|
DeadlyMuffin posted:We need to stop treating this like a team sport. You interpret comments about some members of a group you belong to as applying to the entire group, and take offense to it. Two years ago, you were advocating for America to intervene on the Palestinian behalf as part of your argument defending America arming the Ukrainians against the Russians. If you're doing this much pearl-clutching over Hamas, a group America doesn't fund, while shrugging about the Azov Battalion, my question is, why should anyone take you seriously? I'd argue one of the more major problems with D&D is its insistence in taking arguments like yours seriously but also if engagement with posters like you goes too long and lapses even a smidge with formality when it comes to these ridiculous claims, punishment incurs. It is, to put it as nicely as possible, an unbalanced ratio of effort.
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2024 23:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 12:05 |
|
|
Majorian posted:It's a little difficult not to take offense to someone saying that a group I belong to doesn't genuinely oppose genocide, and instead is only doing it to get at Joe Biden. That's the sort of thing you say when you want someone to take offense, especially when you should know better, as MP absolutely should. In addition to heavily implying that we don't genuinely oppose genocide, posters also get away with directly accusing us of supporting genocide if we dare criticize Joe Biden: small butter posted:Why does B B lust for the death of Palestinian men, women, and children? This post was reported and I even messaged a mod about, but never got a reply. Criticizing Joe Biden is also enough to warrant being called a fascist: Skex posted:Just say that you are a fascist already cause that's who and what you seem to support. Koos: Are these types of posts within the rules of D&D?
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2024 23:03
|
|
|
WarpedLichen posted:I agree with this, probes after the fact just serves to piss people off - having a mod just telling people to knock it off when things get dumb (circular, heated, trolling, etc) would be best. Agree with this. What's the point of rolling through and handing out a 24-hour probe for a post like this when you're doing it a week after the fact in a mostly dead thread? Is it just to remind that poster to continue not posting in that thread? DeadlyMuffin posted:Part of the issue is that what once person considers debunked is not the same as another person. In the I/P thread there are people who see any indication that a journalist has interacted with the Israeli government as disqualifying, and pointing it out is enough to debunk a source. So if someone posts one of those sources there's a bunch of whining about how it's already debunked and shouldn't ever be discussed again. I think this is a gross misrepresentation of what's going on in that thread, and it would benefit your argument to provide some links to what you're talking about. I don't think what you describe has happened recently. The only instance I can think of that kind of fits was a while ago, when the thread was covering how a particular NYT article on sexual violence on October 7th was suspect, and discussing the reasons why. This subject was covered in great detail, and the thread concluded that this article is not credible. Less than two pages later, a new account joins the discussion and starts rapid firing a bunch of obvious propaganda that is immediately shown to be false. That user then also reposts the NYT article the thread just covered, and people get obviously frustrated and tell them it's been debunked and to read the thread. Are you referring to something else? Esran fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Mar 11, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2024 23:15
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:My sincere advice is that Discendo Vox be made D&D moderator. He has categorically refused to hold any position of power on SA. Main Paineframe posted:On the other hand, there are definitely people posting "nothing matters" stuff on a regular basis. Especially in the Trump Legal Matters thread, where every single thing that happens is routinely met with at least one person insisting that Trump is immune to legal consequences and will surely be bailed out by a billionaire or freed from consequences by a judge or simply declare that the consequences won't count because he's rich or will be president. It's very repetitive and annoying to have to respond to that stuff each and every time, especially since it's well-trod ground at this point and the counter-arguments are basically the same every time. skeleton warrior posted:I agree that this is an inherent issue for D&D that we don't have an answer to. There's no debate or discussion between "Trump has received no visible constraints on his lifestyle and ability to spout incendiary bullshit and therefore has not seen anything that could be considered consequences" and "Trump has been assigned penalties by our court system and therefore has received consequences, even if the financial details of them and how they affect him are completely hidden from public view" because those are opposite positions starting from opposite pretenses and