Total posts: 19,931
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Hate speech can occur on 4Chan, not here, as you proudly stated. :)This is not a statement I made lol.
What did you mean then, please do enlighten us. Without moderation this can become 4Chan.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I didn't say arrest them, it was you who said that CoC aren't like the real-world law.
Hate speech can occur on 4Chan, not here, as you proudly stated. :)
I understand that tactically worded hate speech is inside the rules though, I didn't deny it.
Created:
Maybe that is the way other websites work. Banning people you disagree with, so you can bring a hive mind to the site, won't work on a debate site. The site is currently dead other than the campaigns and it is because of policies like David's that created a hivemind like atmosphere.
Not that I disagree with, that over 80% of people are repulsed by.
Severe racism isn't something they need to see discussed but again, that isn't my platform that's what Pie and you kept pushing it to become.
I am not here to censor opinions but there are some extreme opinions that most who come across the website will read and be repulsed by. The least I can do is, if the rules allow that, censor the other toxic abuse of members to make it pleasant both for them and other onlookers or potential newcomers.
Created:
Posted in:
He agrees with bans on people whose ideology he disagrees with.
This is a major twisting of context.
The view he is suggesting is extreme racism and such.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ILikePie5
As for the Dursleys, that enmity comes from Petunia who was jealous of the fact her sister Lilly was gifted and she wasn’t. I think it’s also cannon that Dudley’s son is gifted.
WRONG! It is his uncle who is the nasty one, Petunia is the only reason they gave him a home and she is deeply scarred by the loss of Lily and has a rather nasty and abusive husband.
Created:
Posted in:
Signs and symptoms of narcissistic personality disorder and the severity of symptoms vary. People with the disorder can:
- Have an exaggerated sense of self-importance
- Have a sense of entitlement and require constant, excessive admiration
- Expect to be recognized as superior even without achievements that warrant it
- Exaggerate achievements and talents
- Be preoccupied with fantasies about success, power, brilliance, beauty or the perfect mate
- Believe they are superior and can only associate with equally special people
- Monopolize conversations and belittle or look down on people they perceive as inferior
- Expect special favors and unquestioning compliance with their expectations
- Take advantage of others to get what they want
- Have an inability or unwillingness to recognize the needs and feelings of others
- Be envious of others and believe others envy them
- Behave in an arrogant or haughty manner, coming across as conceited, boastful and pretentious
- Insist on having the best of everything — for instance, the best car or office
At the same time, people with narcissistic personality disorder have trouble handling anything they perceive as criticism, and they can:
- Become impatient or angry when they don't receive special treatment
- Have significant interpersonal problems and easily feel slighted
- React with rage or contempt and try to belittle the other person to make themselves appear superior
- Have difficulty regulating emotions and behavior
- Experience major problems dealing with stress and adapting to change
- Feel depressed and moody because they fall short of perfection
- Have secret feelings of insecurity, shame, vulnerability and humiliation
I think that sums up OT God very well even some NT adds up to that too.
I have specifically made bold what I think applies and underlined what I think really, really applies.
Not for 'adapting to change' God never has had to adapt to change so it can be assumed he'd panic when powerless to stop a change.
Created:
Posted in:
The way I see it, the mods are the swing votes and I know Supa is voting Wylted, so overall I think I lose this by a very slight margin.
I will simply have to let Wylted do his thing and unlike if I'd lost to Pie I can be very sure this will go wrong at some point. We'll see, that's all.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Fruit_Inspector
Since this is forums, not formal debate, I'm hesitant to put in the effort for an extensive case there.
How about you tell me which symptom(s) of narcisstic personality disorder that the Christian and Jewish God does not display in your opinion?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
LOL!!!!
I am sorry but this is funny/absurd for me.
So any fictional world where there are human-like entities that are superpowered is in fact racist?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
Well, to be clear, wizards and witches (though it's actually warlocks and witches with elements of sorcerer/sorceresses) are not technically human.
What you're saying is kind of ridiculous... Are you saying that X-men is racism too since they're above humans in ability? The only difference is the humans isolate and alienate them.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Personally I think we should do-away with RO's. If you can't handle the pressure of a debate forum, then leave
It is not the pressure of a debate forum, it is the distress caused by severe hostility from (and towards) another user.
Created:
-->
@Vader
there's literally no real difference, it's just wording you fixed.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Why do you disagree with my policy when you yourself have benefitted from the peace that ROs offer, in the past?
I can think of 2 people you had it with that you since have been peaceful with.
One is me.
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I'm calm. I also am right.
