Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

Overheal

Deleted User wrote: »

Tbf,a mod could put this bed,if they shown a screenshot of who reported his posts?

There are so many reasons that will never happen, not the least of which is the GPDR.

It's like being in stasi era east Germany..

But really, if there's a trend of someone being continually reported by one person that shouldn't be on..

Quantum Erasure

Overheal wrote: »

There are so many reasons that will never happen, not the least of which is the GPDR.

Well, you're right there. Not the least, not even a little bit...

This is it

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It's like being in stasi era east Germany..

Yeah, exactly like that.

Overheal

Deleted User wrote: »

It's like being in stasi era east Germany..

But really, if there's a trend of someone being continually reported by one person that shouldn't be on..

"If" - and there's not, and if there were yes abuse of the report function.

Like I already pointed out you managed to continue posting in the megathread despite 3 threadbans. If someone really had been continually reporting on you do you really think they would have let that slip by?

What you have is a conspiracy theory.

pjohnson

If someone is repeatedly arrested is it the Garda to blame?

Ok..I want to report Overheal for abuse of the report function..I would like the moderators to review his use of it..

Quantum Erasure

pjohnson wrote: »

If someone is repeatedly arrested is it the Garda to blame?

Well, it depends on, as I said before, if a crime has been committed

Ten of Swords

Deleted User wrote: »

Ok..I want to report Overheal for abuse of the report function..I would like the moderators to review his use of it..

Mods do not give feedback or updates on reported posts. If you want to kick this off report your post and outline the reasons for it but do not expect to hear anything further. Once a report is made the matter is between the mods and the person reported, nobody else.

Outlaw Pete

Deleted User wrote: »

Trump supporters often tend to behave worse, it's a reality tbh.

Deleted User wrote: »

Moderators have been enforcing the rules stringently on posts from both sides tbh. It's not limited to just one group.

Yeah, keep posting that absurd position and just ignore the reality, of which this thread is full of examples of, which clearly show the opposite to be true.

From the moment those threads started pro-Trump users were held to a much much higher standard of posting. Anti-Trump users often got moderated for their posts, that's true, but it would generally be slaps on the wrist; on thread warnings or a Yellow at worst.

One user, for example, must have had four or five other users infracted for saying they had TDS but yet that same user themselves got away with saying ALL users on the other side had TDS. Indeed they even moaned about users saying it about them in this very thread. Similar situation with name calling, liberal users who insulted the whole thread would generally get away with it, whereas if pro-Trump users insulted others in any small way whatsoever, they'd end up threadbanned.

As it stands, I still haven't seen a user threadbanned for making points via rhetorical questions and ignoring strawman arguments and a mod say that amounted to them "hijacking" the thread the way I was, but I'll keep an eye out for it, maybe it'll happen again, one day.

Beasty wrote: »

One thing you can be assured of is the Trump side of discussions is a hell of a lot louder than the Biden side

And that's not picking sides. It's quite clear and evident in the threads. Of course a lot of Trump supporters and/or indeed posters associating with the extreme right side of politics can and do so in a civil manner. Unfortunately though a much higher proportion seem to tthink it is some kind of slanging match

No, it's not clear and evident. That is just your bias. What is evident is that a lot of noise is made in response to pro-Trump views, not just in CA but all over Boards, and via the Report button also, which is of course, directly into the ear of mods. I know that more than any user as I am more often than not met with a barrage of abusive replies for daring to post almost anything positive about him as President, and that's over the last four years.

Ad hominem responses asking 'How can you support a rapist/egomaniac/idiot' etc etc were commonplace and no mod ever jumped on a thread and demanded our posts were respected. Perhaps cause we never made noise via the report button in response to it. Maybe we should have but it's a hallmark of the left to want to silence the views of others, and so I suspect it will never be the case that us (non-leftties) would want users silenced for daring to call a politician that we supported, sleepy, no matter what their objective for doing so was.

Beasty

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

No, it's not clear and evident. That is just your bias. What is evident is that a lot of noise is made in response to pro-Trump views, not just in CA but all over Boards, and via the Report button also, which is of course, directly into the ear of mods. I know that more than any user as I am more often than not met with a barrage of abusive replies for daring to post almost anything positive about him as President, and that's over the last four years.

