CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › I feel like any discussion on Politics is impossible under these current rules.

I feel like any discussion on Politics is impossible under these current rules.

Started by rapidgull14 · · 👁 19 views · 162 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants rapidgull14Jack Jones10wiredsailor10Jeremy Wilson3Jerry GarciaSarah Wilson95driftingdriverAgranitefox16hollowtrucker77Rachel Sanchez11Richard Perez3Roger Robinson682electricscout13Drew Brooks8Jeremy Diaz9Andrew Sanchez572Jonathan Morales79Christian Wells6hollowwalker142Gregory Howardgranitepilot282Jessica Cox5Nathan Bailey65 …
Jerry Garcia Jerry Garcia Member
28 messages
joined Jan 2009
#81 ·
Rachel Sanchez11 said:I wasn't talking about you. An admin shouldn't be responsible for this, because at the end of the day, Politics is just one tiny section out of maybe 30 or 50 total. Having the head admin deal with these issues would be like asking the CEO of General Motors to personally fix a brake fluid issue on an Opel.

Having an Admin/supermod specifically for Politics would give the mods some real weight. You’d still be getting hit with the same appeals you get now, but the endless, toxic arguments would actually stop there.
And I clearly remember the details of when one guy in the Politics section got a permanent ban.
Get this: his name was Anderlon, and he was reinstated. Later on, he even got promoted.
Now, give me Mark Twain or Jeremy Diaz or driftingdriver who actually has authority over that guy. He's deserved a permanent ban a hundred times over by now


One Admin with direct backing from the head admin—someone who holds the line for the mods and can step in to permanently remove someone—would bring actual order to this place.
The mods could still do their jobs, bicker with users, explain their decisions, and defend their moderation, but those marathon debates would end instantly the moment someone hits the "stop" button. No more endless chatter, no more chasing ghosts.
Every subsequent post would just be a ban with a reason: "Clone of a permanently banned user..."

And now some guy is going to tell me that all the high-quality debaters will die off.
Well, I'll say this: plenty of people from that generation want a normal internet experience, but when they see the state of the Politics section, they just don't feel like writing, and that's how both Politics and the forum lose.
Who are we losing them to?
We're losing them to the people who have been polluting Politics for years and make every single discussion look exactly the same.
Go read some threads over there; they're all identical...

Edit:
By the way, Phoenix was banned 500 times until one night a certain lady finally had enough and snapped.
It wasn't until she made the call that the arguing actually stopped.

Also, it's easy to make a decision that makes everyone happy. But the decisions that nobody likes—not even you—are the ones made by the brave or those who have actually outgrown the nonsense.
And the worst decision of all is no decision at all!
Politics stays messy and is allowed to rot. Just read the sentence right above this one.

We already have a supermod over on Politics. Every time he does something the users don't like, they either migrate here or come crying to me. Even if it's just deleting one trashy post—honestly, you wouldn't believe half the things people whine about here. Then again, you probably would, considering you complained because I didn't reply to your PMs 😉.

If we had an Admin, they'd just demand more from them. When I make a decision and clearly state that it's final, people still go looking for Anderlon
.

edit: Simba banned Phoenix 😉
driftingdriver driftingdriver Active Member
62 messages
joined Jul 2010
#82 ·
Rachel Sanchez11 said:I wasn't talking about you. An admin shouldn't be responsible for this, because at the end of the day, Politics is just one tiny section out of maybe 30 or 50 total. Having the head admin deal with these issues would be like asking the CEO of General Motors to personally fix a brake fluid issue on an Opel.

Having an Admin/supermod specifically for Politics would give the mods some real weight. You’d still be getting hit with the same appeals you get now, but the endless, toxic arguments would actually stop there.
And I clearly remember the details of when one guy in the Politics section got a permanent ban.
Get this: his name was Anderlon, and he was reinstated. Later on, he even got promoted.
Now, give me Mark Twain or Jeremy Diaz or driftingdriver who actually has authority over that guy. He's deserved a permanent ban a hundred times over by now


One Admin with direct backing from the head admin—someone who holds the line for the mods and can step in to permanently remove someone—would bring actual order to this place.
The mods could still do their jobs, bicker with users, explain their decisions, and defend their moderation, but those marathon debates would end instantly the moment someone hits the "stop" button. No more endless chatter, no more chasing ghosts.
Every subsequent post would just be a ban with a reason: "Clone of a permanently banned user..."

And now some guy is going to tell me that all the high-quality debaters will die off.
Well, I'll say this: plenty of people from that generation want a normal internet experience, but when they see the state of the Politics section, they just don't feel like writing, and that's how both Politics and the forum lose.
Who are we losing them to?
We're losing them to the people who have been polluting Politics for years and make every single discussion look exactly the same.
Go read some threads over there; they're all identical...

Edit:
By the way, Phoenix was banned 500 times until one night a certain lady finally had enough and snapped.
It wasn't until she made the call that the arguing actually stopped.

Also, it's easy to make a decision that makes everyone happy. But the decisions that nobody likes—not even you—are the ones made by the brave or those who have actually outgrown the nonsense.
And the worst decision of all is no decision at all!
Politics stays messy and is allowed to rot. Just read the sentence right above this one.

