Politics Forum Split

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
Someone dares not to share your view and is therefore "a troll and insulting"

[/ QUOTE ]
Context FTW. He called someone a twit and described the thread as "plenty of manure". What's wrong here again?
[ QUOTE ]
Just a casual one line comment to insult and start a flamewar.


[/ QUOTE ]
huh? lol I didn't insult anybody in that post. However someone did immediately call my statement idiotic.
[ QUOTE ]

The tone in this post is just plain friendly not condescening, insulting or rude. (Cue the "But he started it!" response)


[/ QUOTE ]
You can call it whatever you want. If someone is going to call me a "political ignoramus" excuse me if I don't act as kindly towards them.
[ QUOTE ]
Another one line, zero content adding, insult

[/ QUOTE ]
Again, no insult at all. A poster attempted to make an argument by assuming an unrealistic scenario, I pointed it out for what it was. What's the problem?
[ QUOTE ]
"This is so ignorant it's amazing."

[/ QUOTE ]
You're right I was out of line with that one. In my defense in the next post I described why what he said was ignorant.
[ QUOTE ]
later accuse them of being "intelectually dishonest" for daring to not agree with you.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes of course, even though a lot of posters disagree with me and very few i've called intellectually dishonest, I call everyone that. The ole "well I can find him doing it a couple times, he obviously does it all the time" approach.
[ QUOTE ]
Troll FTW
Borodog, ShakeZulu, and pvn all in for this packwolve attack. This one has it all: Insults, one word troll posts, personal attacks. Weeeeeeeeeee. ("But we don't start it! They is a started it" Try that one looking at this thread)


[/ QUOTE ]
Uh, what are you talking about? Nick did troll with that response, I doubt you'd see him deny it. I responded by pointing out that he did troll, what's the problem?
[ QUOTE ]
I don't like what he say. I'll just insult him.

[/ QUOTE ]
lol, again no insult.
[ QUOTE ]
Shakezulu and bkholdem decide to troll/hijack in a different forum.

[/ QUOTE ]
lol at that being a hijack (let alone troll). It was completely related to the post that I was responding to.
[ QUOTE ]
WooHoo. We get insults from Shakezulu (douche, ridiculous canard, etc...)

[/ QUOTE ]
I called someone a douche because he was acting like one. You wouldn't?
[ QUOTE ]
Oh yeah and a derailment of the thread from a straightforward question about one aspect of AC to somalia

[/ QUOTE ]
Who brought up Somalia? It certianly wasn't me.
[ QUOTE ]
ShakeZulus opening remarks in this thread are a one line insult. "He pulled the numbers out of his ass."

[/ QUOTE ]
lol. He did. He literally posted stats then when asked several times said he wouldn't provide sources for them.
[ QUOTE ]
His next entry is another subtle AC hijack.

[/ QUOTE ]
That post had nothing to do with AC whatsoever and was on topic to the OP.
[ QUOTE ]
he accuses me of gall and ignorance.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're right I shouldn't have said that. You probably caught me in a bad mood.

And I didn't call you a holocaust denier. I said you might as well say the holocaust never happened (implying that saying the holocaust never happened was on par with what you were were saying hasn't happened).

[iron81]

When the forum was reopened for a second time, I vowed that I would not discriminate by ideology in moderation. To be honest, to change my mind there would be bad policy and flat wrong. The reason the forum has a lot of AC content is not because of anything nefarious, but merely because there are a lot of active AC posters. It is basically impossible to "shout down" anyone because no one is actually shouting, this is the internet. Non-AC posts remain on the servers for anyone to comment on.

As for your laundry list, I think a similar list could be complied for any forum if you're willing to search back months. However, the overall impression I get is that AC and non-AC posters alike are generally well-manered relative to the rest of 2+2: many of the links you provided would be completely standard in any other forum.

Basically, NTB is wrong and any effort to get a radical policy shift to restrict AC content is drawing dead. If you guys continue to respond to NTB, it will only be for the sake of arguing: the forum is not going to be split and I am not going to kick the ACists out.

