Introducing the Current Affairs/IMHO forum

steddyeddy

Sweetemotion wrote: »

What else would you like done?

I think posters who differ in view point shouldn't characterise those they disagree with as "the rabid left or right". It serves no purpose. Posters, maybe on both sides could do more to engage with the points made rather than slate the poster or source continuously.

Sweetemotion

steddyeddy wrote: »

I think posters who differ in view point shouldn't characterise those they disagree with as "the rabid left or right". It serves no purpose. Posters, maybe on both sides could do more to engage with the points made rather than slate the poster or source continuously.

Good point and I agree, but I only see one side trying to silence the other.

batgoat

steddyeddy wrote: »

I think posters who differ in view point shouldn't characterise those they disagree with as "the rabid left or right". It serves no purpose. Posters, maybe on both sides could do more to engage with the points made rather than slate the poster or source continuously.

Also think it's entirely unacceptable for ongoing speculation about serious local crimes by posters, particularly when it's to push particularly bigoted views.

Sweetemotion

batgoat wrote: »

Also think it's entirely unacceptable for ongoing speculation about serious local crimes by posters, particularly when it's to push particularly bigoted views.

Like this for example. Have you ever heard anyone from the other side post in feedback that they think it is entirely unacceptable to appose different views?

batgoat

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Like this for example. Have you ever heard anyone from the other side post in feedback that they think it is entirely unacceptable to appose different views?

That's not simply different views which is the thing, it's baseless speculation with added racism.

Sweetemotion

batgoat wrote: »

That's not simply different views which is the thing, it's baseless speculation with added racism.

That is simply your view.

circadian

Sweetemotion wrote: »

That is simply your view.

So you're saying it's not baseless speculation? Has information from official sources been released that corroborates this speculation?

I think it's more than just their "view" to be fair.

Sweetemotion

circadian wrote: »

So you're saying it's not baseless speculation? Has information from official sources been released that corroborates this speculation?

I think it's more than just their "view" to be fair.

Thanks for that Cathy.

You think it's more than just their “view".

Is simply you expressing your view.

To be fair, I think you are allowed to express that view and I shall not report this post or try to shut it down by calling you a racist or bigoted.

Overheal

mike_ie wrote: »

You reported it at 15:01. I threadbanned the poster at 15:11, just before I spotted this post. What kind of turnaround times are you expecting exactly?

Amazon would have already shipped my package, just saying.

Harry Palmr

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Thanks for that Cathy.

You think it's more than just their “view".

Is simply you expressing your view.

To be fair, I think you are allowed to express that view and I shall not report this post or try to shut it down by calling you a racist or bigoted.

You'd look like an idiot if you tried so it's best you don't issue any more non-threat threatening posts!

steddyeddy

Sweetemotion wrote: »

Like this for example. Have you ever heard anyone from the other side post in feedback that they think it is entirely unacceptable to appose different views?

I agree but are people trying to silence different views? I don't complain about the posts I disagree with, I complain with the substance of the post not the views expressed in them. I like to debate and challenge views and this is why Current Affairs is already a good forum.

My problem is with the posts I quoted here. They lack little in the way of content and detract from the debate and the quality of the forum. I'll give you an example of comments I disagree with in terms of view and those I have a problem with in terms of context:

Black people are oppressed by the Democrats more than republicans

Different view to mine and I would welcome a debate on it.

Here's the type of posts I don't think belong in civilised debating:

HA HA HA HA HA

SUCK IT

LEFTIST AGENDA

RABID LEFT

RIGHT WING NUTTERS.

I think that some posters have been resorting to these sort of comments when they don't know how to formulate a response to an opposing view.

Then you have the people who are trolling IMHO. Either doing it out contempt for those of opposing viewpoints or to just get a rise out of people.

For example:

Trump advocates no black people policy in his apartments

Then the next post:

I don't think Trump is racist.