have nothing new to say on either side. The same with "our system can be meaningfully reformed" vs. "reform will never be meaningful enough and only revolution is acceptable". Nobody has anything new or convincing to say on that, but a bunch of people think they do. Marenghi posted:A mod stepping in to tell people to knock it off when discussion gets pulled down into petty slap fights would probably go a long way to improving discussion. Rather than coming by a few days later and randomly probing the participants of said slap fight. WarpedLichen posted:I agree with this, probes after the fact just serves to piss people off - having a mod just telling people to knock it off when things get dumb (circular, heated, trolling, etc) would be best. I agree that the late responses to incidents are a problem. This is due in part to the current mod team as a whole not being active enough, and I'm looking into ways to fix this, such as getting more mods or making clearing reports easier or more rewarding. I'm also going to try to be more personally proactive myself, in the mean time. After reading and thinking about things in this thread, I'm considering the possibility that the root cause of multiple problems such as the mod inactivity and proliferation of arguments no one wants to read is my beloved rule delineation. It may cause mods to feel too constrained to probate poor posts that don't fall into one of the specific categories (or that do, but they don't realize it). Though having moderation that is objective as possible is good for a debate forum where we're trying to avoid bias, we may also need to be more confident when making subjective rulings, by keeping in mind that even the most objective moderation will still produce discontentment and accusations of bias. These are things we'll have to deal with no matter what, which we can't hide from, behind objective rules or otherwise. The point of this would still be to keep discussion interesting and debate fair, honest and satisfying. So it would still be a priority to remain ideologically neutral and foster a diversity of viewpoints. An informative case study to figure out how to do this would probably be Cinci's moderation of the Russo-Ukrainian War thread. He was a genuinely biased mod, who would use rules as ex post facto justifications for actions motivated by disagreement. However, I also received frequent feedback that the thread was high quality, and the leeway he was given seemed to be part of why he was willing to be so proactive in moderating it. So I'd like to figure out some way to have our cake and eat it too, having the best aspects of what Cinci did without the bias, if such a thing is possible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2024 23:17
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:It was stated once that the objective here was to create the Calmest Hitler. How far along to that goal are we and who are the current candidates? Everything I say in D&D is meant seriously, but things I say about D&D on other boards may be joking or trolling.
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2024 23:19
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:Two years ago, you were advocating for America to intervene on the Palestinian behalf as part of your argument defending America arming the Ukrainians against the Russians. If you're doing this much pearl-clutching over Hamas, a group America doesn't fund, while shrugging about the Azov Battalion, my question is, why should anyone take you seriously? I would still love to see the US intervene on the behalf of Palestinians. I'm not holding my breath, obviously. I'm not sure why you think I'm unwilling to discuss Ukranian shortcomings. I do think scaremongering about the Azov battalion is is overblown by people trying to paint the Ukranian side as Nazis. They aren't mutually exclusive. I also think that there is more gray area ethically with Hamas than with the Ukranian government. That's probably inevitable when one is a government and one is in large part a resistance group, although they're the elected government in Gaza. The fact that you see this as some sort of gotcha, or frankly that you're tracking my positions over years, is evidence of your own fixation with me than anything wrong with D&D. Probably Magic posted:I'd argue one of the more major problems with D&D is its insistence in taking arguments like yours seriously but also if engagement with posters like you goes too long and lapses even a smidge with formality when it comes to these ridiculous claims, punishment incurs. It is, to put it as nicely as possible, an unbalanced ratio of effort. This just reads as a weird grudge, and that you're mad about seeing my posts in a place where you have to have a moderated discussion, as opposed to the CCCC thread where I have posted with you before. Esran posted:Are you referring to something else? Yeah, I'm referring to an earlier discussion. I can dig up a link this evening DeadlyMuffin fucked around with this message at 23:44 on Mar 11, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2024 23:38
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Everything I say in D&D is meant seriously, but things I say about D&D on other boards may be joking or trolling. I can't believe you don't take SAD seriously 
|
|
#
?