[ShakeZula06]

[ QUOTE ]
As for your laundry list, I think a similar list could be complied for any forum if you're willing to search back months. However, the overall impression I get is that AC and non-AC posters alike are generally well-manered relative to the rest of 2+2: many of the links you provided would be completely standard in any other forum.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thank you Iron.

I'd also like to point out that not one of my posts got as much as a warning, deletion, ban, or even mod notification, and Iron being a liberal cetainly has no reason to be biased towards the ACists*. Sorry to disappoint Niss and EvilTwin.

edit:* I have been banned before in the politics forum, I'm talking about the posts NTB linked.

[Archon_Wing]

[ QUOTE ]
When the forum was reopened for a second time, I vowed that I would not discriminate by ideology in moderation. To be honest, to change my mind there would be bad policy and flat wrong. The reason the forum has a lot of AC content is not because of anything nefarious, but merely because there are a lot of active AC posters. It is basically impossible to "shout down" anyone because no one is actually shouting, this is the internet. Non-AC posts remain on the servers for anyone to comment on.

As for your laundry list, I think a similar list could be complied for any forum if you're willing to search back months. However, the overall impression I get is that AC and non-AC posters alike are generally well-manered relative to the rest of 2+2: many of the links you provided would be completely standard in any other forum.

Basically, NTB is wrong and any effort to get a radical policy shift to restrict AC content is drawing dead. If you guys continue to respond to NTB, it will only be for the sake of arguing: the forum is not going to be split and I am not going to kick the ACists out.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, people are being a bit too thin-skinned. One thing to realize is that tone is incredibly hard to detect on the internets due to sarcasm or poor writing. Especially since posts happen in real time, people may fire off knee jerk reactions. Indeed, I have gotten a bit annoyed, when people attack my beliefs but stuff happens. I've been called political slurs from all across the spectrum so I might find that amusing. A lot of times the things being said aren't personal. But for those with thin skins, please read BBV/BBV4life; you might find your heart condition improving.

However, ever since you have been the sole mod of this forum (or so it seems) you have done fine IMO. In fact, I have been more willing to post and read there. You do delete posts that are nothing but personal attacks, like posts that insult posters not even in the debate, and that's perfectly fine. It's fine the way it is right now.

But I think a problem that might frustrate AC'ists, is that people tend to devolve into bizzare scenarios. I understand it's all abstract, but I think it's natural for anyone to get offended at the idea that Ac'ism would turn people into psychopaths. EG. (What if Bill Gates buys all the roads around my house, what if someone thinks ok to kill x 100, etc.) I'll just leave it to that, although if anyone wants to talk about that I'll start a thread about that in politics (and of course piss someone off that thinks I'm out to insult them) [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[TomCollins]

Where did this iron come from and where is the old one?


Anyway, make sure he stays locked up in the basement because this new iron is the nuts.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
In response to Shake's request and as further support for my arguments in this thread:

Here is the briefest of lists of links to goings on from certain AC oriented posters. Perhaps, these will shed some light on my arguents WRT why many, like myself, find it, at best, boring and repetive, and possibly quite offensive. Clearly ACers are the dominant political ideology wrt numbers of posters and numbers of posts. That in and of itself is whatever it is as kickabuck said. What I take issue with is the tone and style of some prominent ACers. It comes with offensive personal attack styled argument coupled with a basic intolerance for even minor dissent from their political ideaology. This drives many away from the forum.

I have characterized the following links as I perceive them. I'm sure shake and the others will characterize them differently in their defence. That's fine. My point is, I am a moderate and rational (well I think I try to be) person most of the time and this is how I perceive things. It's not a far reach to think that others "put off" from the politics forum might perceive them similarly.


