NationStates Jolt Archive

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=587131

Sure, he may have some information, but from his own words, I don't see any other purpose for the thread other than trolling.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t+587131

Obama Declares War on Veterans!

I want to know why this thread was closed. It might be seen as trollish, but it does discuss a valid political issue.

Alternatively, would it be acceptable for me or some other individual to open a new thread on the topic?

Mandatory 24 hour cool down (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14613139&postcount=17).

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t+587131



I want to know why this thread was closed. It might be seen as trollish, but it does discuss a valid political issue.

Alternatively, would it be acceptable for me or some other individual to open a new thread on the topic?

I closed it as a pre-emptive tactic while I went through. Provided you avoid the same trollish actions of NM, then yes.

God forbid you dare question General Secretary Obama on his most wise decisions! The fucking liberals would have a god damn fit!

That was OBVIOUSLY a political gesture on the part of Kryozerkia. Definitely wanting to close out anything anti-Obama. He should be ashamed at the OBVIOUS anti-conservative censorship.

Edit: I closed it as a pre-emptive tactic while I went through. Provided you avoid the same trollish actions of the OP, then yes.

Basically daring to question Barrack Obama?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14613139&postcount=17

A 24 hour ban for expressing his opinion? I admit it was over the top and trollish, but it was an interesting article and could have been the start of a great debate. NM was angry about this, and expressed his feelings in such a way. However, he didn't swear or insult anybody. I'd like someone to clarify this. Thanks.

I don't spend a lot of time in General, primarily because its habitues seem so fond of insulting each other so vehemently, and of course it's not a role play so its personal.

It shocks me that Wanderjar would bring that attitude in to Moderation and seems to want to insult Kryozerkia for closing a thread which seemed to have been created purely to encourage unpleasant exchange of mutual contempt.

God forbid you dare question General Secretary Obama on his most wise decisions! The fucking liberals would have a god damn fit!

That was OBVIOUSLY a political gesture on the part of Kryozerkia. Definitely wanting to close out anything anti-Obama. He should be ashamed at the OBVIOUS anti-conservative censorship.

Edit:

Basically daring to question Barrack Obama?

No, by being an asshole about it; in other words, trolling. There are two ways of starting a conversation and trolling is not the way to do it. If you started off by demonstrating through quoting and a comment that is designed to provoke civil debate then it would be fine. My job is to prevent trolling. I am allowing the thread to be re-created, but I won't open a closed one because trolling has an inflammatory affect.

As for it being a political gesture, I could care less about the nature of the discussion. I only care if the inherent purpose is to flame, flamebait, troll/bait etc...

You're perfectly free to ignore the fact that I gave permission for another user to reopen it provided they remained within the confines of the rules, which is to say, do not troll. Period.

Yeah, it seems a little on the draconian side to me too.

Either way, we can still have the debate. I've just reposted a hopefully less trollish version of the topic.

NM has a long record and I had let him off for something else, only to find that thread. It was more than the first post I took into account.

Now then, I've made my decision. I will lock this if people do not cease and desist in playing "pile on the mod". You may hate my choice, but if I let it slide, it's my experience that allowing trolling to go unwarned or even warned with little action that it will snow-ball.

The Romulan Republic, it is definitely not trollish at all. Your wording made a difference. I look forward to reading the debate.

I did worse than that and I didn't get what he got.

NM has a long record

Just out of curiosity, how many times has he been banned already?

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14613139&postcount=17

A 24 hour ban for expressing his opinion?
Havn't looked at the rest of the current threads in Moderation I take it.

However, he didn't swear or insult anybody. I'd like someone to clarify this. Thanks.

That's why it was trolling, not flaming.

God forbid you dare question General Secretary Obama on his most wise decisions! The fucking liberals would have a god damn fit!

That was OBVIOUSLY a political gesture on the part of Kryozerkia. Definitely wanting to close out anything anti-Obama. He should be ashamed at the OBVIOUS anti-conservative censorship.

Edit:

Basically daring to question Barrack Obama?
I closed it as a pre-emptive tactic while I went through. Provided you avoid the same trollish actions of NM, then yes.

