US Politics Feedback Thread - Page 273
Forum Index > Website Feedback |
Nebuchad
Switzerland11926 Posts
| ||
GreenHorizons
United States22694 Posts
On January 19 2020 04:27 LegalLord wrote: Sure, why not, since this group generally seems interested in that: 1. GH posts as he usually does - in my eyes, generally outspoken but also quite a frequent poster, who occasionally gets into those less-than-cordial debates with others. Not always a perfect poster, but no one else is, either. Not bad overall. 2. Neb is... kinda sorta in the same boat? I hear him talk about others being generally hostile to him for his outspoken opinions, but I do have a hard time actually seeing it play out that way. 3. "Good person" JimmiC isn't that much different from either of the two above, but clearly has an addiction to baiting GH. He's not bad outside of that, and generally a pretty constructive poster, but it's a pretty annoying habit. 4. Seeker is acting in a way that isn't really very becoming of a moderator. Choosing obvious a priori favorites and consistently making rather petty remarks, such as the one above about GH being childish. It feels like that approach to moderation does breed the same childish attitude in the thread itself, because the way the moderators moderate does define the mood of the rest of the posters. 5. He didn't come in here, but DMCD does do a lot of really questionable characterizations of the positions of others, so I'm mildly confused why those characterizations are taking center stage in this little meta-discussion. I appreciate the input. I'm not one to shy away from an argument but it's been made clear to me that no one wants to read through every time I disagree with something. It's also why I didn't drag out my interaction with xxio. Simply made my point and moved on. Something people have probably noticed in other instances where I simply stop responding to what strikes me as bait or willful misrepresentation or just a general lack of good-faith interaction. People who are long time thread members know that even the worst I've directed at JimmiC isn't as bad as others got (and gave) before his time (frequent posting in the US politics thread). | ||
brian
United States9610 Posts
| ||
![]()
KwarK
United States41979 Posts
On January 19 2020 00:37 GreenHorizons wrote: I appreciate Neb speaking up and just hope others express their observations. What Neb said. | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
Nebuchad bears a fair bit of the blame (for example, this pointless bait post and the conversation following it) for the nature of his relationship with JimmiC. | ||
Nebuchad
Switzerland11926 Posts
| ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On January 19 2020 11:15 Nebuchad wrote: Yeah, I wrote a dumb post once in november and immediately admitted that it was dumb. Sorry! You admitted it was dumb when I intervened, at which point you switched into trying to get me to say JimmiC had made dumb posts as well. You were transparently trying to stir shit. And let's not pretend this was the only time you've done that. | ||
Nebuchad
Switzerland11926 Posts
On January 19 2020 11:17 Aquanim wrote: You admitted it was dumb when I intervened, at which point you switched into trying to get me to say JimmiC had made dumb posts as well. You were transparently trying to stir shit. And let's not pretend this was the only time you've done that. Had Jimmi made dumb posts as well? Did I get you to say it? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On January 19 2020 11:21 Nebuchad wrote: Had Jimmi made dumb posts as well? Did I get you to say it? Anybody who wants the answers to those questions can read the thread around the linked post themselves. I have no interest in entertaining your attempts to distract from your own blatantly and unambigously shit behaviour. | ||
Nebuchad
Switzerland11926 Posts
On January 19 2020 11:24 Aquanim wrote: Anybody who wants the answers to those questions can read the thread around the linked post themselves. I have no interest in entertaining your attempts to distract from your own blatantly and unambigously shit behaviour. How am I distracting? You are right, that was shitty of me. It's fair that you kept the receipts so that you could get me today, no question. I just wish you'd keep them for other people as well. I tried to find some of this stuff for one of the posts in here today but it's hard to find it again. | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22694 Posts
On January 19 2020 11:24 Aquanim wrote: Anybody who wants the answers to those questions can read the thread around the linked post themselves. I have no interest in entertaining your attempts to distract from your own blatantly and unambigously shit behaviour. That seems a bit of a harsh description unless you'd use it describe a lot of posters behavior. | ||
Nebuchad
Switzerland11926 Posts
On January 19 2020 11:34 GreenHorizons wrote: That seems a bit of a harsh description unless you'd use it describe a lot of posters behavior. Nah it was a shitpost, no question. I was getting tired of Jimmi doing his shit and I posted something I shouldn't have. | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22694 Posts
On January 19 2020 11:35 Nebuchad wrote: Nah it was a shitpost, no question. I was getting tired of Jimmi doing his shit and I posted something I shouldn't have. Fair enough, I noticed it as out of character at the time On January 19 2020 11:32 Nebuchad wrote: How am I distracting? You are right, that was shitty of me. It's fair that you kept the receipts so that you could get me today, no question. I just wish you'd keep them for other people as well. I tried to find some of this stuff for one of the posts in here today but it's hard to find it again. This ^ was more my point anyway I suppose | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On January 19 2020 11:41 GreenHorizons wrote: This ^ was more my point anyway I suppose Precisely which point are you referring to? edit: If you're referring to Nebuchad's comment as to whose posts I can or choose to produce, well... I'm sure it would be nice for y'all if I contributed to your efforts to bait, taunt and ostracise DMCD, JimmiC, etc., but that's not really my kind of game tyvm. | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22694 Posts