<u>Nielso</u>
Standard Trolling. So many many many others to choose from, but even the hardcore ACists I think will find it hard to say he ISN'T a troll/conspiracy theorist with minimal value added.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post11061800

AC Hijack/trolling only 2 replies in. Nielso kicks it off and pvn, shakezulu and others join in later to complete the hijack.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...part=1&amp;vc=1

<u>ShakeZulu</u>
Someone dares not to share your view and is therefore "a troll and insulting"
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post11035596

Just a casual one line comment to insult and start a flamewar.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post11030942

The tone in this post is just plain friendly not condescening, insulting or rude. (Cue the "But he started it!" response)
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post11061883

Another one line, zero content adding, insult
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post11014453

"This is so ignorant it's amazing." Ah, civility on show. Don't agree? Just question their intelligence, or later accuse them of being "intelectually dishonest" for daring to not agree with you. Later on in the thread we get pvn joining in the show, sniping at posters then DODGING the questions. ZOMG! I think that's one of his favorite weapons "Your dodging my points, you troll!"
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post10935919

Troll FTW
Borodog, ShakeZulu, and pvn all in for this packwolve attack. This one has it all: Insults, one word troll posts, personal attacks. Weeeeeeeeeee. ("But we don't start it! They is a started it" Try that one looking at this thread)
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post10978124

I don't like what he say. I'll just insult him. ("Cus only me is allowed to use poor analogies and cryptic one line insulting posts")
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post10950588

Shakezulu and bkholdem decide to troll/hijack in a different forum.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post10914300

WooHoo. We get insults from Shakezulu (douche, ridiculous canard, etc...) and EVASION of questions from pvn. (Yep! That stuff he likes to accuse others of.) Oh yeah and a derailment of the thread from a straightforward question about one aspect of AC to somalia somali...your a douche!
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post10984640

ShakeZulus opening remarks in this thread are a one line insult. "He pulled the numbers out of his ass." His next entry is another subtle AC hijack. Later on in the thread (in which he has contributed v little and I have added multiple logical, rational, and calm posts) he accuses me of gall and ignorance. I respond, questioning his "argument via insult" methods and then my intelligence is questioned and I am accused of being a holecaust denier. I believe this is our 1st encounter in the politics forum. Read and decide who is or isn't on the
personal attack? Who is maintaining calm and rationality and who isn't?
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...1&amp;fpart=all

<u>bkholdem</u>
ZOMG! I can't win this argument, so I'll just say he has no logic then call him an idiot in the next post.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post11006784

<u>GoodCallYouWin</u>
Not many links required just simply look at almost all his posts. As trollish as they come, but hey he's an AC troll and that's OK.Quality value adding content. Not inflammatory, unsupported or biased in the least.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post10961561

[/ QUOTE ]

You win at ATF.

[NewTeaBag]

[ QUOTE ]
When the forum was reopened for a second time, I vowed that I would not discriminate by ideology in moderation. To be honest, to change my mind there would be bad policy and flat wrong. The reason the forum has a lot of AC content is not because of anything nefarious, but merely because there are a lot of active AC posters. It is basically impossible to "shout down" anyone because no one is actually shouting, this is the internet. Non-AC posts remain on the servers for anyone to comment on.

As for your laundry list, I think a similar list could be complied for any forum if you're willing to search back months. However, the overall impression I get is that AC and non-AC posters alike are generally well-manered relative to the rest of 2+2: many of the links you provided would be completely standard in any other forum.

Basically, NTB is wrong and any effort to get a radical policy shift to restrict AC content is drawing dead. If you guys continue to respond to NTB, it will only be for the sake of arguing: the forum is not going to be split and I am not going to kick the ACists out.

[/ QUOTE ]

IRT Iron. My goal is neither a "radical policy shift," nor restriction of AC content. Tis simply to "illuminate the terrain in which we find ourselves deployed." I found this thread and added a simple post which was then "jumped on" rather harshly by pvn and Shakezulu. My latest response is simply an answer to the "looking for examples."

If I had zero interest in the shape or direction of the politics forum, would I bother spending the hours to put that list together? If I was a "troll" as accused by pvn, would I bother?

Looking at my collective list of postings in politics, is it fair or accurate to say I am a troll OR a contributor who tries to add input when my experience/knowledge are relevant and avoid most other discussions?