Do as you please and vote for 3RU7AL. 3RU7AL will get 4 votes maximum (MarkWebberFan, Athias, 3RU7AL if self-voting is allowed and yourself).
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Your vote can literally be the vote that matters. Wylted may literally win by 1 or I may win by 1.
Created:
Posted in:
They were goblins, not trolls. Troll is what Harry found in the school bathroom in Book/Movie 1 though.
Created:
As I speak the threads were dad for the last 3 hours, zero debates are in the challenge period. The site is close to ruin, because of over moderation and Rm's solution is to increase moderation. My priority is to fight the disease that is likely going to destroy this site, if nothing is done.
Yes, your anti-semitic, anti-black and severe conspiracy theory posts and threads tend to make people think this site is full of toxic lunatics. Then they don't sign up. Funny how that works, isn't it?
You're not even breaking rules so you're allowed to do that as you tactically word it all and then go 'oh I wonder why the site's dead, it's got to be overmoderation'.
Since the mods got rid of Mesmer and BrotherD, the religion forums have found a healthy lifestyle again and after the polytheist-witch scenario's been dealt with it will get even less toxic.
That's the real way to attract people to join the website, make it appear healthy to join in.
Created:
Not only am I a proven leader, but I am proven as a master persuader as well.
Evidence one should not take your word for things as you are so persuasive, yes?
Created:
I don't lose. It's up to the site to elect me though.
Yes you do, we all lose things, you just have delusions of grandeur.
Created:
When I lead, my team wins. Winn ING this election, makes the entire site my team.
No, just makes Pie and whoever else is your core support base your team if that analogy were to even work.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
What you said about the muggle vs pureblood dynamic is false, in fact the pure-blood enthusiasts were overly demonised even.
JK Rowling overly catered to people like you when actually the Malfoys weren't all that evil other than being pure-blood supremacist.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
This isn't 4chan, or anything close to that.
Well Wylted, Mesmer and BrotherD sure tried their best to make it become that way.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
How is it that we should fight back to that? Blasphemy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
You think the site hasn't appeared toxic?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I don't understand what exactly you mean and think that many onlookers to a website won't sign up if it appears to be very toxic.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Outside of that mod intervention should be extremely limited in all cases.
Do you agree that you don't mean extremely limited, you basically mean nonexistent?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I didn't accuse you of anything other than being unusually immune to the stresses that can come with severe online rivalry. Do you agree or disagree that you can't relate to people in long-term flamewars? If no, how do you believe we should deal with them, if yes, the same?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
The reason you don't empathise or see the analogy is that, perhaps to the benefit of your mental wellbeing, you never took a website like this serious enough for an interaction to genuinely affect you negatively.
You are an extremely resistant personality to jealousy, insecurity, anger and fear/anxiety. Those latter 4 emotions are part of what comes to play in a long-term rivalry on these websites but you are so severely disciplined that you never will open this website without already being mentally prepared for whatever shows up and being ready to stay emotionless as possible apart from a quick laugh.
Then you say 'everyone should be that tough' but that's just not how things work. I can't know for sure how or why you ended up so immune to the stresses that can occur in long-term toxicity but the main way I have noticed you achieve it is to enter with a mentality of 'this doesn't really matter, just say my piece and let the other talk'. Unless we can rewire everyone's brain to run like yours, there really are emotions at play and feelings at play that need to be accounted for.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
These debaters aren't acting out of instinct or self preservation when they argue with each other. This isn't survival. It's to protect their ego's. It's not our place to seperate them like children, or animals in your example.
How did you think our species evolved emotions and egos?
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I do not stand for forcing mods to overreact, that's never been my platform.
I stand for holding mods to a standard of listening to people when they complain or need help and are overreacting to someone.
Currently the mods only react when someone pesters them enough with reports and PMs. I seek to change that and make them more reactive, not necessarily by moderating alone but also by PMing back with less vagueness and more direct information to the people of what to do.
There is a huge difference between responding to someone 'we will not moderate this, it's not breaking any rules' or saying 'Block them, click the flags and react to them in these ways instead and we'll intervene if they still harass'.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
This is not after 1 argument, this is often what will happen when either 2 keep violating CoC against each other or one turns to the mods for help.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
We come back to the question of who decides what "Bullying" is. In your own example of two animals fighting each other, that is obviously reciprocal, not one "picking" on the other. These situations handle themselves.
While some grudges between animals are indeed 2-way, you generally find that one is more aggressive while the other is more reactionary. The reactionary one doesn't always get picked on unless it's in the 'space' of the other which can even mean several metres away.
It isn't healthy or good ownership to ignore this when/if it develops.
