Moderation Issues (5)

Please use this thread for (and only for) alerting admins to moderation issues and for raising complaints arising from particular decisions. We remind participants that TSZ is a benign dictatorship, the property of Dr. Elizabeth Liddle. All decisions regarding policy and implementation are hers alone.

2,097 Replies to “Moderation Issues (5)”

  1. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    phoodoo: Then what about making fun of Christians is that a subset of racism?

    I’m disappointed you still don’t get this. The prime directive here is we attack ideas not people. Insulting fellow members is against the rules. Pointing out errors and fallacies in their arguments is not.

  2. phoodoo says:

    Alan Fox: I’m disappointed you still don’t get this. The prime directive here is we attack ideas not people. Insulting fellow members is against the rules. Pointing out errors and fallacies in their arguments is not.

    So we can insult Jews in general, but just not specific people, is that what you are saying?

  3. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    phoodoo: So we can insult Jews in general, but just not specific people, is that what you are saying?

    Good grief!

    I know you are just playing your usual rôle of Lord of Misrule but on the off chance something is still not clear:

    Judaism, the religion, is a subject available for discussion.

    Ethnicity is a subject available for discussion.

    Insulting individual members, whether they happen to be Jewish or not, religious or not, is against the rules.

    Antisemitism, insulting people, whether members or not, solely because they are Jewish, is a bannable offence.

  4. phoodoo says:

    Alan Fox,

    Alan, watching you dance around your hypocritical double standards is only amusing for a short time.

    Its either an offense to insult a religion or it isn’t Alan. You don’t get to choose which religion it is ok to insult and which it isn’t. Unless, you are a completely disingenuous asshole, which we most certainly can’t rule out.

    So which is it Alan, is it against the rules to insult a particular religious group or is it not? Stop fucking around and just answer the simple question.

  5. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    phoodoo: So which is it Alan, is it against the rules to insult a particular religious group or is it not?

    Good grief squared.

    Insulting any fellow member is against the rules.

    Racially abusing anyone or any group, members or not, is a bannable offence.

    Criticising religion, or aspects of religion, is not against the rules.

    Criticising religious groups is not against the rules.

    Insulting religious groups is not specifically against the rules. I think we can reserve judgement whether and when that morphs into hate speech (a bannable offence) if and when it happens.

  6. phoodoo says:

    Alan Fox,

    Ok great. So don’t you think Jews are a bunch of grubby penny pinchers Alan?

    I don’t mean any particular Jew, but just Jews in general, right? Haven’t you noticed that?

    Are Christians a race or a religion Alan?

    You are trying to best to cover for the fact that everyone here knows you and no one else here has ever done one dam thing about insulting Christians, but now you are trying to squirm you way around that ugly fact. Aren’t you Alan.

    But anyway, do you think all Jews have big noses, or just orthodox ones?

  7. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    phoodoo: You are trying to best to cover for the fact that everyone here knows you and no one else here has ever done one dam thing about insulting Christians…

    Is that the real beef?

  8. phoodoo says:

    Alan Fox: Is that the real beef?

    You are a hypocrite Alan. You are a ridiculous unashamed hypocrite. You are such a hypocrite, that it doesn’t even seem to bother you when it is pointed out to you. Keiths showed you many instances where you used double standards, where you were biased, where you were inconsistent as hell, and your only action was to ban him for pointing that out.

    Now you are trying to do the same again. Its why your answer to a simple question about whether or not Christians are a race just like Jews are. You give these squirrelly responses saying, well, we will see, you know insulting other members is against the rules, and um, um, we will reserve judgement..

    Why do you need to reserve judgement Alan, have Christians been regularly insulted here or have they not? Are you pretending you are unaware of this? Are you playing the deaf dumb and blind guy routine again? You have tried that one already Alan.

    So as you worm away from giving a clear answer, I will ask one more time. Is it against the rules to insult Christians as a group or not? If its not, you have zero ground to stand on claiming it is against the rules to insult Jews.

    Its pretty simple Alan. Be a man and admit when you are full of shit for once Alan. You made a mess of the keiths situation. You claimed you had quit as a moderator. You regularly see Jock abuse the rules and do nothing. Now you are trying to pull another fast one here.

    Don’t expect people to not notice.

    Is it against the rules to insult Christians as a group or not? Why is that so hard for you to give a straight answer?

  9. DNA_Jock says:

    Alan
    It appears so. We are in “War on Christmas” territory here.
    Hence his elision from ‘Jews’ to ‘Judaism’ to promote his analogy with persecution of Christians by mean atheists.

  10. phoodoo says:

    DNA_Jock,

    And Christianity to Christians.

    And you so called moderators still can’t answer a simple question.