- I completely agree; the core issue is that once a moderator is chosen and trusted, they should simply be allowed to execute their vision. They need support, even when they stumble, because anyone can make a mistake—especially when they're working this hard. More often than not, it’s just a misunderstanding... Mistakes should be discussed calmly through private messages. There is always a way to fix an error. Otherwise, nothing gets done.
- The Politics section is such a high-traffic, volatile part of the Reddit community that it’s impossible to truly know what’s happening there unless you’re monitoring it daily. An Admin can't possibly manage that unless they want to get flack from every direction. Their only real option is to trust the moderator.
- A moderator doesn't need a RED nickname or a PURPLE one to do their job effectively, provided they have that support from above. If they don't, then I suppose you're left with nothing but apologies and excuses.
Rachel Sanchez11 Rachel Sanchez11 Active Member
131 messages
joined Oct 2007
#83 ·
Simba banned him, but man, that little song he sang was hitting hard behind the scenes.
Simba stepped up like some kind of supermod from the Politics section. And because of that, people are always going to see him as just a Politics mod.
Another thing—supermods don't actually have the mandate to carry more weight than regular mods. Their whole function is fundamentally different from the start. That changes how everyone on the forum perceives them. Basically, they’re just mods who happen to be able to moderate the entire site.
That is completely wrong, though. Supermods should be given way more authority and actual clout.

You just don't get it. An Admin should never come from that specific sub-section. They need to be neutral, standing on the sidelines.
And they should have your sign hovering right above them that says: I agree! Signed, Bell

And this thing about Anderlon? He’s got his own stronghold too. It’s happened a few times now where Anderlon shows up and just tears through the mods and admins.
So, really, your job is to prove that Anderlon is essentially speaking for every single mod.
Anyway, there’s this concept in business management called mission and vision.
The rule of thumb is that a CEO is considered successful if the lowest-ranking manager in the hierarchy is telling employees the exact same mission and vision the CEO laid out.
You've got a tough job ahead of you. Honestly, the worst-case scenario for you is if they call in Anderlon and he makes a move, because at that point, you basically cease to exist.
Jonathan Morales79 Jonathan Morales79 Active Member
85 messages
joined Nov 2009
#84 ·
First of all, this thread starter "rapidgull14" with his two months of spammer seniority on the forum, along with that pro-Yugo officer mouthpiece and the spammer "Jack Jones10"—and her off-topic sister who’s practically weeping while peeling American-nostalgic onions, "wiredsailor10"—they don't offer anything of value to the discussion on Politics... not morally, scientifically, factually, educationally, stylistically, or even interestingly. So, I wouldn't even bother opening this pathetic whining about spoiled preserves if Jerry Garcia hadn't joined the fray, whose forum contributions remain a massive enigma to me. :confused :
Well, aside from basic decency, her original nickname would be some pretty interesting information.

(There are also those newly hatched clones like Rob-Roj, the radio guy, Taxi... whom Albatrolčina attracted, but that's a different thread entirely). Nevertheless, I'll throw in a few disconnected observations to counter some of the premises laid out by the previous ramblers. Inquisitor, along with Obelix, was absolutely the best moderator for Politics.
Why?
They allowed sharp opposition, but they didn't allow mindless drivel or genital filth; and since they possessed a sense of humor and a broad view of total diversity, they understood metaphors, irony, and parables. They never crowned themselves with narcisoid epithets like: objective, deserving, omniscient, politically correct... because that isn't the purpose of Politics.

I remember how Obelix once locked a fiery thread, but upon receiving reasoned pleas, he unlocked it, allowing certain facts to be cleared up. In fact, he knew how to admit and even correct a mistake. That is where his greatness lies. 🙏

Objectivity? : thinks:
On Politics? : rolleyes:
Objectivity isn't even possible in the debates on Politics. Politics isn't like vacuuming a carpet so you can conclude the trash has been sufficiently cleared away. To some, it's dirty; to others, it's not clean enough; and to some, it's brilliant.

Politics is, by its very nature, multidisciplinary, but composed of mutually conflicting sub-disciplines. That is the most important thing to understand first, and the next thing is to accept that an infinitesimal fraction of the Earth's population—and certainly this chaotic political cesspool—possesses encyclopedic knowledge. It is vital that there be no taboo subjects or any kind of sanctimonious caution, which the neophyte chatterboxes call so-called POLITICAL CORRECTNESS. 🙂 :mad : We aren't in the Wetlands, or some moldy, open-air swamp being dictated to us by someone like Jovo kuga, Gojko Ubiparip, or Obrad Kosovac. :rolleyes: Besides, intellectual curiosity cares about arguments and the psycho-socio-pathological genes from which both "Das Kapital" and "Mein Kampf" or the "Power of Marshall's word" emerge. Why should these topics be forbidden for discussion? Would banning them achieve some greater illusion of democracy??? Honestly... 🙂

More than a good moderator on Politics Informatics, Milky Way was a total CATASTROPHE for Politics. Which is natural, because the subject of the debate expects the participant—and especially the moderator—to possess great intellectual breadth, particularly regarding the tools of presentation and persuasion.

