Forums Discussion v2 - GO TO PAGE 109 FOR SOMETHING NEAT
4,995 replies, posted
-wait snip shit-
[QUOTE=AkujiTheSniper;52180103]This reminds me of when wicked was posting a bunch of different news threads in SH involving babies dying and he got banned :v:
I'm really confused as to why he did it in general though[/QUOTE]
if his last ban is any indication, he just hates children
Can we have a talk shit about tudd thread somewhere else please? I keep coming here noticing 100+ posts expecting something cool like a new mod or something but I'm greeted with some cunts whining
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;52179988]
Seriously man, if just seeing his thread titles boils your blood or something you need to take a step back and realize what this is. We aren't deciding the fate of some country or writing laws. This is a forum full of kids and young adults.
I've been here longer than some kids playing rust have been alive. If I've learned anything over almost a decade and a half is to not take things on here too seriously.[/QUOTE]
Maybe I'm not giving kids enough credit but they're easily to manipulate and patterns they learn when young stick with them. Tudd misrepresenting crime demographics and trying to rile up fear/distrust of immigrants (specifically muslim/middle eastern/north african ones) will be having a real effect on people.
Ironically he's similar to those radical islamist hate preachers, in that he sews distrust and hatred but plays just within to rules to avoid punishment.
He shouldn't be banned but he should probably stop. Half of me thinks its all/partially an act just to troll people, the avatars and the sarcastic comments in SH. If the topic wasn't so grim (him trying to make people fear others based on colour of skin/where they come from) the whole tudd ordeal would be pretty funny.
[QUOTE=Exploderguy;52180435]Can we have a talk shit about tudd thread somewhere else please? I keep coming here noticing 100+ posts expecting something cool like a new mod or something but I'm greeted with some cunts whining[/QUOTE]
Tudd thread and if it reaches 5000 posts Tudd gets banned, but also anyone who posts inside the thread gets banned too
[QUOTE=NachoPiggy;52180452]Tudd thread and if it reaches 5000 posts Tudd gets banned, but also anyone who posts inside the thread gets banned too[/QUOTE]
postal logs onto kiwi's account and posts 5000 times
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52178603]Disclaimer: I don't care about Tudd one way or the other.[/QUOTE]
*proceeds to write a 655 word post about Tudd*
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52178603]I don't think people are upset by the news he posts. I'm just guessing though. I could be wrong.[/QUOTE]
Nobody would care if he was posting content that fit in with their political views.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52178603]As far as I can tell "shitposting" is more or less moderator discretion and since you think he is the MVP of SH the of course he isn't shitposting.[/QUOTE]
It's subjective. Shitposting is the act of posting shit posts. The definition of "shit" changes with each moderator.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52178603]Also the fact that you banned the guy who responded to someone posting an image macro for "shitposting", coincidently after he made a post you might find upsetting, makes me wary about what you yourself consider shitposting.[/QUOTE]
I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about here. I don't remember him posting anything else, other than him being a dick to whoever posted a strawman image. I don't tend to find anything on this website upsetting, because I am an adult. Don't be worried about what I consider shitposting. If I wanted to ban you, I just would. I don't need to justify it.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52178603]Didn't you ban someone for flaming Trump.[/QUOTE]
:why:
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52178603]What is the "matter appropriate for that section" because the rules change constantly.[/QUOTE]
How exactly do the "rules change constantly"? They have remained largely the same for [B]years[/B]. The updated thread I posted in February was just a rewording of the 20 odd bullet point list that was the former rules for that section. The revisions since then have been minor.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52178603]Is it ok if you "call out Tudd's bullshit" and then explain why whatever he posted is wrong?[/QUOTE]
Yes. We're banning people for acting like children and having tantrums. Read the guidelines of the section and compose a reply that adheres to them.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52178603]Wait I thought we divided up SH and Politics* because things were getting too serious. Now you want people to be super serious responsible debaters? I'm gettin some mixed messages here Hezzy. [/QUOTE]
Read the guidelines. It really isn't that hard to understand. We want people to put effort into their posts. There are no mixed messages, you are just confused but I am not exactly sure how. The rules are literally copied and pasted for both sections with some minor alterations.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52178603]*I'd also like to take this time to say "told you so" regarding the whole split. [/QUOTE]
I have no idea what you're on about.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52178603]As for disrespect, is it disrespectful to assume the people you are talking to are thin skinned sheep who can't think for themselves? Because I know atleast one person who should be banned, were that the case.[/QUOTE]
If people were thick skinned, we wouldn't have to ban the legions of people who throw their toys out of their pram every time Tudd makes a post.
