Moderating Mapleafweb's Moderation

[The_Squid]

How was that rule enforced? Are warnings handed out for not backing up claims?

[eyeball]

Stop drifting this thread.

Yes.

In light of what I've had deleted recently? Ok, whatever you say chief.

[GostHacked]

In light of what I've had deleted recently? Ok, whatever you say chief.

Agreed, we have thread drift treated with more of a heavy hand than we see with blatant trolling. All of it is arbitrary and inconsistent. Hence the reason many of us are making the complaints.

[cybercoma]

Agreed, we have thread drift treated with more of a heavy hand than we see with blatant trolling. All of it is arbitrary and inconsistent. Hence the reason many of us are making the complaints.

And that's the truth. But I don't care anymore. Burn it all to the ground.

[Charles Anthony]

How was that rule enforced?

On a case by case basis.

Are warnings handed out for not backing up claims?

Perhaps. What do you recommend?

In light of what I've had deleted recently? Ok, whatever you say chief.

I do not understand what you are asking.

Please complete your question: In light of what you have had deleted recently, ..... ?

[msj]

Perhaps. What do you recommend?

I would recommend that people stop "discussing" matters with those people.

I have found myself reading many posts and just before I hit the reply button I see it is Argus or Hal or August and I think to myself: do I really want to waste my time "discussing" anything with these types?

More often than not the answer is "no" so pointless discussion is avoided and precious bandwidth saved.

I suspect if we all did this more then these types would frequent this forum less often.

[Argus]

I would recommend that people stop "discussing" matters with those people.

I have found myself reading many posts and just before I hit the reply button I see it is Argus or Hal or August and I think to myself: do I really want to waste my time "discussing" anything with these types?

Really? I suspect what you actually say to yourself is "Gee, if I try to post my usual snide, adolescent rebuttal they'll batter my pathetic post to pieces like they always do and I'll have to slink away fuming. So no, I better sit here and shut up.

[Big Guy]

..

I suspect if we all did this more then these types would frequent this forum less often.

I believe that is the approach recommended by the owners of this site.

[Argus]

So because of a few whiny leftists, the progressives topics has been permanently closed? Why? The clear and obvious response to all posts westcoastrunner and Jacee made should have been to delete the posts as being nothing but trolling and issue warning points. Why was that not done?

Others were engaged in actual conversations. I mean seriously WCR drops by the topic last week to whine that she doesn't like the topic because it's too complicated for her and it gets temporarily closed. She stops by once it's reopened to once again whine that she doesn't like the topic because it's too complicated for her, and it gets closed down. What kind of moderating is that? Jacee stops by to engage in character assassination and her post isn't deleted either.

If you don't like a topic then don't read it. How is this too complex for the regressives of the Left to cope with?

[Charles Anthony]

So because of a few whiny leftists, the progressives topics has been permanently closed?

No.

Why?

The thread was closed because it was turning into a disorganized mess. Consider it a 1st draft.

We suggest that you re-open your topic again but try to write a more focussed Opening Post.

[Argus]

The thread was closed because it was turning into a disorganized mess. Consider it a 1st draft.

We suggest that you re-open your topic again but try to write a more focussed Opening Post.

Define "disorganized mess".

The issue, as I see it, is there are a lot of things which are screwed up because of soft headed progressives, but if I mention them all, and give examples in an opening post the post will be too long. Nobody here is going to read a long wall of text. I mentioned a few examples, and fleshed them out a little more later on in the topic. What was wrong with that?

What happened between when you re-opened the topic, and when you closed it? Nothing out of the ordinary until Westcoastwoman (who is always complaining about how people don't treat her politely) and jacee posted a series of character assassination posts which had zero to do with the topic. Why weren't they deleted and the two posters warned? Any number of conservatives have been suspended for less.

Edited April 21, 2016 by Argus

[msj]

I believe that is the approach recommended by the owners of this site.

Yes and I think they are right.

[BC_chick]

Define "disorganized mess".

The issue, as I see it, is there are a lot of things which are screwed up because of soft headed progressives, but if I mention them all, and give examples in an opening post the post will be too long. Nobody here is going to read a long wall of text. I mentioned a few examples, and fleshed them out a little more later on in the topic. What was wrong with that?

What happened between when you re-opened the topic, and when you closed it? Nothing out of the ordinary until Westcoastwoman (who is always complaining about how people don't treat her politely) and jacee posted a series of character assassination posts which had zero to do with the topic. Why weren't they deleted and the two posters warned? Any number of conservatives have been suspended for less.

