Zone1 Top down control or individual liberty?

[Coyote]

It is very lefty of you to introduce the notion that I am denying a business their rights. This is a red herring


You are reaching out here for an admin to rescue you, since you cannot win the debate with stronger debate or arguments. You need admin muscle to win this for you. You will inevitably be rescued with censorship, since that is the only way lefties can win this one. Watch.

Whatever coyote wrote about me is ALWAYS trolling or derailing my thread. ALWAYS.

 

[Orangecat]

That's a brilliant idea! Redundant subforums.

If the poll is any indication, about 3 out of every 4 would be posting in the non-moderated of the redundant forums.
I like the idea. Choice is always preferable.

Truth be told, I'm of the opinion that allowing people to be anonymous and discuss political issues actually facilitates the type of behavior that Zone1 seeks to diminish.
I mean, who here would be willing to let everyone know their true identity, or link to, say, their facebook account?

 

[EvMetro]

The problem with my idea of having one normal race forum and a redundant one with the snowflake zone warning on it, is that the mods would STILL censor the crap out of the normal one. Before the snowflake zones, my threads in the normal racism forum got censored and deleted like no tomorrow. There is no way this mod team would ever let my evidence of racism threads for Trump and Biden run simultaneously on this site without being compelled to step in, safe zones or no safe zones. It would allow the inconvenient political truth to surface.

 

[AyeCantSeeYou]

Just because we have a few areas as Zone 1 does not mean you can't start a thread (whose topic falls under those categories) in the Flame Zone, Rubber Room, or Badlands IF you want it to be a free-for-all. If insults and overused redundant oneupmanship is your thing, then by all means, use the area downstairs!

 

[EvMetro]

Just because we have a few areas as Zone 1 does not mean you can't start a thread (whose topic falls under those categories) in the Flame Zone, Rubber Room, or Badlands IF you want it to be a free-for-all. If insults and overused redundant oneupmanship is your thing, then by all means, use the area downstairs!

The problem with this is that racism threads belong on the racism forum. That's what racism forums are for. Why not make the snowflake zones the downstairs?

It would be dishonest and wrong to post racism threads in a place called the rubber room or the flame zone. I don't want to bounce around or be on fire, I just want to talk about racism when I post a thread about racism.

 

[AyeCantSeeYou]

You can discuss racism in the proper area as long as you abide by the rules there. If people can't discuss it without calling each other names, trying to change the thread topic, and throwing insults around, they don't need to be in that area. It's that simple.

 

[EvMetro]

You can discuss racism in the proper area as long as you abide by the rules there.

I am doing this and being heavily censored. My threads are getting deleted and closed.

If people can't discuss it without calling each other names, trying to change the thread topic, and throwing insults around,

Righties cannot stop lefties from interpreting righty agenda as offensive. There is no rule that can be written to stop lefties from interpreting what I have to say as offensive.

Flac and the mod team can't tell me what I say that is offensive or illegal, they can only quote the entire rule book and tell me to comply with it.

they don't need to be in that area. It's that simple.

Racism threads go in the racism section, religion threads go in the religion section.

 

[flacaltenn]

Zone 1 allows LibTards to lie politely and complain when you call out their lies.

That's true for ANYONE that brings dishonesty/evasion into Zone 1 threads. The deal is -- you can take a whack at dismantling their assertions and if they come back to refute that, but instead CONTINUE to be dishonest/evasive -- you can just walk away a winner. They lost. Game over. Go talk with someone else.

Not FEEDING them ruins their intent to be there. Same with members who post the same or similar gripe threads. If they AREN'T honest/responsive -- Do Not patronize their threads. Plenty of other things to DO on USMB. Let THEM figure WHY no one wants to partake of their soap-boxing.

I think the members who act like they cant function without troll on troll violence dont get that part. You're NOT obligated to waste time with members who "lie politely" or otherwise. Members have MORE power over trolls than the mod staff does in reality. And that power isn't isn't a 2 page profane name-calling encounter. THEY might GAIN power from that or love it more than you do.

 

[flacaltenn]

I am doing this and being heavily censored. My threads are getting deleted and closed.

Explained THREE times to you in past 48 hours. That's resolved.

 

[flacaltenn]

Flac and the mod team can't tell me what I say that is offensive or illegal, they can only quote the entire rule book and tell me to comply with it.

