Important Civility Rules Enforcement

[Bacle]

Honestly, I thought we replaced "fag" with "cuck".

It's more accurate in what people are trying to say, anyway. Although I honestly think fag/faggot is overblown...maybe not something we should have sprawled across our message board with a small user base.

With regards to 'fag/faggot', I generally think it's a crap terms to use for insults, because it has meant a lot of things in the past that had nothing to do with homosexuality or that stuff.

In fact, South Park did a whole episode on how the word has changed:

 

[The Name of Love]

Honestly, I'll probably close my account after this. I don't trust the moderators to do a good job. The moment you start screaming about muh racism and conspiracy theories, you've lost me.

 

[Deleted member 1]

Honestly, I'll probably close my account after this. I don't trust the moderators to do a good job. The moment you start screaming about muh racism and conspiracy theories, you've lost me.

I do admit that the banner may have gone too far. It does imply a crackdown on ideas, from a certain reading, which was not my intent, and so to some extent I agree with you. Would you be happy if it was edited to remove that sentence?

 

[Flintsteel]

Since it seems hard for people to understand, I'm just going to quote the entire civility rule here:

Rule 2 – Civility Rules​

The purpose of this website and forum is to promote the exchange of ideas in a civil manner, upholding the value of freedom of speech. In order to fulfill this purpose certain exchanges between users which are unproductive are prohibited. In addition, material very likely to provoke such exchanges may not be posted on the boards. This includes, but is not limited to;

• a) Racial, ethnic, religious and other slurs solely intended to demean a person for a group identity. A non-exhaustive set of examples includes “Nigger”, “Kike”, “Spic”, “Faggot”, “Slant”, etc.
• b) Entering a thread solely to insult another poster without addressing the topic at hand.
• c) Posting inflammatory content in an attempt to bait other users to violate the civility rules.
• d) Coordinated efforts to overwhelm a single poster (eg ‘dogpiling’) by a group of other posters.
• e) Accusations of being or belonging to a political extremist group or holding an extremist ideology, unless the poster self-identifies as such or can be proved to be such, with the accuser having the burden of proving their accusation.
• f) Drastically derailing a thread from the topic established by the original poster.
• g) Attempts to organize harassment of posters, individuals, or other websites.
• h) Harassing behaviour toward another member.

Read it, learn it, understand it. It is not hard.

The major change is we used to look for a violation of a specific, lettered point, when the intent was those were guidelines, not an exhaustive list. This misunderstanding by moderation has been corrected.

 

[LordSunhawk]

Again, I'll reiterate that the rules have always been clear, with bright lines established.

Rule 2 – Civility Rules

The purpose of this website and forum is to promote the exchange of ideas in a civil manner, upholding the value of freedom of speech. In order to fulfill this purpose certain exchanges between users which are unproductive are prohibited. In addition, material very likely to provoke such exchanges may not be posted on the boards. This includes, but is not limited to;

• a) Racial, ethnic, religious and other slurs solely intended to demean a person for a group identity. A non-exhaustive set of examples includes “Nigger”, “Kike”, “Spic”, “Faggot”, “Slant”, etc.
• b) Entering a thread solely to insult another poster without addressing the topic at hand.
• c) Posting inflammatory content in an attempt to bait other users to violate the civility rules.
• d) Coordinated efforts to overwhelm a single poster (eg ‘dogpiling’) by a group of other posters.
• e) Accusations of being or belonging to a political extremist group or holding an extremist ideology, unless the poster self-identifies as such or can be proved to be such, with the accuser having the burden of proving their accusation.
• f) Drastically derailing a thread from the topic established by the original poster.
• g) Attempts to organize harassment of posters, individuals, or other websites.
• h) Harassing behaviour toward another member.

Note 2a, note 2c, note 2e, 2f, and 2h.

These have been the bright line rules from the start. As mods we've been trying to enforce these with as light a touch as possible, but lately there are is a small minority of posters who seem to be taking these rules as challenges of the 'I'm not touching you' variety, to skate as close as possible to them without getting called on it, or blatantly flying over the line and then complaining when they get called on it or declaring it as a 'joke'.

If you simply follow those rules, you will be fine no matter if you love your Hoppean Snake Memes, Helicopter Rides, or whatever else.

 

[Duke Nukem]

I do admit that the banner may have gone too far. It does imply a crackdown on ideas, from a certain reading, which was not my intent, and so to some extent I agree with you. Would you be happy if it was edited to remove that sentence?

I don't think he can respond, since it seems he has closed his account already.

 

[The Original Sixth]

I do admit that the banner may have gone too far. It does imply a crackdown on ideas, from a certain reading, which was not my intent, and so to some extent I agree with you. Would you be happy if it was edited to remove that sentence?

