Originally posted by Bosse de NageI generally only use that button in the case of major spammers or very gratuitous profanity. It's not really necessary anyway, since the moderation team is all hanging out right here, cheering you on as you prove my point.
So alert my post. (You're a hypocrite if you do).
Originally posted by Bosse de NageNo thanks. I can do without the forum ban that comes with taking the wrong side of a debate in that forum. Besides, there's nothing to debate here. You are wrong and the only thing you have to fall back on is personal insults.
Post in Debates if you want an argument.
1 edit
Originally posted by leisurelyslothWell, the mods don't answer to you, but I'll humour you.
Luck's use of the term was in Debates, not General. We won't know the context since it's been removed. Bosse's was purely gratuitous and in General. Clearly there's no mitigating factors in Bosse's case.
Luck was arguing for something the mods disagree with and Bosse is on the same side as the mods. The real point here is that the mods toss peo ...[text shortened]... their disagreement. Interesting Debates forum, when you ban the people you disagree with.
Luck posted:
ACORN [Insert racist derogatory term used usually to refer to black people] = Criminals => JAIL
and then put in a link to an article on a borderline white supremacy site.
Luck was pushing a racist agenda and you're absolutely right, the mods disagreed with it.
We don't just mod purely on the actual words, but content. What's wrong with this?
Originally posted by Bosse de NageLet me count the ways....
Wrong about what?
Wrong about arguing in favor of banning someone because you disagree with them.
Wrong about arguing against the use of racial epithets, accept when they are useful to the argument that you want to make.
Wrong about using personal insults as a substitute for your failed arguments.
Originally posted by leisurelyslothYou are looking sillier by the minute...
Let me count the ways....
Wrong about arguing in favor of banning someone because you disagree with them.
Wrong about arguing against the use of racial epithets, accept when they are useful to the argument that you want to make.
Wrong about using personal insults as a substitute for your failed arguments.
Use it / Don't use it.
Originally posted by CrowleyIn a Debates forum, you are moderating not based upon the words that are used, but rather upon whether or not you agree with the premise that the author is putting forth. So it's OK to use racial epithets as long as it's in an argument that you agree with. You don't see the conflict here?
Well, the mods don't answer to you, but I'll humour you.
Luck posted:
ACORN [Insert racist derogatory term used usually to refer to black people] = Criminals => JAIL
and then put in a link to an article on a borderline white supremacy site.
Luck was pushing a racist agenda and you're absolutely right, the mods disagreed with it.
We don't just mod purely on the actual words, but content. What's wrong with this?
Originally posted by leisurelyslothI haven't even stated my position on this issue, fool.
Let me count the ways....
Wrong about arguing in favor of banning someone because you disagree with them.
Wrong about arguing against the use of racial epithets, accept when they are useful to the argument that you want to make.
Wrong about using personal insults as a substitute for your failed arguments.