• Forums Discussion v2 - GO TO PAGE 109 FOR SOMETHING NEAT
    4,995 replies, posted
[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52569932]dude that's pretty obvious, I just want to know WHY they think/feel they way they do about the subject, not just how they feel about it that doesn't tell me anything other than they hate Trump.[/QUOTE] It's not just random Trump hate just because he's Trump, it's his actions that make people react. If the thread is about trump banning transgenders in military, firing the fbi director or saying something in general, I think it's pretty obvious at what they are mad about. They don't need to go "I hate Trump, because he tried to ban trans from the military." We already what the thread is about. Should people who speak positively of one of his actions but don't explain why despite it being obvious by the thread title or article be punished too? Fuck no. You seem to have not thought about this very well.
Just make it so Garry has to personally pre-approve every single post before it gets posted
[QUOTE=TrafficMan;52569985]Just make it so Garry has to personally pre-approve every single post before it gets posted[/QUOTE] Garry Before Polidicks [t]http://www.journaldugamer.com/files/2014/01/camera2x.jpg[/t] Garry after Polidicks [t]https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/3375393261/613bd3eee298194e0207dd3a6bfc4636_400x400.png[/t]
[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52569616]I don't know if I believe this. I came into this thread for a place to ask this question and saw this post. Polidicks and Sensationalist Headlines seem to be going downhill, any given thread that has even the slightest to do with President Trump (and even some that have nothing to do with him) immediately get shit up with dogpiles of posters doing nothing but wishing ill of the President and insulting him. None of these posts are constructive or have any substance to them, and threads just devolve into a huge circlejerk of people calling Trump a coward or an idiot. This type of talk is bannable when it is directed at another user, so why is it acceptable for such toxic commentary to take place about the President? I don't mind posts where people state disagreement with him on moral or ethical grounds, but I would still prefer posts that are backed by some degree of evidence or fact. Even when I try to debate people from my conservative viewpoint (admittedly, I usually phrase myself pretty shit) I try to provide some sort of tangible evidence for why I think that way. It seems like users posting in opposition of Trump, even posts that have no substance and are completely non-constructive are safe from bans whereas conservative posters making the same style of commentary get struck down for "shitposting" or "having a hostile posting style." I understand that Facepunch is wildly liberal but I would hope that the bans don't carry the same implicit bias as most of the posts do. [editline]13th August 2017[/editline] It took me 5 minutes to find all these. These posts go on for days. Why are these okay? Even the Polidicks rules say this is bannable[/QUOTE] I completely agree with this. The problem is that a lot of our moderation is based on reports. Facepunch has a heavy political bias towards the left and as such, users probably wouldn't be so inclined to report low quality posts that are sympathetic to their view point, as opposed to low quality posts that oppose it. Please report posts like those examples. It requires two reports to show up in our queue. [QUOTE=FinalHunter;52569699]I don't expect mods to do that at all. Some of those posts had upwards of 50 positive ratings on them. The issue isn't that people are making these comments so much as it is that these comments have become the standard. I've never seen a user banned or even warned for saying something like "Trump is such a fucking idiot" and posting no actual content - there's no deterrence. When these posts are made every day on such a huge scale without any intervention (ever), it just feels like the mod team condones the sentiment. It's hard to get things flagged when the majority of the people posting it all agree with each other, the whole thing just turns into an echo chamber.[/QUOTE] I did ban somebody once for calling Trump a "cheeto cunt" so it does happen. Albeit it was a mistake on my part, I thought he was flaming a user. People can call him what they want, so long as they put a bit of effort into it. PD isn't really the place to post just "X is a moron". You have to elaborate on why you think he is a moron. [QUOTE=YOMIURA;52569723]I already have, no where does it say debate is the only conversation to be had? It is saying if you make a claim, then these are the expectations moderator will hold poster to for backing up their claim. If I am fundamentally misunderstand, and you are correct, then moderator can correct me. I do not see what you are saying.[/QUOTE] Literally one of the first sentences in the PD guidelines is; "Because this is a debate forum we expect you to put effort into your posts"
[QUOTE=Hezzy;52570067]I completely agree with this. The problem is that a lot of our moderation is based on reports. Facepunch has a heavy political bias towards the left and as such, users probably wouldn't be so inclined to report low quality posts that are sympathetic to their view point, as opposed to low quality posts that oppose it. Please report posts like those examples. It requires two reports to show up in our queue.[/QUOTE] Maybe if we ban enough people on "the left" we can redress that balance and posts will suddenly become better. Just like that time we wanted to cut politics out of Sensationalist Headlines so it could go back to being a lighthearted board about lighthearted news. That really worked out well. Actually I have a better idea: If you don't want to see people bitch about Trump, to to r/the_donald. [editline]13th August 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Hezzy;52570067] I did ban somebody once for calling Trump a "cheeto cunt" so it does happen. Albeit it was a mistake on my part, I thought he was flaming a user. People can call him what they want, so long as they put a bit of effort into it. PD isn't really the place to post just "X is a moron". You have to elaborate on why you think he is a moron.[/QUOTE] So say in a thread about Trump banning transgender people from the military, would posting "Trump is an asshole" be bannable?