Apologies if this sounds harsh, and I'm not directing at you, but some of the absurd positions adopted by Trump are openly supported by some of his "fans" around here. That means they are on a bad footing to start off with. If they try and defend the indefensible they are more likely to cause issues on this site

Smee_Again

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Its almost as if the likes of the morris tribunal,likes of ian bailey etc never happened




Seems to me,as someone without a skin in the game either way.....the chaps conspiracy wont die,and the replies to him are v.well worded,neither confirming or denying if its same people smashing the report button??

What does it matter? It’s not like 10 reports = 1 sanction.

If posters can’t stick to the rules they’ll be sanctioned, stay within the rules and they won’t.

Bunch snowflakes the lot of them, and by them I mean anyone who gets threadbanned and then starts whinging about reported posts.

Outlaw Pete

Beasty wrote: »

Apologies if this sounds harsh, and I'm not directing at you, but some of the absurd positions adopted by Trump are openly supported by some of his "fans" around here. That means they are on a bad footing to start off with. If they try and defend the indefensible they are more likely to cause issues on this site

Well, they shouldn't be on a "bad footing" as this is a discussion forum and it should be a level playing field.

Did mods ever see those suggesting Trump and his campaign conspired with Russia to fix an election to be an "absurd position" ? Of course not and this why it is a much different proposition posting as a liberal on Boards than it is as a non-liberal, as the deck is stacked against you from the get-go.

I've been banned from threads on Boards and mods cite my opinions and volume of reported posts as a reasoning for why they threadbanned me. I've also been threadbanned because my opinions were labelled "conspiracy theories" (when they were anything but).

Mods should be able to moderate fairly despite thinking a user's view is "absurd" though, that's the point. The rules of a charter should be applied consistently and not just when it suits. Some mods seem perfectly capable of this and some it seems either are blind to how much they subject one side of the aisle to a standard of posting they never do the other, or they are aware of it and just don't care.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Its almost as if the likes of the morris tribunal,likes of ian bailey etc never happened




Seems to me,as someone without a skin in the game either way.....the chaps conspiracy wont die,and the replies to him are v.well worded,neither confirming or denying if its same people smashing the report button??

But it still goes back to violating the rules.... If somebody is spam reporting or something, the person being reported is fine as long as they aren't breaking the rules.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Never did think,id see the day,id end up talking up for trump supporters though :pac:

Haha.. likewise..

Smee_Again

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Matters not a jot to me,but the replies to the query are v.well worded,and only adding fuel to the flames,



Dont really see,what hurling abuse at people and calling em showflakes is intended to achieve?

People are surely allowed to provide feedback and have inquires answered surronding issues without abuse hurled at em??,little point in asking for feedback otherwise?

Never did think,id see the day,id end up talking up for trump supporters though :pac:

Just because something is well worded that doesn’t mean it has merit.

If posters stuck to the rules and followed the numerous warnings then they wouldn’t be banned. In this thread are posters who were previously threadbanned complaining about their posts being reported after they’d been banned. That’s such a whiney position to take, just take some responsibility for your (not directed at you obviously) actions.

Fair point on calling people snowflakes but I’m just calling it like it is. I assumed some would appreciate that.

Outlaw Pete

Smee_Again wrote: »

What does it matter? It’s not like 10 reports = 1 sanction.

I've had mods (whilst justifying their threadbans) cite volume of reports and so yes, the amount is a factor for some mods. Look at how many thanks certain mod actions receive. Only natural that would be a motivating factor for some.

If posters can’t stick to the rules they’ll be sanctioned, stay within the rules and they won’t.

That's very naive but a liberal would say that as it's not you that is subjected to a unfair standard of posting or attacked and insulted for merely expressing a view.

Bunch snowflakes the lot of them, and by them I mean anyone who gets threadbanned and then starts whinging about reported posts.

The Queen thinks the world smells like fresh paint.

Smee_Again

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

I've had mods (whilst justifying their threadbans) cite volume of reports and so yes, the amount is a factor for some mods. Look at how many thanks certain mod actions receive. Only natural that would be a motivating factor for some.



That's very naive but a liberal would say that as it's not you that is subjected to a unfair standard of posting or attacked and insulted for merely expressing a view.



The Queen thinks the world smells like fresh paint.

No doubt you appealed them to the Dispute forum and won? No, thought not.

The problem is that you post lies and then expect not to be called out on it, then you post more and more lies or repeat the same lie and get banned.

You claimed the other day that you’re never wrong because you get your news from multiple sources, but you also claimed Trump would win.

How can anyone take you seriously on any topic when you post such ridiculous statements like that?

