PSA: I was suspicious for a while, but I'm convinced
-
If I started enforcing the rules in the way liberals want, you'd be crying on the help desk far more than you guys do now.
This feels very much like you're drawing an assumption, in the belief it absolves you from doing your job. It doesn't.
Oddly, liberals violate the rules as much, if not more, than the conservatives but complain about the rules not being followed/enforced almost exclusively.
This is observationally untrue, but since you made the claim, go ahead and share the method by which you can prove it. Or, are we back to alternative facts?
We see it here in various threads.
However, you'll need to become a staff member to see the Reported Posts section, help desk and others.
-
We see it here in various threads.
Seriously, please clarify. what is the "it" you refer to? If it is sutieday and Frederick going after each other like two pre-menstrual bitches, then both are at fault. And Raphjd, you are noticeably silent when faced with facts–-like the "Trumptard" vs ""libtard" statistics.
-
"IT" refers to rule violations by liberals while crying about rule violations.
Let's use your example of Fred and Sutie.
They get into a slagging match. Sutie and other liberals will complain in the forums, the help desk, reported topics and site email. I'll be called "alt-right" and accused of abusing my powers and whatnot. Fred won't complain and just get on with it.
Why are you insistent on limiting it to "Trumptard" vs "libtard"? Expand it out and you'll see that both sides are pretty equal in name calling.
I was called a racist simply because I pointed out 2 proven lies told by Rep John Lewis. I didn't mention race, just that he lied. That was enough to make me a racist. Why do you want to ignore things like that, if you want to talk about facts.
-
"IT" refers to rule violations by liberals while crying about rule violations.
Let's use your example of Fred and Sutie.
They get into a slagging match. Sutie and other liberals will complain in the forums, the help desk, reported topics and site email. I'll be called "alt-right" and accused of abusing my powers and whatnot. Fred won't complain and just get on with it.
Why are you insistent on limiting it to "Trumptard" vs "libtard"? Expand it out and you'll see that both sides are pretty equal in name calling.
I was called a racist simply because I pointed out 2 proven facts told by Rep John Lewis. I didn't mention race, just that he lied. That was enough to make me a racist. Why do you want to ignore things like that, if you want to talk about facts.
Once again.. the "left" try to isolate a specific person to attack and ignore the rest. Not going to work. This time they are trying to blame all the problems on myself and Sutieday. Another day it's just mhorndisk and royalcrown.. another day it's just Raphjd and DrWas.. and then there is ppucci and a gaggle of other leftists.
By the way.. Rep John Lewis has been arrested over 45 times. He is a unique character in that he both behaves and LOOKS like a rebellious 4 year old who is throwing a neverending tantrum - which is why he has been arrested over 45 times.
-
"IT" refers to rule violations by liberals while crying about rule violations.
Let's use your example of Fred and Sutie.
They get into a slagging match. Sutie and other liberals will complain in the forums, the help desk, reported topics and site email. I'll be called "alt-right" and accused of abusing my powers and whatnot. Fred won't complain and just get on with it.
Why are you insistent on limiting it to "Trumptard" vs "libtard"? Expand it out and you'll see that both sides are pretty equal in name calling.
I was called a racist simply because I pointed out 2 proven lies told by Rep John Lewis. I didn't mention race, just that he lied. That was enough to make me a racist. Why do you want to ignore things like that, if you want to talk about facts.
How about ban all name calling and just use "liberal" and "conservative"??? But, I'm sure you get a kick out of the incivility.
-
Here's some objective evidence. Before these words were banned, "Trumptard" was used 19 times in this forum, while "libtard" was used 140 times. How can you really state there is no difference between the groups?
Yes, and in the future, I will respond to particularly misleading posts about inflated liberal offenses with the sign-off, "19-140." This will stand as a reminder of how often these baseless alternative facts are peddled around here. And it will look a little bit like
19-140
-
I just want to clarify a few things.
I personally don't report or downvote anything. Ever. I strongly believe everyone should be allowed to state their opinions. No matter how extreme opinions are, everyone should be engaged intellectually, not muted. This is why I don't really get caught up in arguments about who breaks the rules.
That said, my reason for making this topic is not to accuse people of breaking rules. If they did, I don't care. I made it because I have a lot of appreciation for real debate. And I think the two users I mentioned are not genuine. I believe they've made these personas to upset people. Which is fine. If that's what they want to do, more power to them. I'm not going to report that either. It was just a warning to people who might be taking them seriously. Recognize that you're arguing with a character, and it's fairly likely they don't actually believe what they're saying.
-
"IT" refers to rule violations by liberals while crying about rule violations.
Let's use your example of Fred and Sutie.
They get into a slagging match. Sutie and other liberals will complain in the forums, the help desk, reported topics and site email. I'll be called "alt-right" and accused of abusing my powers and whatnot. Fred won't complain and just get on with it.
Why are you insistent on limiting it to "Trumptard" vs "libtard"? Expand it out and you'll see that both sides are pretty equal in name calling.
I was called a racist simply because I pointed out 2 proven lies told by Rep John Lewis. I didn't mention race, just that he lied. That was enough to make me a racist. Why do you want to ignore things like that, if you want to talk about facts.
How about ban all name calling and just use "liberal" and "conservative"??? But, I'm sure you get a kick out of the incivility.
I'm sorry, but I can't take any you say seriously.
-
"IT" refers to rule violations by liberals while crying about rule violations.
Let's use your example of Fred and Sutie.
They get into a slagging match. Sutie and other liberals will complain in the forums, the help desk, reported topics and site email. I'll be called "alt-right" and accused of abusing my powers and whatnot. Fred won't complain and just get on with it.