[QUOTE=sam6420;52570137]I'm guilty of making low effort posts in SH/PD. It's so easy to treat it like a comment section and not a forum discussion.[/QUOTE] bans will fix that quickly, keep an eye out
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52570110]Maybe if we ban enough people on "the left" we can redress that balance and posts will suddenly become better. Just like that time we wanted to cut politics out of Sensationalist Headlines so it could go back to being a lighthearted board about lighthearted news. That really worked out well. Actually I have a better idea: If you don't want to see people bitch about Trump, to to r/the_donald. [editline]13th August 2017[/editline] So say in a thread about Trump banning transgender people from the military, would posting "Trump is an asshole" be bannable?[/QUOTE] Or you know, we could provide a fair and balanced forum for everybody rather than it being a "fuck trump" echochamber If you want that, "to to" r/EnoughTrumpSpam Would "Trump is an asshole" be in keeping with the guidelines in that section? [editline]14th August 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=sam6420;52570137]I'm guilty of making low effort posts in SH/PD. It's so easy to treat it like a comment section and not a forum discussion.[/QUOTE] SH is more relaxed because it's a general news section. PD was originally envisioned and discussed to be a debate forum by users in this thread. It requires a higher standard of posting.
[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52570123]Dude, if the posts were about Hillary or any other democratic figure I would be saying the same thing. Trump happens to be the current example because a large share of the threads in Polidicks are about Trump, and thus attract the majority of these types of posts. This isn't some attack on liberal viewpoints.[/QUOTE] I wasn't replying to you but first, I doubt it, and secondly, I'd still respond the same way. I don't see the practical difference between making posts that say "Trump is an asshole" and "Trump should not ban transgender people from the military". [QUOTE=Hezzy;52570156]Or you know, we could provide a fair and balanced forum for everybody rather than it being a "fuck trump" echochamber[/QUOTE] Banning leftists isn't going to make more right wing people post if they aren't posting already. How is calling Trump an asshole stopping people who disagree from replying? This echo chamber shit is an asanine self-fulfilling prophecy. [QUOTE=Hezzy;52570156]If you want that, "to to" r/EnoughTrumpSpam[/QUOTE] This would be a lot more effective if I was the one asking for peoples posts to be policed. [QUOTE=Hezzy;52570156]Would "Trump is an asshole" be in keeping with the guidelines in that section?[/QUOTE] I don't know that's why I'm asking you. I'm going to guess no but I want to understand where the line falls on "low effort posts" because the standard put forward by FinalHunter seems to be posts that are short and critical of Trump. [QUOTE=Hezzy;52570156]SH is more relaxed because it's a general news section. PD was originally envisioned and discussed to be a debate forum by users in this thread. It requires a higher standard of posting.[/QUOTE] So in an SH thread that is naturally going to involve politics I can still say "Trump is an asshole" but if I make that same post in polidicks I'm going to be banned? [editline]13th August 2017[/editline] I don't even understand the mental gymnastics you have to engage in to say that the one calling for the echo chamber is the person arguing for [I]less[/I] moderation and told someone that they would be better served arguing Trumps case rather than trying to get people banned for posts critical of Trump that happen to be under whatever Hezzy's "fair and balanced" idea of low effort is.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52570170]I wasn't replying to you but first, I doubt it, and secondly, I'd still respond the same way. I don't see the practical difference between making posts that say "Trump is an asshole" and "Trump should not ban transgender people from the military". Banning leftists isn't going to make more right wing people post if they aren't posting already. How is calling Trump an asshole stopping people who disagree from replying? This echo chamber shit is an asanine self-fulfilling prophecy. This would be a lot more effective if I was the one asking for peoples posts to be policed. I don't know that's why I'm asking you. I'm going to guess no but I want to understand where the line falls on "low effort posts" because the standard put forward by FinalHunter seems to be posts that are short and critical of Trump. So in an SH thread that is naturally going to involve politics I can still say "Trump is an asshole" but if I make that same post in polidicks I'm going to be banned? [editline]13th August 2017[/editline] I don't even understand the mental gymnastics you have to engage in to say that the one calling for the echo chamber is the person arguing for [I]less[/I] moderation and told someone that they would be better served arguing Trumps case rather than trying to get people banned for posts critical of Trump that happen to be under whatever Hezzy's "fair and balanced" idea of low effort is.[/QUOTE] I didn't explicitly say anything about "banning leftists". All I said is that the guidelines should be enforced properly. Those guidelines state that there should not be low effort posts in PD.