I noticed that someone is confusing characterless, impotent lukewarmness and empty dragging-on with STEADFASTNESS 😵
If, for example, an editor of some commercial newspaper were like Albatrolčina—someone whose columns would stall on boring, hackneyed phrases from the American era, just conveniently repainted with a different color, so that narcissism could be called forceful lecturing through blunt narcisoid preaching, dragging the discussion toward their own persona and (un)work for reasons known even to mediocre psychoanalysts. 😊 Would you read, let alone buy, such anemic, impotent material????

Alongside Mark Twain, driftingdriver is the textbook definition of a mediocre bore... but as a moderator? He’s nothing but pure, anti-intellectual, self-important garbage, obsessively focused on nothing but handing out punishments and recklessly slamming threads shut. There isn't an ounce of actual moderation from him, maybe just some mindless "policing"... (I even started a poll on the Politics of the Republic of America this summer "Is it actually healthy to have a moderator on the Politics sub who is a narcissistic but uneducated tyrant?" ).
But then, oh, he just went and did his typical self-congratulatory thing and DELETED IT. 😵 (hollowtrucker77 🙂 hey there, buddy 🙂 ) Intelligence and any semblance of broad-mindedness clearly haven't touched "his excellency"... a chronic lack of having read even a few decent books means he couldn't possibly conceive of anything beyond a pile of half-finished crossword puzzles that serve as his only source of insight (aside from his month-long plumbing projects, of course...). Here is a quick example of his "brilliant" 2 x 30 point rule violations:
Panic over CBS or Should Americans from Canada lose their right to vote?—where a rarely used yellow flag gets a post
zaba1111 said:You are an idiot!

. 😁
The worst part is how he writes these self-satisfied little posts and wipes out everything else, without even bothering to understand the context. Because of that, independent observers and unreported users can't even see the nonsense this brat—who probably shouldn't be allowed to touch a book with those hairy little hands—has been using to dilute the Reddit feed.
Experienced regulars tell me that, just like me, they found it pointless, or they simply didn't dare to post because they feared this guy would, in a fit of narcissistic compensation, delete their carefully crafted entries while simultaneously punishing them with some patronizing little explanation. It's automatic, thoughtless, yet driven by an innate, undeserved sense of superiority. Just like Mark Twain and granitefox16, or rather Rubni, as I affectionately call him. Granitefox16 is the prime example of an uneducated fanatic, a tavern-logic, party-line drone whom I don't even see the point in arguing with—not even about the color of the rag he might use to humbly kneel and clean someone's shoe, or perhaps two shoes at once. He constantly punishes debaters, only to later delete his own self-indulgent posts. :flop :

As for Refka—the old-timers call her that because it's short for Sarah Wilson95. I call her Refka because typing out that whole useless heap of letters is too much work... I just call her Refka 🙂 , mostly because of how she spends all day haunting this cluttered town square. I picture her as some sort of landlady wearing an apron and overalls, clutching a ladle that's dripping with, you guessed it, burnt gravy. 😍

The biggest issue with the moderation here is the atavism of TOTALITARIANISM, which bad moderators use as fuel to lash out with their limp virtual sticks, and it's as obvious as...The state of the mind. The absolute biggest issue is precisely that the bearer of this recessive moral beast remains completely unconscious of it. This narrow-minded, mindless, self-frightened, tabooed disability represents the stunted corpse of this fallen den of debauchery.
An unfree spirit cannot, nor should it ever, dictate freedom to others.

Boasting that it is forbidden in History to discuss the Partisans or our Nationalists isn't just some sad little anecdote; it’s a moronic reality that one could accidentally stumble into anywhere else under the current leadership of these pissed-off tailors with small, leaden hind legs.

Who for Moderator?

In my above explanation regarding what kind of moderator does NOT belong on PDF-politik, I should add—for the sake of any possible healing of this sunken chatterbox...

Exceptional and creative forum users, of which my humble self is one, are never placed in low bureaucratic positions because doing so traps their creative strength, time, and energy in depressing arbitrations. PERIOD. To appoint Phil Lynott (aka Chairman Mao), Gregory Howard, the Executioner, or the likes of Jalnuški Diletant or OrangeC as moderators would be a dramatic degradation of the interest and quality of this Reddit.
driftingdriver driftingdriver Active Member
62 messages
joined Jul 2010
#85 ·
- Jonathan Morales79, I have to hand it to you, you actually managed to get a laugh out of me. 😂 I don’t think I’ve ever witnessed such a staggering collection of wrong judgments and delusions about a person. 🙂 Since we both hail from the same parts of the coast, I once suggested we meet up face-to-face so you could see firsthand just how much you've "missed the mark." But clearly, you either lack the nerve or you're simply terrified of being confronted by your own flawed perception of my insignificance. 🙂
Everything you claimed about me is completely baseless; honestly, what you wrote was just good entertainment. 😁
- Then again, every Reddit needs its own version of Jonathan Morales79, Jalnuški, and the rest of that crowd. 😂
wiredsailor10 wiredsailor10 Member
19 messages
joined Nov 2008
#86 ·
driftingdriver said:- Jonathan Morales79, I have to hand it to you, you actually managed to get a laugh out of me. 😂 I don’t think I’ve ever witnessed such a staggering collection of wrong judgments and delusions about a person. 🙂 Since we both hail from the same parts of the coast, I once suggested we meet up face-to-face so you could see firsthand just how much you've "missed the mark." But clearly, you either lack the nerve or you're simply terrified of being confronted by your own flawed perception of my insignificance. 🙂
Everything you claimed about me is completely baseless; honestly, what you wrote was just good entertainment. 😁
- Then again, every Reddit needs its own version of Jonathan Morales79, Jalnuški, and the rest of that crowd. 😂

