[quote=“Feiren”]I’ve split the discussion of Chinese relations with the Vatican to the international politics forum. Please discuss that issue there unless what you have to say directly bears on Chen’s trip to the Vatican.
Zeugmite: I’m going to start deleting your posts if you can’t stay on topic and discuss this issue without veiled insults, trolling, and slurs. I let your comment about papists a few pags back slide, but I’m not inclined to be tolerant anymore.[/quote]
I disagree with this characterization. If you are even a little bit honest, you will agree that the off-topic turn was taken by He in the post on “You don’t get it, diplomatic relationship is with billions of Catholics, blah blah” not on my post answering about “two Chinas” as it relates to CSB’s trip.
Also please point out what are the veiled insults, trolling, and slurs as they apply to that thread, so I can know what you consider to be such.
And I resent the insinuation that I made some unacceptable comments about papists “a few pages back.” You must have me confused with somebody else. I made only one post in that thread “a few pages back” and it was about CSB.
[quote=“Feiren”]I’ve split the discussion of Chinese relations with the Vatican to the international politics forum. Please discuss that issue there unless what you have to say directly bears on Chen’s trip to the Vatican.
Zeugmite: I’m going to start deleting your posts if you can’t stay on topic and discuss this issue without veiled insults, trolling, and slurs. I let your comment about papists a few pags back slide, but I’m not inclined to be tolerant anymore.[/quote]
[/quote]
After reading the thread I would only observe that
a) more posters in the thread should have received a message of: I’m going to start deleting your posts if you can’t stay on topic and discuss this issue
b) allowing overt, derisive terms such as ‘papist’ to slide, while publicly attacking going off topic and “veiled insults” is, in my opinion a real lapse of judgement. Papist?
There should be no room for that here.
Interesting, political bias profiling as a moderator and acting upon it. Haven’t we flogged this issue enough with the IP folks?
I agree with OOC that a lot of people need to be told to stay on topic in TP (just as in IP). I hope you told others that. Application of the rules as consistently across the board is critical to healthy political/cultural forums. When they’re not, Feedback gets a lot of activity which helps no one.
It’s not just the off topic comment (and let me say it was off topic, I acknowledge it, but it wasn’t started by me any way you look at it; and many participated, but only I was singled out for the named “lesson”), it’s the entire “veiled insults” “trolling” “slurs” spiel which I believe is him projecting any past experience he had onto the current thread and me. This is profiling, too. So unprofessional for a moderator. The whole attitude, too.
Well, there’s the “It probably means even more to CSB’s vanity more than anything he is supposed to represent,” “Maybe he’s trying to show he is now ‘genuine’ about getting good straits relations. Naaaah,” “He should have no time to grin when he is busy making sad faces to appear to grieve for the late Pope. LOL,” all of which seem like trolling - ie posting negatively basically fishing for a reaction - and close to, if not dead on, being slurs.
. <-------- world’s smallest violin, playing just for you.
Bullshit. I will apply the “Communist” test. What’s the “Communist” test? Replace the offending party with a “Communist” equivalent and see if you still feel such things will be singled out.
“It probably means even more to Hu’s vanity more than anything he is supposed to represent,”
“Maybe Kim Jong Il’s trying to show he is now ‘genuine’ about getting good international relations. Naaaah,”
“Li Peng should have no time to grin when he is busy making sad faces to appear to grieve for the late Deng. LOL,”
You believe these three will cause even a blip on any mod’s radar? Double bullshit. Such are the standards.
Well, there’s the “It probably means even more to CSB’s vanity more than anything he is supposed to represent,” “Maybe he’s trying to show he is now ‘genuine’ about getting good straits relations. Naaaah,” “He should have no time to grin when he is busy making sad faces to appear to grieve for the late Pope. LOL,” all of which seem like trolling - ie posting negatively basically fishing for a reaction - and close to, if not dead on, being slurs.
. <-------- world’s smallest violin, playing just for you.[/quote]
OK, so what is the difference between Zeugmite’s “trolling” and this post in the same thread:
[quote=“I”]
cmdjing wrote:
Saving 1.3 billion souls obviouslly has more appeal than a mere 20 million. The papists know their role
Nah, damn 'em all to hell’s inferno. They’ll have to add a tenth to Dante’s nine levels in order to have a special spot just for the bastards fingering the buttons on the missiles in Fujian. [/quote]
In my opinion, some of Zeugmite’s statements lack taste, but that is nothing to warrant threats of censorship.
[quote=“zeugmite”]Bullshit. I will apply the “Communist” test. What’s the “Communist” test? Replace the offending party with a “Communist” equivalent and see if you still feel such things will be singled out.
“It probably means even more to Hu’s vanity more than anything he is supposed to represent,”
“Maybe Kim Jong Il’s trying to show he is now ‘genuine’ about getting good international relations. Naaaah,”
“Li Peng should have no time to grin when he is busy making sad faces to appear to grieve for the late Deng. LOL,”
You believe these three will cause even a blip on any mod’s radar? Double bullshit. Such are the standards.[/quote]
Two different issues mate, stop trying to cloud things. I think those comments would deserve moderation too, but I’m not a moderator. They’d be trolling if used in a pro-China context solely for the response they’d get - which rules them out as being considered trolling here - but they’re still bordering on slurs, just like your comments were.
You can cry double standard all you want, but trolling is by definition dependent on the biases of the forum in which you’re posting, and you know very well the biases here, and the comments I quoted were quite obviously deliberately designed and posted to get a rise out of people, hence, you were trolling.
And Jive Turkey - you quite clearly misunderstand the definition of trolling.
[quote]An Internet troll is either a person who sends messages on the Internet hoping to entice other users into angry or fruitless responses, or a message sent with such content.[/quote]Given the overwhelming bias of Forumosa away from the Communists rather than toward them, I don’t see how that reply could be considered trolling. cmndjing’s one should probably be considered a troll as well. But he’s not the one complaining in this thread, is he, so I addressed zeugmite’s complaint.
Irrelevant to the current issue under discussion. The issue is the uneven application of the rules based on (a perceived) political bias. This seems to lead toward censorship. When you can’t shut them up, or shout them down, you ban them. Simple and effective.[/quote]
Yes, it is relevant to the issue. And who said anything about a ban? So your Red Herring should not be here. But I do know where you can put it.
The issue is how moderation based on political biases is being applied unevenly. That as Jive Turkey states is censorious. That’s not a good thing. We’ve been through this with IP. The difference with IP is that people don’t get banned over there. TP is a bit different. You can get banned for what you say and how you say it. zeugmite’s next on the hit list. The only thing saving cmdjing from banning is the fact that he doesn’t post much. If he posted as much as either AC or zeugmite here, he’d be gone too.
[quote=“Yellow Cartman”]
zeugmite’s next on the hit list. The only thing saving cmdjing from banning is the fact that he doesn’t post much. If he posted as much as either AC or zeugmite here, he’d be gone too.[/quote]
There is no “hit list” and your reference to one is both misleading and insulting to this site.
[quote=“Durins Bane”][quote=“Yellow Cartman”]
zeugmite’s next on the hit list. The only thing saving cmdjing from banning is the fact that he doesn’t post much. If he posted as much as either AC or zeugmite here, he’d be gone too.[/quote]
There is no “hit list” and your reference to one is both misleading and insulting to this site.[/quote]
No you’re not a reader of TP are you? If you were, you’d know the palpable dislike between the camps of TP posters that is carried out on a post-by-post basis and in the mod forums.
[quote]Description of Red Herring
A Red Herring is a fallacy in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue. The basic idea is to “win” an argument by leading attention away from the argument and to another topic. This sort of “reasoning” has the following form:
Topic A is under discussion.
Topic B is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
Topic A is abandoned.
This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious because merely changing the topic of discussion hardly counts as an argument against a claim.[/quote]
[quote=“Yellow Cartman”][quote=“Durins Bane”][quote=“Yellow Cartman”]
zeugmite’s next on the hit list. The only thing saving cmdjing from banning is the fact that he doesn’t post much. If he posted as much as either AC or zeugmite here, he’d be gone too.[/quote]
There is no “hit list” and your reference to one is both misleading and insulting to this site.[/quote]
No you’re not a reader of TP are you? If you were, you’d know the palpable dislike between the camps of TP posters that is carried out on a post-by-post basis and in the mod forums.[/quote]
Actually I do read the posts and I am fully aware of the feelings that run through the TP forum. But you have insinuated that there is some sort of conspiracy (ie: hit list) and I’m only saying that you are wrong. Like as in way…way…wrong.
There are discussions in the mod forums about TP…there are also discussions about just about every other forum also.
[quote=“Tetsuo”]
You can cry double standard all you want, but trolling is by definition dependent on the biases of the forum in which you’re posting, and you know very well the biases here, and the comments I quoted were quite obviously deliberately designed and posted to get a rise out of people, hence, you were trolling.
And Jive Turkey - you quite clearly misunderstand the definition of trolling.
Wrong. Clearly the rules define trolling based on intent, which may be measured through actual reception, but is never defined relative to the perceived biases of a forum – there is just no such thing – I can’t even believe you forwarded that ridiculous idea. What am I supposed to do? Go with the flow?
Intent: I never intended to “get a rise” out of anybody or to entice others into angry or fruitless response. In fact, even a CSB personality cult worshipper could find some truth in those statements, and most are not.
Reception: The reception is clearly not angry or fruitless.