Reading is your friend, kiddo.

God forbid you dare question General Secretary Obama on his most wise decisions! The fucking liberals would have a god damn fit!

That was OBVIOUSLY a political gesture on the part of Kryozerkia. Definitely wanting to close out anything anti-Obama. He should be ashamed at the OBVIOUS anti-conservative censorship.

Edit:

Basically daring to question Barrack Obama?
Wanderjar, step down. New Mitanni can post anti-Obama threads once he learns to be civil about it and not flamebait with terms like "The dark lord".

Shame on you for not understanding the difference between "discussing" and "namecalling."

I did worse than that and I didn't get what he got.

I'm no moderator, but I can say that a user's posting history plays an important role in this.

If NM didn't have a history of flaming/flamebaiting/trolling/whatever infraction, he likely wouldn't have gotten anything more than perhaps a red card at worst. Perhaps he might have gotten a yellow card if he were a model citizen.

If NM had titled a thread to the effect that Obama's policies toward veterans constitutes breaking a campaign promise and his wording encouraged open debate on the subject, the thread likely would not have been locked.

However, neither of the hypotheticals I raised above are the case, based on what little I've seen. Thus, this is the right ruling in my opinion.

Wanderjar, step down. New Mitanni can post anti-Obama threads once he learns to be civil about it and not flamebait with terms like "The dark lord".

Shame on you for not understanding the difference between "discussing" and "namecalling."



To be fair, I hope we dont plan on considering NM calling "The Dark Lord" trolling. Its irritating and childish, but in the interest of fairness, after years of everyone calling Bush "shrubs" Id think it would be a bit inconsistant to give a poster a yellow card every time he called Obama "the dark lord".

To be fair, I hope we dont plan on considering NM calling "The Dark Lord" trolling. Its irritating and childish, but in the interest of fairness, after years of everyone calling Bush "shrubs" Id think it would be a bit inconsistant to give a poster a yellow card every time he called Obama "the dark lord".

There's a hint of something rather obnoxious about calling a black president "The Dark Lord" which I think calling Bush "shrubs" doesn't quite contain. But that's purely my opinion and I should probably shut up anyway...

Now, if Caribou Barbie and John McPain had outpolled the Dark Lord, then Hellary wouldn't be Foreign Minister and Shrub's Australian mate Little Johnnie would still have a place to stay when he visits, maybe even raise a glass with Dick Shamey while they rubbish Johnnie's replacement, Ruddy Kevin ...

KoL, mods've let this sort of thing pass because we can actually tell the difference between a passing dig and determined, deliberate, sustained trolling. I don't think you need worry on NM's behalf.

Not about that, anyway.

Kat i love you, your always fair but I disagree, if people were alloud to use terms such as King George. Or Bushavic, a name put at me a couple times, with no moderation, than Obama should be just as open. Bush and Cheny were openly refered to as the Emperor and Vader numerous times. Big Brother was also a name that got kicked around in regards to the patriot act.

If NM wants to call Obama the Dark Lord he should be more than welcome to after the 4 years or so that us Conseratives had to put up with Now Nm's post was very emotional, thats fair, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it flaming or trolling. He started his own thread, no one is required to look at the thread or post. If he had come into a thread, that was being a well thought out debate and interupted it with this than yeah that could be construed as a deliberate open troll. But to quote Haikoku 2 "all US troops should be forced to stay in Iraq until they learn how to bring all the innocent Iraqis murdered back to life." and so on and so forth

Now this thread was aloud to go on for pages and was never modded. but its along the same lines. An obvious lefted slant opinion.

Nm posted a pretty anti left thread, and in no less than 5 minutes it was posted to the mods. I have to agree with wanderjar that a double standard here seems to be existant on NSG.

Tarsonis Survivors
I'm sure she would see your point but NM has had a history of trolling as well as other rulebreaking.

Now Nm's post was very emotional, thats fair, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it flaming or trolling. You mightn't; mods would. We make allowances for inexperience, for hot-button issues and for emotional outbursts, but New Mitanni has been around NS long enough to know what not to do; nonetheless, he did it.

