Moderating Mapleafweb's Moderation

[Big Guy]

So when you call people racists your purpose is to reinforce to them that they're on the right track?

No, it is to indicate to them what track they are on. I hope that they review their attitude and compare that with the views of extremist organizations and the definition of racism. Racism is an attitude towards other races, cultures and religions. If the individual chooses to equate it to a negative personality trait or consider it an insult then that is their choice.

For many years it was a badge of honor to be worn by nationalists in the Southern US.

[Argus]

No, it is to indicate to them what track they are on.

And yet, you say when people call you a racist or a bigot you simply take it as affirmation that you are on the right track.

[?Impact]

Is anyone else getting dizzy?

[Big Guy]

And yet, you say when people call you a racist or a bigot you simply take it as affirmation that you are on the right track.

You missed the point. I said that it depends who is doing the calling. If I respected that persons opinion then I would think twice. But if that poster was a jackass, argumentative, negative and generally a pain in the ass, then I would take his name calling of me as an indicator that I was on the right side of the argument - the side I want to be on.

I am fairly comfortable with my views of society. They have led me to two successful careers and the friendship and respect of some very nice people. I am pretty sure of who I am. Therefore, when someone calls me a name, that tells me more about the person than it does about me. Even on this board. There are a few posters whose criticism of me I seriously consider.

[Big Guy]

Is anyone else getting dizzy?

You mean like this?"

Dizzy

[Argus]

You missed the point. I said that it depends who is doing the calling. If I respected that persons opinion then I would think twice.

Ah, so. If I have zero respect for you then I should take no heed of your name calling.

[bush_cheney2004]

...For many years it was a badge of honor to be worn by nationalists in the Southern US.

It still is a badge of honour in parts of Canada....right up to last week's comments about a shooting in Saskatchewan. "Racism" is proudly on display.

Edited August 16, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[Charles Anthony]

Being called a racist just means there is no argument against what was said. It's a catch all for saving face and avoiding the issue. It's no reason to stop arguing though.

Not that it matters much but I believe being called a racist just means there is no argument against what was said because I know, you know, he knows, she knows, we all know the word "racist" is vague.

I believe being called a racist is enough of a reason to stop arguing.

I usually burst out laughing whenever somebody calls me a racist. I keep laughing until I can not "argue" anymore or the "argument" defacto stops.

I'm just trying to figure out whether you're OK with people shouting down everything they disagree with by hurling these insults

No. We are not OK with people hurling these insults.

or whether you really don't see it.

We see it. We just do not make a point of deleting more than necessary to get the behavior to stop.

I've told Michael that I don't think he actually understands how or when a troll post happens, but maybe there's something else going on here.

What is going on is time.

You folks do not appreciate how time matters in our decision to intervene or not.

If trolling has stopped or if 99% of the membership ignores the trolling, we will not go out of our way to delete posts.

If trolling has not stopped, we start hacking at the branches until 99% of the members refrain from feeding the trolling.

You folks need to learn how to stop and let go.

You mean like this, right?

"So, in agreeing with Trump, are you comfortable being painted with the same brush - that of being a bigot and an Islamaphobe?"

It does not matter.

If you do not like the question, do not answer it. Ignore the post and move on. Nobody is obligated to respond to other members.

How about if they imply one is racist without actually having the courage to come out and finish the word?

That sounds like a thread derail.

There is no need to take anything too personally because derailing a thread is against the forum rules and guidelines too.

[WestCoastRunner]

I've told Michael that I don't think he actually understands how or when a troll post happens, but maybe there's something else going on here.

Like Obama and ISIS?

[Big Guy]

Ah, so. If I have zero respect for you then I should take no heed of your name calling.

Do you really want me to tell you what to do?

[Moonlight Graham]

Stop Trollhood Hunger

[Hal 9000]

Not that it matters much but I believe being called a racist just means there is no argument against what was said because I know, you know, he knows, she knows, we all know the word "racist" is vague.

I believe being called a racist is enough of a reason to stop arguing.

I usually burst out laughing whenever somebody calls me a racist. I keep laughing until I can not "argue" anymore or the "argument" defacto stops.

No. We are not OK with people hurling these insults.

We see it. We just do not make a point of deleting more than necessary to get the behavior to stop.

What is going on is time.

You folks do not appreciate how time matters in our decision to intervene or not.

If trolling has stopped or if 99% of the membership ignores the trolling, we will not go out of our way to delete posts.

If trolling has not stopped, we start hacking at the branches until 99% of the members refrain from feeding the trolling.

You folks need to learn how to stop and let go.

It does not matter.

If you do not like the question, do not answer it. Ignore the post and move on. Nobody is obligated to respond to other members.

That sounds like a thread derail.

There is no need to take anything too personally because derailing a thread is against the forum rules and guidelines too.

If you believe that calling someone a racist basically means "there is no argument against what was said" then you obviously agree that it's a troll post. Why would you allow it? And, by allowing it, you must know things will never change. Sure, Ignore and move on - I get it, but would't it make more sense to put the onus on the troll rather than the recipient?

If A person has no other argument (as you agree) than to lash out and call someone a racist, it is them who should be accountable. Instead of telling us to "just move along", how about telling them that if all they got is shouting racist - don't bother posting? Wouldn't it make more sense to stop the action that is causing the problems?

You still seem to want to allow the agitator to roam free, while you punish the retaliation. Must be a Brad Marchand fan.

Seems pretty simple to me; Call, imply, suggest, infer that a poster is racist (even thinly veiled racist insults that MH seems to approve of) and you get an infraction.

[poochy]

If you believe that calling someone a racist basically means "there is no argument against what was said" then you obviously agree that it's a troll post. Why would you allow it? And, by allowing it, you must know things will never change. Sure, Ignore and move on - I get it, but would't it make more sense to put the onus on the troll rather than the recipient?

If A person has no other argument (as you agree) than to lash out and call someone a racist, it is them who should be accountable. Instead of telling us to "just move along", how about telling them that if all they got is shouting racist - don't bother posting? Wouldn't it make more sense to stop the action that is causing the problems?

You still seem to want to allow the agitator to roam free, while you punish the retaliation. Must be a Brad Marchand fan.

Seems pretty simple to me; Call, imply, suggest, infer that a poster is racist (even thinly veiled racist insults that MH seems to approve of) and you get an infraction.

It's pointless, they have chosen a side, at least some of them think it's cutesy when some troglodyte can't make a reasonable argument but can come up with an underhanded way of calling you a racist, it's as personal an insult as calling someone stupid, but most of the stupids are the ones receiving the protection while also being the ones calling people racists. They just happen to mostly on the left, surely a coincidence, a happenstance, they are also demonstrably some of least intellectually endowed people here. But while they can call you a racist for wondering if its a good thing to change our ways to accommodate a dark ages custom, you dare not point out how stupid they are for say starting yet another 9/11 truther thread, or when they insinuate that anyone here thinks that 'the only good muslim is a dead muslim', as was done by one of them today, it's the best they can do, and this is their playground.

Edited August 17, 2016 by poochy

[?Impact]

It's pointless, they have chosen a side, at least some of them think it's cutesy when some troglodyte can't make a reasonable argument but can come up with an underhanded way of calling you a racist, it's as personal an insult as calling someone stupid, but most of the stupids are the ones receiving the protection while also being the ones calling people racists. They just happen to mostly on the left, surely a coincidence, a happenstance, they are also demonstrably some of least intellectually endowed people here. But while they can call you a racist for wondering if its a good thing to change our ways to accommodate a dark ages custom, you dare not point out how stupid they are for say starting yet another 9/11 truther thread, or when they insinuate that anyone here thinks that 'the only good muslim is a dead muslim', as was done by one of them today, it's the best they can do, and this is their playground.