Outlaw Pete

steddyeddy wrote: »

Here's the type of posts I don't think belong in civilised debating:

RIGHT WING NUTTERS.

But yet......

steddyeddy wrote: »

I mostly hear about her from right wing nut jobs. They do a great job of advertising her policies.

I really hope admin aren't falling for what is going on here. I have already shown where this user suggested in a CA thread post (by means of a nonsense story about their employer) that Trump voters have a low IQ ( / 'have trouble accepting facts') and now you can see that in CA they use the exact insulting terms which they pretending here in Feedback that they are against, in the hope they will be seen as being all about "civilised debate" of course.

Nah, they're not. I'll say it again, there are a cohort of users that are clearly trying to pull the wool over Admin's eyes and their objective is clear: they want admin/mods to act so that it will no longer be okay in CA for someone to accuse a user of having a leftist agenda. That's their aim, don't be fooled. Note how they compare someone being called a 'Right wing nutter' (to give the appearance of non-bias) to someone being told they have a 'Leftist agenda', as if these two things are in any way comparable.

The only thing comparable to a user being told they have a leftist agenda is a user being told they have a right wing one. Would you want admin to action anyone saying the latter? No you wouldn't but yet here you are doing your utmost to see they action the former. Please.

steddyeddy

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

But yet......



I really hope admin aren't falling for what is going on here. I have already shown where this user suggested in a CA thread post (by means of a nonsense story about their employer) that Trump voters have a low IQ ( / 'have trouble accepting facts') and now you can see that in CA they use the exact insulting terms which they pretending here in Feedback that they are against, in the hope they will be seen as being all about "civilised debate" of course.

Nah, they're not. I'll say it again, there are a cohort of users that are clearly trying to pull the wool over Admin's eyes and their objective is clear: they want admin/mods to act so that it will no longer be okay in CA for someone to accuse a user of having a leftist agenda. That's their aim, don't be fooled. Note how they compare someone being called a 'Right wing nutter' (to give the appearance of non-bias) to someone being told they have a 'Leftist agenda', as if these two things are in any way comparable.

The only thing comparable to a user being told they have a leftist agenda is a user being told they have a right wing one. Would you want admin to action anyone saying the latter? No you wouldn't but yet here you are doing your utmost to see they action the former. Please.

In both instances of left and right wing nutters I was referring to people directing that label at the poster. Either way you're right that it's a low brow term to use and I shouldn't.

Sorry Pete but my employer's do indeed limit the use in official documents, grants or press releases based on the level of understanding Trump, his administration and supporters have of the science. For instance it's well publicised that he doesn't want the climate change to appear on our grants.

steddyeddy

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

But yet......
The only thing comparable to a user being told they have a leftist agenda is a user being told they have a right wing one. Would you want admin to action anyone saying the latter? No you wouldn't but yet here you are doing your utmost to see they action the former. Please.

The only problem with anyone being labelled as leftist is that it's meaningless. Trust me when I say that compared to American politics all of us are on the left.

Outlaw Pete

steddyeddy wrote: »

Sorry Pete but my employer's do indeed limit the use in official documents, grants or press releases based on the level of understanding Trump, his administration and supporters have of the science.

I don't believe a research facility thinks 62 million people have a poor understanding of science based purely on how they voted in an election and I'd would suggest that if you saw their press releases before Trump was elected, there would be little differences in how they are today. Sounds to me like the employee(s) you cite were just being smartarses.

Either way though, it's neither here nor there, as you said it on the thread in order to have a sly dig at the user you were engaging with.

steddyeddy wrote: »

The only problem with anyone being labelled as leftist is that it's meaningless. Trust me when I say that compared to American politics all of us are on the left.

Fine, but you're not in Feedback arguing about the legitimacy of the term though are you. You're here saying it doesn't belong in a civilized debate, which is a much different thing entirely.

Faugheen

Nothing on the instances of promoting harm towards a child that has been highlighted umpteen times?

