Jump to content
Guests feel free to register and post ×
WELCOME NEW MEMBERS AND GUESTS FEEL FREE TO REGISTER AND POST ×
WELCOME NEW MEMBERS AND GUESTS ×

Poll On The Up/Down Voting System .. Cast Your Votes


bludog
 Share

Consensus of opinion on the up/down voting system.  

10 members have voted

  1. 1. Consensus of opinion on the up/down voting system.

    • Keep the system as it is now
    • Keep the upvote feature but get rid of downvotes
    • Scrap the entire system

This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Olivaw said:

@kfools @Ghostofkf,  why is this individual a moderator and why does he think he can overrule the liberal administrators and council?  If the liberal council and leadership team is a farce then come clean and don’t string us along with BS about libs running the forum. I want nothing to do with providing cover for Bugaloo Bois hate. 
 

@bludog, @RollingRock, @zkyllonen8, @impartialobserver, @SpyCar

 

IMO, no matter how clean the room, provocations and taunting can still occur if preposterous arguments are interpreted by the authorities as being legitimate.  And the second problem is that what is legitimate and what is preposterous is often determined by the political inclination of the the authorities in charge.  This would apply to any "clean" room.

 

"Member Debate", the strictest, most formal room of all is full of, in my view, some of the most absurd and petty topics on these boards.  Topics like:

RESOLVED:  Obama was a true fascist while Trump is not a fascist.

RESOLVED:  Do leftists suffer from TDS?

RESOLVED:  Should a spammer know whether you've deleted their email or not?

RESOLVED:  What is the optimal temperature of the earth?

 

The tone of these topics is reflected in many of the posts within.  And other topics in "Member Debates" often devolve into absurd taunting by simply presenting irrational arguments.  What is the solution?  Beats me.  But I don't often go in there.

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, kfools said:

That should be done with thier elected moderators. 

 

Unless the council wants you here for some reason. Otherwise you should take it direct to leadership and have THEM explain to thier council why they decided what they did.

 

I know how this sounds but the Liberal take over was not a song and dance. They NEED to have total board control (within reason) 

I'm not going against the grain with anyone and I've went well out of my way not to step on any toes. I know where my lane is and that's that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, lucifershammer said:

As I am neither a liberal nor a conservative  if you guys want me gone then kick me to the curb.  I'm only here to provide my input as a mod and nothing else.  If I want to fight I'll take that nonsense to NHB where it belongs.   But this is a place to watch our forum grow and suggest ways to make it better.  

 

Since you do not identify as a Liberal but not a Conservative either, I think you should be here.  I also invited kking as an honorary member but he declined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bludog said:

 

IMO, no matter how clean the room, provocations and taunting can still occur if preposterous arguments are interpreted by the authorities as being legitimate.  And the second problem is that what is legitimate and what is preposterous is often determined by the political inclination of the the authorities in charge.  This would apply to any "clean" room.

 

"Member Debate", the strictest, most formal room of all is full of, in my view, some of the most absurd and petty topics on these boards.  Topic like:

RESOLVED:  Obama was a true fascist while Trump is not a fascist.

RESOLVED:  Do leftists suffer from TDS?

RESOLVED:  Should a spammer know whether you've deleted their email or not?

RESOLVED:  What is the optimal temperature of the earth?

 

The tone of these topics is reflected in the posts within.  And other topics in "Member Debates" often devolve into absurd taunting by simply presenting irrational arguments.  What is the solution?  Beats me.  But I don't often go in there.

 

 

 

I just want an area without the trappings of NHB where dialog can actually happen with too much devolving. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, kfools said:

Your bearing and opinions on that are not relevant.

 

You have a room. It's all yours to run as you see fit.

 

This is to be the "Liberals forum"

 

A clean debate/discussion room with you modding it doesn't interfere with that. However, if they want to add rooms EVEN IF THEY RUN contrary to yours....well to be blunt, it's none of your fucking business. 

 

That said,you are doing a great job with your room and I hope you stay on. It's the libs forum now though.

 

Change is inevitable.


Thank you. This fully addresses my concern. @lucifershammer is a member of this council. He is certainly entitled to argue against my idea, as is every everyone else. He should not disallow it unilaterally
 

A few more libs need to comment in Toldya’s thread about racism. It’s not enough to jawbone about it privately or throw our hands up and leave. We need to seek a constructive solution that allows the forum to attract and retain libs while preserving the freedom of expression that LF promotes. It’s no easy task. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Olivaw said:


Thank you. This fully addresses my concern. @lucifershammer is a member of this council. He is certainly entitled to argue against my idea, as is every everyone else. He should not disallow it unilaterally
 

A few more libs need to comment in Toldya’s thread about racism. It’s not enough to jawbone about it privately or throw our hands up and leave. We need to seek a constructive solution that allows the forum to attract and retain libs while preserving the freedom of expression that LF promotes. It’s no easy task. 

