Horrible Moderation In Politics Forum

[Borodog]

I've changed my mind. All of this bashing of Iron is antedotal.

[img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
no comment

[/ QUOTE ]


Censored for moderator?

[BluffTHIS!]

I have previously made my views on iron's modship known and don't feel the need to belabour them here. But I would like to point out the irony of the fact that the principals of the trolling firm of canis, cardcounter0 & whiskeytown, LLC, have not to come to his defense in this and other threads on his modship. After all they were running scared during the brief tenure of a former politics mod who was keeping trollishness in check. And now that those 3 uber-trolls are allowed to flourish virtually without limit they won't even stick up for the mod who enables their trolling. How damned ungrateful is that?

[whiskeytown]

[ QUOTE ]
I have previously made my views on iron's modship known and don't feel the need to belabour them here. But I would like to point out the irony of the fact that the principals of the trolling firm of canis, cardcounter0 & whiskeytown, LLC, have not to come to his defense in this and other threads on his modship. After all they were running scared during the brief tenure of a former politics mod who was keeping trollishness in check. And now that those 3 uber-trolls are allowed to flourish virtually without limit they won't even stick up for the mod who enables their trolling. How damned ungrateful is that?

[/ QUOTE ]

or maybe it's because we don't bother to come to this part of the forums very often cause it isn't a topic about which I care to devote much interest. However, you caught me on a night when, desperate for validation, I ran a search on my name - LOL

I do support Iron81 fully, he did ban me for 24 hrs for personal attacks - I stand by the humor of the statements, however - [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I continue to fully support Iron81 for his work in doing what he can to handle the biggest bunch of cry-babies on 2+2 - at least up until now.

so get bent and stop speaking in ignorance of facts lest people presume it also applies to you personally - whoops - too late.

go Iron81 [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

rb

[BluffTHIS!]

whiskey,

It's about time you showed some [censored] gratitude. Also the pity of the thing re you 3 trolls I mentioned, is that you are the one who is capable of making decent posts, but except for a very few instances, just won't make the effort and resort to the trollish use of bumper sticker slogans and links with no real reasoning/discussion.

[iron81]

Bluff, for the life of me I have no idea why you believe those three posters are trolls. There are much more obnoxious posters in Politics than those three. I think that Whiskey is one of the best posters in there and while Cardcounter and Canis aren't as good as him, there's nothing wrong with them. I also don't think its a coincidence that all three posters on your list are liberals.

As for 4 High's ban, the reason I did it was a passage in the pamphlet where the Congressman explained that Evolution science is the result of a Jewish conspiracy. This is classic anti-semitism because it feeds into the "Jews control the world" myth. I can PM the link on Monday if anyone is interested.

4 High's excuse that he was mocking the Congressman is a mitigating factor which is why I banned him for 1 day instead of two. But I don't think I can completely excuse it because more than half of the country believes in creationism. There is a reasonable possibility that someone like that would take the Congressman's message to heart and that's why I banned him and I stand by the ban.

That said, I recognize that there are people on this forum who could do a better job at moderating Politics than I. I would be willing to step down if someone came forward that I thought could do a better job than me. I have [censored] and Andyfox in mind, but I'm open to suggestions.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Bluff, for the life of me I have no idea why you believe those three posters are trolls. There are much more obnoxious posters in Politics than those three. I think that Whiskey is one of the best posters in there and while Cardcounter and Canis aren't as good as him, there's nothing wrong with them. I also don't think its a coincidence that all three posters on your list are liberals.

[/ QUOTE ]


iron,

You don't realize how I hate criticizing your modding of the politics forum because I have always liked you and think you mean well. But the quote above shows a lot about your judgement. whiskey is indeed capable of good posting, but like I said above mostly won't make the effort. But ANYONE who can say with a straight face that canis isn't a TOTAL troll just has either very poor judgement about posters or very low standards.

Also it is very clear you have a PC bias in moderation, and make knee-jerk decisions about isolated tame or non-racist/hate instances as with the OP's topic, rather than using a standard of either a stream of subtle examples or one very blatant and clear one.

I also think it is very commendable that you are willing to step down in the face of criticism, although I think it needs to be acknowledged both that you obviously don't receive clear guidance from the admins for modding standards (and they never commented on my previous postings here in ATF where I proposed the standard of intellectual honesty, which is actually a lot less subjective than any current standards), and that your co-mod vulturesrow has been mostly absent.