Smee_Again

[Deleted User] wrote: »

aye they should take responsibility too so of posting us a joke,a bad one at that.... but they are providing feedback/quiring x,y and z about reports etx and everyone is being v.obtuse and its only a breeding ground for resentment carrying on like this

Fair point about the feedback but in essence it amounts to “I don’t want to have to suffer the consequences of my actions” and then blaming others for being caught.

It’s Scooby-Doo levels of ridiculousness

And I would have gotten away with it too, if it wasn’t for you meddling kids

Outlaw Pete

Smee_Again wrote: »

No doubt you appealed them to the Dispute forum and won? No, thought not.

You can't appeal a threadban in the DR. If you read my posts in this thread you'd know that.

The problem is that you post lies and then expect not to be called out on it, then you post more and more lies or repeat the same lie and get banned.

I was banned for posting lies? News to me. Can you link to a lie? Thanks.

You claimed the other day that you’re never wrong because you get your news from multiple sources, but you also claimed Trump would win.

I am rarely wrong tbf, it's true, and yes, I felt Trump would win but that makes me more accurate than 99% of anti-Trumpers on Boards who claimed there would be a blue wave, that Biden would win in a landslide, as they yet again believed the liberal suppression polls were accurate. So, even if Trump loses this close race for the Oval, I still won't be anywhere near as wrong as the anti-Trump Boards contingent were, sure they were miles off.

How can anyone take you seriously on any topic when you post such ridiculous statements like that?

See you on the field.

blanch152

pjohnson wrote: »

People seem to be upset that their posts are reported and think that is why they get threadbanned?


Have you considered that the content of the posts is what gets you thread banned?

I don’t think that’s the point being made.

Certain viewpoints actively reject contrarian views. They then report consistently other posters who disagree with them. They become shadow moderators in essence.

If the other posters respond in kind, threads and discussions become a mess. However, if they don’t, one side of a discussion can become silenced, and sometimes, because that side does not engage in the same level of reporting, and moderators do not see every post on a thread, the side of the discussion being silenced may not be the worst offender.

gozunda

Overheal wrote: »

Don’t at all understand the phrasing of your questions here.

I’m threadbanned from the BLM/WLM thread. The mods aren’t responsible for ensuring there are co equal contingents of pro police vs police brutality commentators and it’s not an entitlement of mine, similarly, to be an ordained police brutality commentator on the thread. It’s just as well IMHO, the thread has moved about as fast as molasses since I left, which seems indicative of the lack of constructive argument on the subject as a whole. People weren’t really progressing the central argument they were just lashing out at anyone who called out police brutality, so, there’s little to be gained from giving it more oxygen.

That bit certainly has an element of truth tbf ...

Overheal

gozunda wrote: »

That bit certainly has an element of truth tbf ...

Yes and you expressed support for a great many of those posts, many of which were carded.

gozunda

Overheal wrote: »

Yes and you expressed support for a great many of those posts, many of which were carded.

I think you may be partially mistaken. Don't remember thanking any of your posts. If I did my apologies :pac:

hullaballoo

Admin: this thread is very much not what this forum is intended for and unless there is a very concerted effort to bring it back around to the aims of this forum in the next day or two, I'll be closing it off.

gozunda

On a more serious note and an additional bit of Feedback - the BLM / ALM thread mentioned above was remarkably well moderated imo. Especially given the developing and often controversial topic. Did a quick scan off the last half of the thread and i was surprised that there were very few comments which required / recieved carding tbf.

Most of the small number of comments (with a few exceptions) which were carded were simply stupid reactionary type stuff and generally off topic. So yup a thumbs up for that thread.

Smee_Again

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

See you on the field.

Probably not Pete, I’ve no interest in engaging with you on the vast majority of topics/threads you seem to get yourself banned from.

Maybe in 4 years.

gozunda

gozunda wrote: »

On a more serious note and an additional bit of Feedback - the BLM / ALM thread mentioned above was remarkably well moderated imo. Especially given the developing and often controversial topic. Did a quick scan off the last half of the thread and i was surprised that there were very few comments which required / recieved carding tbf.

Did the reporting of threads stop once Overheal was threadbanned?..

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Did the reporting of threads stop once Overheal was threadbanned?..

That's a very unhealthy obsession you seem to have with that particular poster.

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How.in the context of feedback,is this helpful,or constructive??

How is people constantly asking for screenshot of whom reported whom considered feedback?

The mods can't do that, posters know mods can't do that but temhey keep asking for it so they can then accuse the mods of bias and of hiding things.