  11. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    phoodoo: You are a hypocrite Alan. You are a ridiculous unashamed hypocrite.You are such a hypocrite, that it doesn’t even seem to bother you when it is pointed out to you. Keiths showed you many instances where you used double standards, where you were biased, where you were inconsistent as hell, and your only action was to ban him for pointing that out.

    I suspended Keiths (he was never banned) and his suspension period expired a while ago.

    Now you are trying to do the same again.Its why your answer to a simple question about whether or not Christians are a race just like Jews are.You give these squirrelly responses saying, well, we will see, you know insulting other members is against the rules, and um, um, we will reserve judgement..

    Christians are a diverse bunch. I agree there is not much respect here among many members for YEC nonsense nor for right-wing evangelical pseudo-Christianity. But, for example, Robert Byers and Sal Cordova enjoy the same posting and commenting privileges and protections as other members.

    Why do you need to reserve judgement Alan, have Christians been regularly insulted here or have they not?Are you pretending you are unaware of this?Are you playing the deaf dumb and blind guy routine again?You have tried that one already Alan.

    There are currently six non-dormant admins here. It is open to you to report instances where you feel rules are ignored. Do you have specific instances where Christians have been insulted regularly?

    So as you worm away from giving a clear answer, I will ask one more time.Is it against the rules to insult Christians as a group or not?If its not, you have zero ground to stand on claiming it is against the rules to insult Jews.

    I already said there is no specific rule protecting Christians as a group from being insulted, though the abuse could enter the category of “hate speech”. I’ve seen nothing approaching that, here. Again, I invite you to produce some specific instances.

    Its pretty simple Alan.Be a man and admit when you are full of shit for once Alan.You made a mess of the keiths situation. You claimed you had quit as a moderator.

    I also support a second Brexit referendum!

    You regularly see Jock abuse the rules and do nothing.Now you are trying to pull another fast one here.

    Again, specific instances would be helpful in support of your diatribe.

    Don’t expect people to not notice.

    I guess it depends on their level of interest.

    Is it against the rules to insult Christians as a group or not? Why is that so hard for you to give a straight answer?

    It is not specifically against the rules to insult any group so long as it remains below the level of hate speech, incitement, etc. Should we have a list of groups that must not be insulted at TSZ? Christians, I assume, would be your number 1. What about Muslims, Buddhists, atheists? Women? Young people? Short people? I have to say I haven’t noticed a huge problem of group abuse. Have I missed something?

  12. phoodoo says:

    DNA_Jock,

    Hey Jock, why do Jewish men like to watch porn backwards?

  13. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    DNA_Jock,
    Seems so.

  14. newton says:

    Alan Fox: 1. What about Muslims, Buddhists, atheists? Women? Young people? Short people? I have to say I haven’t noticed a huge problem of group abuse. Have I missed something?

    How about moderators?

  15. DNA_Jock says:

    What about incitements to sexually assault hobos?
    Overly specific?
    😉

  16. newton says:

    phoodoo:
    DNA_Jock,

    Hey Jock, why do Jewish men like to watch porn backwards?

    Because porn to them is like cutting crown molding. It has to done upside down and backwards.

  17. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    newton,

    I Googled out of curiosity. Wished I hadn’t. 🙁

  18. Allan Miller says:

    Gawd bless us, every one.

  19. newton says:

    Alan Fox:
    newton,

    I Googled out of curiosity. Wished I hadn’t.

    That is the easy part, putting it on the out of square wall standing on a ladder is the where it gets really fun.

  20. phoodoo says:

    Alan Fox:
    DNA_Jock,
    Seems so.

    So you are making moderating decisions and you can’t even answer if it is against the rules to make fun of Christians or not?

    The reason Jews like to watch porn backwards is so they get to see the hooker giving the money back.

    Like that one Alan? Thought you might.

    I got more. Let me know if it is against the rules to make fun of Christians or not.

  21. newton says:

    phoodoo: I got more. Let me know if it is against the rules to make fun of Christians or not.

    Get your comparison right , stupid. You are not making fun of another religious belief which you then can equate with the onerous persecution suffered by the lack of respect for your religious beliefs on this site. Apples to apples.

    You are making fun of an ethnic group. People are not considered cheap because they follow a certain religion.

    You should be mocking the Old Testament beliefs if you wish to expose the horrible double standard.

    Geez ,phoo.It just is not that complicated.

    Apologies for calling you stupid. It is not because you are a Christian.

  22. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    phoodoo,

    That’s an example of a racist joke that would finish anyone’s career in standup. Don’t post any more examples at TSZ.