Translation: lefties are stupid troglodytes + a bunch of useless verbiage

[cybercoma]

It's hilarious that people see "racist" and suddenly they think there's no argument. I've called out posters for making racist arguments here often. Every time I have clearly outlined the problems with their argument, what makes them biased, and how their premises are faulty. Racism invalidates people's arguments because it's logically incoherent. Just take a look at the judge appointments thread. The arguments there were boiled down to racist bias. Not a single poster who criticized the appointments could offer any​ indication that the appointed judges were defective in any way other than to point to their race or cultural heritage. That is an argumentation problem. That is faulty logic. If you simply dismiss the rest of what I've argued because you see the word "racism" or "bigotry" then you're really not interested in arguments and debate. You're dismissing someone's arguments as soon as you see "racism" and "bigotry" all while claiming that the person is in the wrong for dismissing others' arguments when they say those things. You're doing exactly what you're criticizing without even realizing that you are actually ignoring the substantive part of the arguments that are being made. Why is racism a problem? Because it leads to biased conclusions and erroneous premises. And if you can't understand that this is an argument against a person's arguments, then I'm sorry but it's nobody's responsibility to understand things for you once they've explained them.

[Spiderfish]

It's hilarious that people see "racist" and suddenly they think there's no argument. I've called out posters for making racist arguments here often. Every time I have clearly outlined the problems with their argument, what makes them biased, and how their premises are faulty. Racism invalidates people's arguments because it's logically incoherent. Just take a look at the judge appointments thread. The arguments there were boiled down to racist bias. Not a single poster who criticized the appointments could offer any​ indication that the appointed judges were defective in any way other than to point to their race or cultural heritage. That is an argumentation problem. That is faulty logic. If you simply dismiss the rest of what I've argued because you see the word "racism" or "bigotry" then you're really not interested in arguments and debate. You're dismissing someone's arguments as soon as you see "racism" and "bigotry" all while claiming that the person is in the wrong for dismissing others' arguments when they say those things. You're doing exactly what you're criticizing without even realizing that you are actually ignoring the substantive part of the arguments that are being made. Why is racism a problem? Because it leads to biased conclusions and erroneous premises. And if you can't understand that this is an argument against a person's arguments, then I'm sorry but it's nobody's responsibility to understand things for you once they've explained them.

I'm sure there's maybe some truth to some of what you're saying, however it doesn't fit every situation. For example, in the swimming segregation thread, you more or less agreed with a position I took in a post and someone else responded immediately calling my position racist and accusing me of discussing a dislike of immigrants. In agreeing with my position, this would make you racist and a hater of immigrants as well in the other posters perspective. How does this insult contribute to the discussion? Who's logic is faulty? If' there's no substance to back up the claim of racism, it's simply a thread derail, plain and simple.

It is of course possible that the person throwing out the racism accusation can't see any substance to the conversation past the race angle, they simply can't get past it and get stuck on it which makes their argument logically incoherent. It goes both ways.

[cybercoma]

Yes, I saw that and did you see how I responded to being called a racist? Hell, Argus's favourite thing to do is call me and other "progressives" racists and bigots. How do I respond to that?

​I don't give a crap because his argument is nonsense. Likewise, I don't give a crap about the poster in the swimming thread claiming I'm racist because I don't believe I've taken a racist position and they've done nothing to demonstrate that I have. So I don't give any credit to those kinds of statements.

The reason some people flip out about being called racist is because they know that their position might very well be judged that way by outsiders. Like the judges thread, they get frustrated when they can't defend their position and instead of reflecting and perhaps changing it, they get mad at the accusation.

​If the person making the accusation is not making any sense or doesn't have any credibility, I don't see why on earth it would matter if they called you a racist or a bigot or whatever. Why anyone would be affected by someone they consider stupid saying something they consider stupid is beyond me. It should literally be the meaningless rambling of someone you perceive as an idiot.

I think the problem is when it cuts too close to home. When you're busy trying to hide your racism because you don't want to be perceived that way, but you know inside that you're disgusted by black people or Arabs or whatever. I think it only becomes a problem when you have to face that reality and you don't like what you see. Otherwise, like I said...the meaningless opinion of someone who isn't making any sense.

Edited August 17, 2016 by cybercoma

[Argus]

But while they can call you a racist for wondering if its a good thing to change our ways to accommodate a dark ages custom, you dare not point out how stupid they are

This is the unfairness of it and why I hate it. It's a cheap insult that losers resort to because they don't have the ability to argue effectively. And what are you gonna do back? I mean, if someone says that to me elsewhere I'd ask if their mother and father were also their siblings, and whether they have to get help to tie their shoes given their subliterate IQ. You can't do that here, though. That's the frustrating part.

[Big Guy]

This is the unfairness of it and why I hate it. It's a cheap insult that losers resort to because they don't have the ability to argue effectively. And what are you gonna do back? I mean, if someone says that to me elsewhere I'd ask if their mother and father were also their siblings, and whether they have to get help to tie their shoes given their subliterate IQ. You can't do that here, though. That's the frustrating part.

Sure you can do it here and the smart ones will take it from where it is originating. You still do not seem to understand that when you insult someone, you are saying, "what I think is that you are ...". All it is doing is revealing how you think. It says everything about you and very little about your target. When you insult anybody on this board do you really think they take you seriously? Do you think that it somehow elevates your standing here?

“He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool.”

― Brigham Young

Only a few fools here.

[Argus]

When you insult anybody on this board do you really think they take you seriously? Do you think that it somehow elevates your standing here?

Well, you seem to feel it works for you...

[cybercoma]

This is the unfairness of it and why I hate it. It's a cheap insult that losers resort to because they don't have the ability to argue effectively. And what are you gonna do back? I mean, if someone says that to me elsewhere I'd ask if their mother and father were also their siblings, and whether they have to get help to tie their shoes given their subliterate IQ. You can't do that here, though. That's the frustrating part.

This all coming from the guy who couldn't backup his claim that bilingual judges and judges of various ethnicities are somehow less qualified than judges who only know one language or are white. The only claim you made is that they're not white, so they must have some sort of special privilege to get their position.

I'm sorry, but who exactly are you calling a subliterate loser with inbred parents and an inability to argue effectively?

Yeah. You were called racist because your argument entirely hinged on the race of the judges. You're called a bigot when you talk about Islam because your arguments entirely ignore the differences between Muslims, as you lump them all together with the worse common denominators in their societies that many there are fighting against.

But yeah....the people pointing out your racist and bigoted arguments are the idiots. The Dunning-Kruger effect would like a date with your sense of superiority.

[Spiderfish]

​If the person making the accusation is not making any sense or doesn't have any credibility, I don't see why on earth it would matter if they called you a racist or a bigot or whatever. Why anyone would be affected by someone they consider stupid saying something they consider stupid is beyond me. It should literally be the meaningless rambling of someone you perceive as an idiot.

I agree, however it is distracting to the focus of the thread, and it's meant to be. So basically it comes back to moderation; if someone is saying stupid things with the intention of insulting and distracting those participating off the focus of the topic, it needs to be dealt with by the moderators. It does nothing to contribute to the topic and is actually detrimental to the discussion. Yet this garbage is still allowed to stand. This is something I don't get. If the moderators intent is to keep the debate focused and relevant to the OP why not take out the garbage?

I can't help but agree with what many see as a problem around here, moderators seem to reprimand the compelled reaction to trolling rather than dealing with the cause.

[cybercoma]

That's exactly what they do. People have pointed it out over and over again. I've been suspended answering someone's rude and insulting questions in kind. They delete my response but leave the instigation there for everyone to see. They do this to everybody and people get pissed every time.

It's like this, right. A kid in class is shooting spitballs. After pegging you a few times and you're tryi to ignore it, he finally hits you in the eye and you shout, "STOP SHOOTING SPITBALLS, IDIOT!" You get detention for your outburst and the other kid is still sitting in the class shooting spitballs at the other students. Instead of addressing the problem, the teacher is punishing the reaction to the problem.

That is the modus operandi of the mods here as far as I can tell. This is one of the very few things those of us who disagree on nearly everything actually agree upon.

[GostHacked]

Well said cybercoma. That sums up my sentiments very well.

[Charles Anthony]

Seems pretty simple to me; Call, imply, suggest, infer that a poster is racist (even thinly veiled racist insults that MH seems to approve of) and you get an infraction.

When you encounter that and you want moderator intervention, report the post and tell moderator staff what you want done. Do not quote the post and do not respond to the post in the public forum.

If you believe that calling someone a racist basically means "there is no argument against what was said" then you obviously agree that it's a troll post.

If the post consists of nothing more than a drive-by "You are a racist!" or snark to that effect, then the post should be taken down before anybody feeds or responds to any more trolling.

If a member chooses to respond/quote the post before mod staff can intervene, then the post may be left up if the response/quote makes an effort to stay on topic and ignore the trolling.