Questions for the mods regarding post sanctioning rules.

Hey there,
I was wondering if it's actually allowed to insult voters from certain political parties on this forum?

For example,
if I were to write:
Democratic Party voters are all basically traitors.

or
Republican Party voters are nothing but thieves.

Do posts like that get flagged or sanctioned here, or not?

What’s permitted in one PDF doesn't necessarily apply to another. It works both ways...

If there is a specific post causing issues, please drop a link here so the people involved can take a look at what's going on.

Michelle Evans said:Just because something flies on one subreddit doesn't mean it’s okay on another. It works both ways.

If there’s a specific post causing issues, please drop the link here so the people involved can actually see what the fuss is about.

Here are the three posts I flagged for the mods. I haven't gotten any real feedback from them, and nothing seems to have been done about it throughout the day.

Morgan Cook10 said:Here are three controversial posts I flagged to the moderators—but no real response, and as the day went on, I didn't see any actual penalties applied.

Look, you’ve got mods and admins who think the rules don't apply to them—and then you've got their buddies who also act like they're above the law—plus a complete lack of impartiality from leadership who will back anyone whose opinion matches their own. That's the short version of how things run on this site. Just look at my own cases; it’s a total wash, at least in my experience. It’s like fighting windmills—they completely ignore their own regulations. If you're lucky, maybe they'll actually penalize someone who deserves it, but if that person happens to fall into one of those three categories mentioned above? I highly doubt they'd even issue a warning, let alone a ban. Honestly, I have no idea what it would take for them to discipline one of their own or anyone who simply gets on their bad side.

It truly is quite bizarre that you’ve allowed a pack of absolute degenerates to take over the sports section of this forum, suddenly becoming the dominant force simply because you let them run wild.

Jamie Davis9 said:It’s honestly bizarre how you've let a pack of degenerates take over the sports section—suddenly they’re the dominant force just because you let them be.

Fair point, though unfortunately, it’s the exact same story in every other corner of this forum. But hey, that’s just society for you—everyone wants to shove their opinions down your throat instead of just stating them. They claim they "respect different views," while simultaneously refusing to accept anyone else's.
Except they don't. They just bulldoze through with their own agendas—and then the people doing the bulldozing get shielded by the mods and admins. I've seen plenty of irresponsible posts in the sports section myself; it's clear these people couldn't care less, or worse, they actually support this chaos.

And why on earth am I getting a notification saying my access to linked posts has been restricted?

bluecyclist64 said:So why on earth am I getting notifications saying I'm blocked from accessing linked posts?

They probably got nuked in the meantime, so now they're invisible to everyone except the mods.

It isn't about deleting anything; even the links aren't working for me, yet I can still see the deleted posts. It looks like we’re in for another bout of forum-induced madness. By the way, Morgan Cook10, is it possible to redo this?

William Bennett53 said:It’s not even about deleting things—the links aren't working for me either, yet I can still see the deleted stuff. This is turning into another classic forum glitch. By the way, Morgan Cook10, is there a way to redo this?

No worries.
In case the direct link to the post breaks again, here's the page:

This specific post:

And this one:

on the following page.

There are a few more, mostly using indirect ways to call Republican Party voters thieves.

The real issue is that the mods haven't touched these posts... In American political discourse, there's sort of an unwritten rule where politicians and parties can go at each other all they want... and that's fine. But here, people are actually attacking the voters who support them.
..so I'm wondering, would someone get sanctioned if they called voters from a different party a slur, or basically attacked any other group of people?

Morgan Cook10 said:No worries.
on this page (in case the link to the post breaks again)
http://www.forum.com/showthread.php?t=657136&page=131

this post
http://www.forum.com/showpost.php?p=5...postcount=2606

and this one
http://www.forum.com/showpost.php?p=5...postcount=2621
on the next page.

There are a few others that more indirectly label voters as Republican Party thieves.

The issue is that the moderators didn't react to those posts... in American politics, there is an unwritten rule that parties and politicians can insult each other... and that's fine... but here, people are insulting those who vote for the same side.
..so I wonder if someone would be sanctioned for calling voters of another party a slur, or really any other group?