[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;52180093]So let me just understand here. If I were to post every article I could find of cherry-picked incidents of, say, bearded people committing crimes, and included a "just wanted to share this with you guys, just want to balance out the forums to show what bearded people can do in our modern society" in every OP, would I get banned? It's legitimate news articles just like Tudd posts, but over-representing a particular group of people as far as crimes go and implying a causative factor without actually providing evidence, just like Tudd's doing.[/QUOTE]
No. I'd just think you were a silly person with an obvious anti-beard agenda, stop reading what you were writing and move on.
[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;52180098]If that's what you truly believe be my guest, though just like anyone else regardless of content if all you do is thread after thread after thread you'll get banned for spamming. Also you need to take into account the news sources that you use as outline in the SH rules.[/QUOTE]
Just curious, I remember one guy got banned for constantly posting "Florida man" news. How is constantly posting "illegal immigrant committing crime" news different?
Can we talk about the editorialising titles thing?
People are getting banned over seemingly innocuous titles.
Some people make purposeful shitty titles (me) and get banned for it but that shouldn't be a reason to flat out ban anybody for editorialising titles.
Under this system there is no option to make fun titles with alliteration or word play type titles. It takes some of the Soul out of SH and leads to people arguing and mod involvement where the majority of people would have been happy without mod involvement. Don't get me wrong you guys do a great job but the editorialising titles flat rule seems unnecessary.
News papers/MSM news outlets play with titles and they're 5 or 6 levels below the average facepunch user in terms of e-credz and general pizzazz.
Is the aim to stop all title changes or to make mods jobs easier by easing the burden of agency regarding whether or not a title is ok? Would Sartre not say that is living in bad faith??
[QUOTE=Rika-chan;52180700]Just curious, I remember one guy got banned for constantly posting "Florida man" news. How is constantly posting "illegal immigrant committing crime" news different?[/QUOTE]
I think it's because Florida man became more of a forced meme/shitpost and users just started to search for any news related to Florida and added Florida man on every title, which resulted in threads just going "oh hey that damn kooky Florida man just don't know when to stop!" without any real discussion. Sorta similar I think on how news puns/mojo posts were banned before.
[QUOTE=NachoPiggy;52180707]I think it's because Florida man became more of a forced meme/shitpost and users just started to search for any news related to Florida and added Florida man on every title, which resulted in threads just going "oh hey that damn kooky Florida man just don't know when to stop!" without any real discussion. Sorta similar I think on how news puns/mojo posts were banned before.[/QUOTE]
Makes sense, it has been so long I forgot how bad the contents of those threads got.
Didn't somebody else get banned because they kept posting Michigan news? Could be remembering wrong though.
[QUOTE=Rika-chan;52180711]Makes sense, it has been so long I forgot how bad the contents of those threads got.
Didn't somebody else get banned because they kept posting Michigan news? Could be remembering wrong though.[/QUOTE]
Pretty sure that's because he kept posting stuff about his hometown or w/e and tried connecting everything to himself.
[QUOTE=Marbalo;52180856]The fact that folks are this upset over selective news articles posted by a dude who clearly has his own agenda just like the rest of us and are actively asking for the guy to either be banned or the ignore system revised to accommodate their weird hurt feelings is inane and completely lacks any form of perspective.[/QUOTE]
People keep saying this but I don't recall anyone saying Tudd should actually be banned? In fact quite a few people explicitly stated they [I]don't[/I] think he should be banned so I dunno where people keep getting this bullshit from.
time to mod Tudd again
Tudd this Tudd that, why is this thread 95% about Tudd all the time?