Typically the most shy and fearful creatures are, in practise as prone to violence as the most brutish and aggressive ones. This is because in practise both bully once they feel their area, food, attention-with-owner or anything like that has been invaded and disrespected. This can be akin to how an aggressive user on the website reacts to the presence of another in their thread.
There are indeed other solutions. In the link above it recommends giving a lot more toys (or as I suggested building more 'areas' to hide/be) so that they feel less conflict between each other over the same things in the same space.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Forcing someone not to interact with another person doesn't change anyone's ideas or enforce an atmosphere of intellectual or personal growth.
Yes it does when their interactions are the very things stunting those latter things. ROs are temporary, not permanent, generally speaking.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
The types of people I am describing are less debating more berating each other.
I have even been in such relationships with people in the past on here, I know first-hand that it's not easy to get out of if the other wishes to perpetuate it and you feel offended/chased-away
Created:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
I am not convinced you or wylted would be as neutral as Brutal in taking into account the facts of the case versus your personal beliefs about the accused's character and your personal or political agendas.
That is because neither Wylted nor myself has had a chance to prove neutrality in leadership, we never have been leaders on the website so far.
I would point out that both Wylted and I have shown shifts in approaches to mods though but that was also self-interest based in part for both of us so it doesn't really show neutrality.
I don't get how you expect 3RU7AL to be better with even less of a track record in any department. That user barely interacts with others in a social sense, the main supporter Athias has been a better spoken figure than 3RU7AL himself during this campaign.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Why do you disagree with my policy when you yourself have benefitted from the peace that ROs offer, in the past?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I mean if you continually smack your dog when it does something you don't like, yeah it will eventually stop doing that thing. When having heated clashing opinions on a debate site you get your hand slapped, why even stay on or participate on the site? Their interactions change because they fear reprimand, not because they suddenly had a change of heart or something. On the contrary I think letting people hash out their differences is more likely to get people to change their mind about another individual. Regardless I don't see why a moderator needs to interfere when the good ol' blocking feature is handy.
I actually think it's more akin to separating 2 animals with a grudge-relationship (or where one is bullying the other) and slowly making them eat near each other but with a protective, transparent barrier (or protective railed/cage-like barrier) between them. This shows them that they don't need to fight the other to remain sustained.
In the case of cats and rats, it's often wise to allow the timid one 'free' first and teach it to go for higher places. As in, you build things or buy things where it can climb. Then the more 'bully-like' one gets introduced later and doesn't feel that the timid one is invading its personal space in the ground arena and slowly won't mind even when it does.
This is more akin to what I recommend to do with people. I want two people with a grudge to feel fulfilled without clashing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I DO NOT ABUSE ANIMALS
That is it I have had enough of this.
I take a break now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
he would use his role to advise moderators not to act on things they normally would act on.
This sounds like being pro-neglect to me.
Perhaps you're seeing specifics where I'm not.
Do you really think that I am only pro-action btw? You don't think I'd push for more lenient punishment ever? I am all about gradual warnings and reform, you have twisted my platform out of context.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
If they are both engaging in toxic dispute and consentual to it, then why does it matter
You know the type 2 I describe, the one who is toxic in retaliation? Often they feel there is no outlet to save them other than being mean back.
Consensual flaming is borderline okay as long as it stay in the rules but just how consensual is it for the angry and reactionary one? If they agree to not interact with the other and vice versa, at least for 3 weeks, you will find both have developed habits of interaction that when you take the RO away, they can better interact around each other rather than into each other.
Think of it as social lubrication therapy.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
My take here really shouldn't be all that surprising. If wylted was out here campaigning for stricter moderation the only difference with this thread would be the title "Why you should not vote for Wylted."
He is pro-neglect, would you go as far as to agree to that?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
The end result of an RO is less communication and discussion. You seem to agree with me that drama shouldn't be bannable, so why are you such an enforcer of RO's if that's all two users arguing is, is just drama?
It's not at all just drama. No, no, no.
What you are referring to goes way beyond fun drama, it is about genuine relentless frustration, disdain, loathing even and just a genuinely grudge-based feeling for each user. It usually forms like this:
One is overall a 'ha he/she/they posted let's troll!'
The other is overall as 'omg, should I be scared to post? No! I should be brave... oh no! They're at it again ;-; why me always I just wanted to post here and have a normal discussion but they just come to troll me... LET ME SHOW THEM WHAT I'M MADE OF'
The reaction style of the latter fuels the former and it goes on and on and on.
Generally if both are the former type, they even enjoy each other's brutish ways. Also generally, if both are the latter type, after an initial clash or two they learn to back off each other as it's not in their nature to keep at it.
