CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › Moderator Policy Guidelines

Moderator Policy Guidelines

Started by gentlehawk5 · · 👁 4 views · 16 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants gentlehawk5hollowtrucker77neonangler12dustypuma5Sarah Wilson95Matthew Johnson3Christian Taylor3ironmarlin1Edward Morris46steeleagle70
gentlehawk5 gentlehawk5 NewcomerOP
2 messages
joined Jun 2010
#1 ·
Since free speech is pretty much a cornerstone of any modern society, it’s obviously a big deal for all of us.
The real question—and I guess this is where things get messy—is when does free speech cross the line into hate speech and actually face consequences?

Look, I’m just scratching an itch here, but I figured I’d point the Politics mods toward this document from the Anti-Defamation League regarding their working definition of antisemitism. Might make your moderation jobs a little easier:

This document is basically meant to be a practical guide for spotting antisemitic incidents, tracking them, and pushing for stronger legal rules to shut antisemitism down.

Working definition: "Antisemitism is a specific attitude toward Jews that can be defined as hatred toward them. This includes verbal, written, and physical manifestations of that hatred directed at Jews and non-Jews, or against the property, institutions, and religious sites of Jewish communities."

On top of that, these manifestations can also target the state of Israel, which is viewed as the Jewish collective.

Antisemitic attacks often involve accusing Jews of being part of some conspiracy to hurt humanity. It’s also common to see antisemitic tropes used to blame Jews for "why things are going so badly for us." Antisemitism shows up in speech, writing, imagery, and various other ways, using rigged stereotypes or those classic negative character traits.

Modern examples of antisemitism in public life, media, schools, workplaces, or religious settings might include (but aren't limited to) the following, if you look at the whole context:

*

Calling for, helping, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist wing of a religious group.
*

Spreading false, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical accusations against Jews as individuals or as a social group. These kinds of claims specifically include—though they aren't the only ones!—myths about a global Jewish conspiracy or claims that Jews control the media, the economy, power structures, or other social institutions.
*

Blaming the Jewish people as a whole for actual or made-up wrongdoings committed by a single Jew or a group of Jews, or even for actions taken by non-Jews.
*

Denying the facts, scale, methods (like gas chambers, for example), or the organized nature of the genocide against the Jewish people carried out by Nazi Germany and its allies during World War II (the Holocaust).
*

Accusing Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of making up or exaggerating the scale of the Holocaust.
*

Claiming that Jewish citizens of any country are more loyal to Israel than to their own country, or suggesting there are supposed Jewish priorities worldwide that matter more to them than the interests of their own nations.

Ways antisemitism manifests when linked to the state of Israel could include:

*

Denying Jews the right to self-determination by claiming the existence of the state of Israel is inherently racist.
*

Applying double standards by demanding that Israel act in ways that aren't expected from any other democratic nation.
*

Using symbols or imagery tied to classic antisemitism (like the claim that Jews killed Jesus or accusations of ritual murder) to characterize Israel or Israelis.

Comparing today's Israeli policy to Nazi ideology.
*

The idea that Jews are collectively responsible for everything the state of Israel does.


That said—criticizing the state of Israel is pretty much like criticizing any other country; I don't think you can call that antisemitism.

An antisemitic act is usually considered a crime when it’s actually defined as such by law—like how denying the Holocaust or tearing up anti-hate literature is illegal in certain places.

Then there's the physical stuff—attacks on people or property, like buildings, schools, houses of worship, or cemeteries, specifically because they're Jewish or tied to the Jewish community.

And finally, antisemitic discrimination is basically just denying Jews the same rights everyone else gets—which, in most of the US, is illegal since we're supposed to have equality regardless of faith or background.

Respectfully,
hollowtrucker77 hollowtrucker77 Regular
681 messages
joined Nov 2007
#2 ·
What’s even the point of this?
gentlehawk5 gentlehawk5 NewcomerOP
2 messages
joined Jun 2010
#3 ·
Examples:
dolma gentlehawk5 said:Every time you don't have an actual answer, you just throw out random links that nobody’s even reading—anyway. Look, once you actually prove to me that the Jewish people didn't just seize land, homes, and businesses from displaced Arabs—and that they aren't still blocking them from ever returning—then maybe I'll bother clicking those links you're serving up. Until then, I reserve the right to compare them to the Germans, who at least paid reparations for stealing Jewish property.