  23. BruceS says:

    Alan Fox:
    It is not specifically against the rules to insult any group so long as it remains below the level of hate speech, incitement, etc.

    The rules are not explicit about breaking the law as far as I can see; the closest seems to be the prohibition of advocating illegal activities. I assume ‘illegal’ refers to UK laws, and there hate speech laws do require going beyond bare racism to include eg incitement.

    So that was why I originally concluded that bare racism is not prohibited at TSZ.

    To that point, this agrees with sites that take a more standard approach to the terms of service, as captured at the following link (the same text is used at PS).
    https://thephilosophyforum.com/page/terms-of-service

    But that standard terms of service also includes the right of owners of the site to remove any content at their sole discretion. So such sites could choose to remove racist content. After all, private sites can choose to become stricter than the law.

    Moderators take ownership of allowing racist content at such sites.

  24. BruceS says:

    The block poster functionality does not seem to apply to the moderation thread. Can this be changed?

    Some exchanges in this thread serve as clear examples of the sheer wrongheadedness of public discussion of moderation decisions.

  25. phoodoo says:

    Alan Fox:
    phoodoo,

    That’s an example of a racist joke that would finish anyone’s career in standup. Don’t post any more examples at TSZ.

    You are a moderator and you still can’t answer if it’s against the rules to make fun of Christians? You are a fucking joke. You are the one who should be ashamed.

  26. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    BruceS,
    I also think the site should have a proper “terms of service” statement. I was hoping for some input from Lizzie by now.

  27. phoodoo says:

    Has anyone ever heard of a site, anywhere, where the moderator refuses to give a straight answer to a simple question about the rules? Isn’t Alan making a farce of the whole concept of a moderator?

    Hey Mung, since Alan is too much of a chickenshit to answer the question, why don’t you tell us, you have the same authority as Alan, and apparently all his sycophants are equally cowardly, so I ask you-Is it against the rules to make fun of Christians or not.

    Until we know the answer I can only assume its also ok to insult Jews.

  28. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    BruceS,
    The ignore commenter thread works on comments to opening posts but not on pages. I already changed Sandbox so commenters can be ignored. I left Guano, Noyau and Moderation Issues as is. I’m ambivalent regarding visibility of moderation discussions but it would be a larger policy change than I think we can make without EL’s approval. I don’t see any harm in enabling the ignore feature in Moderation Issues if there are no sensible objections.

  29. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    phoodoo,

    No you can’t.

    There’s no rule about making fun of people or groups, there is a rule about insulting fellow members. Racial slurs are a different category that will result in a ban for the perpetrator. Clear enough, now?

  30. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    PS @ phoodoo. There’s no rule against being an obnoxious arsehole either but that does not mean such behaviour is encouraged.

  31. phoodoo says:

    Alan Fox: There’s no rule about making fun of people or groups, there is a rule about insulting fellow members. Racial slurs are a different category that will result in a ban for the perpetrator. Clear enough, now?

    No its not clear at all Alan. Is it or is it not against the rules to make fun of Christians?

    Are Christians a race or only Jews are a race? Another yes or no question Alan.

    Stop trying to weasel out of being clear Alan. You made a fucking debacle of the whole Keiths situation, and you are doing exactly the same thing here. I have zero respect for you quite honestly. You don’t seem to have an honest bone in your body.

  32. phoodoo says:

    Alan Fox,

    Its quite clear what you are trying to do Alan. I am sure everyone can see it. You want to continue to make it ok to make fun of Christians, and then try to twist some logic around to then say, but its not Ok to make fun of Jews.

    There is no honesty or integrity to this position whatsoever Alan. You can not justify it, so instead you are just squirming around trying to weasel out of explaining this hypocrisy. Basically, you don’t like Christianity, so to you, you can justify being duplicitous and hypocritical. It seems you truly lack character.

  33. phoodoo says:

    I mean, the whole reason for the existence of this site is to insult Christians and Christianity. If that wasn’t allowed, that would take away the whole lifeblood of the site, so you can see why Alan is so loathe to say that’s against the rules.

    So look how many posts it has taken Alan to continue to refuse to answer this simple issue. This site couldn’t possibly continue if you weren’t allowed to make fun of Christians. Alan knows this, and thus his tortured hypocrisy.It means more to Alan to continue this loophole, then it does for him to have any shred of honesty, and integrity.

    Patrick was a belligerent ass, but at least he was honest about it. The same can’t be said about Alan.

  34. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    phoodoo,

    I repeat, there is no rule against “making fun of” any group or individual who is not a member if TSZ.

    Christians are not an ethnic group and certainly not a race. Some sects of Christianity that remain culturally isolated might be so described, perhaps.