Faugheen

Faugheen wrote: »

Nothing on the instances of promoting harm towards a child that has been highlighted umpteen times?

oh pleeeease tell me this is about criticising greta

amazing

Faugheen

[Deleted User] wrote: »

oh pleeeease tell me this is about criticising greta

amazing

Not at all, it's about people wishing for a second Titanic. That goes far beyond the criticism she gets.

Also about people making excuses for the girl who was attacked for wearing a hijab in the Gemma thread too.

Mr E

Faugheen wrote: »

Nothing on the instances of promoting harm towards a child that has been highlighted umpteen times?

The reason all 12 mods of the Current Affairs/IMHO forum didn't action your reported post (all 3 reports of the same post) was because it's not actionable.

In a thread that started with lots of tongue-in-cheek remarks, it's another tongue-in-cheek remark.
It was an attempt at a humourous comment that fell a little bit flat (or dare I say, sank).

Nobody is wishing actual harm to Greta, her dad or anyone else on the boat.

Faugheen

Mr E wrote: »

The reason all 12 mods of the Current Affairs/IMHO forum didn't action your reported post (all 3 reports of the same post) was because it's not actionable.

In a thread that started with lots of tongue-in-cheek remarks, it's another tongue-in-cheek remark.
It was an attempt at a humourous comment that fell a little bit flat (or dare I say, sank).

Nobody is wishing actual harm to Greta, her dad or anyone else on the boat.

Clearly didn't see the post by the same poster later on talking about how the waters will be getting a little bit choppy.

You can call if humour if you want, but you've just said that 'jokes' in relation to harm of a child are fair game.

Would you accept it if I made a comment about wishing harm on another member then followed it up with 'lol jk'? I don't think so.

It's bang out of order, and previous admin wouldn't have stood for that. You're absolutely pandering to the trolls now.

Beasty

Do you genuinely think they were being serious?

Faugheen

Beasty wrote: »

Do you genuinely think they were being serious?

Considering they follow up with another 'joke' about the waters getting choppy, I personally think they were.

Do you honestly think 'jokes' that wish harm on children are acceptable? Can I make similar 'jokes' about who I want on here then?

the absolute state of this level of sensitivity


gwan, say 'cesspit' you know you want to

Beasty

Faugheen wrote: »

Considering they follow up with another 'joke' about the waters getting choppy, I personally think they were.

Do you honestly think 'jokes' that wish harm on children are acceptable? Can I make similar 'jokes' about who I want on here then?

I have absolutely no problem with posters trying to bring some levity into certain threads

You clearly do have an issue with it. That does not make it actionable (and yes others reported the post, but it's well buries in the thread now and all I think you are doing now is drawing more attention to the post rather than the moderation. Of course I accept others may think differently

Mr E

Faugheen wrote: »

... and previous admin wouldn't have stood for that.

I've been an admin for 5 years and I can comfortably say that none of my peers during that time (or before that time) would have been heavy handed with that post.

The faux outrage is withering.

Annasopra

I see a moderator of CA/IMHO posted a thread in CA/IMHO indirectly encouraging traveller bashing. It's pretty disgusting that there is so much traveller bashing on this site but it is disgraceful that a mod is taking actions to indirectly encourage it.

batgoat

I was pretty depressed by that thread, the OP(the mod) seemed to be pretty positive about the idea out of rejecting people from hotels because they're travelers. Basically racially profiling people. Whatever about representing another forum, a mod of the very forum they're moderating contributing to a problem of threads that target minority groups is ****e.

i too have seen mods post items i personally disagree with, id like to lend my weight to this class action

Tikki Wang Wang

To balance this I support the mod.

Beasty

It's not a thread I would intend posting in. It is a thread we may well see some problems with. However we do not dictate to mods what they can or cannot post. they are as free to start a thread as anyone else. In this particular case I think there's a fair chance someone else would have started a thread on this topic anyway