|
|
Post by montegriffo on Apr 14, 2024 13:30:54 GMT
Barroom fights have proper context if we are playing-fighting 'world wrestling' style. This is very much the position Red Rackham takes - ie we fight , but we are mates really and nobody wants anyone to be actually hurt. Everyone on the board should have this position imho. We all have a common interest The trouble with huge piles of supposedly consistent rules is they paradoxically sow mistrust. Board members stop play-fighting and the game becomes 'serious ' ie exploiting the rules to remove each other from the discussion. Every rule provides a new avenue for this gambit. I have been very much against allowing this pattern to grow because, I suspect, many of our posters use the forum as a significant social venue. Everyone loves Red Rackham, but no one takes debate with him seriously. Why do you find it so difficult to identify with what we are talking of here. Not banter or Joshing. Not even insults and put downs. But the lack of anything else. Rather surprisingly, Red Rackham's red line is changing his avatar to a Care Bear. Clearly some childhood trauma I was unaware of. |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Apr 14, 2024 13:33:50 GMT
Tinculin did seem to be particularly energised by the events in the ME. There are real people behind the anonymous online identities. Perhaps he was personally involved in some way - maybe he is Jewish himself - maybe he even has family there.
|
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Apr 14, 2024 13:39:07 GMT
Everyone loves Red Rackham, but no one takes debate with him seriously. Why do you find it so difficult to identify with what we are talking of here. Not banter or Joshing. Not even insults and put downs. But the lack of anything else. Rather surprisingly, Red Rackham's red line is changing his avatar to a Care Bear. Clearly some childhood trauma I was unaware of. Actually although I think there is a decent old boy behind Red’s online presence, he has become angrier and less coherent as time goes on. His less attractive inarticulate inebriated late night self has rather spread into day time. I’d be a little worried about his mental health and would strongly recommend a month off detox from GB News and politics in general. Not sure he is heading in the right direction tbh. |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Apr 14, 2024 13:41:01 GMT
Tinculin did seem to be particularly energised by the events in the ME. There are real people behind the anonymous online identities. Perhaps he was personally involved in some way - maybe he is Jewish himself - maybe he even has family there. If he's Jewish himself, it's strange that he judged calling somebody Goebbels as not being equivalent to calling them a Nazi. It's also peculiar that he would introduce a Nazi-name-calling rule that protects the forum's resident white supremacist and Nazi apologist. |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Apr 14, 2024 14:31:08 GMT
Tinculin accused me of being a terrorist supporter and an anti-Semite. An anti-Semite would be indifferent to the Holocaust as Jewish people are not on the same level as others. No ban for Tinculin though. If you do not agree with him or are not persuaded by his 'argument' he shuts you down. I agree. The Nazis will be remembered for their anti-Semitism long after the invasion of Poland has been forgotten. Under Tinculin's rules, you can't equate somebody to a Nazi ... unless you are Tinculin. What's more, there's no parity of treatment. I questioned a mod decision in polite terms and received a two-week ban. Another member of this forum questioned a mod decision in stronger terms, questioned it again, and yet again, when his threads were deleted. He received no sanction whatsoever. Also consider that two members on the Right received a two-day suspension for calling someone a paedophile, while I received a two-week ban for politely questioning an extraordinary mod decision. Tinculin simply makes up the rules as he goes along. That is why members of his own mod team have questioned him. That forum is imploding. It was warned about the likely result of almost no moderation many times. Tinculin is a result not a cause. |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Apr 14, 2024 14:33:35 GMT
I agree. The Nazis will be remembered for their anti-Semitism long after the invasion of Poland has been forgotten. Under Tinculin's rules, you can't equate somebody to a Nazi ... unless you are Tinculin. What's more, there's no parity of treatment. I questioned a mod decision in polite terms and received a two-week ban. Another member of this forum questioned a mod decision in stronger terms, questioned it again, and yet again, when his threads were deleted. He received no sanction whatsoever. Also consider that two members on the Right received a two-day suspension for calling someone a paedophile, while I received a two-week ban for politely questioning an extraordinary mod decision. Tinculin simply makes up the rules as he goes along. That is why members of his own mod team have questioned him. That forum is imploding. It was warned about the likely result of almost no moderation many times. Tinculin is a result not a cause. No moderation or bizarre and arbitrary moderation? |
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Apr 14, 2024 14:36:40 GMT
That forum is imploding. It was warned about the likely result of almost no moderation many times. Tinculin is a result not a cause. No moderation or bizarre and arbitrary moderation? I mean prior to Tinculin going berserk. And almost no moderation. Light moderation as it is called. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 14, 2024 14:41:30 GMT
Saint, I'd have some more sympathy if you hadn't expended weeks of effort trying to get Bentley removed from the forum for making a sly insinuation.
Everyone wants it their own way and lots of hard rules with big penalties make any compromise more difficult.
|
|
|
|
Post by Zany on Apr 14, 2024 14:44:32 GMT
Saint, I'd have some more sympathy if you hadn't expended weeks of effort trying to get Bentley removed from the forum for making a sly insinuation. Everyone wants it their own way and lots of hard rules with big penalties make any compromise more difficult. Of course if Bentley had been stopped from doing it in the first place.... Does anyone doubt he did? |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Apr 14, 2024 14:45:47 GMT
Saint, I'd have some more sympathy if you hadn't expended weeks of effort trying to get Bentley removed from the forum for making a sly insinuation. Everyone wants it their own way and lots of hard rules with big penalties make any compromise more difficult. I didn't try to get anyone removed from the forum. I wanted a sanction for his calling me a paedophile. I would have expected the same if he had called you a paedophile. The rule says: you can't call someone a Nazi OR imply they are a Nazi. In what world is calling somebody Goebbels not implying they are a Nazi while calling someone a holocaust denier is? |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 14, 2024 14:54:14 GMT
Tinculin did seem to be particularly energised by the events in the ME. There are real people behind the anonymous online identities. Perhaps he was personally involved in some way - maybe he is Jewish himself - maybe he even has family there. If he's Jewish himself, it's strange that he judged calling somebody Goebbels as not being equivalent to calling them a Nazi. It's also peculiar that he would introduce a Nazi-name-calling rule that protects the forum's resident white supremacist and Nazi apologist. This is part and parcel of the context and equivalence mud-pit you enter by having explicit rules like this. The reason the Goebbels comment was not deemed a Nazi accusation was context related - ie they were talking about propaganda, It would be far better if rules like were not public or, to put it another way, the mods just used their discretion. Once a rule is public it becomes a game |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 14, 2024 14:56:19 GMT
Saint, I'd have some more sympathy if you hadn't expended weeks of effort trying to get Bentley removed from the forum for making a sly insinuation. Everyone wants it their own way and lots of hard rules with big penalties make any compromise more difficult. Of course if Bentley had been stopped from doing it in the first place.... IIRC the message/s were removed pretty quickly. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 14, 2024 14:59:18 GMT
Tinculin did seem to be particularly energised by the events in the ME. There are real people behind the anonymous online identities. Perhaps he was personally involved in some way - maybe he is Jewish himself - maybe he even has family there. I think is quite likely - ie more likely than not. |
|
|
|
Post by Saint on Apr 14, 2024 15:03:54 GMT
If he's Jewish himself, it's strange that he judged calling somebody Goebbels as not being equivalent to calling them a Nazi. It's also peculiar that he would introduce a Nazi-name-calling rule that protects the forum's resident white supremacist and Nazi apologist. This is part and parcel of the context and equivalence mud-pit you enter by having explicit rules like this. The reason the Goebbels comment was not being deemed a Nazi accusation was context related - ie they were talking about propaganda, It would be far better if rules like were not public or, to put it another way, the mods just used their discretion. Once a rule is public it becomes a game Listen to yourself! Buccaneer called me Goebbels because I said that it would be better to defer to the judgment of medical professionals, psychiatrists and doctors, when it comes to dealing with transgender issues. Because I said that, it was okay to call me a Nazi (Goebbels). Buccaneer gets away scot free. No sanction. Apparently, you took it upon yourself to judge it okay to call someone a Nazi when it suits you. After all, it was YOUR judgment that my saying that deferring to medical professionals was propaganda. YOUR judgment. So, people can be called Nazis when it suits your agenda. Now, look at Red Rum. He said somebody was denying a holocaust. A very strong argument can be made that a holocaust is occurring. But, magically, this time he was calling someone a Nazi (by Tinculin's judgment). So, it's okay to call someone a Nazi if he reasonably asserts that medical decisions should be taken by medical professionals; but it's not okay to call someone a holocaust denier if there is a probability that a holocaust is actually occurring. As I said: listen to yourself! |
|
|
|
Post by dappy on Apr 14, 2024 15:05:20 GMT
If he's Jewish himself, it's strange that he judged calling somebody Goebbels as not being equivalent to calling them a Nazi. It's also peculiar that he would introduce a Nazi-name-calling rule that protects the forum's resident white supremacist and Nazi apologist. This is part and parcel of the context and equivalence mud-pit you enter by having explicit rules like this. The reason the Goebbels comment was not deemed a Nazi accusation was context related - ie they were talking about propaganda, It would be far better if rules like were not public or, to put it another way, the mods just used their discretion. Once a rule is public it becomes a game I think there is much sense in having a rule where mods mod based on their common sense and discretion. It is only a politics forum after all. If you don’t like the way a forum is moderated, leave. |
|
