The rules are changing, we are going to start showing the assholes the door

@Robert Gentel,

Lord on the one hand you had complained that no one is complaining when it is pointed out to you that Hawkeye is far from the worst on this site and ask for us to point out the sinners and now if we do so we will be blocked from the help desk at best and ban from the site at worse.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

When you started complaining saying that there was "much worse" things that were not acted on I said you could feel free to report them to direct them to our attention, nothing more.

But quite frankly you guys complaining about Hawkeye's suspension are absolutely full of it. It is just plain not true that there are others who have done what he did (which is not merely pissing off other people, plenty of you all piss off others all the time) and are tolerated.

If any other member used homophobic slurs (or racial slurs etc) directed at another member then they will be suspended too. And if you have examples of it then feel free to report them.

But if anyone floods the moderators with frivolous reports of posts that are not against our rules then this too will be acted on as spamming the mods with reports is against our rules as well (it's a small mod team, we do not have time for childish games).

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

Let see charging someone with being a pedophile with zero proof of that being true in an ad hominem attack is just having some fun but a homosexual slur can not be allowed?

So if someone post that he consider that .08 for DUI is too low a limit and it should instead be .1 and then had an ad hominem attack that the poster must be a drunk driver that is ok?

If a poster take the position that the drug war should be ended and drug users should be move, as must as possible, out of the criminal justice system into the public health system and get an ad hominem attack that he must be a drug user that is ok?

So only racial and sexual slurs are worth reporting?

1 Reply

@layman,

layman wrote:

Quote:
... Americans continue to fail to understand or to acknowledge that with the Democrats and Republicans it's a case of conservative and more conservative.

If there's anyone who deserves to be criticized and ostracized for their political views, then it's a damn commie, I figure.

What's your definition of a commie?

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Ad hominem attacks are not good arguments but we have never said we are going to ban all ad hominem attacks.

Quote:

So if someone post that he consider that .08 for DUI is too low a limit and it should instead be .1 and then had an ad hominem attack that the poster must be a drunk driver that is ok?

That is not necessarily something that we would ban someone for, no. And it doesn't even begin to rise to the level of calling a member a "fag" etc. You are being ridiculous.

1 Reply

@Wilso,

Quote:

What's your definition of a commie?

Synonym (euphemism): Progressive.

1 Reply

@Robert Gentel,

I feel so must better Robert that while I can be accused or being a pedophile I know that no one is going to dare to call me a fag.

You surely know how to zero in on the things that matter the most..

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Yes, you've said this over a dozen times to me that you do not agree with the rules. Do you think repetition is going to make you more convincing or change anything?

This is never going to become a community that treats slurs about race or sexuality as equal to any ad hominem argument, if you do not like that make your own community where you get to call people "fag" all you want.

Edit: if you want to point out the instances of being called a pedophile (not just implied after you start talking about encryption and porn etc, but actually called a pedophile) those might be worth reporting. I have not ever seen anyone call you a pedophile (at most perhaps suggest it and that is not the same thing as repeatedly going around calling a gay member you don't like a "fag").

2 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Yes Robert I will dig through such people as Izzy thousands of posts to see it any of the constant attacks on me in threads that mostly does not even have anything to do with the subject of pedophiles might interest you.

Once more however I must tell you how happy I am that no one is going to be allowed to called me a fag or such thanks to you.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Quote:
He maybe back at this moment, posting under a different name.

Given his large "personality" I question if he could post under another name without everyone knowing he was doing so.

I can't think of anyone less likely to change writing style.

1 Reply

@roger,

Quote:

I can't think of anyone less likely to change writing style.

Other then myself I agree with you.

1 Reply

@BillRM,

You write just like anyone else - sometimes.

1 Reply

@roger,

sometimes.

LOL

0 Replies

@Robert Gentel,

Robert Gentel wrote:

Conservatives on this forum have spewed this paranoia for over a decade without a shred of evidence. It's an annoying persecution complex that is wholly unwarranted (I suspect more liberals have been banned in the history of this site than conservatives, but don't know about the last few years). When I have asked some conservatives who complain about the moderation being unfair to conservatives to help moderate they decline, sounds like they just want to whine about perceived persecution and they don't actually care if it's true or not or actually help with the difficult and complicated task of managing a community.

I give this kind of feckless opinion all the consideration it is due.