If you CAN and WANT to -- you probably do alright in civil discussion. You just want special privileges to take sensitive topics/forum into the gutter.

 

[flacaltenn]

IM2 did that and created his own echo chamber where only six or seven people who agreed with him were allowed to post. It quickly died a natural death because it was even boring to them when they agreed with everything each other said.

Dont participate in soap-box derbies. No crowd, No soap box.

 

[BackAgain]

Unless a zone 1 thread (here I’m talking about race as the topic) complies with the “clean start” rule also, then some remarkably stupid shit can get said that begs for a rejoinder of equal derision. No. I don’t mean replace one racist thought with another one. But to give a racist OP special protection is really an odd glitch in the matrix. Yet, a justified derisive rejoinder could be the post that gets mod sanctioning. Not an intentional side effect of the stupid rule. But a side effect just the same.

 

[flacaltenn]

If the poll is any indication, about 3 out of every 4 would be posting in the non-moderated of the redundant forums.
I like the idea. Choice is always preferable.

Truth be told, I'm of the opinion that allowing people to be anonymous and discuss political issues actually facilitates the type of behavior that Zone1 seeks to diminish.
I mean, who here would be willing to let everyone know their true identity, or link to, say, their facebook account?

Political discussions aren't gonna get fixed by removing anonymity. Twitter is PROOF of that. Only diff is -- if you screw up on the Twit Box -- "they" can wreck your job, reputation, and life. NOTHING fixes the myriad of problems in political discussion. Now ALL those top tier social media platforms REQUIRE your identity to be a member. THEY know who you are and your phone number/zipcode, ect.

Mods have a different view of USMB as community. We get know the ACTUAL person(s) BEHIND the poster names. And a LOT of time that's eye-popping surprises. Dont KNOW their identities, but just the diff between their "USMB persona" and how they really act and think. USMB IS a "community". The daily tribal skirmishes just dont give those impressions.

But yeah, folks dont generally go-off on family, friends, random acquaintances, neighbors or the cops. WHY? Because there are consequences. AND -- relationships that deserve to be preserved. Important to remember that so that the MOST SENSITIVE and emotional topics and the people IN THEM --------------------- are treated with respect. That was what was LACKING in Race and Religion.

One last observation. A LOT of the same folks complaining about dishonesty, trolling, evasion in the RELIGION forum and whining to moderation about that --- are the same ones whining about making the Race forum Zone1. Same folks who were pushing us to clean up the Religion forum. And THAT forum -- is much less of problem since it became Zone1 and actually NOW HAS a lot more page hits and posts/threads.

 

[EvMetro]

Explained THREE times to you in past 48 hours. That's resolved.

Link me to even one of these three

I've seen you claim that I was punished for posting my racism thread in the racism subforum, and it has not yet been cleared up as to why on earth I would not post racism threads in the racism subforum. I've even seen you claim that the racism subforum is not actually a racism subforum.

I've seen you refer to the rules as a whole, but not which rule broke with quotes to isolate what broke the rule.

I've seen you tell me that I have to post civilized, but then you can't post what was uncivilized. I've even seen you say that the action was "heading" the wrong direction, which means nothing bad actually happened yet.

Flac, I am willing to learn. All I need is to have my violations quantified, and why exactly those evidence of racism threads had to be censored. If you can give me a reasonable explanation for all this, I will probably advocate in favor of all your safe zones and censorship.

 

[flacaltenn]

Unless a zone 1 thread (here I’m talking about race as the topic) complies with the “clean start” rule also, then some remarkably stupid shit can get said that begs for a rejoinder of equal derision. No. I don’t mean replace one racist thought with another one. But to give a racist OP special protection is really an odd glitch in the matrix. Yet, a justified derisive rejoinder could be the post that gets mod sanctioning. Not an intentional side effect of the stupid rule. But a side effect just the same.

Clean start has NO bearing on the CONTENT of new threads. It only specifies that title/Opost have to be clean and few other details. MEMBERS dont get to call other members "unclean" if there is no baiting or polarization involved. Reparations is not necessarily baiting. AAction is not baiting. Comparing crime rates is not baiting. Psych studies of the mental processes of racism are not baiting. History of Civil right ABUSES are not baiting.

They CAN be -- but that's a moderation call. Not a member call.

 

[flacaltenn]

Link me to even one of these three

R U KIDDING ME??? One time PUBLICLY was IN THIS THREAD.