Mar 11, 2024 23:54
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:No. Your decision to refuse to consider the source of media when you find it rhetorically convenient to do so does not mean that I do not scrutinize the content of media. The "schism" is the degree of tolerance shown for your interest in making GBS threads up the forum, as demonstrated by your rapsheet. I think they considered the source of the media, considering its from the mouth of the defacto Yemeni PM and not some random guy off the street.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 04:34
|
|
|
Homeless Friend posted:I think they considered the source of the media, considering its from the mouth of the defacto Yemeni PM and not some random guy off the street. Yeah, Vox didn’t like the message so he had a tantrum about who was relaying the message. I’m glad he was probated for that because he failed a basic test in having debate and discussion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 04:51
|
|
|
B B posted:Koos: Are these types of posts within the rules of D&D? No they are not, and I apologize.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 05:10
|
|
|
I can understand "This is Iranian state media" but the concept of 'softball interview' isn't unique to Iran. I read the New York Times despite knowing it has seemingly boosted every war since I've been alive but you can discern, and in fact must discern, what is factual, what is state stenography yourself to some extent. We don't get the privilege to pull the truth from the aether. Posting any source is in fact useful because you yourself can interpret further, its why I like people who gimmick post whole articles, since finding sources is actual work and I appreciate when it is done for free. Fact is there are not an overwhelming availability of sources of "Interviews with Abdel-Aziz bin Habtour on the Red Sea and Palestinian/Israeli Conflict" so even if he shows himself in the best possible light, that itself is not peculiar.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 05:17
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:No. Your decision to refuse to consider the source of media when you find it rhetorically convenient to do so does not mean that I do not scrutinize the content of media. The "schism" is the degree of tolerance shown for your interest in making GBS threads up the forum, as demonstrated by your rapsheet. It appears that's the only source for what the Houthi prime minister said. Should he have not posted it at all?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 05:21
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Though having moderation that is objective as possible is good for a debate forum where we're trying to avoid bias, we may also need to be more confident when making subjective rulings, by keeping in mind that even the most objective moderation will still produce discontentment and accusations of bias. These are things we'll have to deal with no matter what, which we can't hide from, behind objective rules or otherwise. I'll break kayfabe for a moment here and respond to this seriously. Cinci's success, IMO (as someone who lives next to Russia, so  bias alert) was predicated on three things. First, he was blunt and crude which can be amusing, and this is the least helpful point I suppose. Second, there was a demand for the specific type of approach the thread's tenor took under his reign, namely that Russia were and are conducting a horrifying and international law defying, unprovoked war of aggression, while sprinkling war crimes and crimes against humanity into the mix. Third, there were avenues for the opposing viewpoint (such as is it) elsewhere on the site, as a release valve. This is difficult to generalize; C-SPAM's existence does not seem to ameliorate the liberal-left divide (for lack of better monikers for the "sides", apologies), and as the grudges seem to be fairly deep by this point, the same issues more or less repeat themselves across threads. I think we (as in D&D) have three separate threads, more or less on topic, discussing the moral and health failings of Joseph Robinette Biden at the moment (probably more, I don't read all the USpol-adjacent threads), with similar logical fallacies or debate foibles reoccurring like clockwork. There have been calls for some sort of "thunderdome" every now and then over the years, but this approach would have its own issues. We can't really escape the fact that some people have fundamentally differing axioms with which they approach political issues, and the tools available on the SA forums where serious politics discussion is permissible simply don't allow for soft solutions on squaring that circle. Other than slowly killing off all serious political discussion in Dungeons and Debates, of course, most people eventually get bored.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 06:31
