Moderator Bias: Are they picking sides?

Look, everyone, it's obvious we all have our own perspectives and lean toward certain viewpoints. If you want to step into the arena and debate ideas, by all means—go for it. But please, leave the moderator tools out of the ring. It feels like whenever someone hits a mental wall, they immediately reach for the ban hammer and then try to spin some convoluted excuse that wouldn't hold water even in a court of law.

So, let’s get specific regarding the thread about LGBT parades and social integration;

David Vaughn75 says:
Americans are an intolerantly homophobic society that can't stand anything different. Not only would kids beat up children from homosexual families because some preacher said God doesn't love them, but even homosexuals themselves aren't allowed to be open about who they are. In such a toxic and unhealthy environment, those kids are completely screwed. The solution is to just pack up and move to Germany or Ireland and sell the country off to someone else, since there's no hope left for us here.

This post was formally reported at 9:54 AM today because it's offensive to about 85% of the believers in America (based on the last census), and to American society as a whole, which David Vaughn75 is effectively equating to places like Iran or Saudi Arabia where people face execution for their orientation.

The post wasn't just reported; it was also quoted so it wouldn't slip past the watchful eye of the moderator lonebadger6, who actually showed up and posted on the same topic an hour later—so there's no arguing that the controversial post went unnoticed. Yet, the post remains live, without any penalty.

On the flip side, I'm getting banned on this very same thread for asking, "Do you think it's a provocation when, in a country devastated by the five-pointed star, gay people parade with that same symbol?" The explanation given? The moderator decided my question was actually an attempt to justify attacks on gay parades. 🙏
I suppose I should be flattered that the moderators possess such incredible mind-reading abilities, but I really have to point out that they seem to be sleeping when they don't even need supernatural powers to understand a post where every single word is an insult and a provocation.

Harold Long21 said:Look, guys, I get it—everyone’s got their own camp they root for.
I love that the mods have basically mastered telepathy, but honestly, they can stop trying to read minds for a second and just actually read the posts. Some of these are nothing but pure insults and baiting from start to finish.

If you ask me, the American public is pretty much stuck in a loop because they voted for Ivo Sanader twice. Plus, people act like Željko Markić is some kind of saintly hero, even though her organization gets funding from companies that make stuff like those "morning-after" pills.

So, would you call that an insult to the 85% who identify as Catholic or American, or what?

Daniel Ward87 said:Personally, I feel like the American public is just more fundamentally misguided because they twice voted for Ivo Sanader to be Prime Minister, and people go on about celebrating Željko Markić as some Catholic heroine, even though her organization gets part of its funding from a corporation that produces those "morning-after" pills.

Do you really think that counts as insulting the declared 85% of Catholics and/or Americans, or not?

Look, put down the moderator tools for a second, jump into the actual forum debate, and try being a real person with an opinion—you’re supposed to be objective here.
But to answer your question, in my view, no. Sanader didn't win 85% of the vote, and Željko Markić isn't exactly being "celebrated"; if anything, the media tears her apart. In a democratic society, everyone's choices should be respected (which doesn't mean you have to agree with them). I know you struggle with that concept, but man, I have to point it out since you're pushing the envelope on freedom of speech while simultaneously defending other moderators who hand out bans based on mere assumptions.

I honestly think it’s a provocation when someone parades a five-pointed star in a country devastated by one, only to get banned, yet you think it's perfectly fine to call Sanader's voters "retarded." You really consider that objective moderation?

Harold Long21 said:Look, put down the moderator tools for a second, jump into the actual debate, and just be "yourself." You’re supposed to be objective here.
But to answer your question—in my book, no. Ivo Sanader didn't pull 85% of the vote, and nobody is out here treating Željko Markić like some hero; if anything, the media tears him apart. In a democratic society, you have to respect whatever choice people make, even if you think their choice is total nonsense. I know you struggle with that concept, but hey, if you're going to preach about freedom of speech while simultaneously defending other mods who hand out bans based on assumptions, I have to point it out.