Maybe, maybe not. It all depends on context. But since you seem bothered by insults directed at the Republican Party, I have to wonder why you weren't bothered by the insults toward the Democratic Party—which were quite "entertaining," involving labels like "party of brainless voters," "descendants of butchers," or "Red Communists." You have to admit, calling someone a thief is mild compared to being called a butcher.☕
Consistency is the fundamental rule of moderation, and also of reporting posts that don't belong here.

Some things get moderated, while others don't.
☕

Why is it that the moderators over at this political forum let certain users get away with constant insults without any consequences? They just ignore the reports on those posts, yet they’ll nitpick someone else's grammar or tone and hand out bans just because they have a different opinion.

Take this thread about the Golden Gate Bridge, for example:

none spends two whole posts calling people trolls and being straight-up abusive, kiss me describes other people's arguments as "pathetic vomit" and "total nonsense." All three posts were reported, but absolutely nothing happened. No penalties, no nothing.

Charles Fox10 said:It really all depends on the context, I guess. But since you seem so bothered by the jabs at the Republican Party, it makes me wonder why you didn't mind the insults thrown at the Democratic Party. Those were pretty hilarious—calling them a party of nothing, the heirs to some old-school butcher shops, or even Red Khmerists. Honestly, those were some top-tier creative insults. You have to admit, calling someone a thief is pretty tame compared to that stuff.☕

Consistency is everything. It’s the golden rule for moderation, but honestly, it’s just as important for everyone else here if we want to actually build a decent community—especially when it comes to flagging posts that clearly don't belong.

Some things get flagged, while others just slide right under the radar.☕

You're clearly not reading.

Look, this whole thing is really just about people feeling disrespected. voters It’s not even about a political party this time. I actually bumped up the font size—I think you might have missed the bolded and underlined part up there.

Hey Charles Fox10, am I allowed to say that every single Democratic Party voter is just a bunch of unhinged radicals?
Am I going to get flagged for this?

I actually wanted to hit back at everyone mentioned above with a similar move, but then I realized that doing stuff like that on a political forum usually gets you banned. That’s why I’m asking here instead.

Linda Young38 said:Why is it that the mods on this board let certain users get away with constant insults without ever touching them, ignoring every single report filed against their posts, while they go hunting for any tiny excuse to ban someone else just for having a different opinion?

Take the Bridge situation as an example:
I was just scrolling through some old threads and stumbled upon this discussion. It’s funny how much things change, but also how some debates just loop forever. The conversation was basically centered around whether anyone actually believes the current political noise. You had William Bennett53 chiming in with his usual take, which really set the tone for the whole thing. Then Morgan Cook10 jumped in to push back, creating that classic back-and-forth you see whenever people start debating party lines. It felt like watching a miniature version of a late-night talk show debate—lots of strong opinions, plenty of sarcasm, and that specific kind of American cynicism where everyone assumes the other side is completely out to get them. Even when Charles Fox10 tried to steer it toward something more grounded, it was hard to escape the partisan gravity. At the end of the day, it’s just another example of how we love to argue about the big stuff while ignoring the small stuff that actually affects our daily lives. It’s predictable, a little exhausting, but strangely entertaining if you look at it from a distance.

none In two separate posts, he’s just throwing insults around and calling everyone trolls. Kiss me. Someone's calling other people's posts "pathetic diarrhea" and "rambling nonsense," yet all three of their posts were reported and they haven't faced a single penalty.

Look, I’m starting this thread to call out a few specific posts that are getting on my nerves. I really don't want this to turn into a massive, endless shouting match or just one giant, pointless debate. If you have your own grievances, go ahead and start your own thread. That goes for everyone else, too.

Thanks for the help.

The slight issue with your argument is that you’re trying to draw parallels between things that just aren't comparable in the first place.
If someone actually had the nerve to call Democratic Party voters anything as extreme as traitors or insurgents, I’d probably hand them a score of at least 100, which pretty much guarantees an automatic three-day ban... depending on the context, they might even get hit harder.
So, it might be worth taking a second to think about what you actually mean when you say "using the same measure."