On January 19 2020 11:54 Aquanim wrote: Precisely which point are you referring to? edit: If you're referring to Nebuchad's comment as to whose posts I can or choose to produce, well... I'm sure it would be nice for y'all if I contributed to your efforts to bait, taunt and ostracise DMCD, JimmiC, etc., but that's not really my kind of game tyvm. You not think there are several posts similar or worse than that example you gave of Neb from them? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
On January 19 2020 12:50 GreenHorizons wrote: You not think there are several posts similar or worse than that example you gave of Neb from them? I'm sure most all of us have made worse posts (especially a few years ago when the moderators didn't give a shit about the politics threads). Fundamentally, though, I think they are on this website with (broadly speaking) good intentions, and you're not. | ||
Nebuchad
Switzerland11926 Posts
On January 19 2020 12:54 Aquanim wrote: Fundamentally, though, I think they are on this website with (broadly speaking) good intentions, and you're not. What about me? | ||
Aquanim
Australia2849 Posts
"(Broadly speaking) good intentions" is probably the best first-order estimate. | ||
Jealous
10097 Posts
On January 19 2020 10:58 Aquanim wrote: I thought the mods did the right thing when they permbanned GH, they did the wrong thing when they brought him back, and they continue to do the wrong thing by not permbanning him again. He's just getting cleverer and more subtle at bullying and baiting people and making it look like the other person bears more of the blame than they actually do. As a person who only reads and doesn't contribute because I don't know/care enough about politics but enjoy learning through reading others' discourse, I have to mostly agree with this purely from a conversational point of view. While I don't think that any of the headline actors in the thread are innocent of any of the things levied against GH, I find the manner in which he develops conversation to be the most stifling on the long term, and it necessarily draws people like JimmiC and their frustration into the equation through the manner more so than the content itself. To provide a slightly more precise example, a common theme that led me to stop reading GH-involved posts past a certain point would go as follows: Anyone: News story that bodes doom and gloom. GH: The only appropriate answer is revolution. Anyone else: I'm okay with a revolution, but how would it go? GH: It's not my place to tell you how a revolution should go, but we need one, and it needs to be a violent upheaval. Anyone at all: Can you at least tell me how a violent revolution would accomplish these things, then? GH: You don't know anything because you haven't read enough literature to discuss this topic, good bye. And this structure repeats over multiple topics and conversations ad nauseam. Again, I will repeat that GH is not the only one who contributes to the overall degradation of conversation in the thread. I will acknowledge that he does make informed and intelligent posts. However, he is the first to come to mind when I think of people who simply stifle conversation by making it impossible to participate - and this is from an outsider's perspective. So, I may not be as involved so in that sense I acknowledge that my opinion should be taken with a grain of salt. | ||
GreenHorizons
United States22694 Posts
On January 19 2020 12:54 Aquanim wrote: I'm sure most all of us have made worse posts (especially a few years ago when the moderators didn't give a shit about the politics threads). Fundamentally, though, I think they are on this website with (broadly speaking) good intentions, and you're not. I know I can be a bit abrasive, but this genuinely concerns me. If not the "(broadly speaking) good intentions" you see in others, what intentions do you believe I have? On January 19 2020 13:50 Jealous wrote: As a person who only reads and doesn't contribute because I don't know/care enough about politics but enjoy learning through reading others' discourse, I have to mostly agree with this purely from a conversational point of view. While I don't think that any of the headline actors in the thread are innocent of any of the things levied against GH, I find the manner in which he develops conversation to be the most stifling on the long term, and it necessarily draws people like JimmiC and their frustration into the equation through the manner more so than the content itself. To provide a slightly more precise example, a common theme that led me to stop reading GH-involved posts past a certain point would go as follows: Anyone: News story that bodes doom and gloom. GH: The only appropriate answer is revolution. Anyone else: I'm okay with a revolution, but how would it go? GH: It's not my place to tell you how a revolution should go, but we need one, and it needs to be a violent upheaval. Anyone at all: Can you at least tell me how a violent revolution would accomplish these things, then? GH: You don't know anything because you haven't read enough literature to discuss this topic, good bye. And this structure repeats over multiple topics and conversations ad nauseam. Again, I will repeat that GH is not the only one who contributes to the overall degradation of conversation in the thread. I will acknowledge that he does make informed and intelligent posts. However, he is the first to come to mind when I think of people who simply stifle conversation by making it impossible to participate - and this is from an outsider's perspective. So, I may not be as involved so in that sense I acknowledge that my opinion should be taken with a grain of salt. I appreciate the feedback and I'm sorry about my previous joke in this thread at your expense (and mine lol). I just want to clarify something now so it doesn't remain an issue: I don't want a violent upheaval. I want a peaceful and democratic electoral transition from where we are in the US to a socialist economy for a multitude of reasons I'm happy to explain at length at the appropriate time and place (Neb's post lays out a skeleton of some). I think those are unrealistic/improbable desires for myself (and by extension others) for a multitude of reasons I am also happy to explain at length in the appropriate venue. With that in mind, I, like many others (Gorsameth comes to mind as someone that recently expressed this sentiment) think it all ending violently is a likely outcome. As Neb pointed out, and I basically agree, politics is a lot about defining the acceptable targets of that violence (keep in mind the US arms and supports a country that intentionally makes school buses and hospitals the target of bombing tier violence My politics finds that violence unacceptable). | ||
| ||