Even mods have to follow the rules sometimes Otherwise you end up like Mad Maxime
[QUOTE=sam6420;52570148]Just because I consider them low effort doesn't mean they're ban-worthy.[/QUOTE] If you think your own posts are low effort then you shouldn't be posting. Period.
[QUOTE=Hezzy;52570197]I didn't explicitly say anything about "banning leftists". All I said is that the guidelines should be enforced properly. Those guidelines state that there should not be low effort posts in PD.[/QUOTE] But you did explicitly say [QUOTE]Or you know, we could provide a fair and balanced forum for everybody rather than it being a "fuck trump" echochamber[/QUOTE] And I'm wondering how banning people for making low effort posts (a standard that you seem unwilling to share with anyone) plays into that. The underlying logic seems to be that you don't want to outright ban people for being critical of Trump but you can cull some of the posts and make things appear more balanced with the pretenses of saying its low effort.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52570229]But you did explicitly say And I'm wondering how banning people for making low effort posts (a standard that you seem unwilling to share with anyone) plays into that. The underlying logic seems to be that you don't want to outright ban people for being critical of Trump but you can cull some of the posts and make things appear more balanced with the pretenses of saying its low effort.[/QUOTE] How does low effort feed into discussion or debate? We want actual conversation, not sick zinger low effort posts. If you walked up to me in Costa Coffee and said "Fuck Trump" I would just fucking ignore you. But if you said "I dislike what Trump is doing with x", then maybe we can actually talk.
[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52569951]I guess my problem is just that you could take the same posts and paste them in 10 different threads and they wouldn't be any more or less meaningful in any one of them.[/QUOTE] While they're fairly generic posts in general that can only happen because they're still [I]relevant[/I] in all those ten threads. The overwhelming proportion of Trump threads posted on Facepunch (or really articles in the news in general) are very negative about him to begin with. [QUOTE=Hezzy;52570156]Or you know, we could provide a fair and balanced forum for everybody rather than it being a "fuck trump" echochamber[/QUOTE] Calling it an echo chamber assumes that people are just randomly parroting the same lines to reinforce their viewpoint. In reality the reason people constantly criticize Trump is because Trump consistently does shit they find criticizable. Meanwhile those who don't agree with those viewpoints tend to either not post at all or drop in and make one or two fairly vague points then bail rather than discussing it at all. (And those who [I]do[/I] stick around tend to be criticized for the way they argue as people have repeatedly pointed out to them in the past which largely invalidates their entire argument.) Edit: [QUOTE]I get personally attacked every time I do for holding a viewpoint that doesn't mesh with the group consensus of what is best.[/QUOTE] You're confusing personal attacks with criticisms of the way you argue. You and the other Trump supporters who actually bother posting tend to be incredibly intellectually dishonest 99% of the time which isn't conducive to anything resembling an actual discussion. So people very quickly get frustrated trying to debate you which obviously results in things quickly getting more heated than they should.
