down on even the fucking stupidest possible hill to die on.
Your inability to go ‘hey, actually this hill ain’t too pretty I don’t fancy dying on it’ isn’t on any other forum user, it’s entirely on you.
I’ve watched you, someone who generally I think is a smart guy, with similar instincts who makes many a good post, make some of the fucking stupidest argumentative stands I’ve ever seen. It appears in your matrix there is the concept of ‘down’, but it’s only ever paired with ‘doubling’ and not ‘backing’
And like obviously that’s Kwark’s fault for calling it out
He doesn’t shit on me. Maybe I’m just too stupid to even be worth his ire, or maybe I don’t post trash, who can know but the man himself?
|
On October 09 2025 08:48 WombaT wrote:
He doesn’t shit on me. Maybe I’m just too stupid to even be worth his ire, or maybe I don’t post trash, who can know but the man himself?
I mean, it would take a special kind of prick to have a problem with you lol
|
Does no one remember the "bullying is bad" era of moderation/thread consensus?
|
United States43112 Posts
On October 09 2025 08:56 GreenHorizons wrote:
Does no one remember the "bullying is bad" era of moderation/thread consensus?
I remember the years you spent insisting that everyone but you was literally complicit in genocide if that helps.
|
On October 09 2025 08:55 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2025 08:48 WombaT wrote:
He doesn’t shit on me. Maybe I’m just too stupid to even be worth his ire, or maybe I don’t post trash, who can know but the man himself?
I mean, it would take a special kind of prick to have a problem with you lol
He's just one post of wrong think on the wrong thread from the tides a turning!
On October 09 2025 09:17 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2025 08:56 GreenHorizons wrote:
Does no one remember the "bullying is bad" era of moderation/thread consensus? I remember the years you spent insisting that everyone but you was literally complicit in genocide if that helps.
Less long term and more forgettable to most is the time he spent denying the ongoing cultural genocide in China that is proved by the governments own documentation. Unless of course you think that having the wrong name, or wrong type of beard is a totally reasonable socialist reason to lock people up. I mean they are probably capitalists.
|
|
|
On October 09 2025 09:50 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2025 08:55 Nebuchad wrote:On October 09 2025 08:48 WombaT wrote:
He doesn’t shit on me. Maybe I’m just too stupid to even be worth his ire, or maybe I don’t post trash, who can know but the man himself?
I mean, it would take a special kind of prick to have a problem with you lol He's just one post of wrong think on the wrong thread from the tides a turning!
He isn't, no. Also thinking correct things is generally good.
|
On October 09 2025 10:03 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2025 09:50 Billyboy wrote:On October 09 2025 08:55 Nebuchad wrote:On October 09 2025 08:48 WombaT wrote:
He doesn’t shit on me. Maybe I’m just too stupid to even be worth his ire, or maybe I don’t post trash, who can know but the man himself?
I mean, it would take a special kind of prick to have a problem with you lol He's just one post of wrong think on the wrong thread from the tides a turning! He isn't, no. Also thinking correct things is generally good.
Every single person would agree with that, it the details they do not. There also used to be a lot of people that were OK with people having different opinions and even found it interesting. This era of endless purity tests is very lame and boring.
|
On October 09 2025 10:05 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2025 10:03 Nebuchad wrote:On October 09 2025 09:50 Billyboy wrote:On October 09 2025 08:55 Nebuchad wrote:On October 09 2025 08:48 WombaT wrote:
He doesn’t shit on me. Maybe I’m just too stupid to even be worth his ire, or maybe I don’t post trash, who can know but the man himself?
I mean, it would take a special kind of prick to have a problem with you lol He's just one post of wrong think on the wrong thread from the tides a turning! He isn't, no. Also thinking correct things is generally good. Every single person would agree with that, it the details they do not. There also used to be a lot of people that were OK with people having different opinions and even found it interesting. This era of endless purity tests is very lame and boring.
You constantly attack people who have different opinions than yours, applying your own purity tests.
|
On October 09 2025 10:09 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2025 10:05 Billyboy wrote:On October 09 2025 10:03 Nebuchad wrote:On October 09 2025 09:50 Billyboy wrote:On October 09 2025 08:55 Nebuchad wrote:On October 09 2025 08:48 WombaT wrote:
He doesn’t shit on me. Maybe I’m just too stupid to even be worth his ire, or maybe I don’t post trash, who can know but the man himself?