|
|
|
On the topic of doomposting above; one of the more irritating things that has been happening in various places, but particularly in relation to the I/P thread, is people who show up to constantly derail any concept of nuanced opinion with a definitive blanket statement that can't be engaged with or refuted. In the I/P thread in particular, you get a bunch of drive-by sniping of any conversations regarding the complicated issue of support for Israel among the populace (and its political ramifications) with a dismissal of "nah, biden is a turbo zionist who loves genocide, it's that simple and it's not worth having any other discussion". Some of it comes with very old (and, to be fair, factually accurate) statements from Biden during his days as a senator, but most of the time it's just a pithy one-liner dismissal designed to shut down discussion and eliminate nuance from a difficult topic. It's essentially the along the same lines as the frivolous doomposting that was talked about otherwise, and mostly just serves to be a form of venting that everything is bad and it's impossible to get better. To be specific, I'm not arguing that such a *position* lacks merit, just that it's frustrating when it's presented in a way that's designed to kill nuanced discussion. Politics is complex and it's frustrating when discussion of those complexities gets killed by a rejection of that nuance. This is not the only position of this type, but it is the most recent and pernicious. Regarding cinci / the Ukraine thread, sometimes it can be beneficial to have a mod that is biased against the type of "positions" that tend to be bandied about in bad faith, good enough at recognizing that kind of bad faith arguing, *and* is active enough in the thread to act on it before it gets to suck the thread into a morass of bad faith bullshit that derails it for days on end. When there are common positions that are difficult to discuss and defend in good faith, having someone who is willing to at least have their bullshit-o-meter start at "probably bullshit" helps keep things on track.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 08:27
|
|
|
Since D&D has a large amount of articles being posted as a matter of course - either to focus discussion on their contents or to be used to back up a claim - I think it would be useful to add novamute's "Posts With Links Only" bookmarklet to the D&D Rules thread so it can be conveniently found and its proper use explained (specifically that it's a tool of convenience in aiding thread navigation, not a method to find The Most Important Posts). I personally can attest to it making threads focused on heavy subjects (such as armed conflicts or mass death) significantly more digestible.novamute posted:I made a small bookmarklet to automatically filter this thread down to just posts with tweets, external links, or external images to help catch up when I inevitably fall 100 pages behind. Figured I'd post it here in case it helps anybody else stay current. Just remove the space between java and script and add it as a bookmark then you can click it on the pages you want to filter down. (the actual code has been removed because SA gets fussy when I try to include it, but it can be found in the original quoted post)
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 10:08
|
|
|
Kith posted:Since D&D has a large amount of articles being posted as a matter of course - either to focus discussion on their contents or to be used to back up a claim - I think it would be useful to add novamute's "Posts With Links Only" bookmarklet to the D&D Rules thread so it can be conveniently found and its proper use explained (specifically that it's a tool of convenience in aiding thread navigation, not a method to find The Most Important Posts). I personally can attest to it making threads focused on heavy subjects (such as armed conflicts or mass death) significantly more digestible. Oh, that's a neat idea, thanks for posting it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 13:20
|
|
|
Everything's mostly business as usual but Isreal v Palestine remains an absolutely cursed subject and will go deranged for entire pages Reinstate martial law and make lengthy threadbans a common feature
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 16:20
|
|
|
Staluigi posted:Everything's mostly business as usual but Isreal v Palestine remains an absolutely cursed subject and will go deranged for entire pages OK, why?
