Patrick Bailey4 said:I’m only going to bring up one single, recent example to back up what I've been saying, because honestly, it’s so incredibly convincing that I think it speaks for itself.
Look, you can't just take one single poll as some definitive truth. On this specific thread, we’ve had 695 people weigh in on this particular option so far—with 384 voting for one choice, which technically makes it the majority, though there were 257 votes for the runner-up among the four choices offered. Out of those 695 voters, 24 of them are part of the site administration, and 21 of those went for the current frontrunner. Now, considering our total admin team consists of 183 members, I'm certainly not going to sit here and claim that those 21 votes represent 90% of the leadership, nor do I have any way of knowing how the rest of them would feel or vote if they had participated. Honestly, I don't even bother trying to figure that out because it doesn't matter to me. I'm not sitting here tallying up who is male or female, who leans left or right, whether someone is religious or an atheist, or what social group they belong to; none of that stuff is relevant when it comes to moderating this community.
I think you probably already have a pretty good idea of how the moderator selection process actually works around here. Right now, they pick a candidate, I weigh in with my approval or disapproval, but honestly? It’s incredibly rare—almost unheard of—for me to be the one stepping up to suggest someone. At the end of the day, the final call always rests with Anderson.
Patrick Bailey4 said:I think Primjer is trying to make a point about how biased this whole place can be. It feels like the mods basically curate the conversation to ensure almost everyone stays within the same ideological bubble, pushing a very specific worldview. You see it everywhere—it’s baked into the way discussions are steered and even in the specific types of PDFs being circulated around here. It just feels like there's a massive lack of objectivity when the people running the show are all pulling in the exact same political direction.
Look, if you’re going to complain about how this thread was handled, I need more than just a vague feeling—give me a link to the specific discussion and provide several actual examples to back up what you're saying, not just one isolated incident. Just because a few of the moderators happen to agree on this one particular point doesn't mean they’re a monolith. They aren't a hive mind; they don't all share the exact same worldview or political leanings on every single issue that comes our way. And most importantly, it absolutely does not follow that they are all sitting around consciously and subjectively rigging things just to screw over anyone who disagrees with them.
If you take a quick look at the rules for this subforum, you’ll spot a specific section that explicitly forbids throwing around accusations without backing them up with actual, concrete evidence. To be honest, looking through everything you've just laid out, I'm simply not seeing any proof to support those claims of yours.
Patrick Bailey4 said:How on earth is it even possible that 90% of the elected moderators hold one specific viewpoint in a country where the vast majority of people actually feel the exact opposite? It just doesn't add up, does it?
Look, we’ve already established that it isn't even close to being 90% moderators. To actually answer your question—if we set the specific numbers aside for a second—I'd say the odds of that happening are about the same as the chances of almost every single person on this forum holding the exact same opinion at the same time right here in the States.
Patrick Bailey4 said:Why on earth does your opinion carry weight when it comes to picking sub-moderators?
Look, honestly, almost all of these moderators joined the admin team way before this whole referendum debate even started, let alone this specific thread. For most of them, I didn't even know what their political leanings were, and frankly, it never really crossed my mind to care.
Patrick Bailey4 said:I’ll get straight to the point here: rustydrifter10, if you still—despite all the clear facts laid out right in front of us—truly believe or claim that this forum is heading in an objective, fair direction that serves absolutely everyone who wants to write here, then:
either a.) you're being so biased that you're completely blind to reality, or
b.) you're intentionally steering the forum toward your own agenda regardless of how one-sided it becomes.
You aren't exactly presenting me with many options here, so please, don't try to pin either of those labels on me! At the end of the day, forums are run by actual human beings, not some flawless computer algorithm; a little bit of subjectivity is perfectly normal and honestly expected. Problems only really arise when decisions are repeatedly and deliberately made to screw over one side, and I truly don't think any of the moderators who voted in that poll are doing anything of the sort.