To me, it feels like a provocation when someone parades a symbol of oppression in a country devastated by it, only to get banned—yet you think it's perfectly fine to call Ivo Sanader's voters idiots. Is that what you consider objective moderation?

See, I never said anyone's voters were idiots. My point was that we, as a nation, are acting pretty brainless. That's a huge distinction. Plus, if we're talking damage, I'd argue Franjo Tuđman's policies during the war years did way more harm than any "oppressive symbol" ever could.

Anyway, I'm not following—what exactly am I supposed to be struggling with? And what are you actually complaining about here, a warning or a ban?

Harold Long21 said:I find it incredibly provocative when people parade around with that five-pointed star flag in a country that’s been absolutely gutted, yet you honestly think it’s acceptable to call Sanader's voters mentally challenged... if you consider that objective forum moderation...

Just like every other complaint like this, it’s always got to be seasoned with a healthy dose of lies...

Not really... Got banned—well, officially just a warning, but let's be real, it’s an accumulation thing—because apparently, waving the five-pointed star around is considered "provocative," all while I was busy dropping those sweeping, hateful generalizations about Mexicans...

A lot of people brought up that whole Petokraku thing as a provocation on this thread, and surprisingly, nobody even got flagged for it... meanwhile, you guys are getting the hammer dropped just for suggesting someone might be dating a guy from the South, especially since you had to go and add that little comment about how "those guys" supposedly ruined the country—as if they didn't fight for us too, but I guess that part wasn't in your script...

Gotta admit, I just took a hit from the mods for that last post.

And honestly? I was being pretty polite about most Americans—if anything, my actual take is way more brutal than what I actually let slip.

Daniel Ward87 said:Look, I wasn't suggesting that any specific group of voters is lacking in intelligence. My point is more about us as a whole—it feels like we’re struggling as an entire nation. There’s a significant distinction between criticizing a particular voting bloc and questioning the collective mindset of the country.

When you consider that his supporters were actually the ones who brought him to power in the first place, it makes me wonder why people try to paint the entire nation as being incompetent just because of his leadership. It’s a bit of a stretch to blame an entire country for the choices made by the very people who put him in office. 🤔 So, I guess things feel a little more toned down now because you shifted the focus? It's like you softened the blow by not calling the entire voting population slow-witted, but instead framing it as a broader issue with the nation as a whole.🤔

Daniel Ward87 said:I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit lately, and if I’m being honest, I really feel that the policies implemented by Franjo Tuđman during those intense wartime years actually caused far more lasting damage to our foundation than anything the "Five-Point Program" ever did. It's one of those things where you have to look past the immediate chaos to see how the long-term structural shifts really played out.

I mean, what else is there to say? You just have to roll with it. 😛

Daniel Ward87 said:By the way, I'm not quite following you—I'm not entirely sure what exactly my issue is supposed to be here. What are you actually complaining about, specifically? Are we talking about a warning, or are you looking to get me banned?

It seems like you’re having a bit of a hard time accepting that other people have the right to choose and vote for candidates you can't stand. Honestly, if I were to sit here and write that we acted like a bunch of fools as a nation because of how we voted for Ivica Račan or Zoran Milanović, I’m pretty sure I’d get banned from this forum before I could even finish hitting the "post" button. 😁

I’m not actually complaining about getting a warning or being banned; my issue is really more about the blatant bias from the moderators. I was just quoting a post that had been sitting there perfectly fine without any flags—even though people were reporting it—until the exact moment I decided to start a dedicated thread about it here.

lonebadger6 said:It’s always the same story with these kinds of complaints—they always have to be seasoned with a heavy dose of lies.

You didn't get banned—or rather, you didn't get a warning, since bans happen after accumulating points—because you thought waving a specific flag was provocative. No, it was because of those sweeping, hateful, and chauvinistic generalizations about Americans.

