Is anyone from management actually going to weigh in on this?
Basically, we're looking at a thread where the tolerance for figurative language is exactly zero percent. There just isn't any room for it. The moderator established the ground rules and has already wiped hundreds of posts, while handing out dozens of warnings to users who posted vague nonsense or failed to interpret the statistics and data accurately—whether they meant to or not. Posts have to be crystal clear, concise, written in plain American English, and backed by a credible, verifiable reference. I’ve personally taken a few warnings myself, and some of my own posts were pulled because I didn't break down the statistics into granular detail... it's necessary to ensure there's absolutely no room for manipulation. Anyone participating in this thread understands that. Otherwise, you'd end up with posts claiming "most people" or "everyone from a certain group" committed all the rapes in Germany, or "the majority of a specific demographic" committed most of the robberies in Germany, and things like that. While someone might try to take those statements figuratively, they would only serve to incite intolerance and would be immediately flagged as fake news or "alternative facts." In political discussions, especially when dealing with international affairs, breaking these rules is a very difficult thing to get away with...
It really just comes down to one question: did the moderator write that post with full intention, or are they actually breaking the very rules they claim to enforce with such an iron fist?...
If this is a case of pure ignorance—and it seems like the moderator truly doesn't realize there have been more than two and a half terrorist attacks in the last two years (though, honestly, what does one even mean by "half an attack"?!)—then we really have to question their competence in moderating a discussion they clearly don't understand well enough. I highly doubt they would allow a moderator from a frat house to oversee a subreddit about pregnancy, or let a gambling enthusiast moderate a forum dedicated to ethics. But that likely isn't the issue here... given how regularly they comment on this thread, it’s obvious they are reading it. Unless there's some sort of medical issue affecting their memory, it feels more like a conscious violation of both common sense and the general forum rules...
If we’re talking about the deliberate spreading of falsehoods or using "figurative" language—which is really just a polite way of saying manipulation—then this is a textbook violation of our guidelines. It’s exactly the kind of thing that used to flood the ban appeals section back in the day, sparking endless complaints about moderators on this thread and several others like it... As I’ve pointed out before, the moderation team maintains a zero-tolerance policy when it comes to any sort of ambiguity or dishonesty regarding victims, their numbers, or other sensitive topics...
The admins can still see everything you delete. It isn't actually a physical removal from the server; it’s more like a "hide" function. All the moderators still have access to those archived posts...
Well, if I may borrow your words for a moment...
Quote: There are just some things that simply cannot be tolerated. Like blatant, shameless lies...
Whether we're talking about 700,000 or saying "less than 1,000," those kinds of claims shouldn't be tolerated here... It’s all the same to me. You only received a relatively minor warning for trolling because I wasn't entirely certain if your post was intentionally meant to claim that fewer than 1,000 people were killed at Auschwitz—though that was clearly the message you were sending, even if you were being incredibly clumsy about how you phrased it. Had I been absolutely sure of your intent, it would have been at least a 500-point deduction and a seven-day ban... |
No, you received a warning because a portion of your post very clearly implies—and as I mentioned, I’ll allow for the fact that you expressed yourself quite clumsily and incorrectly—that fewer than 1,000 people perished at Auschwitz. Taking your response into account, it seems like there is less and less chance of you correcting this misunderstanding, so I am warning you now... the administration has the authority to either remove a warning or increase it just as easily...
http://www.reddit.com/showthread.php?t=963827
I’ll say it again: I couldn't care less about the warnings or bans. I have zero desire to spend my energy pointing out every single inconsistency from the moderator running this thread based on their own personal biases... that's a whole different conversation that the mods clearly aren't interested in, and frankly, dragging them into it just invites endless debates over arbitrary interpretations of the rules. This particular issue is much more serious, and in my view, it's quite straightforward. You've all challenged the staff over much smaller, more trivial matters before, but all I am asking for here is an objective review of how this section of the sub is being handled... or perhaps even granting more authority to another moderator, one who isn't nearly as controversial, like DJTusa, regardless of the subject matter here...