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 16:58
|
|
|
Seven Deadly Sins posted:Regarding cinci / the Ukraine thread, sometimes it can be beneficial to have a mod that is biased against the type of "positions" that tend to be bandied about in bad faith, good enough at recognizing that kind of bad faith arguing, *and* is active enough in the thread to act on it before it gets to suck the thread into a morass of bad faith bullshit that derails it for days on end. When there are common positions that are difficult to discuss and defend in good faith, having someone who is willing to at least have their bullshit-o-meter start at "probably bullshit" helps keep things on track. If the moderation team chooses members of a subgroup to police themselves and their biases align, they will protect their subgroup, it propagates a cycle where posters can push the boundaries ever so slightly on and on, and in extreme cases (like the war) it very quickly turns into the absolutely deranged Ukraine thread(s) where posters commonly posted insane things like:
In any case the conclusion to take from Cinci's tenure is that while yes, moderators are more inclined to be active members of the forums when they're exactly as deranged and biased as the posters they unfairly protect, it also totally ruins the presumed goal of D&D, so it's not a worthwhile trade-off. This has been pointed out by other posters many times over the years and in my opinion still holds. It should be obvious that the feedback being positive under Cinci was not just meaningless but indicative of severe issues, unless the purpose of D&D is to foster echo chambers instead of thoughtful, high-effort, vibrant discussions. In terms of satisfying the two sides of the issue, (maintaining fairness and motivating moderator participation) the workload needs to be minimized and detachment underlined. To that end maybe punishments need a far harsher baseline and moderators need to be chosen who are not a part of in-groups in D&D. If the minimum probe in D&D is 24-hours, and/or posting is slowed dramatically across D&D then fewer moderators can cover more posts and things don't get out of hand as easily. D&D shouldn't be a chat/chill subforum where buds hang out, it just leads to the issues at hand. Staluigi posted:Everything's mostly business as usual but Isreal v Palestine remains an absolutely cursed subject and will go deranged for entire pages
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 17:20
|
|
|
Seven Deadly Sins posted:On the topic of doomposting above; one of the more irritating things that has been happening in various places, but particularly in relation to the I/P thread, is people who show up to constantly derail any concept of nuanced opinion with a definitive blanket statement that can't be engaged with or refuted. In the I/P thread in particular, you get a bunch of drive-by sniping of any conversations regarding the complicated issue of support for Israel among the populace (and its political ramifications) with a dismissal of "nah, biden is a turbo zionist who loves genocide, it's that simple and it's not worth having any other discussion". Some of it comes with very old (and, to be fair, factually accurate) statements from Biden during his days as a senator, but most of the time it's just a pithy one-liner dismissal designed to shut down discussion and eliminate nuance from a difficult topic. It's essentially the along the same lines as the frivolous doomposting that was talked about otherwise, and mostly just serves to be a form of venting that everything is bad and it's impossible to get better. I think this is misrepresenting the I/P thread, and like I asked the other guy, please point to the posts you think are problematic instead of just handwaving about how people are posting badly with opinions you disagree with. People don't just post "Biden evil lol" (that would get you probated), they build a case that Biden is a Zionist by sourcing statements Biden has made throughout his career, as well as statements made by others, and actions taken by Biden both before and after he became president. It is not "pithy one-liner dismissal", it is as well sourced and supported as anything posted in D&D. It is not "Biden said a thing one time in the eighties that was bad", it is "Biden currently says and does things that are bad, and has a long history of both saying and doing things that are bad, and here are receipts". It is not generally designed to shut down discussion, but to provide pushback on the (wildly optimistic and fanciful IMO, but more importantly generally posted without attached evidence) opinion that Biden is not these things. If you disagree, you are welcome to post evidence that supports the position that Biden is not a Zionist who loves, or at least tolerates, genocide (in that thread, not here). It should not be the purpose of moderation to ensure you don't see opinions you disagree with just because they lack nuance in your eyes, and nuance is only warranted if you can provide evidence that supports that nuance. Esran fucked around with this message at 17:44 on Mar 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 17:31
|
|
|
also all things are nuanced because life is inherently complex. the fact that a situation may be nuanced tells you nothing about how best to discuss it. trump admin white house palace intrigue was certainly nuanced and complex and had an enormous effect on policymaking, and that nuance would have been rightfully derided as totally irrelevant if the discussion was about policy outcomes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 18:50
