|
Gumball Gumption posted:It's a Hitler gang tag about him as an artist, not as a genocide architect Sherman in the context of their actions during the civil war and nothing more. And nice  If you seriously think everyone wearing the GIP gangtag is endorsing Sherman's actions against Native Americans, you are out of your mind. And the Admins already agree, so you can keep dropping the hot takes, that's not something that's gonna get you any traction. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 15:31 on Oct 28, 2021 |
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 11:41 |
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:It's a Hitler gang tag about him as an artist, not as a genocide architect. Oh it reminds you of the genocide? Have you tried getting smarter you baby? This. We're celebrating calm hitler, not genocidal hitler.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:33
|
|
|
 John Lewis
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:34
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Sherman in the context of their actions during the civil war and nothing more. And nice I dont think they are the one out of their mind
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:35
|
|
|
If mods are essential workers, then just pay them lol I would moderate this forum for $15/hr. Ez
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:37
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
Idk. If you have a gang tag that opens you up to easy criticism, maybe you should accept that criticism instead of getting bizarrely defensive about it and hitting buttons to make the mean people go away
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:38
|
|
Nobody is saying Sherman's treatment of the Natives was not despicable. But the idea that you guys are going to go pretend gang tags are a wholly historical treatment of the people in the tag and something reflects the entirety of that person is hilarious.
|
Harry Potter on Ice posted:I dont think they are the one out of their mind You are posting on SomethingAwful, if you expected anything less than that, you probably should've set your sights a little lower. HashtagGirlboss posted:Idk. If you have a gang tag that opens you up to easy criticism, maybe you should accept that criticism instead of getting bizarrely defensive about it and hitting buttons to make the mean people go away Criticism? Sure. Constant white noise about "Oh you liked Sherman's crushing of the Confederacy ergo you endorse everything Sherman did rather than those specific events" in a joke GIF. That's not criticism. That's painting with broad strokes and being surprised that its a hot take.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:38
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:You are posting on SomethingAwful, if you expected anything less than that, you probably should've set your sights a little lower. So is your position then that nobody can point out that gang tag is in poor taste because it’s already been pointed out and you’ve decided the criticism is wrong and you shouldn’t ever have to hear it again? May I point out that this is a good example of using your buttons to win arguments
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:42
|
|
|
I have a question/mod feedback, why was this post probated? TwoQuestions posted:Bill's dead Why was it probated with a threat of a threadban? If the bill does die, as seems likely now, will the poster be unprobated or compensated or even apologized to? This was done at 11pm est last night, after days of discussion about how threadbans aren't the way to go. Repeatedly in fact this poster has been probated for "doomposting," and in none of them is rude or even particularly unrealistic. Was it just because you didn't agree with the posts? What rule was being broken, and is that rule evenly applied?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:42
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
I hate to break it to you dude, but when you endorse a person, you are endorsing the person. Like, there is a difference between "I love the Cthulu stories" and "I love H.P. Lovecraft," because Lovecraft was a racist gently caress. When you endorse Sherman, what you're saying is "I think that his role in the civil war excuses or outweighs his role in indigenous genocide."
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:43
|
|
|
HashtagGirlboss posted:So is your position then that nobody can point out that gang tag is in poor taste because it’s already been pointed out and you’ve decided the criticism is wrong and you shouldn’t ever have to hear it again? If I was doing so, I would've already hit you with a sixer. Surprisingly, I'm not. Muscle Tracer posted:I hate to break it to you dude, but when you endorse a person, you are endorsing the person. Like, there is a difference between "I love the Cthulu stories" and "I love H.P. Lovecraft," because Lovecraft was a racist gently caress. When you endorse Sherman, what you're saying is "I think that his role in the civil war excuses or outweighs his role in indigenous genocide." Where in the GIF does it say "We love Sherman". Its specifically highlight his Civil War actions, the crushing of Confederacy, are we pretending he wasn't the one who did that now? If The March to the Sea was a Cthulu story, would we pretend Sherman was not the main character? Its highlighting a specific scope of actions in relation to a specific portion of history.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:44
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:You are posting on SomethingAwful, if you expected anything less than that, you probably should've set your sights a little lower. Why are you still posting in this thread? Every single one of your posts is hostile against the userbase. It's a feedback thread. The feedback is that the Sherman tag is pretty dumb. It's not your sacred duty to defend the gang tag.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:45
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:If I was doing so, I would've already hit you with a sixer. Surprisingly, I'm not. Are we expected to be gracious you aren't abusing your mod powers in this instance?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:46
|
|
|
Can someone probe CG again so that we can actually have a conversation itt again? And now 2 days later, can FoS respond to the multiple effortposts he demanded about sexual assault and then ignored, again? jesus loving christ
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:46
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:If I was doing so, I would've already hit you with a sixer. Surprisingly, I'm not. So is pointing out that the Sherman gang tag is in poor taste probable or not? If it isn’t, why did you probe lib or let die? If it is, go ahead and probe me over it because I agree it’s in bad taste, not because I want to own you, but because I think celebrating Sherman in light of his treatment of native Americans is in very poor taste
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:47
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
