P&R News

[Dill]

(08-23-2023, 12:24 PM)basballguy Wrote: Moderating users based on what they say about public figures is an awful idea and will not allow for neutral moderation.  If done correctly, every user on this forum would be banned within a week for shit they say about DJT and JB alone.

My sense of B'holic's reference to "juvenile" and "inflammatory" behavior, etc. was more related to how we treat each other.

Not sure he would have a problem if I called Trump a "lying, womanizing pig who talks out his ass." But I don't know.

However, I'm DAMN sure he'd have a problem if I called YOU a "lying, womanizing pig" etc. He wouldn't let it fly because I'm "left leaning."

With you, I'd like to see examples of what counts as bad behavior, and maybe let people discuss them a bit, stuff "both sides" might easily agree on, at least in the abstract. Figure out what rules might work well and what might not. (I foresee possible disagreements over what counts as "off topic.") 

Some of the invective might lessen if more could agree that just saying something doesn't make it true. Let evidence make the point.

Also it seems to me that people could better realize that most invective just describes their feelings--not the actual object of their ire. 
E.g. "X is a stupid idiot" is really just angry expressive noise, like a child stamping his feet, and not a statement of fact.

Finally, many of us count good friends among the moderators, but we expect them to do their duty if we violate the rules. Because they are friends, we should have an extra incentive NOT to put them in the stressful position of having to rap another friend's knuckles.