Nm posted a pretty anti left thread, and in no less than 5 minutes it was posted to the mods. And who posted it? A mod? No, another poster who considered it broke the site rules. Are you seriously accusing mods of bias because someone else chooses to post speedily?I have to agree with wanderjar that a double standard here seems to be existant on NSG.

Then next time, perhaps, you'll post a complaint instead of keeping your outrage to yourself. And a mod will read your complaint, and decide whether it's justified, and act on it to the degree necessary if there has been rule-breaking, because that's what we do.

But we don't go out hunting for extra work and we don't have a Spidey-sense that alerts us to rulebreaking; so if the left, the right or all stations in between want to complain, they have to make the effort to come here.

A heads-up: you're welcome to agree with Wanderjar, but please don't copy the posting style he used in this thread. One bias all the mods do share is a preference for common politeness in the Moderation forum.

But to quote Haikoku 2 "all US troops should be forced to stay in Iraq until they learn how to bring all the innocent Iraqis murdered back to life."

Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain.

You mightn't; mods would. We make allowances for inexperience, for hot-button issues and for emotional outbursts, but New Mitanni has been around NS long enough to know what not to do; nonetheless, he did it.

He posted a boldly emotional thread, but he did it respectfully. Maybe not towards Barack Obama, but he did towards the NS community. No foul language and no attempts at threats.

And who posted it? A mod? No, another poster who considered it broke the site rules. Are you seriously accusing mods of bias because someone else chooses to post speedily?

I'm aware that the mod were alerted by a site user. My comment was mainly that in the past, complaints have been lodged under similar circumstances and no action was taken.

Then next time, perhaps, you'll post a complaint instead of keeping your outrage to yourself. And a mod will read your complaint, and decide whether it's justified, and act on it to the degree necessary if there has been rule-breaking, because that's what we do.

Not to be rude, but to my knowledge thats exactly what I was doing by posting my opinion. Katganistan sited NM use of "the dark lord" in reference to Obama as one of the problems with the OP. I merely commented that by that based on previous history of name calling an insult throwing towards bush and bush supporters, that insults at Obama should be perfectly allowed. If not than it is hard to argue that there is not a leftest slant in the mods.

But we don't go out hunting for extra work and we don't have a Spidey-sense that alerts us to rulebreaking; so if the left, the right or all stations in between want to complain, they have to make the effort to come here.

Never implied that the mods were a NS version of big brother swooping in at the slightest sign of rule breaking. My comment was more that within secconds of the complaint, the thread was locked down and no one could partake in the discussion until a 3rd party put up the question in a warm fuzzy setting. Though his initial comments on that thead also I could have grounds to call trolling based on his comments toward the news industry, if we use this locked thread as a precident.

I took offense to him blatently calling Fox News uncredible, a stance held dear by many of the far left posters on NSG. It was a swipe at a 3rd party that could be meant to spark an emotional outburst.

NM didn't target any person on NS in particular. It wasn't a thread to talk about how much The nation of hypothetical names sucked. He was bringing up a viable topic, about a 3rd party not NS related, that has a lot of the country up in arms with the same amount of emotion behind it.

A heads-up: you're welcome to agree with Wanderjar, but please don't copy the posting style he used in this thread. One bias all the mods do share is a preference for common politeness in the Moderation forum.

I'm sorry if you percieved my post to be inflamatory, I assure you it wasn't meant to be. I wasn't vain or crass when writing it, It was a respectful disagreement to a mod and lodging a complaint as to why in hopes that one of the mods may look back and attempt to see a pattern. I agree with Wanderjar's opinion, but his method of cursing and stomping was flawed. \

"Governments are a group of people, usually notably ungoverned."- firefly.

Please understand that I hold the Mod's in high respect, but even they should be subject to question.

From the NS Faq.
What can't I post?
Any content that is:

obscene
illegal
threatening
malicious
defamatory
spam

I fail to see how NM's post falls under any of these. Though if you will explain I would love to hear it.

Katganistan sited NM use of "the dark lord" in reference to Obama as one of the problems with the OP.

Not a mod.

I've encountered the use of "The Dark Lord" outside of NS, almost from the minute of Obama's election success - and it has strong implications of racial slur.

Now - NM has (I believe) stated that he is NOT implying that, but (personally, and again - not a mod) I think he should be sensitive enough to the possible racial overtones in his phrasing to realise that it might not be a good idea to use that nickname. For all the various nicknames levelled at Bush, I don't think we/he ever had to endure a racial slur.

'Shrub' is a reference to the former presidents name (and, think about it - when your name is 'Bush', there are several places it could have gone, of which 'shrub' might be considered one of the more harmless options). "King George", I'm sure you remember, only became popular after the repeated circumventions of Constitutional law. There is no parallel between either of those, and 'the Dark Lord'.

Not a mod.

I've encountered the use of "The Dark Lord" outside of NS, almost from the minute of Obama's election success - and it has strong implications of racial slur. That is one I haven't heard, but being in the south, you can imagine I've heard quite a few racial things about the president.

Now - NM has (I believe) stated that he is NOT implying that, but (personally, and again - not a mod) I think he should be sensitive enough to the possible racial overtones in his phrasing to realise that it might not be a good idea to use that nickname. For all the various nicknames levelled at Bush, I don't think we/he ever had to endure a racial slur.

And this is where the PC curse is plaguing everyone. He stated he had nothing racial towards the president. There end of story. This idea, that we should censor ourselves, because some people might possible construe it as something that it wasn't and therefor take offense to it is ludacrise. "The Dark Lord" most commony in english refers to an evil ruler. That was NM's basis, not racially. I mean seriously.

'Shrub' is a reference to the former presidents name (and, think about it - when your name is 'Bush', there are several places it could have gone, of which 'shrub' might be considered one of the more harmless options). "King George", I'm sure you remember, only became popular after the repeated circumventions of Constitutional law. There is no parallel between either of those, and 'the Dark Lord'.

Love how you skipped my mention of Vader and the Evil Emperor. There is parrallel because it's an insult hurled at the leader, whether he deserved or not. While I see what your saying, the question of whether he actually did circumvent the constitution is still debateable, whether you think the case is watertight or not.


EDIT: I do however think we might wanna take such debates between nonmods to the NSG.

Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain.

Is this not flamebaiting?

And this is where the PC curse is plaguing everyone. He stated he had nothing racial towards the president. There end of story.

Well, not quite. His posting history matters. And his posting history includes calling Obama things like "the Magical Negro".

So, we have reason to believe NM is a racist. However, I prefer to just believe he really buys into his whole LotR fantasy hes created, because that is much more amusing.

Well, not quite. His posting history matters. And his posting history includes calling Obama things like "the Magical Negro".

So, we have reason to believe NM is a racist. However, I prefer to just believe he really buys into his whole LotR fantasy hes created, because that is much more amusing.



To be fair the concept of "the magical Negro" comes from media studies where a tendency was identified for TV and films to include a specific form of black character who seems to be somehow more mystically "in tune ", this character then goes on to divulge all sorts of deep and meaningful things about life to the white main protagonists, and is instrumental in their success.


Mind you I still think calling Obama "The Dark Lord" is highly dubious.

Is this not flamebaiting?

No. He brought me up in an argument I wasn't even in, and, quite frankly, I responded very mildly, given that I hate being treated as a prop. I didn't flame him, nor did I claim his race/opinions/etc are that of bad/stupid/etc people. I only claimed to be God and reminded him of a Commandment. It was a cutesy way to tell him that, unlike Sarah Palin, I am not a stage prop.

You can carry on these shenanigans in General. Moderation is not the place for discussion. A ruling was passed and explained.

We interrupt this thread closure to bring you an apology.

Tarsonis Survivors, I didn't perceive your post to be inflammatory. I'd switched in my head from the specific "you, Tarsonis Survivors" to the general "you, all posters who might agree with Wanderjar", but I didn't make that clear in my post. My remarks about politeness were a snark at Wanderjar's posting style. I'm sorry I used you as the wall to bounce it off.

And now, back to our regular programming ...