Can you stop with the sarcastic defensive bullshit? It really undermines the point of a feedback thread when this is how you respond to legitimate criticism. I didn't say that you endorse all of Sherman's history. But the problem is that the genocide is obviously not a deal breaker for you. "Sure he did some genocide, but he did a lot of other good things too" is just a softer form of genocide denial.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:47
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:I didn't say that you endorse all of Sherman's history. But the problem is that the genocide is obviously not a deal breaker for you. "Sure he did some genocide, but he did a lot of other good things too" is just a softer form of genocide denial. Fister Roboto posted:I didn't say that you endorse all of Sherman's history. You quite literally just did. HashtagGirlboss posted:So is pointing out that the Sherman gang tag is in poor taste probable or not? If it isn’t, why did you probe lib or let die? If it is, go ahead and probe me over it because I agree it’s in bad taste, not because I want to own you, but because I think celebrating Sherman in light of his treatment of native Americans is in very poor taste He got a sixer for trolling. He knew what the Gangtag was about but was stirring the pot to get exactly the responses you are providing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:48
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:You quite literally just did. You can't read if that's how you're taking that comment. Jesus christ dude. Stop defending a mass murderer it's not loving hard.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:49
|
|
|
Bring back threadbans, but for CommieGIR
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:50
|
|
|
This thread is for d&d feedback not inane gotchas about gang tags.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:50
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:This thread is for d&d feedback not inane gotchas about gang tags. That’s fair, but my question is should a mod or ik be using their buttons because somebody pointed out that their tag is in poor taste?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:52
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:You quite literally just did. No, it's honestly the same argument you seem to miss about what people mean when they say voting for biden or trump also minimizes bad past behavior. You don't necessary endorse or agree with everything they did, but the (genocide/rape/racism/etc) obviously wasn't such a dealbreaker that you won't still (gangtag him/vote for him/idolize him/defend him). You just feel whatever the upside is, it's worth overlooking the past. Others may or may not agree, and everyone sets where the line is differently. That's why we debate and discuss it. e; Sorry I guess that was slapfighty, I'll drop it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:53
|
|
|
.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:53
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:This thread is for d&d feedback not inane gotchas about gang tags. What if your feedback is that mod abused their powers? (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:54
|
|
|
I think having a Sherman gang tag is like dropping the r word. You can do it but people are going to call you out for it and there will be consequences in general If you like it that’s fine, but don’t get defensive when people point out that it’s in really poor taste
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 15:55
|
|
|
I wonder how many people complaining about the Sherman gang tag have a Facebook account (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:00
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I wonder how many people complaining about the Sherman gang tag have a Facebook account They said drop it, we're all dropping it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:04
|
|
|
I can't speak to a lot of the problems going on here, but one of the main ones is people wanting 'bad' posters to be removed by people with a lot of Posting time on their hands being nasty to them until they leave, instead of via internal website functions that make people unable to post. I can't think of a single reason why anyone would think they'd be able to acheive this state of things in the Serious Politics forum, but it seems some believe they can just like..manifest D&D into being this kind of forum by obsessing about it and trying really hard to chase mods away until there are none left.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:04
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I wonder how many people complaining about the Sherman gang tag have a Facebook account I’m not following your point? My feedback is that that is an example of a bad probe because the criticism, whether in good faith or not, is valid criticism and Commie opened themself up to it be sporting the tag. If mods can give you sizers for pointing out that the things they do or say are in poor taste than what’s the rule you’re aiming to enforce? Are we back to mod sass being probable? Are mods and iks just allowed to use their buttons to tell people making valid points to go away? The tag itself is far less interesting to me than the response to the tag Edit: I’ll drop it because I don’t think I’ll get any feedback which is honestly a shame (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:04
|
|
|
Heck Yes! Loam! posted:I wonder how many people complaining about the Sherman gang tag have a Facebook account This is the second time now you've just straight slapfight insulted posters. Heck Yes! Loam! posted:A hit dog will holler Mod feedback: I don't understand why some people are getting threadbanned and probated for posting feedback but this poo poo is allowed. This is what I mean when I say moderation here is totally inconsistent and based on what "team" the mods think you're on. Hey JFY, this is the type of stuff! Right here in this thread! I said it like 20 pages ago! Skyl3lazer posted:When rules aren't enforced evenly (clearly isn't even as much of an issue!) then sure people will avoid posting, because they don't understand what's allowed. Even if the rules are clear, that will be the case with uneven enforcement. But, it's important to realize, that even a consistent moderation will have people that don't agree or want to deal with it. That can be ok - after all, a "no nazis" rule might annoy nazis, but you don't want them posting anyway. Right now part of the problem with this mod team is that the rules are enforced "evenly," but the rules aren't ones people want to engage with. Extremely importantly in fact, the rules aren't actually the ones posted in the rules thread up top, even if you don't realize it. Adding more mods or rules to the list won't address what it is people don't like about the forum. That's the reason I argue for a rebuild of D&D. Tinkering with the rules or adding or removing a mod isn't going to change the environment enough at this point.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:04
|
|
|