There are only 3 people who can unilaterally nix an idea. Kfools kking and bludog  .  I'm just a mod ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, lucifershammer said:

There are only 3 people who can unilaterally nix an idea. Kfools kking and bludog  .  I'm just a mod ....

I’m pleased with resolution.
 

It is my understanding from your post in NHB that you don’t want input to the rules in your room. That’s why I suggested a separate polite room with rules set by the lib team. It was certainly not to undermine your effort. Are you willing to reconsider your stance on rules?
 

Obviously this is all just my opinion. I don’t speak for anybody else, least of all moderators and admins. I’m just a lowly member with a big mouth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, bludog said:

IMO, no matter how clean the room, provocations and taunting can still occur if preposterous arguments are interpreted by the authorities as being legitimate.


Absolutely. We all interpret the world according to our preconceptions and biases. Most libs view the marches as a struggle against police brutality and injustice against blacks. Many cons see only looting and riots. What one side considers reasonable, the other considers outrageous. it goes for the world and the forum. 
 

I don’t envy your volunteer job here. There are no easy answers and your decisions will be second guessed by armchair moderators. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Olivaw said:

There are no easy answers and your decisions will be second guessed by armchair moderators. 

 

Heh heh.  Always.  And there's no shortage of them.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Olivaw said:


Thank you. This fully addresses my concern. @lucifershammer is a member of this council. He is certainly entitled to argue against my idea, as is every everyone else. He should not disallow it unilaterally
 

A few more libs need to comment in Toldya’s thread about racism. It’s not enough to jawbone about it privately or throw our hands up and leave. We need to seek a constructive solution that allows the forum to attract and retain libs while preserving the freedom of expression that LF promotes. It’s no easy task. 

It can't be done without censorship.

 

Let's be realistic. That's what is really being discussed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ghostofkf said:

It can't be done without censorship.

 

Let's be realistic. That's what is really being discussed.


Rules that restrict what we can say on the forum already exist. What’s the difference between those rules and a rule against blatant racism? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Olivaw said:


Rules that restrict what we can say on the forum already exist.

In what context though? Words that can potentially cause harm to a person physically. Not emotionally.

1 minute ago, Olivaw said:

What’s the difference between those rules and a rule against blatant racism? 

See above.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ghostofkf said:

In what context though? Words that can potentially cause harm to a person physically. Not emotionally.

See above.


No insulting offspring in any room. 

No personal attacks in most rooms.

No memes in one room. 
No spam (with a creative definition applied to the word) 
 

What protection from physical harm do those rules offer? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Olivaw said:


No insulting offspring in any room. 

Where is that rule? To my knowledge that isn't a rule.

8 minutes ago, Olivaw said:

No personal attacks in most rooms.

No memes in one room. 

Rooms with censorship as a goal.

8 minutes ago, Olivaw said:

 

 


No spam (with a creative definition applied to the word) 
 

Because it drowns out speech.

8 minutes ago, Olivaw said:

What protection from physical harm do those rules offer? 

None. And none apply to NHB except spam. You are gonna have a tough row to hoe convincing me to keep the spam and ditch the speech.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ghostofkf said:

Hypothetically. 

 

Let's say we say "No blatant racism"

 

What would that be considered?


My view only.

  • The rule would apply to a separate discussion room, not NHB. 
  • Terms like “nigger”,  “jigaboo”, “niglet”, “honky”, “spic”, “porch monkey”, “sand nigger” disallowed in any post. (Some sites use software to do this).
  • Threads promoting race war or genocide disallowed. 
  • Anti-Semitic threads disallowed etc.
     

And yes, I know the StormFront sect will use their code words, phonetics and dog whistles in an attempt to beat the system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Olivaw said:


My view only.

  • The rule would apply to a separate discussion room, not NHB. 
  • Terms like “nigger”,  “jigaboo”, “niglet”, “honky”, “spic”, “porch monkey”, “sand nigger” disallowed in any post. (Some sites use software to do this).
  • Threads promoting race war or genocide disallowed. 
  • Anti-Semitic threads disallowed etc.
     

And yes, I know the StormFront sect will use their code words, phonetics and dog whistles in an attempt to beat the system. 

If it's not NHB I don't give a shit what you guys do. Even in NHB I am willing to make concessions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...