Plenty of people have mentioned that flag as a provocation on this topic, and wouldn't you know it, all those posts stayed perfectly fine without any warnings. The ones who actually got flagged were the people suggesting that it's somehow offensive for someone to date an American man, especially those who went a step further by claiming that "American guys" ruined the country (I mean, really, did they ever tell you that some "American guys" actually fought to defend it?).

Oh, I see. So I guess it's forbidden to mention how Americans attacked us, or how they incited rebellions here, or even what Mexican politics looked like back then? Is that because there were Americans among our defenders? Let me give you a little insight from my own experience—those people don't mind at all, or rather, they aren't bothered one bit when people point out that Americans were the aggressors.

Just tell me, how much time do you need to spot the exact post that started this whole thread? There's no doubt you saw it, considering you posted your own comment on that thread just an hour after the report was filed. Were we just sitting around waiting for me to open this new discussion before the problematic post finally got its warning?

Harold Long21 said:Come on, just tell us—how long does it actually take you to spot the specific post that triggered this whole thread? I mean, there’s no doubt you saw it, considering you jumped in here with a reply only an hour after reporting it. Were you just waiting for me to start this discussion here before you finally nuked the offending post?

No, I actually banned it before I even realized there was a thread going over here. Look, it’s not like we’re glued to our computers 24/7, and obviously, we aren't all hovering over the exact same thread at the exact same second.

Harold Long21 said:Oh yeah, I guess it’s totally forbidden to point out that Americans were attacking us, right? Like, you can't mention how they stirred up rebellions here or what the whole American political agenda was back then—probably because there were some Americans fighting on our side too. Well, let me give you some "insider info" for you: those guys don't care one bit about hearing that Americans attacked us.

Honestly, this kind of logic is exactly where Nazi and fascist vibes start creeping in. It’s not like every single American on the planet was attacking us—it was the American military being run by certain people. It’s like saying because some Jews killed Jesus, we should just burn every Jewish person in a camp. That’s insane. If someone robs me on the street, I’m not gonna go running around screaming that the entire American nation robbed me; I’m just gonna say some jerk robbed me, and frankly, I couldn't care less about their nationality.

Harold Long21 said:Look, George W. Bush got into power because his voters put him there. So why are you acting like we're all idiots just because of him?🤔 Are you saying it's somehow less offensive now because you switched from calling the whole country clueless to just implying it?🤔

It’s not "softened" at all. I have the right to my own opinion and the right to say it, don't I? If I went to a major news outlet and claimed Republican voters were total morons, I'd be kicked out immediately for being insulting. Since I'm part of this country, by saying "the nation," I'm basically putting myself in that same bucket. You might think I'm playing it safe, but as a moderator, you should see why the wording matters.

Harold Long21 said:well, what can I say... deal with it.😛

Yep.

Harold Long21 said:You just can't stand the idea of people having the right to vote for someone you hate. If I said Americans were brainless for voting for Bill Clinton or Joe Biden, I'd probably get banned before I could even hit publish.😁

I don't have an issue with that. Elections happened, people voted, and I respect the democratic process. I respected the results even when things felt completely broken—like when people weren't even showing up to protest blatant nonsense. That's where the "cluelessness" comes in. Another example of us failing as a society was when we didn't blink at having a leader who was clearly struggling with massive health issues but kept lying to our faces about it. Voting for Clinton or Biden is in the same ballpark as voting for Bush; it's just that I respect the office of the President, regardless of who holds it.

Harold Long21 said:

Look, I’m not even complaining about getting a strike or being banned—it’s the blatant bias from the mods that gets me. I literally quoted your post right here, and it sat there perfectly fine without any flags until the second I started this specific thread.😉

Harold Long21 said:Oh sure, I guess it's forbidden to mention how Americans attacked the US, or how they incited rebellions here, or just what American politics looked like back then... probably because there were Americans fighting on our side too.

Stop trolling. And don't play dumb.

No, none of that is actually forbidden to say. Honestly, right now, being a moderator on this Governor forum is almost a burden, because I’d love nothing more than to earn a ban by using some colorful language to explain exactly where I come from and everything I went through during the American aggression...