Why are you insistent on limiting it to "Trumptard" vs "libtard"? Expand it out and you'll see that both sides are pretty equal in name calling.
I was called a racist simply because I pointed out 2 proven lies told by Rep John Lewis. I didn't mention race, just that he lied. That was enough to make me a racist. Why do you want to ignore things like that, if you want to talk about facts.
raphjd, liberals and many moderates go to other "institutions" within GT in the hope of fairness with their issues, because your observations about who-is-doing-what in Politics & Debate are so consistently skewed. As the overall topic here remains Civility, there are surely other curse words where a count would confirm that cons surpass libs by a large margin. I mean, it's not as if you've called me a fucker…
Oh wait, you did.
19-140
-
"IT" refers to rule violations by liberals while crying about rule violations.
Let's use your example of Fred and Sutie.
They get into a slagging match. Sutie and other liberals will complain in the forums, the help desk, reported topics and site email. I'll be called "alt-right" and accused of abusing my powers and whatnot. Fred won't complain and just get on with it.
Why are you insistent on limiting it to "Trumptard" vs "libtard"? Expand it out and you'll see that both sides are pretty equal in name calling.
I was called a racist simply because I pointed out 2 proven lies told by Rep John Lewis. I didn't mention race, just that he lied. That was enough to make me a racist. Why do you want to ignore things like that, if you want to talk about facts.
raphjd, liberals and many moderates go to other "institutions" within GT in the hope of fairness with their issues, because your observations about who-is-doing-what in Politics & Debate are so consistently skewed. As the overall topic here remains Civility, there are surely other curse words where a count would confirm that cons surpass libs by a large margin. I mean, it's not as if you've called me a fucker…
Oh wait, you did.
19-140
They might be (let's be honest, they are) skewed observations, but they are just observations. I believe raph is super lax with enforcing the rules, which I have no problem with. What would be an issue is if he started punishing one side based on these skewed observations. I haven't seen even a hint of that. But please post it if you have.
-
Super frustrated by this thread and the attitude of our moderator regarding his role. He should be here to literally "moderate" the discussions by diffusing useless flaming. But he is set in his ways. Resistance is futile.
-
I actually don't have a problem with raphjd moderating and participating. He has never mixed the two since I've been posting on here. Like abcddddd said, he hasn't been punishing one side while ignoring the other. I've reported users and he has taken action, no matter what side their own. I did once think he had something to do with the report function acting up, but it's been working fine lately, so I apologize for that thought lol.
-
abcddddd, I really appreciate your observations, always civil and thoughtful. Knowing that you're mellow about our rights to post ideas freely, I will say that there are two areas where our opinions diverge:
Our neo-con posters? I think they are 110 percent real. Vast numbers of people, on both sides of the pond, get their news from Breitbart, think that Ann Coulter is a voice of moderation and reason, etc., etc. Yes, their writings on GT veer toward the bombastic (and as we've seen, prone to vulgarity). But these are essentially their core beliefs, imho.
As well, I don't favor the super-laxness of our administrator, I feel the forum rules provide a needed structure, and when the rules are largely unenforced, as on the Politics & Debate thread, one ends up with a mosh pit that may disincline some members from participation.
But how refreshing that we can exchange differing views without someone popping a gasket. Cheers.
-
I actually don't have a problem with raphjd moderating and participating. He has never mixed the two since I've been posting on here. Like abcddddd said, he hasn't been punishing one side while ignoring the other. I've reported users and he has taken action, no matter what side their own. I did once think he had something to do with the report function acting up, but it's been working fine lately, so I apologize for that thought lol.
royalcrown89, enjoyed your post. I will say that I favor political forums where the moderators refrain from joining in the fracas via their own posts, whatever their political leanings. When they do engage in posting, to me, it's a bit like having the same person as judge and lawyer on a case. Police hats or no hats, it doesn't assuage my concerns about overlap.
I realize that moderating-only requires sacrifice, but I have enjoyed forums where moderators concentrate solely on that craft, but alas, not on GT P&D.
But my main reason to write is to laud you on your "encourage civility" graphic. It looks just great, and if only it possessed magic powers to compel others. Nicely, nicely done.
-
I don't even read Fredericks posts anymore (he seems to have stopped using his other ID). I just pass right by them. I don't even bother to vote him down. He likes it.
-
I actually don't have a problem with raphjd moderating and participating. He has never mixed the two since I've been posting on here. Like abcddddd said, he hasn't been punishing one side while ignoring the other. I've reported users and he has taken action, no matter what side their own. I did once think he had something to do with the report function acting up, but it's been working fine lately, so I apologize for that thought lol.
royalcrown89, enjoyed your post. I will say that I favor political forums where the moderators refrain from joining in the fracas via their own posts, whatever their political leanings. When they do engage in posting, to me, it's a bit like having the same person as judge and lawyer on a case. Police hats or no hats, it doesn't assuage my concerns about overlap.
I realize that moderating-only requires sacrifice, but I have enjoyed forums where moderators concentrate solely on that craft, but alas, not on GT P&D.
But my main reason to write is to laud you on your "encourage civility" graphic. It looks just great, and if only it possessed magic powers to compel others. Nicely, nicely done.
Thank you. After falsely being labeled a member of Antifa and a communist, I decided to just do something that could not be misconstrued in anyway unless the person doing the misconstruing is trolling or looking for a way to cause trouble.
-
I don't even read Fredericks posts anymore (he seems to have stopped using his other ID). I just pass right by them. I don't even bother to vote him down. He likes it.
Me neither, I usually avoid alt-right posters, and I don't have the time to downvote as much
-
"everyone i don't like is a troll!"