    Regarding your attempt to obfuscate between Jewish ethnicity and Judaism, I doubt repetition is going to improve your performance.

  35. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    phoodoo: I mean, the whole reason for the existence of this site is to insult Christians…

    Rubbish.

  36. phoodoo says:

    Alan Fox: Rubbish.

    Everything you have said here is rubbish. Why is it you are trying so hard to preserve the right to make fun of Christians Alan?

    You need that so bad don’t you? Its just kills you to think that could be against the rules, so you will say anything. make up any shit you can. Lie, fucking do anything, you don’t care. The important things is you can’t say the words, “Its against the rules to make fun of Christians.” That would just kill you.

    How little integrity can one person demonstrate? Can it be less than zero? Rats have more integrity than you Alan. Sometimes rats are compared to some religious people, but even they have more integrity than you. Shameful Alan.

    When are you going to quit like you promised, you liar.

  37. BruceS says:

    Alan Fox:
    BruceS,
    The ignore commenter thread works on comments to opening posts but not on pages. I already changed Sandbox so commenters can be ignored. I left Guano, Noyau and Moderation Issues as is. I’m ambivalent regarding visibility of moderation discussions but it would be a larger policy change than I think we can make without EL’s approval. I don’t see any harm in enabling the ignore feature in Moderation Issues if there are no sensible objections.

    Moderation only would be fine with me. I try to ignore the guano and noyau threads unless one of my posts is affected. Or at least, that is one of my New Yea’s resolutions.

    I wonder if at some point the moderators will ask Lizzie if she if OK with becoming a silent benefactor formally instead of just de facto.

    At that point, perhaps the moderators can stop relying on the need to await her possible re-engagement with the forum to make rule changes they agree on.

  38. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    BruceS,
    It needs resolving, I agree.

  39. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    phoodoo,
    I really can’t decide whether you are serious or just ramping up your performance. I suggest a walk in the fresh air.

  40. phoodoo says:

    Alan Fox:
    phoodoo,
    I really can’t decide whether you are serious or just ramping up your performance. I suggest a walk in the fresh air.

    Anything to prevent you having to say its against the rules to make fun of Christians, right Alan?

    Well, Jesus was a Jew Alan, so you better go and move all the posts that make fun of Jesus Alan.

    You are shameful Alan. You think others can’t see it? You think everyone is a dope?

  41. phoodoo says:

    Alan Fox:
    BruceS,
    It needs resolving, I agree.

    What makes you think you are the right person to resolve it?

  42. newton says:

    phoodoo: Has anyone ever heard of a site, anywhere, where the moderator refuses to give a straight answer to a simple question about the rules? Isn’t Alan making a farce of the whole concept of a moderator?

    My experience is most sites would just ban you and just be done with it. They rarely discuss at any length moderation decisions.

    The rules are simple, if moderators view you as a nuisance ,you are history. You have no right to post, you are a guest. Obnoxious guests get shown the door.

  43. phoodoo says:

    newton,

    Ban me for what, what the hell are you talking about. What rule have I broken? Speaking the truth about Alan?

    This thread is for questions about moderation. In fact, the site outlaws people from asking questions about moderation (at least if you are not one of their favorites) , because they say you can get answers about moderation here. So what the heck are you talking about? maybe its you who should be banned for false accusations.

    And are you really going to try to defend Alan’s ridiculous excuse that its Ok to insult Christians but not Jews? Could you be any more of a suck up?

    Anyone who defends that horseshit is just as loose with their integrity as Alan.

  44. DNA_Jock says:

    Hey phoodoo, Could you be a good chap and promise not to clutter up other threads, just this one?
    Just let me know one way or the other.
    Thanks in advance.

  45. phoodoo says:

    DNA_Jock:
    Hey phoodoo, Could you be a good chap and promise not to clutter up other threads, just this one?
    Just let me know one way or the other.
    Thanks in advance.

    Sure, just as soon as you agree not to clutter up other threads. In the meantime fuck off, I didn’t break any rules. People here aren’t obliged to post only what you want them to post. I know how much you want to play censor, but shove it.

    You have already broken enough rules yourself, by making up rules that don’t exist. Lizzie wanted a place where anyone can post, supposedly regardless of viewpoint. I know you and Alan would love to change that, but Alan already tried a site of his own, and that didn’t work out so good. You have about as much integrity as Alan, minus 3.

  46. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    phoodoo: nd are you really going to try to defend Alan’s ridiculous excuse that its Ok to insult Christians but not Jews?

    I’ve never made any such statement. Please stop misrepresenting me.

  47. Alan Fox Alan Fox says:

    Please continue in new “Moderation Issues (6)” thread here. Comments now closed for this thread.

Comments are closed.