Horrible Moderation In Politics Forum

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
HOLY CRAP IS THIS WHAT THE POLITICS FORUM IS LIKE?

GOOD GOD

[/ QUOTE ]

Pretty sad, isn't it?

All it takes is a couple of posters to take what could be a meaningful thread and reduce it to a waste of time.

Do you think that it's being done intentionally, or can these few simply not help themselves?

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
There is a thread going in the Mod forum on the issue of replacing me. I identified who I wanted (a current mod), but the feedback I got was that I am doing a good job, particularly on the racism issue. I look forward to continuing to serve as Politics mod.

[/ QUOTE ]


Big surprise that nothing changed. Mods of a feather flock together.

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
Myrtle,

I wasn't addressing you there but Mickey, and my responses to him are entirely appropriate and *on topic*.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bluff,

Again I ask you.....

Are you willing to assist on getting this thread back on track?

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think that it's being done intentionally, or can these few simply not help themselves?


[/ QUOTE ]

I very humbly suggest that you review your own posts in this thread...

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you think that it's being done intentionally, or can these few simply not help themselves?


[/ QUOTE ]

I very humbly suggest that you review your own posts in this thread...

[/ QUOTE ]

If I've gone off-track it was not done intentionally.

Please share with me where you think I've done this?

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
If I've gone off-track it was not done intentionally. Please share with me where you think I've done this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you summarize the main point you are trying to make in this "Jumped the Shark" post in 3 sentences?

[BluffTHIS!]

iron,

Since this thread has reached its predictable end, as there never was any chance of either you being forced out by the admins nor your bogus offer with its condition that you approve your replacement coming to pass, I think it would be fitting for you discuss how you would mod the following statement in the politics forum:

"Mohammed was a pedophile, Islam was thus founded by a pedophile, and any Moslems who endorse Shari'a law which includes allowing marriage to 9 year olds, as is the case in Iran, are condoning pedophilia."


I believe that I can prove the above statement to be a logically valid conclusion from a factually correct set of premises. So in your judgement, is the statement above racist merely because it discusses the founder and many members of a major religion in an unflattering light thus making it inflammatory as well, or is it just an uncomfortable truth not in accord with how the PC crowd would like things to be? Note that I would agree that extending that conclusion and pedophilia label to all members of the Moslem religion to be both untrue and needlessly inflammatory and thus racist.

[iron81]

Bluff, I'll tell ya, that's a head scratcher. I remember when you posted your proof of that statemen that Mohamad was a pedophile and it seemed logical.

I think I would moderate that based on context: if it came up in that thread about Muslims' proclivities toward rape, I probably wouldn't allow it, even if you weren't specifically claiming that Islam teaches rape. If it came up in a historical thread discussing the life of Mohammed, I would probably allow it.

As for the second part: that a Muslim endorsing Sharia was endorsing pedophilia, that's a head scratcher. On one hand, by western standards anyone screwing a 9 year old is a pervert, period. On the other hand, I can definately see how that statement could inspire hatred toward muslims, and western standards aren't universal standards. I probably wouldn't allow it.

[Msgr. Martinez]

[ QUOTE ]
iron,

Since this thread has reached its predictable end, as there never was any chance of either you being forced out by the admins nor your bogus offer with its condition that you approve your replacement coming to pass, I think it would be fitting for you discuss how you would mod the following statement in the politics forum:

"Mohammed was a pedophile, Islam was thus founded by a pedophile, and any Moslems who endorse Shari'a law which includes allowing marriage to 9 year olds, as is the case in Iran, are condoning pedophilia."


I believe that I can prove the above statement to be a logically valid conclusion from a factually correct set of premises. So in your judgement, is the statement above racist merely because it discusses the founder and many members of a major religion in an unflattering light thus making it inflammatory as well, or is it just an uncomfortable truth not in accord with how the PC crowd would like things to be? Note that I would agree that extending that conclusion and pedophilia label to all members of the Moslem religion to be both untrue and needlessly inflammatory and thus racist.

[/ QUOTE ]

And Mary was lying whore.

[Myrtle]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If I've gone off-track it was not done intentionally. Please share with me where you think I've done this?

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you summarize the main point you are trying to make in this "Jumped the Shark" post in 3 sentences?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why should I have to summarize (in three sentences or less) what is clearly stated in that post to fit a qualification that you have artificially placed upon what I have written?

Is your objection that it is too long?

There are numbers of issues that I brought up in that post.

I brought them up in the manner that I did in an attempt to clarify my thought process and illustrate that as one peels away the layers of the onion of the original subject, that things are often not as simple as some would like them to be.

From your original response (which I noted at the time) I don't believe that you want to go where you know that I'm going.

More importantly, I don't believe that you want me to go there, hence your attempt to move the thread away from that direction.