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:D&D has failed to be a forum I would want to post in. There's just a core cadre of posters in every American Politics thread here who are very unpleasant to deal with through their condescension, clearly disingenuous positions, and especially their tendency to frame their position as reached through some "consensus" that is almost always illogical in conclusion. [...] The tendency towards "evidence-based arguments" seems to always ignore the forest from the trees, like arguing that you can't call the Titanic cruise a failure because the electrical work on the boat was so good. Aside from the cadre point. I don't post in this forum ever, if at all, and this articulates the main reason why. There is a frequent type of post here, which is essentially illogical points made from a false premise. Because of the overall tone of D&D, these posts occupy a large part of the screen, and require a decent amount of effort to contradict. They frequently use rhetorical strategies such as asking several questions, with the result that large spans of text stem from these idiotic posts. It is simpler and healthier to simply not post at all. For me, the posting style of false assertion, dumb/nonexistent premise, and demands for further effort from the reader, stifles actual debate and discussion if we can't simply call the goon stupid and move on. In the interest of avoiding the posting clique thing I am deleting the example from page 1 of this thread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 19:18
|
|
|
Free Wizard Master.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 19:29
|
|
|
E Depois do Adeus posted:Aside from the cadre point. I don't post in this forum ever, if at all, and this articulates the main reason why. There is a frequent type of post here, which is essentially illogical points made from a false premise. Because of the overall tone of D&D, these posts occupy a large part of the screen, and require a decent amount of effort to contradict. They frequently use rhetorical strategies such as asking several questions, with the result that large spans of text stem from these idiotic posts. It is simpler and healthier to simply not post at all. There are other sub forums on this website that I don't post in, in large part because I expect if I did post there that a disagreement with the core thread cohort would result in me being called stupid or presented with two year old forum quotes to argue about by people with a grudge, as has happened in this very thread. I don't think "everyone on the site should want to post here" is a good goal for a sub forum. It certainly isn't one that I expect from any other sub forum. I don't post in AI either, because I find talking about cars boring. That's okay.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 20:06
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:There are other sub forums on this website that I don't post in, in large part because I expect if I did post there that a disagreement with the core thread cohort would result in me being called stupid or presented with two year old forum quotes to argue about by people with a grudge, as has happened in this very thread. Exactly if you didn't like AI but still spent all your time posting about AI in other subforum where 90% of your posts mention "the bad thread" that would be weird and creepy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 20:11
|
|
|
Quotey posted:Free Wizard Master. https://wiki.teamfortress.com/w/images/b/ba/Heavy_no03.wav
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 20:27
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:There are other sub forums on this website that I don't post in, in large part because I expect if I did post there that a disagreement with the core thread cohort would result in me being called stupid or presented with two year old forum quotes to argue about by people with a grudge, as has happened in this very thread. I'm not that interested in a slapfight with you, but to be clear, you're implying that having a memory is a form of harassment. I think a forum where people are required not to remember things would result in a lot of disingenuous gimmick posting, a forum of How Are Yous. As is, it's actually in D&D rules that posters can be forumbanned if they post about D&D elsewhere while posting here, so if you're going to demand blindness for any posting in the chat thread, I suppose I should demand the same for CSPAM. In any case, this is the kind of effort imbalance I'm talking about - "Everyone must assume I'm posting in good faith even as I contradict myself unless I post in the forbidden forum in which case my 'bad faith' can be assumed even without evidence. Surely this won't lead to even more forum grudges." In conclusion, Free VitalSigns. Anyway, I don't want to make this any more personal, but if you think my posting attitude has changed towards you, (a) Don't pretend you weren't just sniping at me in the electoralism thread, something I'm sure you were doing with no bitterness in your heart and completely pure of malice, and (b) Yeah, it's strange how arguing the usual liberal stuff can be one thing but Just Asking Questions about Hamas amidst a genocide can lead people who've engaged with you earnestly in the past to suddenly feel used and self-loathing at ever giving you the time of day.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 21:02