I didn't express an opinion. I expressed a fear or suspicion. Since you are saying straight out that this will not be used that way, I am relieved. I have had many conversations, including recently, in which I have been personally insulted over and over by other posters for politely disagreeing and expressing my own opinions. In general, the people who do this do it habitually, certainly qualifying as "a repeated patter of boorish behavior." If it is now going to be dealt with, I look forward to it. However, I still have to say that I'll believe it when I see it.

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Quote:

s. In general, the people who do this do it habitually, certainly qualifying as "a repeated patter of boorish behavior." If it is now going to be dealt with, I look forward to it. However, I still have to say that I'll believe it when I see it.

Robert just stated that ad hominem attacks/insults are not going to be deal with!!!! Only racial or sexual slurs are going to be deal with.

Sometime I feel like I had fallen down the rabbit hole at least when it come to Robert thinking and logic is concern.

As he seems to take contradict positions from one posting to the next.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Quote:
s. In general, the people who do this do it habitually, certainly qualifying as "a repeated patter of boorish behavior." If it is now going to be dealt with, I look forward to it. However, I still have to say that I'll believe it when I see it.

Robert just stated that ad hominem attacks/insults are not going to be deal with!!!! Only racial or sexual slurs are going to be deal with.

Sometime I feel like I had fallen down the rabbit hole at least when it come to Robert thinking and logic is concern.

As he seems to take contradict positions from one posting to the next.

I wouldn't presume to speak for Robert, but he initially gave "a repeated pattern of boorish behavior" as the criterion, and incessant ad hominems in response to polite, dignified disagreement would qualify in most peoples' minds.

2 Replies

@BillRM,

Do you really want this to be a community where members get to call each other "fag" or "nigger" or are you just being contrary?

2 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Many in this thread have interpreted this as meaning everyone who insulted them a few times is gone.

That is not going to be the case. We cannot draw too strict a line without stifling legitimate debate so don't hold your breath waiting for me to step in and resolve every forum dispute and ban your every forum enemy. We are just going back to our original rules and tone (and there was plenty of insults and people getting each other angry then, I make no promise to try to stop all of that and have repeatedly said we have no intention of moderating every dispute on this site).

So far after this announcement one person was suspended and it has been for a rule that we have always had: you don't get to call members here things like "fag" or "nigger". The moderation direction drifted a bit and that should have always been responded to. I'm trying to fix this drift, not make everyone get along. I am not here to herd cats.

0 Replies

@BillRM,

BillRM wrote:

Robert just stated that ad hominem attacks/insults are not going to be deal with!!!!

I stated that not ALL of them would be. You are smart enough to have understood me well and do not need to twist my words.

Not all ad hominems should merit a response. This is an ad hominem:

"Of course you would think that, you are a Republican."

Are you asserting we should ban people for this? Of course not, and we have never said we would so stop playing the fool here.

Quote:

Only racial or sexual slurs are going to be deal with.

I did not say this either. You are demonstrating intellectual dishonesty in addition to regular old garden-variety dishonesty.

Quote:

Sometime I feel like I had fallen down the rabbit hole at least when it come to Robert thinking and logic is concern.

My logic is consistent, yours is entirely absent here.

Quote:

As he seems to take contradict positions from one posting to the next.

No, you are merely misrepresenting it at every opportunity because you do not value intellectual honesty.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

I wouldn't presume to speak for Robert, but he initially gave "a repeated pattern of boorish behavior" as the criterion, and incessant ad hominems in response to polite, dignified disagreement would qualify in most peoples' minds.

If it were truly "incessant" (which I have never seen from any long time member) that would obviously qualify.

Thing is, most here are not objectively acessing this. They have forum "enemies" who they think are always bad and "friends" who they claim are only sometimes. They judge the behavior based on how much they like the person and are simply not being objective observers here.

Hell here some of the folks who like Hawkeye in this thread insist he doesn't hold grudges thread to thread and is generally polite etc. They completely ignore (or fail to notice) him following a gay member around to call him as "stupid fag" etc.

This is not really a tricky or difficult decision: do you want to use a forum where you get to call each other "nigger" and "fag" or not?

If you do want one go to 4chan, go to stormfront, go to any of the many communities out there that tolerate this. This will not be one of them and I really don't think any of you in this thread would really want it to be that way.

2 Replies

The rules are changing, we are going to start showing the assholes the door

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know