Here’s a proposed D&D rule: you can’t say lmao or lol unless you are actually, physically laughing. This will be enforced via mandatory computer/phone camera monitoring, which will be done by AI. If you post lmao while the AI determines you are Mad, Actually, it’s an automated ban+30. This is a very serious suggestion. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:17
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Here’s a proposed D&D rule: you can’t say lmao or lol unless you are actually, physically laughing. This will be enforced via mandatory computer/phone camera monitoring, which will be done by AI. If you post lmao while the AI determines you are Mad, Actually, it’s an automated ban+30. 100% behind this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:19
|
|
|
Skyl3lazer posted:I have a question/mod feedback, why was this post probated? Would like to know more about this since the thread isnt focused on CG anymore. has Ralph read this thread?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:33
|
|
|
Would it be possible to hear from the mods on what they believe the problems are in DnD? I know that FoS made a good post about posters abusing the rules to win arguments. Could we hear more stuff like that? Why does the mod team believe that DnD has become so toxic? Or do they not believe it's toxic in the first place? Would be good to know. If I missed any significant mod input in the nearly 30 pages itt please point it out. Also possible that the 60 page qcs thread had some stuff I was missing. I dunno, lots of words flying around. Also people have been hurling "suggestions" at the mod team for almost a week now and it feels like a lot of them have been dismissed outright. I'm not even sure the posters and the mods are on the same page so I'm not sure what the next step in this process should even be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:34
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Here’s a proposed D&D rule: you can’t say lmao or lol unless you are actually, physically laughing. This will be enforced via mandatory computer/phone camera monitoring, which will be done by AI. If you post lmao while the AI determines you are Mad, Actually, it’s an automated ban+30. This is why I get completely jokerfied before posting
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:34
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:36
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Also people have been hurling "suggestions" at the mod team for almost a week now and it feels like a lot of them have been dismissed outright. I'm not even sure the posters and the mods are on the same page so I'm not sure what the next step in this process should even be. No? That's not entirely true, there was discussion around some feedback, but in the end we have to take all this thread, condense it and go over the feedback with an admin. Its going to take a while. Pamela Springstein posted:Would like to know more about this since the thread isnt focused on CG anymore. has Ralph read this thread? Yes, they have. There's a lot going on behind the scenes with Ralph, FoS, EHF, and other Mods (including me) relating to this thread. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 16:48 on Oct 28, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:40
|
|
|
I feel that the suggestion to ban conservative view points is just opening pandora's box by giving ammo to the posters with the most extreme viewpoints to redefine moderate views as "conservative" in order to demand mod enforcement action on beliefs or positions they disagree with. I think the core to a lot of the conflict here is that for a good chunk of people they are not able to respect the opinions they disagree with. Most people here agree (as do I) that universal non-means tested government programs are good policy; but this is not a majority view among people in real life. And many people to a varying degree of education on the topic, will have concerns and opposing view points and it should be possible to respectfully Discuss and Disagree with those views in a respectful manner. Because what if they have a good point? People should want to strive for the optimal solution and not just the right solution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:46
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Would it be possible to hear from the mods on what they believe the problems are in DnD? I know that FoS made a good post about posters abusing the rules to win arguments. Could we hear more stuff like that? Why does the mod team believe that DnD has become so toxic? Or do they not believe it's toxic in the first place? Would be good to know. I wrote this in a mod discussion the other day and while it's a social-media-wide phenomenon, SA definitely isn't escaping its effects. fool of sound posted:I hate that increasingly every discussion venue is replaced with a "community", and I hate that people pretend their little parasocial cliques are a community. The dozen superstar posters in a megathread or a subreddit or a big discord don't know each other in any sort of personal way, much less know all the less active members of their little "community". Recognizing a username or avatar isn't a relationship, no matter how much you like their posts. The saddest, angriest people take charge because they've substituted actual caring about other people with caring about the place they like to post about video game or communism or how much they hate women. This poo poo directly leads to the obsessive inter-clique grudges and warfare via dogpiles and playing the refs. I don't think there's really any way of unringing that bell though, all we can really do is be aware of it and mitigate the effects to the best of our abilities.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 11:41 |
|
|
This is one of the problems with the modding right here. You've got a mod in the feedback thread getting in multiple aggro slapfights and then punishing the people they're arguing with. If you want to say "gang tag feedback rejected, no more gang tag chat in the feedback thread" then fine, but why are you punishing someone for bringing it up then continuing the derail yourself for pages, then punishing people for taking part in an argument you're involved in too. I'm still putting together my feedback but this is one of the problems that creates resentment: mods dealing with an argument they don't want to see by punishing the people they disagree with rather than say everyone involved if the derail is so egregious that it has to be stopped. Even worse when the mod is one of the participants riling people up with sarcastic remarks instead of just saying "hey stop talking about this" E: and for the record I agree with CG that the gang tag is a silly gotcha, I'm just commenting on how this thread is being managed and how this is an example of the kind of viewpoint bias people are complaining about. Not that CG woke up and said "aha I will probe people I disagree with today" but how mods tend to blame and punish the side of an argument they disagree with for the whole argument. It's just especially noticeable here when the mod is one of the participants. VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 16:59 on Oct 28, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2021 16:53
|
|