3 Likes
How about how do they cause harm here?
1 Like
But what are we going to do? Censor ideas and wrong thought?
I agree they may be wrong, but I also think it’s wrong to censor them and not effective. It just drives the idea underground. It’s why I’m in far left and far right groups. It’s interesting to see what they’re thinking so I understand them better.
3 Likes
This particular post was in reference to conspiracy theories.
IMO when you state that because someone doesn’t believe what you do then they are not a good person, condone murder, not a good parent etc. Those statements do cause real harm.
They are offensive to the person they are addressed to. They are not a good example for new posters. And they are an attempt to shutdown debate by publicly shaming.
I don’t think I need to post examples of that as it was just over the last few days.
1 Like
I don’t advocate for censoring ideas at all but rather I think it’s upon us the content creators to call it out.
However, when it comes to debates getting personal then I think that needs to be addressed. Posts should be removed and posters should be warned. That goes for myself too.
4 Likes
OK, so constant gaslighting is OK though…shocker. 
What do you mean by that? Are you saying I am gaslighting in the above statement or that I do it all the time in other statements?
I agree.
I also agree. And for the most part, they are.
1 Like
Maybe jumping to conclusions should be included or excluded as well?
Move things not properly sourced into a conspiracy theory thread.
Not flat opinions, but when someone says something is a thing, then posts a tweet with no supporting data or evidence for that thing, for example, it should be moved.
It’s a technique employed by disinformation spreaders in an attempt to be taken more seriously. Adding links that only support their narrative without evidence, that at a glance might be thought of as an actual source, when rather it’s just propaganda/unsourced.
Then often when called out on it, you get the ‘I dunno if it’s true I just saw it online’ feigned innocence deal.
That’s why stuff like it should be moved.
1 Like
I would hope so. I try to think the best of people but initially there did seem like a bit of a right leaning bias in moderation in the IP forum.
I don’t know their offenses but why is it that “R” is still here and Homer is banned? I didnt read everything they have posted, but from what I have read does look like bias on the surface.
He is not. He left on his own free will as far as I know.
Included or excluded from what? That was a genuine question and not an attempt to bait you. If you think I’m gaslighting, I’d like to know why. I do not shy away from self improvement.
Personal attacks are a clear line for me. Gaslighting is subjective, but I’d still be interested to hear your opinion.
I got an instant, marked as indefinite ban once for not even levying a personal attack once, in a playful exchange in which the guy being teased even admitted they weren’t bothered by it. They certainly didn’t complain about it.
And not even preceded by a warning, or discussion, and I’d never been actually warned on the site before. It was reversed, but the lack of consistency has been made painfully obvious.
Someone started an actual thread trying to rally the board against me, no ban for them though.
Meanwhile I get accused of defending illegal, disgusting things, and it’s radio silence. Once a cartoon character did this to me, I didn’t flag it, but still it was interesting to see how quickly I was moved on, while the inadequate person attacking me went unnoticed. This was after a long debate which was relatively normal, until they flipped the indecent switch on.
Yesterday got the same thing (there wasn’t even a conversation leading up, just a random attack) I flagged it, and was actually asked by the mod to deny I defend these disgusting accusations, first.
All facts. 
3 Likes
go to reddit if you want a leftist echo chamber
2 Likes
I think everyone just wants a place with consistently applied rules, and sourced claims. It’s not a political thing.
1 Like
I agree except OP purposefully doesn’t mention both sides, which I have seen on here so I don’t understand their issue
1 Like
I am happy to act as moderator for such a site, but the workload involved would require me to charge a dollar a post (from the poster). And that’s a US dollar, not NTD.
2 Likes
As an observer, IMO it’s not a both sides thing problem here. This site has been inundated by a specific ideology being spammed and bumped for years now. Posts without sourcing, posts off-topic, posts clearly designed to bump some topics to the top, or things off the page. And quite a bit of trolling/baiting effort on top of this sundae.
I’ve been observing it for years, and have even pointed it out to admin long before now.
It’s not my site and I would never want to mod this mess, but to the average visitor, I think it looks like an ideological echo chamber.
Maybe the site runners are fine with this, I have no idea. I’ve tried to give my two cents in an attempt to give some guidance as to how to avoid this perception. But I truly believe a lot of people looking at these forums for the first time will auto nope the F out from a first glance of the front page.
3 Likes
I had a very similar experience but won’t go into the details.