Now, if you’re calling both Republican Party and Democratic Party voters thieves, well, that depends on a whole lot of variables—the context of the story, the tone of the post, how the debate is flowing... but in my book, that wouldn't push anyone past a 35-point penalty for trolling. We have 10 moderators on this forum and there isn't a rigid rule for every single tiny detail, so one colleague might make a solid case for giving more points, while another might decide to give nothing at all.

lonebadger6 said:The slight issue with your logic is that you're comparing apples to oranges right out of the gate.
If someone starts throwing around labels like "terrorists" or "extremists" against Democratic Party voters, I’d probably slap them with a penalty of at least 100 points, which is an automatic three-day ban. Depending on how they say it, they might get even more.
So, as a starting point, it might be worth thinking about what "equal treatment" actually looks like.

Now, if you call Republican Party or Democratic Party voters "thieves," that's a different story. It depends on a lot of things—the context, the tone, how the debate is flowing... but in my book, that kind of trolling wouldn't score more than 35 points for either side. We have 10 moderators here, and there isn't a rigid rulebook for every single tiny detail. A mod could easily justify giving more points, or maybe nothing at all, depending on the situation.

If you had handed out 35 points for trolling for those posts I reported, I wouldn't even be opening this thread (honestly, I was expecting you to do just that, and then the matter would be settled)... but you didn't. That’s why I’m curious about the actual principles being used on this forum.

You're saying it's okay to call Republican Party or Democratic Party voters "thieves," but you can't call Democratic Party voters "extremists" or "insurgents." So, what's the line? Can we call them "parasites"? Or "deadbeats"? Or maybe just "idiots"? Is that acceptable??

Where does the line actually get drawn?

Defining those lines is tricky, I’ll give you that. But if we're talking about people just being annoying or "nuisances," I wouldn't reach for the ban hammer...

To me, the actual "thieves" fall somewhere in that gray area, and it really just depends on the context. Looking at the three posts you "reported"—though you didn't actually report them, since you have to hit the little icon, and I have no intention of handing out bans just because someone sent me a PM with a troll title 🙂 regarding the fact that there are now 9 moderators instead of 10 after Rez left—if anyone thinks action is needed, they probably saw something we didn't, but in my view, only that second post deserves a strike; the first and third don't. Obviously, some colleagues might think all three are violations because they caught the subtext, while others who missed the point might think all three deserve a ban. We can't all nine of us think exactly alike, and there aren't crystal-clear rules for every single tiny detail...

Regardless, I did issue a strike on another post just now, because leaving something like that up without any consequence isn't right.

***OFF ***Morgan Cook10 asked that we don't drift off-topic here, so I'll just give a quick answer since this thread is already moving... Linda Young38, if you think you're being punished just for having an opinion, you're delusional, and honestly, that kind of logic won't get you anywhere. A dozen different moderators and supermods have already explained the rules regarding your warnings to you, and if you still haven't grasped it, then we might as well just admit you're being stubborn and leave it at that... nothing is going to change just because you refuse to listen. As for those reports you keep filing on other people, I'll be blunt: I barely even look at them anymore. Sorry, but this is all volunteer work that eats up way too much time, and frankly, you've become one of our biggest spammers when it comes to reporting; out of ten reports from you, nine and a half are total nonsense, regardless of how many dramatic adjectives you throw at them, which only serves to discredit your actual, legitimate complaints... I've lost interest in reading your reports entirely, and while there are eight other colleagues around, whether they actually review them or just ignore them because they're tired of the nonsense is anyone's guess... ***END OFF***

Aha, I see. So there wasn't even a report filed via the little triangle icon?
I would kindly ask that this be the standard procedure moving forward; failing to report an issue and then coming here to shout about the guidelines is simply an invitation for conflict.

In any case, I support the moderation action taken on the linked post, and with that, I wish to close this matter.