Here we go again—you’re acting like you took a personal hit. Look, that’s just his opinion, so deal with it. If everyone else gets to air their views, he should be allowed to air his too.
Look, you already said all that back when things were still looking good at the start. We read it, we got it, and it was fine. There’s really no need to keep repeating yourself. 🙂
Jonathan Morales79 Jonathan Morales79 Active Member
85 messages
joined Nov 2009
#87 ·
driftingdriver said:- Jonathan Morales79, I have to hand it to you, you actually managed to get a laugh out of me. 😂 I don’t think I’ve ever witnessed such a staggering collection of wrong judgments and delusions about a person. 🙂 Since we both hail from the same parts of the coast, I once suggested we meet up face-to-face so you could see firsthand just how much you've "missed the mark." But clearly, you either lack the nerve or you're simply terrified of being confronted by your own flawed perception of my insignificance. 🙂
Everything you claimed about me is completely baseless; honestly, what you wrote was just good entertainment. 😁
- Then again, every Reddit needs its own version of Jonathan Morales79, Jalnuški, and the rest of that crowd. 😂

Look, driftingdriver, my stance on the gay population should have been crystal clear to you a long time ago.
But, if I were to stoop down to your level, you wouldn't like it one bit... and frankly, I couldn't care less about whatever it is you think you're seeing through that other, unclosed eye of yours. 😉

Just focus on the topic at hand... and newsflash: the topic isn't you, no matter how much you desperately wish it was. 🙂
Christian Wells6 Christian Wells6 Active Member
61 messages
joined Oct 2007
#88 ·
How curious. Though, truth be told, I haven't read the whole thing. I simply don't have the inclination. My visit here was motivated solely by the desire to invite a few specific individuals over to another Reddit community I frequent; as far as this Politics section is concerned, I’ve spent a grand total of three days here, and frankly, that feels like three days too many.

To be precise—I’ve been handed a red card, all because I decided to start a discussion regarding Istria.
The entire forum strikes me as utterly pointless. Who holds the reins here and why? I couldn't care less. And why exactly certain topics bother the moderators? That is even further from my interests. However, if you are asking whether they are collectively politically illiterate—they certainly are.

The only individual I managed to engage in a proper debate with was driftingdriver, and I didn't give a second thought to whether he held any moderator status or not. He is a remarkably high-quality fellow, though we clearly failed to see eye to eye from the very beginning—which, I suppose, suggests that the level of discourse and socialization these forum users are accustomed to is rather subpar.

And yes, driftingdriver—it was for your sake that I came.
Roger Robinson682 Roger Robinson682 Active Member
73 messages
joined Jan 2008
#89 ·
Jonathan Morales79 said:First of all, this thread starter "rapidgull14" with his two months of spammer seniority on the forum, along with that pro-Yugo officer mouthpiece and the spammer "Jack Jones10"—and her off-topic sister who’s practically weeping while peeling American-nostalgic onions, "wiredsailor10"—they don't offer anything of value to the discussion on Politics... not morally, scientifically, factually, educationally, stylistically, or even interestingly. So, I wouldn't even bother opening this pathetic whining about spoiled preserves if Jerry Garcia hadn't joined the fray, whose forum contributions remain a massive enigma to me. :confused :
Well, aside from basic decency, her original nickname would be some pretty interesting information.

(There are also those newly hatched clones like Rob-Roj, the radio guy, Taxi... whom Albatrolčina attracted, but that's a different thread entirely). Nevertheless, I'll throw in a few disconnected observations to counter some of the premises laid out by the previous ramblers. Inquisitor, along with Obelix, was absolutely the best moderator for Politics.
Why?
They allowed sharp opposition, but they didn't allow mindless drivel or genital filth; and since they possessed a sense of humor and a broad view of total diversity, they understood metaphors, irony, and parables. They never crowned themselves with narcisoid epithets like: objective, deserving, omniscient, politically correct... because that isn't the purpose of Politics.

I remember how Obelix once locked a fiery thread, but upon receiving reasoned pleas, he unlocked it, allowing certain facts to be cleared up. In fact, he knew how to admit and even correct a mistake. That is where his greatness lies. 🙏

Objectivity? : thinks:
On Politics? : rolleyes:
Objectivity isn't even possible in the debates on Politics. Politics isn't like vacuuming a carpet so you can conclude the trash has been sufficiently cleared away. To some, it's dirty; to others, it's not clean enough; and to some, it's brilliant.