Politics is trolled, as my examples demonstrate. That's not necesarily saying it is more or less than other forums, BUT, in politics specifically, emotions run higher due to challenging of strongly held beliefs leading to increased propensity for personal attack and negative tone.

On the whole, what I have seen of your modding, it is decent. This is NOT an attack on your modding. This is pointing out the road of style/tone that a particular forum has taken.


IRT ShakeZulu, I don't hate you or your idealology. I do NOT like the way yourself (and others of AC influence) often conduct the arguments (note NOT all the time, but often enough to be noticable). And yes, I recognize, there do exist anti-ACists who use the same negative techniques. That doesn't make them right, nor does it justify the response in kind.

IRT the rest,
If before or whilst posting one made a concious effort to keep on topic, rational and depersonalized, I think the forum would be a far more "new poster friendly" place. It also makes it far easier for people to at least try to see your POV when there not trying to not get pissed off about the delivery methods.

IOW Communication is comprised of message and transmission. If the transmission is garbled (due to crypticness, personal venom, insult, or whatever reason) there is very little chance of the message actually being read/understood. Pay attention to your transmission methods and more people will at least read the messages for what they are rather then perceiving them purely based on transmission errors.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

[ QUOTE ]

If the transmission is garbled (due to crypticness, personal venom, insult, or whatever reason) there is very little chance of the message actually being read/understood.

[/ QUOTE ]

If your message can't hold in an open debate, dillution often becomes a survival tactic. I don't think the majority of AC'ists or more AC'ists do it than non-AC'ists do it, it is just a few AC'ists that do it and post incredibly much, thus many threads contain it. Maybe an analogy ban could be put in effect, so that new (or old) posters don't have to be accused of supporting rape if they support distribution of food to poor people.

[pvn]

TL;DR. I didn't fact-check all of your examples, just the ones that name me.

[ QUOTE ]
AC Hijack/trolling only 2 replies in. Nielso kicks it off and pvn, shakezulu and others join in later to complete the hijack.
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...part=1&amp;vc=1


[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. Yes, saying "nanny state" in response to a post asking for opinions about smoking bans is a slam-dunk "AC Hijack/trolling". And what, exactly, did I do to "hijack" this post?

[ QUOTE ]

Troll FTW
Borodog, ShakeZulu, and pvn all in for this packwolve attack. This one has it all: Insults, one word troll posts, personal attacks. Weeeeeeeeeee. ("But we don't start it! They is a started it" Try that one looking at this thread)
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post10978124

[/ QUOTE ]

Packwolve attack? I point out that a guy is moving the goalposts. OH NOES, quelle horreur!!!

[ QUOTE ]
I don't like what he say. I'll just insult him. ("Cus only me is allowed to use poor analogies and cryptic one line insulting posts")
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post10950588

[/ QUOTE ]

I clicked on this one since I wasn't sure if it was another "packwolve attack" example. LOL. Yeah, pointing out that Q/Q is a troll sniper, popping up every few days to launch his turd missles then disappearing again, is a crime against humanity.

[ QUOTE ]
WooHoo. We get insults from Shakezulu (douche, ridiculous canard, etc...) and EVASION of questions from pvn. (Yep! That stuff he likes to accuse others of.) Oh yeah and a derailment of the thread from a straightforward question about one aspect of AC to somalia somali...your a douche!
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showfl...ue#Post10984640

[/ QUOTE ]

What question do you think I "evaded" here? I love how you put this in ALL CAPS like it's the SMOKING GUN. I suspect you're referring to the fact that I declined to make any predictions. I presume, then, that you also think supporters of evolution who don't make predictions about what sorts of lifeforms will evolve in the future are also trolls, hijackers, or whatever other smear label you can think of.

Reading your post is like watching a michael moore movie. Lots of emotional appeals, fanbois coming out of the woodwork to cheerlead, and a collapse of the "evidence" when it's actually examined.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
Maybe an analogy ban could be put in effect, so that new (or old) posters don't have to be accused of supporting rape if they support distribution of food to poor people.

[/ QUOTE ]

link plz.