Jump to content

Do we still have moderation?


betsy

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) I'm unfamiliar with the concept of 'protect'.  I agree/disagree with posters on various things.  That's it.

2) I don't sanction anything any more than you do.  I have repeatedly demarcated myself from the moderation and you keep going back to that.

3) Facilitators don't act on posts.  Moderators do.

If you can just focus on discussion and follow the report & ignore process then I'm sure the moderator will give you due attention.

I tried to concentrate on the discussion, but as you see some people derailed it, and you are defending that derailing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GostHacked said:

I tried to concentrate on the discussion, but as you see some people derailed it, and you are defending that derailing. 

If your view is that the thread was 'derailed' as you say, you should report & ignore.  I saw a substantive point in a post and simply asked for a response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

If your view is that the thread was 'derailed' as you say, you should report & ignore.  I saw a substantive point in a post and simply asked for a response.

That derailing went on for 4 pages, which you directly contributed to it.  Then you say' ok then lets get back to the OP' because at that moment you realized the thread had gone off the rails. Open your eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GostHacked said:

1) That derailing went on for 4 pages, which you directly contributed to it. 

2) Then you say' ok then lets get back to the OP' because at that moment you realized the thread had gone off the rails. Open your eyes.

1) I disagree.  There were substantive arguments being made.

2) I realized that HE's responses to me were not about the OP so yes I said let's get back to it.  I don't see what's wrong with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Boges said:

It's pretty cool that most threads now turn into an Anti-American thread because of a certain member. 

He's just adding balance to the other long-standing troll I suppose.  Why would they ban the new one if the old one has been allowed to hang around like a bad smell for years?

Edited by The_Squid
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe because the "other long-standing troll" makes excellent points whether or not you agree with them.  The two have vastly, vastly different approaches to posting on MLW so they are as dissimilar as you can get.  You don't have to like his content - for example, Omni and I are at opposite ends of pretty much every spectrum and I happen to think his reasoning is completely wrong, but he tries to use facts when he argues and isn't a one trick pony with his posts.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/25/2017 at 10:43 AM, Hydraboss said:

And are these people really breaking any forum rules (any more than the rest of us)? 

No.  

 

 

On 7/22/2017 at 6:28 AM, betsy said:

Is it possible to have a reported out-of-topic comment, or personal attack to be removed? 

Yes. 

 

On 7/23/2017 at 11:52 AM, betsy said:

However,  I  think it hurts the board  when the post of someone bent on derailing a topic, is allowed to clutter the thread.  It's up to the moderator to judge whether a post has to be removed, or moved where appropriate.  

On what basis do you want the mod staff to judge whether a comment is on/off topic?  Do you want mod staff to be The Ministry Of Truth in the forums? 

CAVEAT LECTOR: The statement "PostX is off-topic to DiscussionY." is logically equivalent to stating that "PostX contains a lie.

Do you want moderators to delete a personal attack or an off-topic comment to which the rest of the membership has responded or quoted? 

 

On 7/23/2017 at 11:52 AM, betsy said:

What reader won't get fed up sifting and wading through pages of clutters?

Me.

<< Fistons, lisez comment les Canadois se divertissaient lorsqu'ils decidaient votre futur. >>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) I disagree.  There were substantive arguments being made.

2) I realized that HE's responses to me were not about the OP so yes I said let's get back to it.  I don't see what's wrong with that.

You can disagree all you want, but you are wrong. I don't mind substantive arguments but we can leave the insults at the door. THAT is why I reported the post.

I may exercise some slandering of other members here, I wonder if that will get me banned.  Let's give it a shot shall we??

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,742
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    CrazyCanuck89
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • DACHSHUND went up a rank
      Rookie
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      First Post
    • aru earned a badge
      First Post
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • User earned a badge
      Posting Machine
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...