|
Dead Reckoning posted:It seems like making it a bannable offense to admit membership of one of America's two major political parties, that ~30% of adults identify as a part of, wouldn't be very conductive to discussion. The "promotion of any ideology" phrasing coupled with an intersectionalist worldview means that literally any political opinion outside the overton window here can be framed as bigoted and punished.
|
#
¿
Apr 29, 2019 20:55
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 06:11 |
|
|
We should ban Obama voters as well, since he campaigned initially on bigoted rhetoric that excluded gays from marriage.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2019 18:02
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:That, and yes, I am willing to say that if you still support Donald Trump in 2019, you are garbage. Sorry. We can debate on if people who did support him, past tense, have learned their lesson, but Mnoba is the poster child for “toes the exact line he feels he can get away with while inciting a bunch of drama” and I was glad he finally publicly declared something actually really lovely. So you'll be formalizing this into a "no Trump supporters" rule, then?
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2019 23:04
|
|
|
Lightning Knight posted:You seem awfully concerned about that, I wonder why. I've pointed out several times that I didn't vote for Trump and changed my party affiliation the day after the "both sides" presser, but why let actual facts supercede a smug punch down? Anyway, what he actually said "out loud" was that he supports Trump. I think it's fair to ask if this is a bannable offense or not. Can you clarify, please.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2019 23:14
|
|
|
Thank you for at least looking into the ban pic.
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2019 23:35
|
|
|
Regardless, the person who just said "Literally every right winger I've ever seen in D&D has the same playbook" and thinks that pro-life posters should be banned has been rewarded with oversight of uspol. Like, come on.You're not even pretending anymore. At this point, why not just be honest with everyone and explicitly forbid conservatives, republicans, and Trump voters? To me, the idea that no one should be subjected to an opinion they don't agree with seems anathema to SA first principles, and a place where the hottest debate is "democratic socialism or social democracy" sounds lame and boring. But at least explicitly codifying that in a rule shows more respect for your posters' time and intelligence than folding your arms and bald-faced insisting that the rules will be fairly enforced by the person you've chosen. TheDisreputableDog fucked around with this message at 15:01 on May 6, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2019 14:58
|
|
|
fool_of_sound posted:I promise I won't probate anyone for arguing for data based restrictions on abortion or specifics of immigration policy. People are allowed to oppose gun restrictions or support the American military or even defend cops, unless they're being racist or ghoulish while doing so. My goal isn't to ensure only opinions I agree with, it's to promote discussion and intellectual growth by keeping it on topic, safe and welcoming, and free of people acting like assholes. And a few pages ago you said those positions were inherently sexist or racist and posters making them should be banned. "Sorry if this offends". Again, we're all pretty smart people, we all get the message being delivered here. No need for the fig leaf.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2019 16:05
|
|
|
Unoriginal Name posted:If this was true, wouldnt you be banned already? Two of my three bans were cowardly "not for this post but just ummm... reasons" purge bans, which strengthens my argument.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2019 21:04
|
|
|
"We can't determine the character of the forums for you!" He exclaimed, while periodically mass-purging posters he doesn't like. No.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2019 11:39
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 06:11 |
|
|
exmarx posted:if i wished to avoid being caught up in the bad poster purge, i would simply post well Evidenced by my string of bad, probated posts between the two purges, I suppose. R. Guyovich posted:iirc none of the people who got hit with the purges were particularly controversial with the exception of evilweasel. strange no one vouched for you! While it's not surprising to see you hiding behind the skirts of popular opinion here, I'm not only taking exception to the fact that you capriciously ban people. You literally write the rules. You appoint the mods and IKs, and know exactly what their worldviews are. You selectively enforce those rules. You ban people for sport. That's all fine, but you don't get to throw your hands up and be like "I dunno man this is THE PEOPLE'S forum" and pretend like the tone of the forum hasn't been being actively dictated to us. That's intellectually lazy, though to be fair not inconsistent with a realistic implementation of leninism.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2019 13:28
|
|