Politics is, by its very nature, multidisciplinary, but composed of mutually conflicting sub-disciplines. That is the most important thing to understand first, and the next thing is to accept that an infinitesimal fraction of the Earth's population—and certainly this chaotic political cesspool—possesses encyclopedic knowledge. It is vital that there be no taboo subjects or any kind of sanctimonious caution, which the neophyte chatterboxes call so-called POLITICAL CORRECTNESS. 🙂 :mad : We aren't in the Wetlands, or some moldy, open-air swamp being dictated to us by someone like Jovo kuga, Gojko Ubiparip, or Obrad Kosovac. :rolleyes: Besides, intellectual curiosity cares about arguments and the psycho-socio-pathological genes from which both "Das Kapital" and "Mein Kampf" or the "Power of Marshall's word" emerge. Why should these topics be forbidden for discussion? Would banning them achieve some greater illusion of democracy??? Honestly... 🙂

More than a good moderator on Politics Informatics, Milky Way was a total CATASTROPHE for Politics. Which is natural, because the subject of the debate expects the participant—and especially the moderator—to possess great intellectual breadth, particularly regarding the tools of presentation and persuasion.

I noticed that someone is confusing characterless, impotent lukewarmness and empty dragging-on with STEADFASTNESS 😵
If, for example, an editor of some commercial newspaper were like Albatrolčina—someone whose columns would stall on boring, hackneyed phrases from the American era, just conveniently repainted with a different color, so that narcissism could be called forceful lecturing through blunt narcisoid preaching, dragging the discussion toward their own persona and (un)work for reasons known even to mediocre psychoanalysts. 😊 Would you read, let alone buy, such anemic, impotent material????

Alongside Mark Twain, driftingdriver is the textbook definition of a mediocre bore... but as a moderator? He’s nothing but pure, anti-intellectual, self-important garbage, obsessively focused on nothing but handing out punishments and recklessly slamming threads shut. There isn't an ounce of actual moderation from him, maybe just some mindless "policing"... (I even started a poll on the Politics of the Republic of America this summer "Is it actually healthy to have a moderator on the Politics sub who is a narcissistic but uneducated tyrant?" ).
But then, oh, he just went and did his typical self-congratulatory thing and DELETED IT. 😵 (hollowtrucker77 🙂 hey there, buddy 🙂 ) Intelligence and any semblance of broad-mindedness clearly haven't touched "his excellency"... a chronic lack of having read even a few decent books means he couldn't possibly conceive of anything beyond a pile of half-finished crossword puzzles that serve as his only source of insight (aside from his month-long plumbing projects, of course...). Here is a quick example of his "brilliant" 2 x 30 point rule violations:
Panic over CBS or Should Americans from Canada lose their right to vote?—where a rarely used yellow flag gets a post

. 😁
The worst part is how he writes these self-satisfied little posts and wipes out everything else, without even bothering to understand the context. Because of that, independent observers and unreported users can't even see the nonsense this brat—who probably shouldn't be allowed to touch a book with those hairy little hands—has been using to dilute the Reddit feed.
Experienced regulars tell me that, just like me, they found it pointless, or they simply didn't dare to post because they feared this guy would, in a fit of narcissistic compensation, delete their carefully crafted entries while simultaneously punishing them with some patronizing little explanation. It's automatic, thoughtless, yet driven by an innate, undeserved sense of superiority. Just like Mark Twain and granitefox16, or rather Rubni, as I affectionately call him. Granitefox16 is the prime example of an uneducated fanatic, a tavern-logic, party-line drone whom I don't even see the point in arguing with—not even about the color of the rag he might use to humbly kneel and clean someone's shoe, or perhaps two shoes at once. He constantly punishes debaters, only to later delete his own self-indulgent posts. :flop :

As for Refka—the old-timers call her that because it's short for Sarah Wilson95. I call her Refka because typing out that whole useless heap of letters is too much work... I just call her Refka 🙂 , mostly because of how she spends all day haunting this cluttered town square. I picture her as some sort of landlady wearing an apron and overalls, clutching a ladle that's dripping with, you guessed it, burnt gravy. 😍

The biggest issue with the moderation here is the atavism of TOTALITARIANISM, which bad moderators use as fuel to lash out with their limp virtual sticks, and it's as obvious as...The state of the mind. The absolute biggest issue is precisely that the bearer of this recessive moral beast remains completely unconscious of it. This narrow-minded, mindless, self-frightened, tabooed disability represents the stunted corpse of this fallen den of debauchery.
An unfree spirit cannot, nor should it ever, dictate freedom to others.

Boasting that it is forbidden in History to discuss the Partisans or our Nationalists isn't just some sad little anecdote; it’s a moronic reality that one could accidentally stumble into anywhere else under the current leadership of these pissed-off tailors with small, leaden hind legs.

Who for Moderator?

In my above explanation regarding what kind of moderator does NOT belong on PDF-politik, I should add—for the sake of any possible healing of this sunken chatterbox...