I mean, it would take a special kind of prick to have a problem with you lol He's just one post of wrong think on the wrong thread from the tides a turning! He isn't, no. Also thinking correct things is generally good. Every single person would agree with that, it the details they do not. There also used to be a lot of people that were OK with people having different opinions and even found it interesting. This era of endless purity tests is very lame and boring. You constantly attack people who have different opinions than yours, applying your own purity tests.
Nope, the people that I take jabs are people who I think treat people poorly. Similar but different, it also takes a lot and of posts and long term behavior for me to give up on someone and stop trying instead just taking the piss out of them.
You on the other hand used to like KwarK and his style, but now that you found out he thinks different (and honestly not that different) about Israel and Palestine you don't like him and don't understand why you ever did. (paraphrase, not exact words)
Purity test is for sure something you do, you just don't like the word choice. The same way Rayzda doesn't like the word Fascist for Republicans even though the Republicans hit almost all of the criteria.
Like even with you, if you stopped being a complete jerk to people who disagreed with you to the point that they quit the site, I'd be fine with you. I mean you're closing in on jumping the shark, but on some topics you can still be interesting and insightful so at least there is hope.
|
I have a difference of opinion with you, I disagree that you only target people who treat others poorly. This is in my opinion some giant cope that you came up with to justify your poor behavior.
|
On October 09 2025 10:30 Nebuchad wrote:
I have a difference of opinion with you, I disagree that you only target people who treat others poorly. This is in my opinion some giant cope that you came up with to justify your poor behavior.
Counter point, the only people I constantly attack are you and GH. There are plenty of other people who have attacked me that I have either ignored, or stopped attacking them when they stopped with you. You on the other hand have chased people off the site who have never been anything but polite and respectful to anyone.
So like you said different opinions.
|
On October 09 2025 05:07 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2025 02:29 Fleetfeet wrote:On October 08 2025 16:14 Magic Powers wrote:On October 08 2025 11:04 Fleetfeet wrote:I really don't think it matters. Everyone (for the most part) knows who Kwark is and knows he's a shit to pretty much anyone, if given the opportunity. I used to think he's on a pedestal because he's a mod, but that actually isn't the case as best I can tell. Other than something of a personal victory, would anything change if Kwark's modship was removed? I truly don't believe so. No, KwarK is not "a shit to everyone". He is to specific people, which is when he hates something about them, either for their political views (usually) or whatever he imagines their political views are. He also shits on people who call out the fact that he is a mod who'd be long banned if he wasn't a mod. This clearly gets to him, because he can't handle being called out. Now he's apparently on the "look, someone needs to change MP's diapers" train. Doesn't bother me very much compared to what he used to say to/about me. Still not behavior a mod should ever be allowed to display, but if people can handle it, so can I. That's not his worst behavior though by any means. His worst behavior is targeted bullying, as I explained numerous times before. BJ called him out before, and surprise surprise BJ is now gone after calling the culture around here "a cesspool". I disagreed with BJ on that, but perhaps that's because my views are more in line with the people who are acting out lately. You know, BJ never struck me as thin-skinned, quite the opposite. Lets maybe let that sink in for a second. What could've happened lately that made BJ leave? Kwark is a shit to anyone, given the opportunity. You put "shit to everyone" in quotes as though I had written that; I had not. You didn't answer the question, either. Do you believe anything outside of some sort of feeling of personal victory (for you) would change if Kwark's modship was removed? Before I answer your question, I'm a believer in second, third, even fourth and fifth chances. I've been taking the "wait and see" approach a bunch of times. Just recently I thought KwarK had changed and improved, only to prove me wrong again. At some point every glimmer of hope has been erased and more chances are nonsensical. That's the point I think we're currently at. Some people only change when they're forced to change. KwarK, to me, appears to be such a person regarding his mod status. If he retains his mod status, the chances of forum culture recovering are zero. I'm baffled that someone like Wombat is defending KwarK's behavior. He used to always be the voice of reason and balance, but now he's literally approving mods breaking forum rules. To me that's a sign that forum culture has eroded and we've reached a very low point. Mods are supposed to be above rule breaking, which is the deal they (hypothetically) sign to earn their badge. So logically in my mind if KwarK has his mod powers removed, that would instantly lead to a massive improvement of forum culture. It would not only mean that mods are beholden to the same rules as everybody else, it would also imply that all forum users will be warned/banned according to their rule breaking behavior, and exceptions to that will have to be within reason.