Here is how shits going to go down if you start banning people for arbitrarily low effort posts that only exists through their own inaction; Encouraging people to respond to posts instead of demanding moderation demolish the echo chamber that only exists through their own inaction; [QUOTE] [B] Thread: Trump bans jelly beans[/B] Poster One: Trump is an asshole Pro-Trump/Right/Conservative/Libertarian: Why is he an asshole? If you read this study done by this guy it shows that jellybeans blahblablah. Pro-Trump poster is probably dogpiled but thats because FP (in line with the world at large) is decidedly anti-Trump[/QUOTE] vs [QUOTE][B]Thread: Trump bans jelly beans[/B] Poster One: What an asshole (THIS USER HAS BEEN BANNED) Several posts explaining why Trump is an asshole without calling him an asshole Pro-Trump poster never shows up, discourse never elevates, "echo chamber" remains[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52570248]Here is how shits going to go down if you start banning people for arbitrarily low effort posts Encouraging people to respond to posts instead of demanding moderation demolish the echo chamber vs[/QUOTE] Give us an example of this, or are you just pulling "heres is how shits going to go down" out your ass
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52570248]Here is how shits going to go down if you start banning people for arbitrarily low effort posts Encouraging people to respond to posts instead of demanding moderation demolish the echo chamber vs[/QUOTE] Or, you know, you could just not make low quality posts. It's really not a difficult concept here.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52570229]But you did explicitly say And I'm wondering how banning people for making low effort posts (a standard that you seem unwilling to share with anyone) plays into that. The underlying logic seems to be that you don't want to outright ban people for being critical of Trump but you can cull some of the posts and make things appear more balanced with the pretenses of saying its low effort.[/QUOTE] Are you really asking us what defines a low effort post, like actually seriously asking because I'm pretty certain that shit is damn well obvious. Basically you ask the question of, is the post constructive, is it relevant, does it actually apply to the thread and is it more than 2 words. A low effort post, is basically what everyone and their [I]fucking dog[/I] would consider a shitpost, are you really being this dense to not realize that and have to ask us, to actually clarify that because god damn, this shit is as plain as daylight. So yeah, basically a post where its actually relevant, contributes to the discussion and is more than "fuck trump" for example, is something we consider not a low effort post. I mean come on, this is basically a loaded question here, we judge posts off a post by post basis, we have to consider the topic of discussion and the content of the posts, its down to the moderators to judge what is low effort and what isn't, other than what I've stated before there is no standard, its not like a straight "no warez" rule, its something we have to judge on case by case. So please, stop trying to rile this into something else, we work off reports, if you think a post is shit and low effort, report it, seriously. [QUOTE=Raidyr;52570248]Here is how shits going to go down if you start banning people for arbitrarily low effort posts that only exists through their own inaction; Encouraging people to respond to posts instead of demanding moderation demolish the echo chamber that only exists through their own inaction;[/QUOTE] Your examples are shit in this, because in the first one, the first person would be banned as it contributes nothing to the thread, the case in point is that those posts need to be reported for us to see them, we don't check on every thread.
It's my god given right to make bad posts
It's my god given right to make bad posts
It's my god given right to make bad posts
It's my god given right to make bad posts
It's my god given right to make bad posts
[QUOTE=FinalHunter;52570240]This isn't an argument about left or right, it's an argument about quality posts, but you want to pidgeonhole everything I've said to wanting to silence liberals. [/QUOTE] I think you explicitly support silencing liberals. [QUOTE=FinalHunter;52570240]But here you go, I'll play: Because to a conservative like myself, it's just an echochamber. People keep arguing that the reason people are angry is obvious, you just have to infer the reasoning from the original post. What if I disagree or don't understand their objection with what Trump did? Well now your solution is "just ask," to which I'll respond to your next point.