[QUOTE=gastyne;52180931]Tudd this Tudd that, why is this thread 95% about Tudd all the time?[/QUOTE]
Ye you're right!
lets talk about editorialising thread titles! thats a topic we can all get behind. Maybe make a poll and trial it for a month?
On an unrelated note, when are the SH and Polidicks forum icons going to get fixed?
Hey I just want to tell the mods I'm sorry for fat fingering reports sometimes. I've smoccasionally reported someone for warez when I meant flaming, etc. Or I've accidentally reported someone while trying to hit a rating. So sorry about that.
[QUOTE=Kecske;52180966]On an unrelated note, when are the SH and Polidicks forum icons going to get fixed?[/QUOTE]
When we get an icon for polidicks and nag Garry enough to login to ftp to add a single image.
So never basically.
[QUOTE=Reagy;52180999]When we get an icon for polidicks and nag Garry enough to login to ftp to add a single image.
So never basically.[/QUOTE]
we can't even blackmail him with his dick pics because he plasters them all over his twitter
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/Y4ouotm.png[/IMG]
it's getting weird, folks
[editline]3rd May 2017[/editline]
tudd for banword 2018
[QUOTE=Mining Bill;52181030][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/Y4ouotm.png[/IMG]
it's getting weird, folks
[editline]3rd May 2017[/editline]
tudd for banword 2018[/QUOTE]
Suddenly, Tudd becomes he who shall not be named
Man I wish I could get this much attention for writing words on a forum.
Just seeing the outrage over someone not breaking the rules is kinda silly. People need to go outside more often if it rules you up this bad.
now that tudd is over can we talk about editorialising title now?
[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52181043]now that tudd is over can we talk about editorialising title now?[/QUOTE]
I think the rules have always been "don't make up a snappier title". If the source title is sensational/false, it's best you just don't use that source
[QUOTE=Reagy;52180999]When we get an icon for polidicks and nag Garry enough to login to ftp to add a single image.
So never basically.[/QUOTE]
Well there had been a few strong contesters already, my favourite is probably this one:
[QUOTE=lope;52067979]If it's not the dumb box is it a box?
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/uegEuoM.png[/IMG]
All credit goes to you, of course. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Rika-chan;52180700]Just curious, I remember one guy got banned for constantly posting "Florida man" news. How is constantly posting "illegal immigrant committing crime" news different?[/QUOTE]
It must've been an accidental ban, he clearly just wanted to make people on Facepunch hate Florida so it should've been fine
I don't really see the problem with having a discussion about a user if people want to do so. Better to actually have a discussion about it than to leave it bottled up when it's clearly causing so much tension in the first place. Tudd is a large and active force in sociopolitical discussion on facepunch, something that has become an increasingly big part of the site, and so it's only natural that some people would have criticisms for the way that he posts in that context.
I'll keep this concise. The only reason I have an issue with Tudd is that he isn't receptive to any opposing viewpoints and, in having a laser-focus on only certain types of news, makes things out to be bigger issues than they actually are. This sort of agenda pushing is incredibly good at guiding perception, which is why I think that it's dangerous and unacceptable. To be honest, I don't see banning him being much of a solution, and introducing some measure against agenda-pushing would largely be too subjective and oppressive to work.
The way I see it is that banning people calling out Tudd within the threads he makes only makes things worse and inflames the issue further. As far as I'm concerned, criticizing the presentation of an issue [I]is[/I] part of discussing the issue and shouldn't really count as derailing. This is particularly true as by criticizing how often Tudd posts immigrant crimes, you're making a comment on how prevalent this issue actually is which is a reasonable segue into the issue itself.
If people get tired enough of these posts they'll get dumbed and pushed out by public opinion. What I see is more of just unreasonable protectionism of Tudd as some sort of last bastion of impartiality on FP which is just as absurd as it sounds. As people have mentioned in the past, there are plenty of conservative posters that are much better posters and cause much less trouble than Tudd (and some others) does.
I wish i was this popular.
Man that Metaru guy is the worst. Can we ban him?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.