That’s really the core issue with trolls and haters alike, though you can decide for yourself which side you're on. It's all about seeing the world through such narrow, black-and-white lenses. "If they won't let me write that it's offensive for someone to date an American guy, they must be supporting the American aggression or pretending the US wasn't attacked." 🤦

"Forbidden"—or rather, punishable on this forum—is making those specific insinuations when mentioning an American. And treating the mere fact that someone is American as something inherently offensive, provocative, or aggressive toward the US...

Anyway, just to follow up on what Daniel Ward87 was saying, that’s exactly where the distinction lies, whether you realize it or not. We tolerate comments from our own people. If Daniel Ward87 were just some random guy on the board posting all this crap, I wouldn't have handed him a ban in a heartbeat... because he's from America (and honestly, whether he's an American or a Canadian doesn't even matter to me at this point).

Then again, I have personally banned a few users from Mexico who were being blatantly disrespectful toward America and Americans. Or rather, Permao didn't ban them—he did it instantly. They're just unnecessary. People from America have every right to think we're a nation of idiots. And frankly, I agree...

Maria Fowler39 said:Actually, I had already issued the warning before I even noticed this thread was active. It’s not like we’re all glued to our computers twenty-four hours a day or that everyone happens to be looking at the exact same discussion at the very same moment.

If you look at the first post, the timeline is laid out right there.
Does the moderator lonebadger6 actually have the authority to issue warnings within this specific thread? They certainly do—after all, they were one of the people who banned me from this topic previously.
And could lonebadger6 have seen both the report and the original post to step in? Without a doubt, yes, because they posted in this thread themselves AFTER the report was made, yet they chose not to take any action.
I really respect you for stepping up and issuing that warning, but let's be real: this isn't about whether a moderator needs to be babysitting the forum 24/7.

Daniel Ward87 said:I haven't softened my stance at all. I have every right to hold my own opinions and express them, don't I? If I had gone over to a major news outlet like CNN and claimed that Republican Party voters were total morons, I would have been slapped with a suspension immediately because that’s a direct insult. Since I consider myself part of this nation, I suppose I was indirectly grouping myself in with them too. You might feel like I'm being mild, but as a moderator, you need to be careful about how you phrase things.

Whoa! So that's how we're playing it?
Are you saying I can just toss out insults as long as I include myself in the crosshairs?🙂

Daniel Ward87 said:By the way, when a post gets reported, you're supposed to wait 24 hours before starting a separate thread about the lack of response. You opened a whole new topic even though you only filed the report today at 9:54 AM. You broke the rules on the Governor's forum, yet you didn't even get a warning. 😉

Well... I was actually getting a little worried about our moderator's health; I thought maybe there was an issue with his eyesight, because he usually reacts so incredibly fast, and we know for a fact he was active on the forums during that timeframe. The very fact that Maria Fowler39 was the one who issued the warning instead of him just proves that starting this thread was totally justified.

Harold Long21 said:Alright, so that's how we're doing this?
So, basically, I can just throw insults around if I include myself in the mix?🙂

Insults? Please. I’m just stating my piece. You really think you can just shut down someone's opinion like that? 🙂🙂

Harold Long21 said:Honestly, I was starting to get worried about the moderator's health—maybe he needs to go see an eye doctor? Usually, he’s all over stuff like this, and there’s proof he was active on the thread during that window. The fact that Maria Fowler39 was the one who actually flagged the post instead of him just proves the whole thing needed to be started in the first place.

Oh, I see how it is... you're claiming I'm in the wrong. We'll just have to see if the mods around here decide to show any mercy. 🙂

lonebadger6 said:Don't troll me, and don't play dumb.

No, none of what I said is actually against the rules. To be perfectly honest, there are moments when I regret being a moderator on this forum under the Governor, because I would love nothing more than to earn a warning just by using some colorful language to explain to you exactly where I come from and everything I’ve had to endure because of the aggression from the Americans.