You can even call this my own theory of long-term flamewars, you need one in it for the lols and one in it for anguish at the people mocking them.
What becomes a problem is that often the sheer hostility of these 2 types when really at eachother's neck is so hostile that others in the thread become hostile or afraid to post themselves.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
Where you and I differ is I think if you werent the subject of your ban, you would have been okay with that ban on just about anyone else.
This is clever because it baits me to dig up my own past but go ahead.
List to me why I was banned here in late 2020 if you want to dig it up. You and I both know it's a series of serious abuse of context-twisting and rhetoric.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I didn't know Wylted's ban was based on a literal lie, I was not privy to the actual thread and had perhaps a bias to assume it was true but as president I would absolutely want to see the proof there, I can't prove this because I haven't had the chance to be it. It was a deleted thread, yes?
So, I did support his ban and assumed that not only that reason was true but that his other posting only furthered how toxic he was.
I believe Wylted is a very net-negative presence on the website, yes I do but I won't allow pure lies to be why anybody gets banned. I absolutely would demand the proof if I were President at the time of Wylted's ban. I don't know what else to tell you.
Created:
Posted in:
That even when covid's around and lockdown's abound, one post from Donald and mayhem is found.
Created:
Here your psychopathic tendencies are showing again, how come you always defending the aggressors?! We are talking about how to deal with a bad wife, through communication, then separation & silent treatment, then discipline - In order to salvage the marriage. & In case all fails, seeking outside help... But I'm curious, how do you personally deal with a vile wife?
So, 'bad wife' huh? And what is a good wife to do with a terrible husband in your fine religion?
Let's skip the part where you downplayed what strike meant or the amount of completely crap spousal treatment and emotional neglect involved in the 'silent treatement' stage, oh and refusing to sleep with her and talk to her as punishment? Can the wife do that to the man too if he is a bad husband, in your religion?
How did Muhammad treat women? How did his fine sidekick Khalid treat them?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I fundamentally dis-agree that restraining orders provide any sort of solution. Or that two useres who have a problem with the others opinion shouldn't be able to express dis-interest in the others opinion on a debate site. Mods have shown in the past that they don't know how to enforce restraining order punishment also. The supa 7 day ban for example was completely ridiculous, especially in light of the actual "offense" being a friendly interaction with the other party.
I have even lived through on-site ROs to know they are positive and have seen the positivity with other users who participated in them.
They don't always punish fairly (one was often worse than the other) but they get the end-result of reforming done very effectively.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I mean I am literally just using examples of things you have said and done one the website to substantiate this point. You are actually insinuating that I am opressing you or bullying you because I highlighted things you have said that show you don't have an active interest in freedom of speech on the site. How you view what is and isn't bullying is extremely relevant considering you have an active hand with moderation if elected. You are trying to manipulate yourself into being a victim again as we speak. You are proving more and more how dangerous you will be if you get this position.
I am not saying I'm a 'victim' of just you, not at all. I am saying this culture you want to push forth where everyone needs to tiptoe around daring to disengage a situation they feel is toxic (whether bullied or not) and blocking a user needs to live in fear that these disengagements and blocks can be used to smear them as a tyrant in the future.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
. If wylted, or someone else brings up an opinion that you find racist, sexist, or just offensive, you get to put your 2 cents in on how the moderation with such an instance is handled.
You want to get personal about Wylted or you want to make this about 'someone'?
I would say it depends on the posting (including previous posting) and situation but I know you'll call that an escape.
You want me to allow racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic and furthermore extremely personal and nasty abuse to a user to occur and turn a blind eye? Do you want me to say 'oh well done Wylted or other person, your presence on DART is net-positive?'
Where are you going with this? If the mods banned this user, there must have at least been one thing they did that they're able to take either in or out of context that can be seen as negative. This is even true for myself and I will need to at least see that one thing as true, I will then go through the rest of their reasoning for banning the user and have a lengthy discussion about if this user actually is net-positive for the website, perhaps reducing a sentence rather than completely vindicating them.
I can't prove to you how reasonable I'd be because I haven't had the chance to. I don't block the same as I ban this is false equivocation.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lunatic
I am sure that they will consider it. I am also sure people understand that the one who is really oppressing the other here is you.
You want me to live in 24/7 fear of ever disengaging a conversation I am in or blocking someone I don't like on a platform just in case I run for a position on DART and it gets used to shame and frame me as something I'm not.
There is a difference between me freely using my right to block and ignore you and me as a moderator advocating to punish you. If you don't see that difference and keep twisting words, then at least I said this much to negate your sophistry.
Created: