You’ve never even hinted at all the leeway you’ve given me.
I think you must exist in a parallel yet different universe. In this universe I have no idea - zip, zero, nada - how I even came close to being banned by you, twice.
Back this up.
Scroll up. I’m not your google.
Also, “never even hinted”?
If you’re going to make accusations, you better have the evidence to back it up.
lol. Oh you mean your royal leeway.
I got it, your highness. 
I prefer your modjesty, thank you
C’mon. It was right there.
I would still encourage the moderator to specify, in the title, the A&E threads where politics are a no-go of such toxicity that further words are at the behest of royal leeway and will result in verging on being banned.
Putting it in the title is easy to do, it’s fair, and it will help us all walk without breaking eggs around here.
For example, imo you should add a warning in all the MCU threads. It would seem apt. 
It’s already specified in the descriptor what A&E is for. You have a politics forum welcoming you. Go there for that.
If you want to lie to yourself about the ban to make your sulking easier, do it elsewhere (namely feedback, if you have an actual legitimate claim that isn’t pulled out of your 
).
1 Like
Please edit the title of that thread. I know it’s hard to see from your lofty perch, but labelling the discussion there as “yap” would put you on the verge of being banned in other parts of forumosa.
@Mick, sorry. Your highness has some light work for you to do.
I’m good. Go ask Mick (it’s his purview now)
Then please make your rule changes explicit. You should do this in the FAQ (not updated since forever), and imho you should add text like that in Events, where this text is displayed in the header of every thread.
Negative commentary isn’t welcome in the Events Arts & Entertainment forums. You are welcome to post criticism in other appropriate forums. Respectful questions are welcome. If anything seems amiss, please flag the post.
If you refuse to make this change, then please indicate in a thread’s title that you will not tolerate certain opinions to be expressed. It would be very useful if you would indicate in the title what you have in mind, so that we users can avoid personal attacks by you and/or having our comments trashed or moved.
As things stand, it appears that the A&E forum at one time supported open discussion. Going on this sticky still up today, that is. In my opinion, you should update the following text as well.
The idea that my opinion about Captain Marvel is invalid and instantly temped is simply a ploy to deplatform opposing viewpoints, namely mine.
In no universe is it necessary to actually watch a move to have and to express an opinion about it. If it were a necessary condition then nobody would have any reason at all to go watch or abstain from watching. Rotten Tomatoes would be out of business (not to mention Hollywood) if the only opinions judged valid are those opinions formed after seeing the movie.
CM may be an ok movie, but (evidently) it’s not selling toys like Wonder Woman nor is it selling comic books for DC. It has BO numbers to support that it’s no dud, but viewership alone is not the financial metric for a successful superhero movie.
Certainly it’s a movie that requires a great number of people to defend it. And certainly if you’ve looked at it - and then decided not to watch it - your opinion about this particular movie is not welcome - even in Taiwan.
That is, my opinion is not welcome. Based on my experience, I’m sure that if you like CM or the MCU then your opinion is welcome, though.
In fact, after some back and forth with the moderators today, I’m going to stop posting in A&E altogether. I felt like I was personally attacked when I posted my opinion on CM. And as I’ve explained above I believe that my not having seen CM is not a valid reason to attack me personally and temp post after post I make there. Administration is not on my side, however, so in order to avoid unfair and personal attacks it’s just best for me to back away.
I’ve enjoyed posting music and reviews, but it simply isn’t worth being randomly maligned by the moderator there.
Best, all.
2 Likes
It seems like a reasonable enough condition to me in that forum. Note from our rules: “Decisions about content are ultimately made by that forum’s moderator(s), who have paramount authority in their respective forums.” We ask people to respect moderator decisions after they’ve been duly informed, which you have been. From what I’ve seen you weren’t attacked personally.
As you know, I strongly disagree.
Like I said earlier, it’s your website.
Why?
Hollywood has been extremely political lately and very very one sided. Chris Evans and many many other actors have been very vocal about their political stance or rather their disdain for trump and trump supporters. They’ve been having 2 trump bashing award shows the last 2 years where they clap for each other while having guns and fenses blocking out the common people while wearing 50k outfits. It’s perfectly fine they voice their political opinions but guess what, a lot of people have different political opinions they insult and look down on. Just don’t expect there be no consequences. And they are just getting used to the reality that they aren’t that powerful and they live of the dollar of these people they hate and insult. They’re pushing a product, no one has to buy it even for a franchise like marvel. So they don’t get mad if the people involved are making bad PR moves and their image is that, that’s on them.
Also not the first time Disney is accused of taking a beloved IP and making it PC/SJ.
Bre Larson has openly said there is intersectional feminism and the movie was her “form of activism” so even she says so. Plus her comment about her past movie not being for white men and she doesn’t want their opinions on it. Which is fine if you’re also ok if she said a particular movie wasn’t for the color of your skin and the gender you’re born to but I suspect most of you would go crazy if someone said this movie wasn’t for anyone other group besides white men. It’s not hard to see white men being attacked daily today for no other reason than being white and men. I am not a white man but I would take equal offense if someone said this movie wasn’t made for asian men and they don’t want my reviews so I’m not going to support such a statement.
Then we see rotten tomatoes remove the if people are excited to watch the movie rating. It’s one thing to remove “troll” reviews for the actual movie but we will get to that later. Although rotten tomatoes didn’t come out and openly say they removed it for this reason, it doesn’t take a genius to guess since the movie was getting bombed. It seems entirely reasonable to voice you’re not excited to watch the movie, you don’t have to watch it to say that. Now the troll posts removal, idk how they determine what is a troll review. How do you know if I did see it and didn’t like it? It’s evident they really don’t want this movie to fail. There’s been plenty of other movies to bomb and I don’t see all these people trying to keep it going. This to me is borderline censorship.
And even in our own forum, @bojack voiced his opinions and he gets temped. We have a lot of discussions, we have disagreements and opposing views. Things don’t get tempted unless for example they are completely off topic and what he posted was completely on topic. Just voicing his views that may or may be incorrect according to whatever numbers. Even when people are completely wrong, I don’t see people getting tempted for being wrong.
Also every media outlet that’s been pushing that particular ideology not only reports on this issue. Many of them actually call on movie goers to watch it to counter the bad publicity. There’s been so many movie reviews in the AE section. Some better than others and I’ve yet to see the fight back on any of them.
It does seem political to me. It does seem like there is a large group of people who will not let this fail for basically bad publicity that’s entirely on the people involved in the movie. You can’t blame people for having a bad image on your product.
2 Likes
You keep using that phrase, and you cite two particular quotes I’ve used. Tempo (along with many) have also repeatedly agreed that it far from constitutes as a “personal attack.” Ok, at the risk of being redundant, let’s break that down:
Particularly obvious to everyone that you have not just a disdain, but a “flaaaaming” one, considering how much you hover around the topic that, if you honestly didn’t have such burning ℰℳÕ𝒯𝓲õ𝒩𝓢 for it, then
- why hover, and then weeks later,
- re-stoke issues on that same content?
Again, I’m going to quote myself:
I get it, sometimes personal issues are tender and sensitive to you, and you may not want to share every detail. But if you’re gonna be so blatant and loud about it, and drag everyone else along with your crusade, then best provide some good reasons for that behavior.
So now, your favorite quote to source from me:
You’ve been given many opportunities to explain your intents, and to explain from what angle you’re slicing the issues you’ve repeatedly claimed to want to truly discuss. We have been more than generous in our attempts to try to gauge your POV, especially as they relate to the topic you’ve posted under. You have chosen to repeatedly ignore them. Not to mention how much data, and sources, and counter-assessments you’ve chosen to ignore – in favor of engaging in selective ignorance, and unleashing repetitive, unilateral tantrums. Certainly looks like an accurate assessment of your behavior. If anything, at this point it feels even too mild and underestimation of an assessment.
Also looks like someone loves to whine about it when they get called out on their B.S.
And that there, dear Mr. 0409, is the key.
We have an International Politics forum. It is my carefully considered opinion that @Mick would not object to a polite discussion of the political side of Hollywood (which is not as new as you seem to think) in his forum.
I basically ban discussions of Taiwan/ROC identity from Legal, not because I think the issue should not be discussed, but because I believe Taiwan Politics is the place for that kind of discussion.
If a discussion that starts out political in nature becomes more religious in nature, Mick may split it to Religion, and so on.
Is it acceptable to allude to political matters outside of the Politics forums? Yes. But most of us moderators haven’t committed to spending our time and energy moderating outright political discussions, which have an unfortunate tendency to degenerate into tedious rants and flame wars. Online discussions in general are susceptible to that sort of thing, but political discussions more so, and especially nowadays. @Rockefeller would rather deal with a discussion about the artistic aspects of a film, I would rather deal with a discussion about the technical details of a law, and so on.
Does that make enough sense?
2 Likes
I don’t particularly care what you or Tempo think. Your attacks are personal, and you’ve doubled down on them here. Grow a pair and own it.
Politics have become intertwined ( is that a word? ) with the Entertainment industry . Film and TV constantly portray an agenda . That is indisputable. I think it becomes rather difficult to expect those whom disagree with that agenda , to not be allowed to say that . Yes , I get the rules , but the content and quality of Film is being eroded perhaps ? I think the odd point in highlighting ones view is ok . Providing the thread does not continue on that vein for long . . How the content is produced is relevant… to a degree .i choose to stay away from it most of the time