Having said that, I also think that many of the more conservative posters, and not just liberal ones, won't be happy with anyone's modding, as witnessed by their accusations of bias against andyfox, who couldn't have been more evenhanded IMO, despite the fact he and I rarely agree on political matters.

[Mickey Brausch]

Banning 4 High was clearly wrong. Deleting the link was wrong.

You are still a good moderator for the Politics Forum, in my opinion.

(For one thing, you do not claim to be perfect.)

Mickey Brausch

[whiskeytown]

[ QUOTE ]
whiskey,

It's about time you showed some [censored] gratitude. Also the pity of the thing re you 3 trolls I mentioned, is that you are the one who is capable of making decent posts, but except for a very few instances, just won't make the effort and resort to the trollish use of bumper sticker slogans and links with no real reasoning/discussion.

[/ QUOTE ]

my bad - I was imitating Republicans - [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] j/k

seriously though - I consider it fairly dishonest to read a blog and try to paraphrase it's contents or pass them off as my own - if it's a good idea worthy of discussion, I'd just post the link, add my 2 cents, and go from there - whoever said they wanted to ban links to blog posts aren't doing it to improve discussion, they're trying to stifle it.

The debate in the politics forum is a microcosm of the whole political spectrum - and there are two kinds of politicans - those who seek to unite, and those who seek to divide -

Karl Rove, for example, is a divider - he wants 50.1% and that's all he cares about - politics by division is simple-minded and petty and resorts to soundbites and catch-phrases to either label opposition negatively (cut-and-run, slow-bleed) or seek to put a postive spin on something that is too negative by current appearances (surge vs. escalation)

Then there are folks who are uniters - they won't get 100%, but he recognizes that there are solutions that will work for 80% of the American population that can be pursued.

I tend to get snippy and personal with dividers cause at the core, I recognize them as a lesser form of politican then a uniter - they are self-motivated and self-serving rather then trying to serve the greater American good - and for a time I resorted to responding to some in a more negative way then necessary - I think my quality of posting has only improved since....

it also helps that I was on the Republican side since 2000 and understand a great deal of the motivation from that mindpoint, esp. of the constituancy and the leaders.

I for one am completely weary of the politics of division, and I believe a majority of Americans are - which is why Barack Obama has such broad appeal, especially with what will be a crucial demographic - the newly registered 18-21 year old voters in their first presidental election.

However, if Hillary gets the nomination, we're boned. It'll be Clinton Dynasty, part II - I can't think of anyone Repub's would like more to see nominated, either - all the more reason she should stay in the state.

I thought we had two moderators - One leaning to the left, one to the right, to provide balance - do we need our own committee to keep the place running?

rb

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
As for 4 High's ban, the reason I did it was a passage in the pamphlet where the Congressman explained that Evolution science is the result of a Jewish conspiracy. This is classic anti-semitism because it feeds into the "Jews control the world" myth. I can PM the link on Monday if anyone is interested.


[/ QUOTE ]
Do you really think that a link to this website (one that states that the sun DOESN'T revolve around the earth and evoulution science is all a jewish conspiracy) is really going to feed into the "Jews control the world" myth"? If anything bringing this trash to the light exposes it for the idiocy and bigotry it is, which is clearly bad for the whole "Jews control the world" movement.
[ QUOTE ]
more than half of the country believes in creationism.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ugh, don't remind me [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
[ QUOTE ]
There is a reasonable possibility that someone like that would take the Congressman's message to heart

[/ QUOTE ]
Really? What percentage of people that could view the politics forum would you estimate would buy into the idea that the earth doesn't revolve around the sun, and that evolution is fake?
[ QUOTE ]
I would be willing to step down if someone came forward that I thought could do a better job than me. I have [censored] and Andyfox in mind, but I'm open to suggestions.

[/ QUOTE ]
You seem like a nice honest guy so it's hard for me to criticise you. Just ease back on the moderation, don't delete links unless it violates copyrights or 2p2 policy, and add a no-hijacking rule to keep discussion on topic (rather then continuously being hijacked to AC) and I'd love ya.

But if you are taking suggestions, I'd nominate MickeyBraush, Borodog, Poofler, and Bobman. I respect their judgement, and the first two have expierence moderating forums in the past (not on 2p2).