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:There are other sub forums on this website that I don't post in, in large part because I expect if I did post there that a disagreement with the core thread cohort would result in me being called stupid or presented with two year old forum quotes to argue about by people with a grudge, as has happened in this very thread. To make it clear, posting about posters and their credibility is allowed in feedback threads but not D&D proper. This is because these threads require a much greater emphasis on the trustworthiness of a poster's opinions, whereas elsewhere explication and citation are more important. Probably Magic posted:"Everyone must assume I'm posting in good faith even as I contradict myself unless I post in the forbidden forum in which case my 'bad faith' can be assumed even without evidence." The reason dredging up someone's old forum quotes isn't an acceptable way to show they're operating in bad faith (and if it were, you would be expected to use it in a report or PM, not in a thread, regardless) is that posters' opinions can change, and there is nothing dishonest about this. The rule about posting about D&D while posting in D&D, in contrast, is about what's currently happening. As an additional minor point, the rule doesn't assume this means a poster must necessarily be operating in bad faith, only that it makes it more difficult for other posters to trust that they aren't.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 21:31
|
|
|
To be clear, I do not think being inconsistent is a probationary offense. Rather, the onus being on the person dealing with someone inconsistent to not point it out or indeed to argue as dispassionately as before I think ultimately rewards bad faith. I also see no problem in offering up opportunities to explain one's own evolution - I'll be the last person to claim I haven't personally evolved and I'd be happy to elucidate how I've in the past been Zionist or moderate and how I learned to revile those positions and change. Change is good! Would like it noted that no change happened here though, just bizarro logic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 21:46
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:I'm not that interested in a slapfight with you, but to be clear, you're implying that having a memory is a form of harassment. No, I'm implying I was harassed in the CCCC thread. It was mostly by YMB, but I don't recall you saying anything helpful.I learned a lesson about the value of moderation. It's why I left. Probably Magic posted:(a) Don't pretend you weren't just sniping at me in the electoralism thread, something I'm sure you were doing with no bitterness in your heart and completely pure of malice I had to go back and look. I did call saying "there's no expectation placed on the Democratic Party to deliver on its promises" blatantly counterfactual nonsense, but it is. I expanded on why in a later post. And to be clear, I think the blanket statement that nobody has an expectation that a political party will deliver on its promises is a pretty wild thing to say. Obviously people don't expect 100%, but if a Democratic or even a Republican politician says "I will deliver X" there is *some* expectation that they will try to do so, and care about doing so. It's a good example of a pretty wild claim being treated as a good faith argument, actually. I didn't just call you stupid and move on like E Depois do Adeus is advocating for. I did also ask you to put in paragraph breaks because I found your post difficult to read without it. I stand by it.  Koos Group posted:The reason dredging up someone's old forum quotes isn't an acceptable way to show they're operating in bad faith (and if it were, you would be expected to use it in a report or PM, not in a thread, regardless) is that posters' opinions can change, and there is nothing dishonest about this. The rule about posting about D&D while posting in D&D, in contrast, is about what's currently happening. As an additional minor point, the rule doesn't assume this means a poster must necessarily be operating in bad faith, only that it makes it more difficult for other posters to trust that they aren't. There isn't even a real contradiction in the two year old discussion. I'd think the right answer would be to actually address it in the thread "I thought you believed X, how is that consistent with Y?" and you'd get an actual answer rather than seething about it. DeadlyMuffin fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Mar 12, 2024 |
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 22:01
|
|
|
i will not have uspol slandered like this. it has the exact amount of moderation needed
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 22:23
|
|
|
bring back blow thread
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 22:31
|
|
|
I think DnD is fine for the most part. My only significant request is that mods respond faster.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 23:05
|
|
|
Probably Magic posted:To be clear, I do not think being inconsistent is a probationary offense. Rather, the onus being on the person dealing with someone inconsistent to not point it out or indeed to argue as dispassionately as before I think ultimately rewards bad faith. I also see no problem in offering up opportunities to explain one's own evolution - I'll be the last person to claim I haven't personally evolved and I'd be happy to elucidate how I've in the past been Zionist or moderate and how I learned to revile those positions and change. Change is good! Would like it noted that no change happened here though, just bizarro logic. Well, the other factor is that I, and I suspect a large contingent of readers, don't have interest in learning about the personal political journeys SA posters have taken, and come to D&D for information and ideas about the real world.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 23:42
|
|
|
Ither posted:I think DnD is fine for the most part. Yeah, this. Probing stuff from two weeks ago is way too late. Especially stuff that had to have been reported back then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 23:46
|
|
|
Kchama posted:Yeah, this. Probing stuff from two weeks ago is way too late. Especially stuff that had to have been reported back then. It was, and I agree. The ideal solution is to handle reports more quickly, some ideas for which I outlined here, but when that fails, I'm not actually sure whether it's better to give amnesty to old reports or still punish them to make clear to users what they did that was against the rules (I'm currently doing the latter).