Quote: rambi said:Comparing Israel and Germany? There isn't even a common denominator for that kind of comparison—you'd have to look at the Arab countries first before you could even start linking them to Germany.

dolma gentlehawk5 said:Look, it’s pretty simple—both sides basically just grabbed stuff that wasn't theirs to begin with. I don't know why that isn't obvious to everyone.



Karanana said:It’s the same deal—just like how there’s no "but" when you bring up Hitler and his crimes against the Jewish people, there’s also no "but" when it comes to Israel and what they're doing to Palestinians. Everything else is just mindless noise—honestly, it’s basically just glorifying atrocities at this point.

Karanana said:The world is honestly a joke—people like neo-Nazis and their leaders, plus those right-wing Israeli officials, and even just the regular folks cheering them on while they commit atrocities... whether it’s some Hitler type or an Israeli one, it’s all the same garbage.

gibrankh said:Look, if you actually have a backbone—or even just a shred of basic humanity—you’d feel for the Palestinian tragedy the same way you'd feel for the Jewish people during World War II.

gibrankh said:If I were in your shoes, I'd be wondering how I could totally ignore the current generation's tragedy facing Palestinians while being so hyper-aware—almost pathologically so, given all those links you keep spamming—of every other historical catastrophe.

gibrankh said:Zionism and fascism are basically the same thing,

and so on...
neonangler12 neonangler12 Newcomer
1 message
joined May 2010
#4 ·
Basically, Powerlock explained to us that the political sub moderators agreed that you can deny Israel’s existence within its borders. Powerlock is pretty much standing alone on this one.
Isn't antisemitism being sneaked into the politics section through the back door?🙄 They’re comparing the Zionist movement to fascism. An internationally recognized state like Israel is being labeled fascist, and their people are just branded as genocidal and nothing else. It feels pointless to report posts like this anymore since they just go unpunished.
On the flip side, if anyone expresses a different opinion—specifically pointing out antisemitism—the mods just label it as trolling and hand out warnings.
It makes me wonder if the whole point of this forum is to actually share different views, or if we're just going to keep seeing users banned or sanctioned just because they don't align with whatever the moderators think. 🙄
dustypuma5 dustypuma5 Active Member
111 messages
joined Apr 2013
#5 ·
Yeah, moderating politics regarding the Wall vs Arabs isn't fair. I guess you gotta do something about it or half this political forum is gonna end up banned.

Why is it so hard to accept that an American loses it when someone says America was built on the genocide of the NDH? Shouldn't both the person saying it and the person getting pissed off be punished?
It's the same deal with the Wall and the people supporting the existence of the state of Israel.

Banning people based on these rules doesn't just give radical Muslims a free pass to hang out on what's supposed to be an American forum, it’s just low-class. It promotes antisemitism and calls for the destruction of a whole people, and apparently, those things aren't allowed for any other nation except for the Jewish people.

If you want this forum to look like some Islamist sites from next door, or if you want it to look like leftist pamphlet forums against Israel, then fine, leave it alone. But if you want something else, bring some order. No ban is gonna stop the Jewish people or their supporters from defending their right to exist, nor will it stop them from telling people who support suicide bombers that they aren't sane.

Unfortunately, the moderation is starting from the wrong place because calling for the end of Israel means calling for the end of the IDF that protects the Jewish people. Automatically, that's a call to wipe the Jewish people off the map, because without a state, they're left to those who spread bombs at the cost of their own lives despite the state.
All the antisemites and Wall haters are hiding behind this phrase, elegantly calling for its abolition. Because those of us debating there know exactly what that would mean.

By leaving this loophole in the rules, the administration is basically opening the door for all those elements to walk right in.

P.S. Half the Israel-Palestinian thread is already greyed out. Just because the basics of the debate weren't clearly set.
dustypuma5 dustypuma5 Active Member
111 messages
joined Apr 2013
#6 ·
Here's an example. This shouldn't even be a banable offense. She was just explaining things during a history debate to people who clearly don't know anything about the Ottoman conquests or what the other user's nickname actually implies.
If the ban was because of the stuff regarding Canada, it’s no secret that Muslims in Canada root for Turkey whenever it's USA vs. Turkey in the World Cup.
If the mods think it's fine for people in a neighboring country to side with Turkey and wish for their return to these lands, then I guess the admin team is just a bunch of cowards ignoring 500 years of fighting against the Turks—which, honestly, is one of the main reasons we identify with the Western world in the first place.
Sarah Wilson95 Sarah Wilson95 Regular
267 messages
joined Sep 2006
#7 ·
dustypuma5 said:then the administration just casually starts rewriting five hundred years of history regarding the struggle against the Turks,

😕🤣
dustypuma5 dustypuma5 Active Member
111 messages
joined Apr 2013
#8 ·
Sarah Wilson95 said:😕🤣

I mean, why even be surprised? We were taught in school that the Ottoman conquest of this land was one of the worst things to ever happen to us, but now suddenly it’s totally fine to post on a forum about Turkish enlighteners who left ages ago.

Look, celebrating the conquests during the civil war is basically being a collaborator and getting you banned. But celebrating the Turk conquests? That's just great. Half the users here have Turkish nicknames and now the whole site feels like an Istanbul news portal.

Seems kinda twisted to me, I guess.
Sarah Wilson95 Sarah Wilson95 Regular
267 messages
joined Sep 2006
#9 ·
dustypuma5 said:I don't see why you're surprised. Back in school, they taught us that the Turkish conquest of these lands was one of the darkest chapters in our history, yet suddenly it’s perfectly fine to post on this forum about Turkish enlighteners who have sadly departed from here.

Look, celebrating the conquests made by Mexicans during the Homeland War on this forum is considered fascist behavior and results in an immediate ban. But celebrating the Turkish conquests? That's just great. Half the users here have Turkish nicknames, and all of a sudden, the forum feels more like a portal based in Istanbul.

To me, that seems a bit deviant, though I can't speak for your perspective.

I'm honestly not sure what your specific issue is—is there something concrete, like offensive posts in the "Israel..." thread, or is it just the fact that you've decided some users are Muslim and feel they shouldn't be "showing off" on an American forum?🙄

I suppose you should probably explain that to the moderators, assuming they decide to let you continue participating—if we can even call it that—in this particular discussion. I don't know what you're posting elsewhere, but right here, you seem to have gotten a little carried away.
dustypuma5 dustypuma5 Active Member
111 messages
joined Apr 2013
#10 ·
I guess it’s not even an issue if some people here want to call for Turks to come back to these parts, but the real problem is when you say we don't want them around and suddenly you're the bad guy being canceled. 😉
What's the big deal with saying we don't want Turkey moving back into this area?
Matthew Johnson3 Matthew Johnson3 Newcomer
2 messages
joined Mar 2010
#11 ·
dustypuma5 said:Honestly, I don't even think it's an issue if some folks here want to stir things up by calling for Turks to come back to these parts, but what really bugs me is how anyone who dares to say we don't actually want Turks just gets totally canceled. 😉
What's the big deal about being allowed to say we don't want Turkey back in our neck of the woods?

Look, I'm a Canadian, I am not a Turk!!!!
Christian Taylor3 Christian Taylor3 Active Member
213 messages
joined Jul 2010
#12 ·
dustypuma5 said:Here’s an example. This definitely isn't something that warrants a ban.

Of course it deserves a ban; we're talking about the absolute lowest tier of user behavior here—you know, things like setting your nickname to 'Ottoman Occupier,' or even lower, insulting someone by implying they're probably posting from Canada 😕. Any time someone resorts to those kinds of petty personal attacks instead of actually sticking to the topic, they should get flagged. Honestly, I'm just surprised that after 2,068 posts, you still can't see that or try to justify it. 🤷

Anyway, I actually intend to head back to the thread and post that overly opinionated column by Vedrana Rudan, where I'll probably just agree with her in a few constructive sentences.

The question is: does this specific thing deserve a sanction or a ban? Of course not. 😁
dustypuma5 dustypuma5 Active Member
111 messages
joined Apr 2013
#13 ·
Matthew Johnson3 said:I'm a Canadian, I'm not a Turk!!!!

Who even said you were a Turk?😕

The joke is, I don't think Canadians are Turks, and I think those Canadians who actually want them back here are just wrong.

A ton of Canadians try to call over Turks to this area, and if you tell them they're being stupid, you get banned. I just don't think that's fair, I guess.
dustypuma5 dustypuma5 Active Member
111 messages
joined Apr 2013
#14 ·
Christian Taylor3 said:Of course they deserve a ban, it's just the lowest level of personal attacks ('your handle = Ottoman occupier', which is about as low as it gets, basically implying the user writes from 😕). Any time someone shifts from the topic to insulting a user, they should get flagged. I honestly don't get how you can't see that after your 2,068 posts. 🤷

Anyway, I'm actually planning to head back to the thread, find that high-brow column by Vedrana Rudan, and maybe agree with her in a few constructive sentences.