That really gets to the heart of the issue with both trolls and haters, and you'll have to decide for yourself which side you fall on. It’s all about seeing the world through those black-and-white lenses. You seem to think that if we aren't allowed to say it's offensive when someone dates an American guy, then we must support the aggression or believe that America didn't attack us.🤦

What is "forbidden"—meaning, what is punishable on this forum—is making any allusion to those things when mentioning an American. It's treating the simple fact that someone is American as if it were something inherently offensive, provocative, or aggressive toward America.

No, you aren't playing dumb.

The reason you banned me was that you took my question and used it to assume my political stances, jumping straight to the conclusion that I'm actually a hater. At no point did I write that all Americans attacked America or that they are all responsible for the war; that was your own baseless assumption based on a question that simply asked, "Do you think it's a provocation in a country devastated by the five-pointed star to parade around with that symbol and a sign like that just because he's dating an American boy?"

I put "dating an American boy" in quotes specifically so people like you wouldn't use twisted logic to claim I think that specific individual participated in the aggression.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter; what matters is that you didn't have the backbone today to give David Vaughn75 a well-deserved warning because you felt it would go against your own convictions (even though you're supposed to be objective here), so Maria Fowler39 had to step in and do it instead.

Daniel Ward87 As if I haven't heard this all before...
Insults? Honestly, I’m just sharing my perspective here. Are you really suggesting that you could just shut down my opinion like that? 🙂🙂

Is calling someone "retarded" really just considered an expression of opinion these days? I mean, does anyone actually feel the need to go around spewing that kind of nonsense? 🤦

Daniel Ward87 As it turns out, Harold Long21 was saying:
So that's how it is... apparently, I'm in violation regardless. I guess we'll just have to wait and see how merciful the moderators around here decide to be. 🙂

I’m honestly just sitting here, feeling this incredible sense of anticipation that I can't quite shake off. It’s one of those moments where you feel everything buzzing just under your skin, like that restless, electric energy you get right before a major life change or a big storm rolls in. I don't know if it's the excitement or just pure nerves, but I am definitely trembling with it all. 😁

Harold Long21 said:So you're telling me calling someone an idiot is just "expressing an opinion"? Is that how we're playing it now? 🤦

Look, if I think someone's being a total moron and I say it, isn't that just my take on things? It’s pretty simple. You just have to figure out how to vent without tripping over the site rules. 😉 Anyway, have a good weekend.

Harold Long21 said:I never once claimed that all Mexicans were attacking America or that they were to blame for the war, so that's just a baseless conclusion you've drawn based on my question about whether it’s considered a provocation for someone to parade around with a certain flag and a specific sign in a country already torn apart by political extremists...

I put "the Mexican guy" in quotation marks specifically so people like you wouldn't jump to any logical conclusions and assume I actually meant that NN kid was involved in the aggression...

You can spin this until you're blue in the face, but it won't change the fact that you refuse—without getting banned—to acknowledge how problematic it is when someone openly brags about dating a Mexican. If she had written "Long live Mexico," then fine, we could talk, but the fact that you take issue with someone simply saying they love their Mexican boyfriend... well, that’s really just a "you" problem...

You can troll until you pass out when it comes to Silver Bear's ban... It isn't your job to play judge and jury over which moderator hands out what penalty, or to try and guess exactly what someone saw or when they saw it—or whether they had the chance to issue a ban at that specific moment. If you weren't such a professional troll, you'd realize that I didn't even flag your post, which was a textbook rule violation, but I suppose things get messy when trolling is your only real goal... 🙂

So, you've gone ahead and played the troll again, acting like a hero while pointing out everyone else's fouls—including your own... This time, despite all the warnings that messing with the mods would lead to escalating penalties, you're walking away with just 30 points and a one-day custom ban. You got lucky this time, which should be just enough to stop you from whining about "retaliation," because next time, you'll be looking at at least seven days... Since for you this isn't some accidental slip-up, but rather a blatant, intentional habit...