What is Political and Mod Direction

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
EmperorNorton said:
Except coming in to a thread where literally no one is even remotely disagreeing with each other and everyone seems to all be agreeing on things to make sure no one talks about the "bad word" honestly does seem like over-moderating.

Like, if we don't want to over-moderate cause we want to keep things chill, why come in and moderate a thread that wasn't even going sideways.
Click to expand...

Because the rule is "no politics" not "no politics unless everyone is agreeing at the moment"
 
Endless Flight said:
You were complaining about other threads not being moderated, which is why I responded.
Click to expand...
That is ignoring the other entire half of my post. It wasn't "Hey moderate things more strictly" it was "if you're going to come down on any discussion of something existing, even when it is an entirely noncontroversial way in which no one is having any problems with, then you kind of need to do that everywhere, cause that was the most benign discussion of the culture war I'd ever seen".

It is ignoring that I just don't see a reason it should have been moderated at all, but IF that is the choice you as a moderation staff are going to make, it should be done consistently.
 
We’ve already went over this before many times. Sometimes we don’t moderate in the hope that people drop whatever they are talking about and move on. There are lots of examples where somebody mentions politics or the culture war and we purposefully avoid modding. We are always about less is more. It doesn’t invalidate the rule. We want people to self-moderate if possible.
 
EmperorNorton said:
That is ignoring the other entire half of my post. It wasn't "Hey moderate things more strictly" it was "if you're going to come down on any discussion of something existing, even when it is an entirely noncontroversial way in which no one is having any problems with, then you kind of need to do that everywhere, cause that was the most benign discussion of the culture war I'd ever seen".

It is ignoring that I just don't see a reason it should have been moderated at all, but IF that is the choice you as a moderation staff are going to make, it should be done consistently.
Click to expand...
Again, dividing people into two "sides" isn't in any way uncontroversial.
 
Endless Flight said:
We’ve already went over this before many times. Sometimes we don’t moderate in the hope that people drop whatever they are talking about and move on. There are lots of examples where somebody mentions politics or the culture war and we purposefully avoid modding. We are always about less is more.
Click to expand...

So we are back to the thing where people are allowed to tip toe to the line over and over again until they provoke someone. Which is a problem I've always had with this site.

When you do this thing where "well we allow people to make those comments... as long as it doesn't go on long" it basically lets people bait others into arguments. Cause they can always mention something... as long as they don't follow up unless someone else does.

Hilariously in this case, it got moderated because people were just telling jokes about it (I thought the concept of an insensitivity reader was pretty funny).

Black Leaf said:
Again, dividing people into two "sides" isn't in any way uncontroversial.
Click to expand...

No one ever said there are only two sides. There are many people who aren't even part of what this site defines as the "culture war". But there are clearly defined camps inside of it. Do all people in them agree on everything? No. Does that mean there aren't clearly identifiable sides to people who participate in it? I think it would be laughable to say there weren't.

Also, I don't think I ever even said two sides, I just said, the "other side" you know the side that would normally object to anything being called racist. You can't deny there is a group that does that.
 
Endless Flight said:
We’ve already went over this before many times. Sometimes we don’t moderate in the hope that people drop whatever they are talking about and move on. There are lots of examples where somebody mentions politics or the culture war and we purposefully avoid modding. We are always about less is more. It doesn’t invalidate the rule. We want people to self-moderate if possible.
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly this, I ignore a lot of indvidual posts, so as not to be too overbearing. It's when (as in the case of that thread) it becomes multiple/frequent posts or topic of conversation that I'll usually step in.
 
EmperorNorton said:
So we are back to the thing where people are allowed to tip toe to the line over and over again until they provoke someone. Which is a problem I've always had with this site.
Click to expand...

No, not "again and again". One slip up is not a pattern, and patterns I pay close attention to.

There's a pattern that I'm seeing here, for example...
 
It's worth saying that asking people to move on from a topic is pretty much the least moderation action we can take.

It doesn't delete previous posts, it's not a formal admotion for any poster. (In fact it attaches no blame to any poster). It's simply steering something away from a direction that could cause issues.
 
TristramEvans said:
No, not "again and again". One slip up is not a pattern, and patterns I pay close attention to.

There's a pattern that I'm seeing here, for example...
Click to expand...
If you want to make insinuations about me having a problem with the moderation on this forum, I'd say there is also a clear pattern of nearly every single time someone has a problem with moderation, it is specifically with you.

Of course, you didn't have to try to escalate things with snide insinuations but here we are.
 
Well, without going over every mod discussion we’ve had, that’s not true.
 
For the record, I'd be entirely in favour of banning the term "culture war" entirely outside of mods having to go "stop talking about the culture war".

I can think of no legitimate reason for its use out of that.
 
EmperorNorton said:
If you want to make insinuations about me having a problem with the moderation on this forum,
Click to expand...

No, that wasn't what I was insinuating.


EmperorNorton said:
I'd say there is also a clear pattern of nearly every single time someone has a problem with moderation, it is specifically with you.
Click to expand...

I seem to recall last time it was Endless who asked a thread to drop a subject that you took issue with.


EmperorNorton said:
Of course, you didn't have to try to escalate things with snide insinuations but here we are.
Click to expand...

Oh, that wasn't a snide insinuation. This is a snide insinuation: "since you concurrently in the last few posts argued both that you didn't think that moderation should have taken place in that thread and also that one of your issues with this site is that people are allowed to linedance without repercussion, one could uncharitably read that as essentially saying that it should be OK for you to linedance, but not other people..."

But I wouldn't want to say something like that, because it's aa particularly uncharitable interpretation of two of your...varied...arguments so far
 
Endless Flight said:
We can ban it. I don’t see any good reason to discuss it.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
Honestly I'd rather it be completely banned than this weird half thing where it gets mentioned in passing on the forum by several different users and no one can say anything about it in response in those contexts because they are bringing it up in situations where it actually is unquestionably massively controversial (Rings of Power), but then a completely benign conversation where everyone is just having a laugh gets moderated.
 
Can you programmatically ban it? I've just seen some boards where if you include a banned word in your post, you can't post it. I think policing a single phrase is going to make it more evident that it's being policed, and I like the "behind the curtains" moderation that goes on here.
 
chuckdee said:
Can you programmatically ban it? I've just seen some boards where if you include a banned word in your post, you can't post it. I think policing a single phrase is going to make it more evident that it's being policed, and I like the "behind the curtains" moderation that goes on here.
Click to expand...
One board I was on automatically replaced Ha*tur with "He Who Should not be named".

Honestly, though, I think it will go very light moderation quickly. People will only need to run afoul of it a few times to remember. (And I for one am more likely to delete posts wholesale rather than editing them).
 
chuckdee said:
Can you programmatically ban it? I've just seen some boards where if you include a banned word in your post, you can't post it. I think policing a single phrase is going to make it more evident that it's being policed, and I like the "behind the curtains" moderation that goes on here.
Click to expand...
Yes I think it can be done.
 
Black Leaf said:
One board I was on automatically replaced Ha*tur with "He Who Should not be named".

Honestly, though, I think it will go very light moderation quickly. People will only need to run afoul of it a few times to remember. (And I for one am more likely to delete posts wholesale rather than editing them).
Click to expand...
Well the replacement thing just makes whatever you replace it with a placeholder for it. So though they wouldn't be saying "The Word Which Has Been Banned", they'd really be saying it in context...
 
Black Leaf said:
For the record, I'd be entirely in favour of banning the term "culture war" entirely outside of mods having to go "stop talking about the culture war".

I can think of no legitimate reason for its use out of that.
Click to expand...
Eh, these days seems like half the reason industry things are done is exactly because of that. Here's how it goes...

Someone - Mentions something about a game or industry.
Someone Else - "Huh, why did they do that?" or "Can you explain, I don't know what you're talking about."
Someone - Can't talk about that, Culture War stuff.

Conversation ends.

Could just use Politics, but it's not always strictly political.
 
Pancakes
1 Cup Flour
1/2 Cup Milk
1/2 Cup Water
1/4 Cup Cooking Oil
1 Tablespoon Sugar
1/4 Teaspoon Salt
1 Teaspoon Baking Powder
1 Egg

Combine dry ingredients, add wet ingredients, stir well. Heat greased skillet to medium heat. Pour 1/3 Cup portions onto skillet and cook until bubbles form, turn with spatula until cooked but not burned. Serve hot with syrup, jam, or honey.
 
Last edited:
Are we banning discussions about Rings of Power? Because I really like the dwarves in it. Can I talk about how much I like them? Am I being repressed????
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top