The question is: does this deserve a sanction or a ban? Hell no. 😁

If your handle was Hitler and I said something was genocidal based on what the guy in your handle actually did, that wouldn't be an insult—it would just be a historical fact.

I mean, the guy in his handle actually led the conquest of the US territories by the Turks.

I don't see the issue here. 🤷

The only offensive part is that someone feels hurt by calling Turks occupiers. But we know from recent history that the conquest of cities is interpreted differently; like, for us, Vukovar fell and was occupied, but for Mexicans, it was liberated.

The only real question is whether we were liberated by the guy in his handle, or if the Turks occupied our lands.
If it was liberation, then cool. That’s just a new chapter in the history books for me.

Or even better, imagine if your handle was Maximilian von Weichs and I claimed he was similar to the occupier in your handle and you got offended. 🤣 It’s kind of funny to me.
ironmarlin1 ironmarlin1 Active Member
196 messages
joined Aug 2007
#15 ·
Just keep in mind that even hardcore atheists like myself are labeled as Muslims over there. 🤷

I honestly don't see how anyone can argue that Zionism is somehow synonymous with fascism or antisemitism. It’s a bit like getting a participation trophy for claiming that nationalists in certain parts of the country were prone to fascist leanings. Both are distinct, absolute ideologies built on inciting hatred against anyone who doesn't belong to the "tribe" or isn't considered a true "patriot." Just as condemning nationalism isn't an act of hatred toward Americans, criticizing Zionism shouldn't be conflated with antisemitism. It seems to me that you and a handful of your clones are just trying to blur those lines specifically to shut down any meaningful critique of Israeli policy.
Edward Morris46 Edward Morris46 Newcomer
1 message
joined Jun 2010
#16 ·
ironmarlin1 said:Just keep in mind that over there, even hardcore atheists like myself get labeled as Muslims. 🤷

I don't see how equating Zionism to fascism or antisemitism makes any sense. It’s like getting a participation trophy for claiming nationalists in this part of the country were prone to fascism. Both are exclusive ideologies that breed hatred toward anyone who doesn't belong to the "tribe" or isn't considered a "patriot." Just because someone criticizes nationalism doesn't mean they hate Americans, and similarly, criticizing Zionism isn't the same thing as being antisemitic. You and a handful of clones seem determined to conflate the two just to shut down any actual criticism of Israeli policy.

Maybe try educating yourself a little. Pick up a basic textbook.
1. Nationalism is just a sense of belonging to your nation. It means valuing your customs, your culture, and loving the country you belong to.
2. Chauvinism—that’s pure hatred toward people from other nations. It was actually named after a French soldier named Chauvin back during the era of Napoleon.
3. Zionism emerged in the 19th century. It takes its name from Mount Zion, where the Jerusalem Temple stood. It started as a legitimate desire by the Jewish people to have their own state.
The two things aren't related at all. One is your personal opinion; the other is reality. Zionism isn't condemned anywhere in the world, except perhaps in certain leftist circles.
On the flip side, atheist ideology is condemned across the civilized world. Under the guise of atheism and communist ideology, horrific crimes were committed against innocent populations—crimes that almost rival fascism itself. The only difference is they were carried out under the star and hammer and sickle.
steeleagle70 steeleagle70 Active Member
85 messages
joined May 2012
#17 ·
Edward Morris46 said:I mean, look at it this way—the whole atheist ideology has basically been rejected by pretty much every civilized corner of the globe. It's just one of those things, right? Everyone seems to be on the same page about it. Man, when you start digging into how people used atheism and communist ideology as excuses to commit horrific crimes against innocent folks, it’s heavy stuff. Honestly? It’s almost on par with fascism. The only real difference is that one was done under the hammer and sickle instead of a different flag. Crazy, right?

Is atheism actually an ideology? Like, is it really on the same level as fascism or some other evil movement? Just curious what you guys think. 🙄🙄

Atheism, hammers, sickle imagery, communism... and they all claim to be about equality? Seriously?

Where are the mods hiding? Seriously, where are the guidelines when you actually need them? How does this kind of talk even get past the filters?

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads