Appeal to the moderation

For the record, while all of the aforementioned terms for issuing suspensions are legit, we generally don't consider suspensions "bans" unless they're permanent, like someone being banned from a particular forum. Bouncing is its own thing beyond that.

As it says in What to Do If You Are Suspended, a suspension means we want what you're doing to stop, first and foremost. Edit Banned is where the conversation about it occurs. That supersedes all other methods of communication, whether you've been warned or not.

Edited by Fighteer on May 2nd 2019 at 11:02:45 AM

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Just wondering if this is the right place to request the mods to ban a certain topic.

Because I think we've reached that point in the US Politics thread. The thread has gotten so heated when it comes to impeachment that it's already gotten a mod warning twice recently. And it's getting heated again.

Disgusted, but not surprised

Allowing any US political discussion on this site is a mistake imo. It's just asking for flame wars regardless of who's in office.

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with?

We've made it eight years without devolving into flame wars. I don't think that is a concern.

The concern is this particular discussion does get rather heated and derails the discussion as both sides repeat themselves for, to use the latest example, almost six hours and half a dozen pages. As this topic will almost certainly be coming up again continuously for the foreseeable future, I do also think some sort of limit should be placed on it so we aren't bogged down by the same thing every few days.

I’d like to ask how/why one gets a post deleted for a thorough analysis of a film that happens to disagree with majority and/or mod view. I read Tobias’ post on the MCU thread before it was thumped and I saw nothing in bad faith or insulting other troopers. How on earth does that merit a thump?

Wisewillow, we are completely within our rights as moderators to dictate what is and is not a suitable topic of conversation on the forums. That particular one is so dumb that I'm having trouble even crediting that someone came up with it.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

... I’d like an opinion from another mod, please, since you thumped the post in question. “This analysis annoyed me so I killed it” is not a helpful or objective basis for tropers wishing to follow forum rules. Calling a very long and detailed analysis so dumb you can’t believe someone came up with it is not appropriate or helpful, unless, I dunno, someone sincerely argued Thanos is a smurf or something.

Edited by wisewillow on Jun 11th 2019 at 12:01:02 PM

Having read the post as well before it was thumped, I am also perplexed as to what in it was deemed punishable. It really wasn’t different from multiple prior posts on the topic.

Edited by Tuckerscreator on Jun 11th 2019 at 12:18:25 PM

True. However, it was repeating the same argument made many times, rejected, then made again, as if repetition makes it more likely to be accepted. This is not good faith debate.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

From the thread it looked like a completely normal follow up and further explanation of a personal opinion. Not mindless repetition. And you said you thumped it for him “refusing to see the flaws in [his] argument”, not for being repetitive. It’s also not good faith debate to thump a thoughtful analysis because a mod personally disagrees.

Edited by wisewillow on Jun 11th 2019 at 12:23:28 PM

Yeah, if the issue was “it was worded fine, it was just repeating too much”, there’s A LOT of posts and arguments that have gone on longer that could be cited by that metric.

Edited by Tuckerscreator on Jun 11th 2019 at 12:26:02 PM

If an argument has been going incessantly, then I'm fine with a warning or a thump.

There is some disagreement on this being a reasonable thump for bad argumentation, but I do agree it appeared to be a bit repetitious. I probably would have modposted instead of thumping.

There's also some conversation about when it's best for a mod who is casually in the conversation to let another mod make a call on mod action.

Also while mods can decide what's suitable or not, it's not going to always be obvious to folks why or why not, so to go "this one is obvious" isn't gonna be too helpful for most folks who might not be on the same wavelength. I am frequently not on the same wavelength as folks on here, so explanations help.

Read my stories!

Yeah this thread seems kinda pointless if the response to a genuine “so why was that thumped?” is “because I wanted to and it was dumb”.

You guys don’t have to be accountable or open with us, but if you’re not going to be I’d rather you just lock this thread then respond to innocent enquiries with “it’s our right to do that”.

“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran

I agree that the first response on that topic was stubborn and uncooperative, I think the other opinion is what we are hoping to get from this thread. We've had some decent back-and-forth discussion, and I currently expect to see more posts like the latter than the former.

Link to TRS threads in project mode here.

I'd also appreciate a follow up, given Fighteer's mod post after the thump.

So if an argument has "fundamental flaws" and if it's argued ad nauseam, then it'll be prohibited outright? Two issues of concern here include (1) normally such flawed arguments don't need censoring since they are so fundamentally flawed that anyone can see the problem(s) with the argument, and (2) the mod action here at the very least seemed to escalate pretty quickly. I mean, it's a bit convenient that the post was thumped for a "fundamentally flawed" argument, which anyone would be able to verify were it not thumped.

While I think it's reasonable to thump when "an argument has been going incessantly," that wasn't the reason given by the thumping mod. If not the primary reason, the thump occurred because it was a flawed argument. As though the content of the argument was the reason rather than the tactic of the person making the argument.

I won't go on and on, but this is an odd thumping that deserves more of an answer than "because I wanted to and it was dumb." Like how was it dumb, did it equate someone to the Nazis or something?

Edited by WaterBlap on Jun 15th 2019 at 10:23:38 AM

Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they pretty

You are correct that I could have handled that better. I'm not apologizing for the decision, but the delivery was poor. If one or two people in a conversation attempt to continue arguing the same point while everyone else wants them to drop it, they may be thumped or otherwise moderated.

"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"

Thank you that clears things up.

Look at all that shiny stuff ain't they pretty

Wasn't sure where to put this but uh, I got a sex bot pm from the username Sofia 2277. I tried to find a "report pm" button and could not find it so I figured I'd just mention it here and if I'm in the wrong area someone'd yell at me.

Read my stories!

O hey I've got one too. Annd there is an ATT thread about it too, already taken care of.

Though if it's the same as the Discord plague of sexbot spam, it's going to return.

Ah, cool. Also not cool it might return again, but glad it's been dealt with.

Read my stories!

There was a waiting period before private messages become possible as I recall

New theme music also a box

it kind of seems like the mods have been trying to take a bit of a lighter touch in the past couple of weeks. ive seen ~nombretomado going to a lot of effort to give tropers leeway over things that have been instant suspensions in the past. id just like to say that i appreciate this effort, if indeed there is one; the harshness of the moderation is one of the main complaints people tend to have with the wiki. ive always accepted it as a necessary evil to keep the wiki up to par, but id be delighted to be proven wrong, and i appreciate you guys and the constant effort you go to to keep this a good place.

Migrated to Chloe Jessica!

That's very kind of you to say. Thank you.