Partial ban in social science

Since nobody really got back to me about my request to lift that partial ban
in the thread down below, I figured I’d just start a new topic.
So, I’m just looking for an update from the admins regarding the possibility of clearing the restriction
on my posts over in the "social science" subforum.

The moderators and Smod are looking into this. We'll have an answer for you by tomorrow night.
If you want, feel free to drop a note in the meantime about whether anything has shifted regarding the original cause of the split or the whole conversation that kicked it off.

dustyranger64 said:The mods and Smod are looking into it. We'll let you know what we decide by tomorrow night.
If you want, maybe let us know if anything changed regarding the original reason for the partial ban—you know, the whole discourse that led up to it.

Honestly, I can't even remember exactly why I got hit with the partial ban.
Basically, back then I was just jumping into that thread about same-sex
marriage—just sharing my arguments without actually attacking anyone.
I can't dig up those posts right now because the thread is totally buried, but it'll be way easier
to find them once I get back into that subforum.
I ended up posting 72 times in that one thread, and the penalty points were for
"trolling"—hit me with 85 total across four warnings; one was 35, two were 15, and one
was for 20.🤷

Keith Lee2 said:I honestly can't remember exactly why I got that partial ban.
Basically, back then I was mostly just posting in those threads about same-sex
marriage, arguing my side without actually attacking anyone.
Can't dig up the old posts right now because the thread is totally buried, but it'll be easier
to find them once I get access to that subforum again.
I wrote 72 posts in that one thread, and the penalty points were for
"trolling"—85 points total from four warnings; one for 35, two for 15, and one
for 20.🤷

Let me help jog your memory. You got that partial ban because of rhetoric like this:

Yeah, women are being stripped of their rights too since, unlike men, they don't have the right
to say they're men.
And I'm being stripped of my rights because I can't identify as "female."
So, when will there finally be freedom of expression regarding gender, regardless of sex?
Only then will I support same-sex marriage.

In other words, that sight will be "unpleasant" (to put it mildly), no matter if
some group over there decides to call it "healthy," so you'd basically have to force
me to react that way.

The law doesn't ask two men about their sexual orientation, so
there's no discrimination based on orientation.

Two people of the exact same sex interacting can't be a sexual act, so
it shouldn't even be called that.

That's trolling, plain and simple.

Like responding to questions such as:

Then what counts as sex between three people?

like this:

What do you mean, three people? 😲
Where on earth would you find a guy with two penises?

Or using rhetoric like this:

The relationship between homosexuals can't be sexual. We figured that out a long time ago!
For a sexual act to happen, you need two different sexes, which
isn't the case here. So, a homosexual relationship is basically just
mimicking a sexual one—just "acting."

Also, this is just trolling and making up definitions on the fly.
And then topping it off with posts like this:

Keith Lee2 said:If you're using the same yardstick for mental health as you do when you claim a homosexual person is
mentally healthy...
To me, having a sexual drive toward something that isn't sexually compatible with who I am doesn't
look like mental health.

Honestly, why should someone arguing at this level even be allowed to participate?
Aside from totally misunderstanding things and using arguments that fall apart instantly under any scrutiny, what we have here is pure trolling, twisting words, and those final comments trying to link homosexuality to mental health.

dustyranger64 said:I don't see why someone arguing at this level should even be allowed to participate here.
Besides the basic misunderstandings and shaky logic—which could easily be debunked with actual facts—the stuff above is just straight-up trolling, twisting words, and then throwing in those posts about the link between homosexuality and mental health.

Look, if those arguments could actually be shut down with logic, then they
would have been, and there wouldn't be any need to kick the other person
out of the debate.
And that’s not even mentioning how simply failing to grasp what someone is trying to say
gets labeled as "trolling" or "twisting words."
Plus, I don't get why bringing up the correlation between homosexuality and
mental health would get just one person banned, especially since others were
using that exact same correlation in the thread.

Honestly, the whole topic of homosexuality is a closed book for me—I don't see
why we should give it so much weight that someone gets banned from every single
topic on the entire subforum just because they don't support
same-sex marriage.

Keith Lee2 said:Look, if those arguments could actually be debunked, then they
would have been. No need to kick someone out of the debate
just because you don't like their take.
And besides, calling it "trolling" or "twisting words" just because you didn't understand what the other person was trying to say?
That's a stretch.

It *was* debunked! Like, multiple times. Totally useless.
You don't get banned or blacklisted over and over just for having an opinion.

Keith Lee2 said:Plus, at the end of the day, I don't see why mentioning the correlation between homosexuality and
mental health would get one single person kicked out, especially when others
were using that exact same correlation in the discussion.

If the mods missed some people implying homosexuality is a disorder or a mental illness, then yeah, that's just a mistake—not some conspiracy against you.

Keith Lee2 said:Anyway, homosexuality is a closed book for me. I don't see any reason to make such a huge deal out of it that someone gets banned from every single thread on the
subforum just because they don't support
same-sex marriage.

The only reason your posts on this topic are being treated as such a big deal is because it's basically the only thing you've posted about in social science since 2008.
I mean, talk about a gap! That's like, one post every five years. So, forgive us if we actually find them relevant.

dustyranger64 said:So yeah, basically just posting once every five years—don't blame me if people don't take it all that seriously.

But seriously, the big question is still hanging there... is this quarantine—which has been going on for, what, almost
a whole year now—actually gonna end or not?

Keith Lee2 said:So, the big question is still hanging there; is this quarantine—which has basically lasted almost
a whole year now—ever actually going to end?

Per the agreement between the moderators and Smod, partial bans can be lifted.

Just keep in mind, though, that getting that status back doesn't require quite as much work as earning it the first time.

The expectation is civil conversation, especially if you're jumping back into the same thread where you lost your standing in the first place.

Thanks, guys!