[/QUOTE] This point needs to be stressed: Polidicks isn't an echo chamber. You won't be banned for being pro-Trump. In fact evidence suggests you might actually get special treatment if you are a particularly pernicious pro-Trump poster. Just because a lot of people disagree with you doesn't make it an echo chamber. [QUOTE=FinalHunter;52570240]The Google employee said it best so I'll steal his wording. Polidicks is dangerously close to a "a politically correct monoculture that maintains its hold by shaming dissenters into silence." I refrain from posting because I get personally attacked every time I do for holding a viewpoint that doesn't mesh with the group consensus of what is best. If I still disagree once they've finished their argument then my disagreement must stem from "willful ignorance." Over the years I've been called a nationalist, a jingoist, a bigot, willfully ignorant, arrogant, stupid, a sociopath, etc. for expressing different viewpoints here. Right wing people don't post because they've either been goaded into getting themselves banned or because they know it'll be like herding cats trying to have a discussion about something. I'm not here complaining because I have an inherent issue with people shitting on Trump, if they hate the man and have a reason for it (even one I disagree with), I don't mind reading it. What I do mind is opening up a thread, reading the article, and then scrolling through post after post of "what a piece of shit." I've been here for 8 years, I'm not on some lengthy conquest to rid Polidicks of everybody that doesn't think the same way I do, I'm here to read different viewpoints and understand why people feel the way they do on a subforum that I perceived as being about debate. If I just wanted to go to some conservative forum where everybody agreed with everything I had to say all of the time then I would do that. [B]It just feels like you want to challenge me because you like the fact that everybody can just flame Trump all day, and the reason I don't like it must be because I'm conservative and not because I'd prefer reading posts of substance.[/B] This is a problem that can be solved by stricter moderation not culling people. You used Trump and transgenders as an example, is it really so much effort to say "Trump is an asshole, it's really discriminatory with no evidence they can't serve just as well" instead of "Trump is a piece of shit wow hope he gets impeached"?[/QUOTE] This line really sums it up. You say its about post quality then arrive at the conclusion that it has nothing to do with quality and everything with making Facepunch more comfortable to you as a conservative minded person. You don't believe in censorship so you don't want all critical posts of Trump to be bannable, but you are okay with the low effort ones. I think you final example is the most showing however. How, at all, is calling for Trumps impeachment low effort? Why should someone have to explain why they think he should be impeached every time they post that opinion? As for liking that everybody can just flame Trump all day, I personally glaze over posts like the ones you are criticizing but my general rule is that the less moderation the better, and specifically that unless a new rule or new implementation of a rule can have a definitive positive effect on discourse that its really not worth implementing. At this point all I'm seeing is someone who pinky promises that this has nothing to do with politics (but whom made a list exclusively of anti-Trump posts) and a moderator who supports it as a way of making sure Facepunch stays "fair and balanced".
[QUOTE=Alice3173;52570245]Calling it an echo chamber assumes that people are just randomly parroting the same lines to reinforce their viewpoint. In reality the reason people constantly criticize Trump is because Trump consistently does shit they find criticizable. Meanwhile those who don't agree with those viewpoints tend to either not post at all or drop in and make one or two fairly vague points then bail rather than discussing it at all. (And those who [I]do[/I] stick around tend to be criticized for the way they argue as people have repeatedly pointed out to them in the past which largely invalidates their entire argument.)[/QUOTE] It's an echo chamber in the sense that any thread posted about Trump, whether initially positive or negative, devolves into a low effort "Fuck Trump" yelling match with people just posting one liners and generic negative responses. If the only thing they're articulating is "Fuck Trump" then to be honest they should just go sit on Facebook and post that kind of stuff here. The whole idea of PD, what the community requested, was a return of a debate section. Not the comments section on a BuzzFeed Facebook Post. FinalHunter has quite rightly pointed out that masses of these low effort posts go unnoticed and unpunished, contrary to the guidelines that were established in February with the launch of the forum. I have spoken to the Moderation Team to try to rectify this. It isn't about Right vs Left or anything like that, it is about having a decent debate section. I really could not care less about American politics and Right vs Left. [QUOTE=Raidyr;52570248]Here is how shits going to go down if you start banning people for arbitrarily low effort posts that only exists through their own inaction; Encouraging people to respond to posts instead of demanding moderation demolish the echo chamber that only exists through their own inaction; vs[/QUOTE] Thanks Mystic Meg
Just want to point out that most of the "special treatment" that raidyr keeps alluding to is really not like how he states it. He states as if it's a protected class; When the reality is I just get this ironic/meme status, but every time I post I get incredible amounts of scrutiny both from users and moderators who strongly dislike me. Likewise when I get banned it just means other moderators notice when, usually it is a single mod affair. I certainly cant get away with some of the low quality post or personal attacks that other people levied with how much reporting/visibility I get to the average user. Other conservative users experience a similar situation, but just to a lesser degree. It is just easier to fly under the radar when you flow with the rest of the thread. Plain and simple, doesn't matter what political leanings or situation.