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2024 23:49
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:No they are not, and I apologize. Can you be specific about what caused this to happen and what actions will be taken to prevent this happening again? Because this seems like a huge oversight in moderation efforts, especially in the context of people being dinged for strawmen that they weren't making. If all modding was overzealous that would be understandable, but there is a very clear disconnect here that I think it would be helpful to understand the cause of, and how it will be addressed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 00:02
|
|
|
Giggs posted:This doesn't fit with the premise that D&D doesn't moderate positions (even though it does imo, for the same reasons why Cinci was such an awful mod, and why Cinci turned out to be such a ridiculous weirdo), not to mention the constant reliance on "bad faith" being a meaningless subjective cudgel that allows D&D posters the easiest workaround to "objectivity" Koos et al presumably intended to establish with the ruleset. I read the D&D Ukraine thread daily under Cinci's tenure and it was not what you describe here. No one was under the illusion that Something Awful posts help the war effort. The OP specifically was very explicit that SA posting does nothing to affect the war either way. I just looked up what "helldumping" means because I'm not familiar with the word. Apparently "helldumping" is exhaustively searching a person's history for stuff to cancel them. I do not remember any accusations of helldumping at all, let alone false accusations of helldumping. Sometimes posters would get their post histories scrutinized, but no worse than when discussing anything else controversial. The most closely scrutinized posters were the ones notorious for "syq mining" or whatever the gently caress it's called, fishing for quotes they could repeat and mock on C-SPAM. "Posters who disagree with me are genuinely agents of foreign influence who are trying to dismantle freedom, love, and democracy" - if I take what you said literally, then it literally never happened. If I take that phrase as a sarcastic exaggeration because pro-Russia or anti-military-aid-to-Ukraine posters got dogpiled on a lot, then okay, that happened? Those posters did get dogpiled on. But the dogpilers still had to follow D&D rules or they'd eat probes. Stringent posted:OK, why? You're not the only one asking why the I/P thread could be called "deranged" or in need of martial law, but if the past 1-2 weeks of I/P posts don't convince you then I don't know what would. Obviously not all of the I/P posts are horrendous but the thread is subject to frequent horrific derails, and then derails of complaining about the horrific derails, and then the thread will stop moving for a while because no one is posting anything, not even the latest current events - the bad posting has driven out the good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 00:06
|
|
|
Koos Group posted:Well, the other factor is that I, and I suspect a large contingent of readers, don't have interest in learning about the personal political journeys SA posters have taken, and come to D&D for information and ideas about the real world. They must leave very disappointed then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 00:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 12:05 |
|
|
Victar posted:
This is not something that happens with any frequency. There are a lot of posters who are regulars in both DnD and C-SPAM. That's a good thing - it should be encouraged, not discouraged. Yes, there are threads in C-SPAM where occasionally a particularly egregious DnD post gets laughed at, but C-SPAM regulars, for the most part, don't actually post in DnD to provoke goofy quotes. Those rare instances where this does happen usually end up with the cspammer probated or banned.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2024 00:18
|
|