THen it was explained to you on 2 separate days in a warning PM thread.
And I BELIEVE you posted ANOTHER THREAD in Announcements LAST night that I closed after I ANSWERED ALL THIS AGAIN. Not playing rope-a-dope with you anymore on this.

Zone1 - Top down control or individual liberty?

So tell me, what is the domain extension on this site, is it. . .. . . .net? .gov? how about .org? :dunno: .edu? .mil? .org? NO? No, it isn't? Did you notice that it is .com? What does that signify to you? You mean, USMB is, a, wait for, it. . . business? :20: Hmmmmm. ... Well...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[EvMetro]

If you CAN and WANT to -- you probably do alright in civil discussion.

As far as I am aware, civil is always my tone. How lefties perceive it is out of my control. I don't recall ever having a mod isolate anything I've said in an uncivilized tone. I'm not sure why we should be talking about civilized discussion if that's all you've ever seen me do.

You just want special privileges to take sensitive topics/forum into the gutter.

Freedom is not a special privilege in my country.

Sensitive topics? THIS Is what your safe zones are really about. Are you really saying that you want to protect members of a political discussion community from having their feelings hurt? NOBODY on political sites join up expecting to have their sensitive feelings protected. Sensitive topics and safe zones on a political site are an oxymoron. This is politics.

Can you give an example of how I take things to the gutter?

 

[BackAgain]

Clean start has NO bearing on the CONTENT of new threads. It only specifies that title/Opost have to be clean and few other details. MEMBERS dont get to call other members "unclean" if there is no baiting or polarization involved. Reparations is not necessarily baiting. AAction is not baiting. Comparing crime rates is not baiting. Psych studies of the mental processes of racism are not baiting. History of Civil right ABUSES are not baiting.

They CAN be -- but that's a moderation call. Not a member call.

Clean start rules exist. If a thread in a protected forum starts off with some insidious racist crap, it is likely to garner some fairly heated rejoinders (and again, I’m not talking about racist tit for tat). But because it’s a protected forum, the heated rejoinders could yield mod sanctions.

All I am suggesting is that the clean start rule should be particularly invoked in a protected forum. Also, I wasn’t saying that a mere mortal member should make the call of “unclean.” But I think we can all recognize why bait is a particular menace in a protected forum.

 

[EvMetro]

R U KIDDING ME??? One time PUBLICLY was IN THIS THREAD.

THen it was explained to you on 2 separate days in a warning PM thread.
And I BELIEVE you posted ANOTHER THREAD in Announcements LAST night that I closed after I ANSWERED ALL THIS AGAIN. Not playing rope-a-dope with you anymore on this.

Zone1 - Top down control or individual liberty?

So tell me, what is the domain extension on this site, is it. . .. . . .net? .gov? how about .org? :dunno: .edu? .mil? .org? NO? No, it isn't? Did you notice that it is .com? What does that signify to you? You mean, USMB is, a, wait for, it. . . business? :20: Hmmmmm. ... Well...

www.usmessageboard.com

Flac, I can't find anything but allegations about the thread. I am getting really interested in understanding what the problem was, but I can't seem to isolate it in any of your explanations. It all looks vague to me, but I'd absolutely love to be able to see what the problem is. Maybe we can go to the first non compliant post and isolate what was so bad about it that the thread required censorship.

Do we agree now that the racism forum is where racism threads go? If not, what is in the site rules that forbids racism threads from being posted in the racism forum?

 

[monkrules]

That's true for ANYONE that brings dishonesty/evasion into Zone 1 threads. The deal is -- you can take a whack at dismantling their assertions and if they come back to refute that, but instead CONTINUE to be dishonest/evasive -- you can just walk away a winner. They lost. Game over. Go talk with someone else.

Not FEEDING them ruins their intent to be there. Same with members who post the same or similar gripe threads. If they AREN'T honest/responsive -- Do Not patronize their threads. Plenty of other things to DO on USMB. Let THEM figure WHY no one wants to partake of their soap-boxing.

I think the members who act like they cant function without troll on troll violence dont get that part. You're NOT obligated to waste time with members who "lie politely" or otherwise. Members have MORE power over trolls than the mod staff does in reality. And that power isn't isn't a 2 page profane name-calling encounter. THEY might GAIN power from that or love it more than you do.

That's when the Ignore List really shines.