[QUOTE=Tudd;52570315]Just want to point out that most of the "special treatment" that raidry keeps alluding to is really not like how he states it. He states as if it's a protected class; When the reality is I just get this ironic/meme status, but every time I post I get incredible amounts of scrutiny. I cetainetly cant get away with some of the low quality post or personal attacks that other people levied with how much reporting/visibility I get to the average user. Other conservative users experience a similar situation to a lesser degree.[/QUOTE] Reminding everyone that the mod team were so close to actually establishing a "Trump Taskforce" to constantly monitor his posts to gather evidence to quantify the "je ne sais pas" element of his posting that causes everyone to fly off the fucking handle But then actually came to our senses and thought no that's pretty silly we have better things to do
[QUOTE=icemaz;52570252]Give us an example of this, or are you just pulling "heres is how shits going to go down" out your ass[/QUOTE] I mean I thought we were talking about hypothetical situations where we were going to start banning the posts that FinalHunter rattled off, but if you want historical precedent then I'd submit the formation of Polidicks, which was similarly created to combat the feeling of an "echo chamber" in SH, particularly regarding Trump. Pro-Trump posters generally don't post in Polidicks either (which is what I predicted, correctly, at the time) and instead stayed in SH or the Videos section where the rules were less strict. In fact if you want to argue that polidicks is a de facto echo chamber then I predicted that exact thing. [QUOTE=UncleJimmema;52570258]Or, you know, you could just not make low quality posts. It's really not a difficult concept here.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Reagy;52570267]Are you really asking us what defines a low effort post, like actually seriously asking because I'm pretty certain that shit is damn well obvious.[/QUOTE] There seems to be some confusion here regarding whats defined as low effort posts. I never said low effort posts shouldn't be bannable. I was talking to the specific posts FinalHunter and Hezzy classify as low effort. The ones you linked are pretty clearly shitposts. Is calling for Trumps impeachment low effort? I don't think so. Is it a shitpost? I don't think so either. [QUOTE=Hezzy;52570284]It's an echo chamber in the sense that any thread posted about Trump, whether initially positive or negative, devolves into a low effort "Fuck Trump" yelling match with people just posting one liners and generic negative responses.[/QUOTE] I actually find that the more direct posts happen earlier in the thread, and that the longer the thread goes on you tend to get more detailed replies, especially when its the same handful of people replying to each other. That aside, how will more detailed posts make it not an echo chamber? You haven't explained this part to me. [QUOTE=Hezzy;52570284]If the only thing they're articulating is "Fuck Trump" then to be honest they should just go sit on Facebook and post that kind of stuff here. The whole idea of PD, what the community requested, was a return of a debate section. Not the comments section on a BuzzFeed Facebook Post.[/QUOTE] Frankly then you guys have done a real bad job of making it seem like a debate section if we are in August and someone just now sees a problem [QUOTE=Hezzy;52570284]FinalHunter has quite rightly pointed out that masses of these low effort posts go unnoticed and unpunished, contrary to the guidelines that were established in February with the launch of the forum. I have spoken to the Moderation Team to try to rectify this. It isn't about Right vs Left or anything like that, it is about having a decent debate section. [/QUOTE] It's not about right vs left, it's just that most of the posts being culled are those of the left (or even just anti-Trump, because anti-Trump isn't a leftist position) with the goal of making discourse more palatable to conservatives. [QUOTE=Hezzy;52570284]I really could not care less about American politics and Right vs Left.[/QUOTE] On the other hand you do think your role is to redress the difference in representation amongst left and right spectrums, both past and present. [QUOTE=Hezzy;52570284]Thanks Mystic Meg[/QUOTE] I was right about Polidicks reinforcing the echo chamber. I'm confident about this.
also ban bold text because it is the devil
[QUOTE=Tudd;52570315] I certainly cant get away with some of the low quality post or personal attacks that other people levied with how much reporting/visibility I get to the average user. Other conservative users experience a similar situation, but just to a lesser degree. [/QUOTE] Right, its not special treatment, it's meme status, where you get away with posts that people have been banned for before and even a special avatar. Totally different meaning from special treatment because its a meme. No one can get away with personal attacks but as far as getting away with low quality posts I'd say thats fairly debatable. [QUOTE=Hezzy;52570321]Reminding everyone that the mod team were so close to actually establishing a "Trump Taskforce" to constantly monitor his posts to gather evidence to quantify the "je ne sais pas" element of his posting that causes everyone to fly off the fucking handle But then actually came to our senses and thought no that's pretty silly we have better things to do[/QUOTE] Reminder that you are literally the only person who flew off the handle after giving someone special treatment then wondering why you were getting so many people asking why you gave someone special treatment.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.