I hear you, I really do, but I don't think making KwarK not a mod changes a single thing about KwarK. He's still gonna be an asshole when he feels like it, and he's still not gonna get actioned for that, because he's still KwarK.
Again, it feels like your actual issue is with the moderation standards of USPOL or TL at large, and I feel like that should be the focus. The KwarK shit feels like a personal issue, and I wholly understand why someone would have a personal issue with KwarK, but that doesn't make a great foundation for decisionmaking.
(As something of an anecdotal aside, an admin or mod got fully nuked off TL at least once in our history. It certainly can happen. I can't remember their name, but they were a BW caster alongside BisuDagger a bunch iirc, and a reasonably prominent figure in the general community. It's frustrating I can't remember their name, but somone here will fill in I'm sure
edit - it was amazingxkcd, they quit being staff and eventually asked to be perm'd, not as solid an example as I remembered. Oh well!)
|
Bisutopia19282 Posts
On October 09 2025 14:31 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2025 05:07 Magic Powers wrote:On October 09 2025 02:29 Fleetfeet wrote:On October 08 2025 16:14 Magic Powers wrote:On October 08 2025 11:04 Fleetfeet wrote:I really don't think it matters. Everyone (for the most part) knows who Kwark is and knows he's a shit to pretty much anyone, if given the opportunity. I used to think he's on a pedestal because he's a mod, but that actually isn't the case as best I can tell. Other than something of a personal victory, would anything change if Kwark's modship was removed? I truly don't believe so. No, KwarK is not "a shit to everyone". He is to specific people, which is when he hates something about them, either for their political views (usually) or whatever he imagines their political views are. He also shits on people who call out the fact that he is a mod who'd be long banned if he wasn't a mod. This clearly gets to him, because he can't handle being called out. Now he's apparently on the "look, someone needs to change MP's diapers" train. Doesn't bother me very much compared to what he used to say to/about me. Still not behavior a mod should ever be allowed to display, but if people can handle it, so can I. That's not his worst behavior though by any means. His worst behavior is targeted bullying, as I explained numerous times before. BJ called him out before, and surprise surprise BJ is now gone after calling the culture around here "a cesspool". I disagreed with BJ on that, but perhaps that's because my views are more in line with the people who are acting out lately. You know, BJ never struck me as thin-skinned, quite the opposite. Lets maybe let that sink in for a second. What could've happened lately that made BJ leave? Kwark is a shit to anyone, given the opportunity. You put "shit to everyone" in quotes as though I had written that; I had not. You didn't answer the question, either. Do you believe anything outside of some sort of feeling of personal victory (for you) would change if Kwark's modship was removed? Before I answer your question, I'm a believer in second, third, even fourth and fifth chances. I've been taking the "wait and see" approach a bunch of times. Just recently I thought KwarK had changed and improved, only to prove me wrong again. At some point every glimmer of hope has been erased and more chances are nonsensical. That's the point I think we're currently at. Some people only change when they're forced to change. KwarK, to me, appears to be such a person regarding his mod status. If he retains his mod status, the chances of forum culture recovering are zero. I'm baffled that someone like Wombat is defending KwarK's behavior. He used to always be the voice of reason and balance, but now he's literally approving mods breaking forum rules. To me that's a sign that forum culture has eroded and we've reached a very low point. Mods are supposed to be above rule breaking, which is the deal they (hypothetically) sign to earn their badge. So logically in my mind if KwarK has his mod powers removed, that would instantly lead to a massive improvement of forum culture. It would not only mean that mods are beholden to the same rules as everybody else, it would also imply that all forum users will be warned/banned according to their rule breaking behavior, and exceptions to that will have to be within reason. I hear you, I really do, but I don't think making KwarK not a mod changes a single thing about KwarK. He's still gonna be an asshole when he feels like it, and he's still not gonna get actioned for that, because he's still KwarK. Again, it feels like your actual issue is with the moderation standards of USPOL or TL at large, and I feel like that should be the focus. The KwarK shit feels like a personal issue, and I wholly understand why someone would have a personal issue with KwarK, but that doesn't make a great foundation for decisionmaking. (As something of an anecdotal aside, an admin or mod got fully nuked off TL at least once in our history. It certainly can happen. I can't remember their name, but they were a BW caster alongside BisuDagger a bunch iirc, and a reasonably prominent figure in the general community. It's frustrating I can't remember their name, but somone here will fill in I'm sure edit - it was amazingxkcd, they quit being staff and eventually asked to be perm'd, not as solid an example as I remembered. Oh well!)
