Announcement: New Infraction System and Revised Rules

Is calling a conservative white woman "ignorant" sexist or racist?

 

There seems to be some confusion on some peoples part, I never said we should not have discussions on racial issues, and with normal posters I have no problem discussing them. BUT, some of the threads that are started on this board and allowed to stand by yourself and the other mods even after being reported are obvious examples of flame baiting and trolling both of which are against your TOS. It is also telling that when I click on the Today's Posts there is racial thread after racial thread. I know it is your call on whether a thread is closed or not but from here it seems as if far too many are allowed to continue to run and to it reflects badly on this site. I can assure you it has resulted in a few people leaving and in others not joining. I know until things were to change for the better I would not recommend this site to others as I have in the past and am already looking for other options if things do not improve. We shall see if your plan works or not, heck you have had at least one poster post something to you on this thread that was a clear violation of the rules you have explained, so it seems the jury is out, we shall see what the next couple of weeks brings but I can assure your the mods are going to be very busy.

 

excellent point

how about for those who don't view homosexuals as a special race/species or gender and are continuously called "homophobes, bigots and haters" ?

 

I agree here. What the rule is doing is creating a Politically Correct bar. A very subjective one, which is reintroducing into the system what Management claims to be trying to eliminate. IMMHO, any group that voluntarily functions primarily as a group is open to group criticism. Whether it be ignorance, higher propensity fro criminality, cultural shortcomings, politics ............... the list goes on. One only need turn on the news and see folks voluntarily organizing by group, often advocating things worthy of massive criticism.

I agree with Shiva and the study data as well. That would be countered with studies that show that blacks indicate the highest levels of racism towards other ethnic or social groups (such as whites, homosexuals, etc), and commit hugely disproportionate amounts of crime compared to other groups.

Point being, look to the First Amendment, and not some Euro thought-police BS. Otherwise, such is just a power-grab by over-zealous Moderation.

 

Good grief... easy to see why all the mods quit.

There's an old saying, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Seems to be a LOT of fixes to a very popular forum. Gotta wonder about the motivation behind all this.

I'll stick around and give it a chance, but it sounds like we're moving from civil to politically correct and if that's the case, lots of folks will probably be moving on.

One question. .. will rightwingisafraud be forced to change his name? Wouldn't wanna hurt any right wingers feelings, now would we?

 

So we should play patty cake or act like an old ladies' sewing circle?

WORLD WIDE WIMP

We don't need no Netiquette Nannies
We don't need no thought control

Hey!
Web Wizard!
Whiz on the other side of the Wall

All in all, you're just
Another brick through our Window


Coming from our authority-loving society, you busybodies feel it's perfectly within your rights to censor according to your childish, sheltered, and conceited perspectives. Especially oppressive is this idea that we can't respond to insults. It is the same thing as the baby food your ilk is feeding the youngest generation, the Millennial Millies, indoctrinating them not to fight back but to run home and tell Mommy.

 

Nudity =/= Pornography/Obscenity

Does this imply that nudity, as long as it's not outright pornography (which is actually hard to define) is now acceptable on Political Forum? As noted it does have to relate to the thread but typically nudity was prohibited on Political Forum in the past.

Might I also propose that images that are specifically offensive such as gruesome images of dead bodies also be prohibited and that instead a link, with an appropriate warning, be used if they're necessary. Generally these images are used expressly for "shock" value but for some they can be highly emotional. For example I lived through war and I've seen far too many dead people that were mutilated beyond any possible description. It's not that I object to others understanding the real horrors of war that really should see these images but for hundreds of thousands of veterans that have served in combat these images have severe negative psychological effects on them.

I would request this prohibition out of compassion for my fellow veterans many of which suffer from PTSD because of war. Gruesome images of death are something that can be shown by a link when needed and don't have to be "in your face" on Political Forum. I've done this before when appropriate to the discussion out of consideration for others and don't believe it's an unreasonable request. We really don't need images where the sole purpose it to create "horror" for shock purposes directly posted on Political Forum Give the member a warning and provide a link to these images when they're appropriate. That's only being respectful of others.

 

What you are advocating is PC BS censorship. That criticism of black culture, and the black community in general, is somehow improper to the point of not being allowed. As already pointed out by many here, when a group organizes and acts as a group, they are fair game.

Somebody's gotta say it. Even if it offends liberal ears.

 

What if a persons religion says that another religion is XXXXX? Can you in good conscience remove the intended offense at other religions from the text itself, its overall message, or its interpretation?

Cause if religions get a pass, it will funnel hatred into religious context.

I firmly believe people should be offended. I wouldn't come here if I weren't offended every day.


These are not veiled threats I will leave, as if it has some influence on the boxes... I just make lots of broad hyperbolic statements. This is just kibitzing.

 

Top right, click your username. This takes you to your profile. In your profile should be several tabs with one named "infractions." I'm assuming all infractions, point values, and disciplinary actions will be available there.

 

Does this mean you all are gonna crack down on the horrid and chronic liberal trolls here? People are getting pretty tired of being called racist for no reason....

 

Agreed. The only fix needed was the point system, doing away with all the subjective banning that had been going on. That, and I'd like to see more effort against trolling. Should be simple, the post needs to address the topic, and not just a prior poster. Thread bans work wonders in such cases.

 

Thanks. Bear explained that the site standards will be posted somewhere as well, so someone will know when they are getting closer to the line of being banned.

 

All this upheaval and the need for new rules....it's Fife's fault.






.

 

Of note, while not released by the original news story addressing the 2012 study on racial prejudice, a subsequent story that reviewed the results of that study found that 40% of African-Americans also expressed explicit anti-black racial prejudice. An interesting fact that also remains undisputed.

I agree that we don't want to move towards a European Thought-Police process and should let the "facts presented" be addressed by rebuttal with "contracting facts" by other members. Let the "facts" dispute each other as opposed to some third party trying to state "this is true and this is false" because no one can do that.

I'm pretty smart but I would never want to be delegated with the responsibility of being the Truth Police. That's way above my pay grade.

 

Mmmmm that is a deal breaker for me...

All in all though, I'm not too happy with these changes and from the rumors I've been hearing about what's going on around here I'm not likely to stick around. Rather silly that a few people have made complaints and threatened to withhold donations if the forums doesn't head in a direction they want it to.

You also can't have a fair game when the referee is in the bag for the blue team.

Let me know when everyone gets tired of having a left winger circle jerk and wants someone to argue with. The forum won't survive if it's one sided.

I'll look for another forum to post in until these rules change.

 

People are rarely called racists for no reason. For instance, I've never been called a racist to my knowledge. So if someone is getting "pretty tired of being called a racist," they are probably doing/saying something racist.

 

Correct, but then again some don't like it even when they label themselves through their own words, go figure.
It should be interesting to watch to see if these changes will do any good or not, I know on other sites that have similar rules it does some good, but sometimes the shear number of new extremists joining is enough to drive off those that are interested in real discussions and that is the end of the site as it was.
I expect the worst and hope for the best.

 

Not necessarily. I've seen people on here talk candidly about what they see in their own communities.....just a description of what they see and witness....and they get called racist for it.

 

The belief that the prior tempbans and permabans were "subjective" is fundamentally false. I don't know if I'm allowed to discuss the process used previously because as a former staff member I'm not allowed to discuss the "behind the scenes" activities of Political Forum. Perhaps Winter Bear will allow me to discuss the previous tempban and permaban process and if so, I can demonsrtate, that it wasn't all that subjective.

Once again I'll present the new process for review to highlight the problems with it because its far more arbitrary than the prior process.

The first issue is "Each infraction has a certain point value" but what is that? One point is that not all infractions are equal. For example a member could receive an infraction for calling someone an idiot (i.e. personal insult) while another member could make a long post containing numerous insults, flamebaiting, profanity, ect., all of which results in just one infraction. There is a huge difference between the two violations. The critieria for "each infraction has a certain point value" is not defined. If it's based upon the type of infraction, for example all Personal Insults result in the same point value, then the two posts are not comparable if both receive an infraction for a "personal insult" where one has a single insult while the other has numerous insults as well as other violations.

As I've noted previously this doesn't work unless all posts that violate the Forum Rules are addressed by the staff. There will always be those that violate the Forum Rules more than others but that don't have as many of their posts reviewed where an infraction will be issued. Yes, over time they will probably be caught but in the meantime a "better" member is banned while the "worst" member continues to get away with violating the Forum Rules. It becomes highly arbitrary from an "enforcement" standpoint.

As also noted this creates "member bias" in the moderation as the "minority" will always have more of their posts Reported than the "majority" so we'll see more "minority" opinion members being banned than "majority" opinion members being banned.

The only way a "points system" works is if ever post is reviewed and infractions are issued, with an appropriate "value" assigned based upon the severity of the infraction as opposed to the classification of the infraction, or it results in a very arbitrary method of banning. From a "moderation" standpoint the "points system" removes the discretionary role of moderators that has traditionally been used to protect, as opposed to persecute, members of Political Forum.

There will be no protection for the members of Political Forum and the only recourse for members will be to appeal every single infraction and to do that they need to know what arguments are legitimate in obtaining a judgment in their favor. If they let a questionable infraction stand it can very well lead to their temporary or permanent ban because the staff will not be reviewing the infractions after the fact like they have done in the past because the "points system" doesn't allow them discretionary authority when it comes to member banning.

 

But some people are genuinely racist on PF. Is it okay to call those people racist?

If I for example say something like 'I hate non-white people because of their race and view them as inferior and would prefer to see a world with only white people. BUT, I'm not a racist', would it be an insult to call me a racist?