Exceptional and creative forum users, of which my humble self is one, are never placed in low bureaucratic positions because doing so traps their creative strength, time, and energy in depressing arbitrations. PERIOD. To appoint Phil Lynott (aka Chairman Mao), Gregory Howard, the Executioner, or the likes of Jalnuški Diletant or OrangeC as moderators would be a dramatic degradation of the interest and quality of this Reddit.

My colleague Jonathan Morales.....👍😂

Jonathan Morales brought up Jalnuški, a sentiment I find myself agreeing with. It’s always quite a pleasure to read his posts, whereas one doesn't even need to mention the quality of Jonathan Morales's contributions. Perhaps the only thing that could ever hinder Jalnuški might be some trivial, meaningless bans. Everything else seems to work heavily in his favor, I suppose....👍
Rachel Sanchez11 Rachel Sanchez11 Active Member
131 messages
joined Oct 2007
#90 ·
Christian Wells6 said:How curious. Though, truth be told, I haven't read the whole thing. I simply don't have the inclination. My visit here was motivated solely by the desire to invite a few specific individuals over to another Reddit community I frequent; as far as this Politics section is concerned, I’ve spent a grand total of three days here, and frankly, that feels like three days too many.

To be precise—I’ve been handed a red card, all because I decided to start a discussion regarding Istria.
The entire forum strikes me as utterly pointless. Who holds the reins here and why? I couldn't care less. And why exactly certain topics bother the moderators? That is even further from my interests. However, if you are asking whether they are collectively politically illiterate—they certainly are.

The only individual I managed to engage in a proper debate with was driftingdriver, and I didn't give a second thought to whether he held any moderator status or not. He is a remarkably high-quality fellow, though we clearly failed to see eye to eye from the very beginning—which, I suppose, suggests that the level of discourse and socialization these forum users are accustomed to is rather subpar.

And yes, driftingdriver—it was for your sake that I came.

take me too, take me too...
Blue bird, blue bird...
I saw her, I saw her...
😬
hollowwalker142 hollowwalker142 Active Member
100 messages
joined May 2009
#91 ·
Private Messaging

Admin: So, you interested in being a moderator over in the Politics section?

"Typical Forum User": Wait, what did I ever do to offend you?😕😲

😁
Gregory Howard Gregory Howard Active Member
144 messages
joined Dec 2009
#92 ·
I won't comment on specific people, but...

* The term "trolling" is an import from English and lacks a precise definition. Here, various moderators have stretched this vague concept just to hand out penalties to users they find unpleasant. The reality is quite simple: any witty remark should be permitted, especially from outside users. Only repetitive posting intended to harass or insult should face sanctions. Instead, we have a segment of the moderation team jumping at the first opportunity to penalize forum members they personally dislike. That simply won't fly.

* As for insults, that isn't clear-cut either. For instance, I could call certain participants "communist brontosaurs" or "stubborn, old-school American remnants," yet I believe such things should be allowed. The only thing that should be banned is direct insults toward someone's parents or blatant personal attacks. Without labels, no debate is even worth having.
just look at American literature.

Now, I must also emphasize the following:

* I am absolutely in favor of forum moderation. Unmoderated forums inevitably descend into anarchy.

* Certain moderators aren't to my liking. But then again, why should everything suit my preferences?

* I do not approve of the attacks on driftingdriver, who was—perhaps?—one of the best moderators, despite the inevitable mistakes anyone makes in their work.

* As for those users whose opinions I don't care for, I've tossed them into the information abyss (there are about ten of them there), so I haven't the slightest clue what they are saying.

Summa summarum: moderation is necessary, even with this crew, provided some of the moderators behave with more decency.
granitepilot282 granitepilot282 Active Member
126 messages
joined Jan 2008
#93 ·
Anonymous said:I honestly think it’s a mistake to only pick moderators based on who has the most posts on a Reddit-style board. Why? Because those users have already built up certain biases toward other members, making it really tough for them to stay objective when they have to hand out penalties to people they don't know or just don't particularly like.
As for me, I’m throwing my hat in the ring for a moderator position. I actually have hands-on experience with vBulletin since I served as an admin on a similar forum before, so I know the ropes when it comes to moderation. Just because my post count is low doesn't mean I haven't been lurking here for a long time or that I don't fully understand how things work around here.

You're being dense. I mean, you don't need to be a rocket scientist, but a mod should probably have an IQ higher than 40.☕
Jessica Cox5 Jessica Cox5 Newcomer
6 messages
joined Jul 2012
#94 ·
Drew Brooks8 said:If I'm going to be brave enough to throw out two suggestions🙂 I’d say we have two absolutely top-tier political forum regulars here

Gregory Howard and Kexx 🤷

Regarding Canada and the other republics. 👍
Nathan Bailey65 Nathan Bailey65 Active Member
79 messages
joined Oct 2008
#95 ·
wiredsailor10 said:Can I throw out a few points?

We definitely need someone who isn't one-sided. For instance, driftingdriver couldn't stand it when someone spoke out against the church (just a reminder to everyone that criticizing the church is totally normal everywhere else in the world), while Simba, for example, can't stand it when people talk about veterans. That’s what I’ve managed to notice so far. If a moderator does have a personal opinion, they really should know how to keep it in check and not voice it on the forum.

Why? Because it gets awkward—they end up siding with people who think just like them, making the same mistakes, but only punishing those with opposing views.

I don't think we can take into account how many warnings someone has received if they were handed them by a moderator like that in the first place.

Also, I’ve noticed that everything just feels like trolling (aimed at the moderators). You can't expect a real discussion if comments have to be this rigid.

There's a massive difference between a thread veering off into a completely different direction and just someone bringing up examples that are slightly off-topic.

A few stray comments doesn't mean the whole debate is pivoting elsewhere. Besides, moderators aren't just there to hand out bans and delete stuff (at least that's how it works on other foreign Reddits); they're also supposed to help steer the conversation back on track.

I've often seen that people participating in a debate will stick to the point if someone just reminds them they've drifted. There's no need to go around handing out warnings to everyone; people are human, not computers.

🤣 🤣Maybe it seems normal to you, but the way you and a few others "debate" it is anything but pleasant. "Trolls" would probably be a better description.

@Jerry Garcia

As for the criteria... I can only say that, as a rule, the people chosen as moderators are those who have barely posted lately (in recent times) and who don't actually understand the subject matter of the PDF.
As for bias, let's not even go there, but regarding certain mods, we could certainly talk about their integrity (take granitefox16, for example, who, after a debate that didn't go his political way and where he was cornered by facts, simply wipes out the forum user's posts or the entire thread—not to mention he himself went off-topic and started trolling).

I understand that the forum has an editorial policy that leans toward the so-called left wing, and that's perfectly normal and legitimate. However, if public figures—politicians and those associated with politics—are subject to criticism, then the treatment toward them should at least be equal, regardless of whether they come from the left or right. There shouldn't be such things as "sacred cows" that people feel they must spit on or call every name under the sun.

The insults aimed at forum members are even worse. They can routinely call those of us on the right side fascists or bigots... yet the moment you call someone a communist or a radical leftist, you get hit with a warning card.

The criteria for closing threads is a whole different story... take certain verdicts and trials, for example. One can comment on a case right up until the verdict is reached (luckily, they can't carry out sentences here, and thankfully there's no death penalty), whereas some threads are shut down immediately with an explanation that you aren't allowed to comment on cases that haven't been legally finalized.

Gentlemen admins and moderators, nobody is stopping you from representing a specific political stance, but the criteria must be equal for everyone, and they clearly aren't on this forum.
granitepilot282 granitepilot282 Active Member
126 messages
joined Jan 2008
#96 ·
So, this troll doesn't fit the bill. Let's see who actually does... though honestly, it's much easier to list who *doesn't* fit, so let's just stick to that.
driftingdriver isn't the one, because he’s so busy trying to be a bigger Pope than the Pope himself that he’s turned into an Inquisitor. I don't mean his username, obviously, but his whole vibe. On top of that, he’s convinced himself he's sinless; he’d probably find it easier to convince a donkey to swim across the Mississippi while shouting "For the glory of the Republic!" than to actually offer an apology when he screws up.
As for granitefox16, why even waste the breath? That guy doesn't get it. I've seen wooden Mary statues with more flexibility, but this guy is exceptionally rigid. He’s picked up a few buzzwords that he repeats constantly, and if you aren't singing along to them, you're going to have a bad time. God forbid you try to debate him on a thread, because he’ll just ban you immediately. If you complain about the ban, he’ll just ban you again, and it goes on and on until you're totally out of luck. 🤣 In short, a vindictive mediocrity. A manic fanatic lost in his own hallucinations.

Mark Twain? For me, Reddit is just entertainment. Sometimes we outsmart each other, sometimes we trade insults, sometimes someone really gets under my skin—but generally, I hold them dear, even the ones I mock or insult. There are very few people who actually make me want to tear them apart. 🤣 Irritating nerd. Pathetic, a total failure who has set this forum back three steps. Just plain stupid.
Simba? Simba is alright. He’s messed up before, sure, but he knew where he went wrong and fixed it. He’s human enough to say, "Okay, I screwed up." To me, that’s enough to earn my respect.

...so yeah, that's the lineup. Now, for some suggestions.
hollowwalker142. He was already suggested once, but he turned it down because he didn't want to hang out with the losers mentioned above. Suggest him again, let him pick his own team, and the forum will run like a well-oiled machine. ☕
hollowwalker142 hollowwalker142 Active Member
100 messages
joined May 2009
#97 ·
granitepilot282 said:So, this troll doesn't fit the bill. Let's see who actually does... though honestly, it's much easier to list who *doesn't* fit, so let's just stick to that.
driftingdriver isn't the one, because he’s so busy trying to be a bigger Pope than the Pope himself that he’s turned into an Inquisitor. I don't mean his username, obviously, but his whole vibe. On top of that, he’s convinced himself he's sinless; he’d probably find it easier to convince a donkey to swim across the Mississippi while shouting "For the glory of the Republic!" than to actually offer an apology when he screws up.
As for granitefox16, why even waste the breath? That guy doesn't get it. I've seen wooden Mary statues with more flexibility, but this guy is exceptionally rigid. He’s picked up a few buzzwords that he repeats constantly, and if you aren't singing along to them, you're going to have a bad time. God forbid you try to debate him on a thread, because he’ll just ban you immediately. If you complain about the ban, he’ll just ban you again, and it goes on and on until you're totally out of luck. 🤣 In short, a vindictive mediocrity. A manic fanatic lost in his own hallucinations.

Mark Twain? For me, Reddit is just entertainment. Sometimes we outsmart each other, sometimes we trade insults, sometimes someone really gets under my skin—but generally, I hold them dear, even the ones I mock or insult. There are very few people who actually make me want to tear them apart. 🤣 Irritating nerd. Pathetic, a total failure who has set this forum back three steps. Just plain stupid.
Simba? Simba is alright. He’s messed up before, sure, but he knew where he went wrong and fixed it. He’s human enough to say, "Okay, I screwed up." To me, that’s enough to earn my respect.

...so yeah, that's the lineup. Now, for some suggestions.
hollowwalker142. He was already suggested once, but he turned it down because he didn't want to hang out with the losers mentioned above. Suggest him again, let him pick his own team, and the forum will run like a well-oiled machine. ☕

You're crazy,😲 what did I ever do to offend you?😠 I thought we were cool, but apparently not.😲

Ignore this suggestion; I'm a hardcore ultra-nationalist, a fascist, and the worst thing imaginable—I listen to Thompson.👍 😁

Personally, there's no way I could accept a moderator role, because I'd just spend all day harassing myself and my clones on PZK.🤣

Secondly, I'd have to hand out my own bans for trolling, since I'm such a fair person.😢 😁

So, a pure conflict of interest.
granitepilot282 granitepilot282 Active Member
126 messages
joined Jan 2008
#98 ·
Psst, you poor soul... imagine them picking you for a mod position just so you could ban everyone who doesn't follow the rules. Wouldn't that be something?😁
hollowwalker142 hollowwalker142 Active Member
100 messages
joined May 2009
#99 ·
granitepilot282 said:Psst, you poor soul... imagine them picking you for a mod position just so you could ban everyone who doesn't follow the rules. Wouldn't that be something?😁

So, you're telling me I should go out of my way to make more work for the Admins.🤣
driftingdriver driftingdriver Active Member
62 messages
joined Jul 2010
#100 ·
granitepilot282 said:So, this troll doesn't fit the bill. Let's see who actually does... though honestly, it's much easier to list who *doesn't* fit, so let's just stick to that.
driftingdriver isn't the one, because he’s so busy trying to be a bigger Pope than the Pope himself that he’s turned into an Inquisitor. I don't mean his username, obviously, but his whole vibe. On top of that, he’s convinced himself he's sinless; he’d probably find it easier to convince a donkey to swim across the Mississippi while shouting "For the glory of the Republic!" than to actually offer an apology when he screws up.
As for granitefox16, why even waste the breath? That guy doesn't get it. I've seen wooden Mary statues with more flexibility, but this guy is exceptionally rigid. He’s picked up a few buzzwords that he repeats constantly, and if you aren't singing along to them, you're going to have a bad time. God forbid you try to debate him on a thread, because he’ll just ban you immediately. If you complain about the ban, he’ll just ban you again, and it goes on and on until you're totally out of luck. 🤣 In short, a vindictive mediocrity. A manic fanatic lost in his own hallucinations.

Mark Twain? For me, Reddit is just entertainment. Sometimes we outsmart each other, sometimes we trade insults, sometimes someone really gets under my skin—but generally, I hold them dear, even the ones I mock or insult. There are very few people who actually make me want to tear them apart. 🤣 Irritating nerd. Pathetic, a total failure who has set this forum back three steps. Just plain stupid.
Simba? Simba is alright. He’s messed up before, sure, but he knew where he went wrong and fixed it. He’s human enough to say, "Okay, I screwed up." To me, that’s enough to earn my respect.

...so yeah, that's the lineup. Now, for some suggestions.
hollowwalker142. He was already suggested once, but he turned it down because he didn't want to hang out with the losers mentioned above. Suggest him again, let him pick his own team, and the forum will run like a well-oiled machine. ☕

I can't say I really agree with that. This is just one isolated instance. If someone presents me with solid arguments, I have no problem offering an apology.

http://www.reddit.com/post/14446159&postcount=4

The fact that I rarely apologize doesn't necessarily mean I rarely make mistakes; it doesn't mean I'm some genius, either. It simply means I am deeply considerate of others, and that I invest a significant amount of energy into my decision-making process, ensuring that in any ambiguous situation, I wouldn't go around penalizing posts unnecessarily.

@Gregory Howard: Thanks for the compliment. I truly value your takes on Politics. I was always reluctant to hand out penalties to users on this Reddit, but I had to do it because of the rules and the actual conduct of certain users, which unfortunately left me with no other choice.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads