webdiplomacy.net

This thread was not made with the intent to target anyone.

Ok now that we've bypassed that rule, let's talk about all the tyranny going on

The proletariat will prevail!

I feel attacked

Durga wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 21, 2019 4:25 am

This thread was not made with the intent to target anyone.

It's a simple spell, but quite unbreakable.

Agreed. Tyranny must die. There is a reason behind the rule against targeting people, but JMO is overstepping is bounds in my opinion.

I mean this thread's breaking rule 8 by continuing that discussion but consider this mod approval retroactively.

The correct options available

1. post in the political sub forum, we made it for borderline conversations to keep them off the home page for every user

2. If you're concerned with my locking the threads targeting flum, I consulted with the mods and admins so you'll have to go to zultar if you want an appeal on that.

3. If you're concerned that I broke the same rule and applied the same lock to my thread after seeing how out of control and vulgar the threads were getting and want me to instead get a different punishment of a silence then you'll have to go speak to zultar.

4. If you'd like to ignore all site direction on how to properly appeal a mod or admin decision and instead discuss it on the forum in a way that accomplishes nothing for the 10 billionth time in site history, continue to post here.

Idk man, if flum didn't complain I don't see why you need to be so interventionist. If you want to lock it for the vulgar shit happening regarding different sexual partners sure, but not having joke threads about people is a bit of an insane rule unless they feel targeted by them and ask it to be removed.

I don't care that you broke your own rule because that rule is stupid unless the threads are subjectively perceived as an attack. I think my posting on public forums has accomplished a lot actually :) so yeah I will

I disagree with Durga. As much as my preference would be for a forum where people such as Durga have the freedom to say what they wish even if that includes what others may see as unwarranted and bigoted attacks, if you are going to have rules they must be enforced equally and fairly. A system that allows the more easy going members to become default punchbags would be a system that fails the site and its membership.

Durga wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 21, 2019 6:19 am

Idk man, if flum didn't complain I don't see why you need to be so interventionist.

Because if this is set as a precedent, then the only people who get defended are narcs. Nobody wants to be a tattle-tale.

Restitution wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 21, 2019 10:47 pm

Durga wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 21, 2019 6:19 am

Idk man, if flum didn't complain I don't see why you need to be so interventionist.

Because if this is set as a precedent, then the only people who get defended are narcs. Nobody wants to be a tattle-tale.

Sorry obviously if the thread is actually offensive it should be shut down. Ridiculous to think you can't make threads about other users

Durga wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 22, 2019 12:16 am

Restitution wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 21, 2019 10:47 pm

Durga wrote: ↑

Fri Jun 21, 2019 6:19 am

Idk man, if flum didn't complain I don't see why you need to be so interventionist.

Because if this is set as a precedent, then the only people who get defended are narcs. Nobody wants to be a tattle-tale.

Sorry obviously if the thread is actually offensive it should be shut down. Ridiculous to think you can't make threads about other users

C'mon kid you're not a narc are you? Not a narc-enabler huh? Narc!

I thought this thread was just against general tyranny, like just a bunch of internet troll saying things like "Down with the bourgeoisie!" And "Putin is generally considered to be uncool by some" or even "People have strong opinions about Donald Trump!".

No no no, we're fine with general tyranny, the only kind that upsets us is when mods lock threads that break the rules and clog up the home page by making a joke of a members sexuality in a horrible look for the site. Having those locked on a site where we should have free speech...cause reasons?...is a massive affront to my dignity! Especially when the member is publicly complaining about how cringy and awkward those threads are for them, enforcing rules to protect our members and our site image is just a massive abuse of power and I DEMAND JUST DICE!

jmo1121109 wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 22, 2019 4:20 am

No no no, we're fine with general tyranny, the only kind that upsets us is when mods lock threads that break the rules and clog up the home page by making a joke of a members sexuality in a horrible look for the site. Having those locked on a site where we should have free speech...cause reasons?...is a massive affront to my dignity! Especially when the member is publicly complaining about how cringy and awkward those threads are for them, enforcing rules to protect our members and our site image is just a massive abuse of power and I DEMAND JUST DICE!

Okay! I know your making a point right now, ( Great job by the way) but totally separate idea came while reading your post. It's a cooking show, called "just dice" where you're only allowed to dice food; no blending, no slicing, no crushing, no smashing, no beating. Cooking is allowed in any way, but you have to dice everything.
This is an amazing idea!

When I said I was cringing, I was more cringing at the fact I was revealed to be vain, not the joke thread itself. I want to clarify that I was fine with the joke threads.

That said, I thank the mods for acting in something that they thought might be making me upset, and it's probably just the safest thing to do.

jmo1121109 wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 22, 2019 4:20 am

No no no, we're fine with general tyranny, the only kind that upsets us is when mods lock threads that break the rules and clog up the home page by making a joke of a members sexuality in a horrible look for the site. Having those locked on a site where we should have free speech...cause reasons?...is a massive affront to my dignity! Especially when the member is publicly complaining about how cringy and awkward those threads are for them, enforcing rules to protect our members and our site image is just a massive abuse of power and I DEMAND JUST DICE!

Listen I'm not Goldie okay. I know how Flum felt about those threads.

Durga wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 22, 2019 5:58 am

jmo1121109 wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 22, 2019 4:20 am

No no no, we're fine with general tyranny, the only kind that upsets us is when mods lock threads that break the rules and clog up the home page by making a joke of a members sexuality in a horrible look for the site. Having those locked on a site where we should have free speech...cause reasons?...is a massive affront to my dignity! Especially when the member is publicly complaining about how cringy and awkward those threads are for them, enforcing rules to protect our members and our site image is just a massive abuse of power and I DEMAND JUST DICE!

Listen I'm not Goldie okay. I know how Flum felt about those threads.

Right, but you knowing how Flum feels is irrelevant if everyone doesn't. Nor does it particularly matter even if everyone does. If there's a thread calling someone a fag we're not going to leave it even if they're okay with it or think it's funny because it's still vulgar. Threads insinuating that sexuality is or should be a choice during pride month really aren't amazing either. The rules are there for a reason, because without them the more trollish members on this site have proven time and time again that they will not engage common sense. So we nip this crap as soon as it gets questionable because it never just stops at an acceptable point. Feel free to take that strategy up with the owners if you don't like it.

I totally agree with that. I don't agree with the idea that you should lock "POLL: What topic will Fluminator create next?" since you posted your warning on this thread.

That's just silly.

So you're upset with the reason that I didn't lock a thread despite agreeing that the thread shouldn't have been locked? I agree, that is just silly.