It did alarm me when I first saw it.

Anyway, I felt the thread helped to flesh out where the problems were. I admit to having been lax in my work on the forum and I should reach out to some friends and see if we can get them to sign up. I think most of them are conservative, but I think they're all very intelligent. I'll get in touch with them sometime this week.

 

[Deleted member 1]

@The Original Sixth thank you for that effort, I really appreciate it.

I see that The Name of Love has deactivated his account anyway, and I am sorry for that, but that's his choice.

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

Or they do not want us to be like KF where we can call each other the N word, use it to make fun of people, call the LGBT people on the forum slurs even if they take offense. Would you like it if I called you a Uberrilgiuos biggot who thinks Jacen is fucking god? (I am tired and it is horrible but I am giving an example)
How about talking hate about your religion?

I mean we have seen how you react when people disagree about Jacen. Calling them stupid basically because they don't see your way,

I wouldn't personally care and I doubt invictus would either. This rule seems designed to target the only users that hilariously bring activity to the site.

Like it or not your louder edgier voices are the only voices that prolong threads and call to the attention of potential users and the moment you stiffen them the moment you are going to set a precedent that will turn users off.

.


And Threadbanned. Here's an example of the kind of behavior that is no longer being tolerated.

You realize he baited you into banning him so that he could make you guys look like overzealous and hyper aggressive mods fearful of resistance?

Jury is still out on if he succeeded but you walked into that and it does no one any favors that you did.

Bad ideas such as racism and intolerance can be debated without throwing slurs at people.

They can be and regularly are debated here and you can even be theatrical in your debate style which I do and even use shitposty examples as what.to look for in different gaggles of idiots.

I think the like they want drawn is if @Zachowon and I have another of our famous debates about whether or not the average IC member needs to be tried for sedition and treason and if convicted face the full consequences of that. Rosenberg style that if he calls me a basement dwelling autist in response and I refer to him as a glowie we would both eat a ban for being petulant assholes.

Presumably unless we were just screwing around?

Which is a fair point. I've argued fervently I do believe people on the left should face capital punishment for their conduct, I've argued the need for the government to take the leashes off the militias and to create something like the AAA.

But ive been extremely careful to make damn sure its clear im talking about doing so from the position of it being legally sanctioned. I'm not a fan of random acts of insane violence. Mostly having lived through what that does to a country its a profoundly stupid idea for any side of the aisle to engage in it. I think I've been good in making that distinction clear.

Saying ya oughta just light up cops for enforcing plague laws is indefensible and TBH if he wasn't called out in the thread im honestly kind of surprised over it. Because you kinda should.

Which brings me to the crux of my issue. The staff are asking us to inform our friends and they're doing it in an attempt to change the perceived cultural shift on the site.

That is not why many of you came here, many of you are here to escape that kind of culture.

What they should be asking is for you guys to body the dude for talking crazy even if informing on a buddy feels wrong.

 

[Spartan303]

Honestly, I'll probably close my account after this. I don't trust the moderators to do a good job. The moment you start screaming about muh racism and conspiracy theories, you've lost me.

Ironic as from what I saw you were actually a victim of some of this.

 

[LordSunhawk]

I wouldn't personally care and I doubt invictus would either. This rule seems designed to target the only users that hilariously bring activity to the site.

Like it or not your louder edgier voices are the only voices that prolong threads and call to the attention of potential users and the moment you stiffen them the moment you are going to set a precedent that will turn users off.



You realize he baited you into banning him so that he could make you guys look like overzealous and hyper aggressive mods fearful of resistance?

Jury is still out on if he succeeded but you walked into that and it does no one any favors that you did.



They can be and regularly are debated here and you can even be theatrical in your debate style which I do and even use shitposty examples as what.to look for in different gaggles of idiots.

I think the like they want drawn is if @Zachowon and I have another of our famous debates about whether or not the average IC member needs to be tried for sedition and treason and if convicted face the full consequences of that. Rosenberg style that if he calls me a basement dwelling autist in response and I refer to him as a glowie we would both eat a ban for being petulant assholes.

Presumably unless we were just screwing around?

Which is a fair point. I've argued fervently I do believe people on the left should face capital punishment for their conduct, I've argued the need for the government to take the leashes off the militias and to create something like the AAA.

But ive been extremely careful to make damn sure its clear im talking about doing so from the position of it being legally sanctioned. I'm not a fan of random acts of insane violence. Mostly having lived through what that does to a country its a profoundly stupid idea for any side of the aisle to engage in it. I think I've been good in making that distinction clear.

Saying ya oughta just light up cops for enforcing plague laws is indefensible and TBH if he wasn't called out in the thread im honestly kind of surprised over it. Because you kinda should.