Jacee's post was sarcasm. I agree that she was pushing the boundaries of acceptable according to forum rules, but it wasn't just character assassination - she was taking a stance you'd taken and tearing it down through satire.

As for WCR's post, you really were all over the place on that thread. You took a very vague term and slung any mud to it, hoping it'd stick.

I'm not sure if you've noticed but on many issues us 'progressives' don't see eye to eye. The whole idea of Progressives are X is bad enough, but Progressives are A to Z is just too much of a oversimplication.

I agree with CA, it was very disorganized.

Edited April 22, 2016 by BC_chick

[msj]

I agree with CA, it was very disorganized.

CA is being charitable.

Why anyone bothered to reply to that OP in the first place is beyond me.

Sure, I think Argus was instigating with such a mess of an OP but it was obvious so why bother replying?

The people replying are as much to blame for that train wreck and should be ashamed of themselves for falling for it.

[BC_chick]

The people replying are as much to blame for that train wreck and should be ashamed of themselves for falling for it.

Good point. Guilty as charged.

[?Impact]

The teachers are in the playground, lets go hide in the corner and continue our fight.

[bush_cheney2004]

....The people replying are as much to blame for that train wreck and should be ashamed of themselves for falling for it.

Hardly, as the thread was just as valid as any other sociopolitical position expressed on this forum. The topic is not new, and it is easy to find many examples of the polarizing idea in other Canadian media/history. Once somebody chose to personalize the attacks, the obvious happened.

I suspect that a specific topic on single mothers/parents (which it wasn't), would have met the exact same fate.

[WestCoastRunner]

CA is being charitable.

Why anyone bothered to reply to that OP in the first place is beyond me.

Sure, I think Argus was instigating with such a mess of an OP but it was obvious so why bother replying?

The people replying are as much to blame for that train wreck and should be ashamed of themselves for falling for it.

No one should be told they should be ashamed for responding to a post or made to feel guilty. That's ridiculous.

[WestCoastRunner]

Hardly, as the thread was just as valid as any other sociopolitical position expressed on this forum. The topic is not new, and it is easy to find many examples of the polarizing idea in other Canadian media/history. Once somebody chose to personalize the attacks, the obvious happened.

I suspect that a specific topic on single mothers/parents (which it wasn't), would have met the exact same fate.

When the topic 'unwed mothers' or any other issue is mentioned in the OP it's fair game. This is why the OP wasn't focused.

[bush_cheney2004]

When the topic 'unwed mothers' or any other issue is mentioned in the OP it's fair game. This is why the OP wasn't focused.

Unwed mothers was offered as a single example for the OP. It was not the topic, but became red meat for the usual dog whistle respondents. Actually discussing progressive ideology was not their objective.

[WestCoastRunner]

Unwed mothers was offered as a single example for the OP. It was not the topic, but became red meat for the usual dog whistle respondents. Actually discussing progressive ideology was not their objective.

I guess the OP should have been more focused then.

[BC_chick]

The teachers are in the playground, lets go hide in the corner and continue our fight.

It's what usually happens when posts get deleted or threads get locked.

We're pushing 200 pages on this thread, many of them are remnants of old discussions.

[bush_cheney2004]

I guess the OP should have been more focused then.

It was as focused as most any other, so loose and inconsistent be the "standard".

[waldo]

Unwed mothers was offered as a single example for the OP. It was not the topic, but became red meat for the usual dog whistle respondents. Actually discussing progressive ideology was not their objective.

wtf! ... considering 2 of the OP's 6 paragraphs related to "unwed mothers"... ya... I answered that whistle. It was the only extended direct example and was clearly meant to be the "backdrop" for the overall most broad and muddled UNSUBSTANTIATED opinion put forward. And clearly, the thread originator took exception to having his baseless opinions questioned and had a somewhat meltdown when challenged to support/substantiate his statements. Go figure!

.

[Argus]

Hardly, as the thread was just as valid as any other sociopolitical position expressed on this forum. The topic is not new, and it is easy to find many examples of the polarizing idea in other Canadian media/history. Once somebody chose to personalize the attacks, the obvious happened.

I suspect that a specific topic on single mothers/parents (which it wasn't), would have met the exact same fate.

I suspect you're correct. The lack of capable moderation allows people who have rigid ideological views but not the ability to intelligently defend them smear and insult those on the other side without fear of punishment. Instead the moderators just throw up their hands and say "Meh, we'll just close this conversation", and the zealots get their way.

Of course... that's only if they're on the left side of the political spectrum. If I say something like "This post was dumb" I'll get suspended - as I was by MH for doing just that.