Hey, thanks for the shoulder tap and remembering when I casted with AmazingXKCD!
On the Kwark issue:
I think we can all always be doing our best to talk to each other with respect and kindness. A difference of opinion isn't an excuse to say whatever we want to others. As referenced in one of the other nested posts, saying "Go F Yourself", as post content is not acceptable and should not exist on any of the pages of TL. Lately, I've seen more and more hateful content from both sides specifically in this forum. People condoning the murder or celebrating the deaths of individuals. I would like to call on everyone here to hit a reset button and focus on a culture of optimism, positivity. A culture that doesn't criticize the other side, but challenges the other side to think critically about a topic. And if you are on the other side of an opinion, I challenge you to open your mind to that discussion instead of throwing back attacks.
TLDR:
On October 09 2025 09:17 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2025 08:56 GreenHorizons wrote:
Does no one remember the "bullying is bad" era of moderation/thread consensus? I remember the years you spent insisting that everyone but you was literally complicit in genocide if that helps.
This guy is trying to remember a time when we actually tried to respect each other and moderate respect for each other on TL. You can't talk like this to people. This kind of rhetoric is just not okay. Let's please do better then this.
|
we need a poll: +Kwark / -Kwark. it would be enlightening(fun).
|
I was thinking about MPs point and how it would have played out in this situation and he is not completely wrong, it is just that I'm not sure it would be better.
So if KwarK had seen the post from Neb and instead of doing his style of takedown he had actioned it in the traditional mod way. The advantage to culture (as MP puts it) would be that people would be scared to post as Neb did, whereas instead they are trying to emulate KwarK's take downs themselves. The discussion about it and trash talk leaves the threads and happens in the ABL and also likely here.
Now the issue would be, and used to be consistency. There is no way someone reads every single post in these threads and remains unbiased. And a lot of the shittiest posting is not blatant insults but much more passive aggressive, or misrepresentation. Eventually we get to the same point where someone is fed up and this happens.
I think this way is better with pretty loose moderation, it is more fair. People can read KwarK's post and either enjoy it because they agree or dislike it and take some piss out of him. Neb faces no consequences if he chooses to ignore it and at worst some frustration.
If strict moderation could be done fairly and consistently it would likely be the best for good discussion, I do not think MP is wrong about that. I just do not think that it is realistically possible. So we are left to moderate ourselves. Well you may not like the tone, humor, style, or whatever of KwarKs reply, he does take the time to go through in detail why the post was nothing more than a fancy way of saying, nuhuh you just hate brown people. It won't change anything, but I'm not sure banning Neb does anything and given our numbers we really can't handle that many people being banned.
@bisu that is a very optimistic take on GH's post, but I do not think you would have that take if you had been reading the thread for years and GH had called you a genocide enabler over 300 times (that's real numbers, probably even low). So by all means KwarK should be better and we all should. But we are also all human and everyone can only take GH or whoever so many times before the optimism leaves and instead they are finding insults that might not exist, or in this thread likely do but are directed at someone else.
The stricter moderation didn't lead to less shit talk, it was just more passive aggressive.
|
@Bisu: I admire the sentiment and agree with a fair amount of what you said, but I hear “culture of optimism” and “not criticize the other side, but challenge them” about a US politics thread and I wonder if you’ve been following a different US politics than I have. We’re not really in “culture of optimism” times, you know?
|
A culture that doesn't criticize the other side, but challenges the other side to think critically about a topic That only works if everyone is arguing in good faith, which is very much not the case for everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