Which brings me to the crux of my issue. The staff are asking us to inform our friends and they're doing it in an attempt to change the perceived cultural shift on the site.

That is not why many of you came here, many of you are here to escape that kind of culture.

What they should be asking is for you guys to body the dude for talking crazy even if informing on a buddy feels wrong.

What we are hoping for is that people will behave themselves. If you see a fellow poster posting crazy shit in violation of the rules, we as mods would like to know so we can deal with it. Hopefully with a friendly warning that puts everything back on track or a mod voice post that cools peoples jets.

If I go through an entire month without a single report? I'm happy! If I have to deal with a dozen before breakfast... I'm not happy, but that's my job.

 

[Flintsteel]

I think the like they want drawn is if @Zachowon and I have another of our famous debates about whether or not the average IC member needs to be tried for sedition and treason and if convicted face the full consequences of that. Rosenberg style that if he calls me a basement dwelling autist in response and I refer to him as a glowie we would both eat a ban for being petulant assholes.

Presumably unless we were just screwing around?

Unfortunately, tone and familiarity do not translate well in text. While those kinds of joking insults are the norm in in-person interaction with friends, normally in a private environment, this forum is public. And the public cannot tell the nature of those insults, which leads to them being taken completely at face value. This creates a bad optics of the site in general, and is the sort of thing we would prefer there to be less of.

It would be more acceptable in a private subforum of the NSFW forums, as those are not public. It still is something we would prefer to minimize, as it tends to coarser discussion which we feel detracts from the overall board culture.

 

[Duke Nukem]

Unfortunately, tone and familiarity do not translate well in text. While those kinds of joking insults are the norm in in-person interaction with friends, normally in a private environment, this forum is public. And the public cannot tell the nature of those insults, which leads to them being taken completely at face value. This creates a bad optics of the site in general, and is the sort of thing we would prefer there to be less of.

It would be more acceptable in a private subforum of the NSFW forums, as those are not public. It still is something we would prefer to minimize, as it tends to coarser discussion which we feel detracts from the overall board culture.

Honestly the people on our sister sites will always see us as evil nazis no matter what we do, just because we're to the right of them.

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

What we are hoping for is that people will behave themselves. If you see a fellow poster posting crazy shit in violation of the rules, we as mods would like to know so we can deal with it. Hopefully with a friendly warning that puts everything back on track or a mod voice post that cools peoples jets.

Which is perfectly understandable. My issue isn't with that, that goes without saying and all you have to do is make a mod post in that thread to the effect of "SMH dudes, next time report this nonsense".

Everyone, their mother and the kitchen sink is objecting to the implementation of a new policy, one that reads like an Orwellian nightmare and was proven by Ships antics to be subject to the emotional whims of the staff...one that mandates a culture of informing.

That is why many people are here...to not have to be subject to such abuses by policy.

I have had my subscriptions cancelled purely out of prejudice by the site owner, solely because the site owner takes umbrage with the fact that I'll stand up to what I see as misconduct being hidden behind rules...Given the beliefs of the site owner and the things I know said owner has been subjected too by Isilzha and others..the fact that said owner thought it was morally acceptable to treat me with the same level of exclusionism solely as an excuse to feel better about the fact that there wass face loss involved..speaks to a dangerous level of either hypocrisy or a lack of self awareness.

And frankly, after still being subjected to that abuse with no reversal in course, purely out of what I can only surmise is vindictiveness. Because I have been given no honest explanation otherwise..makes me question how much anyone can trust such a policy.

Simply put, you've already got people saying they're shutting their accounts down..and nothing is being done to disprove the concerns of said people.

the public examples that Zoe or others made of many of us for no legitimate reason..outweigh the responsible moderating done by some of you and it's not unreasonable to expect people to be irate, mistrusting and feeling more than a little betrayed.

Or to be less "hostile" what I'm saying is, you guys are now introducing rules that intimidate your base..Your base is your bread and butter and telling them to go fuck themselves and deal is most counterproductive.

Unfortunately, tone and familiarity do not translate well in text. While those kinds of joking insults are the norm in in-person interaction with friends, normally in a private environment, this forum is public. And the public cannot tell the nature of those insults, which leads to them being taken completely at face value. This creates a bad optics of the site in general, and is the sort of thing we would prefer there to be less of.

It would be more acceptable in a private subforum of the NSFW forums, as those are not public. It still is something we would prefer to minimize, as it tends to coarser discussion which we feel detracts from the overall board culture.

When one of the people making the comment spams images like the ones I used to spam after making the comment. If the people making the reports, anyone who does not recognize that both parties are being sarcastic is not someone whose reports are worthy of consideration?

I've never truly understood this argument "Sarcasm doesn't translate well over text" has always read like a moderator cop out..A justification for laziness, or an unwillingness to familiarize themselves with the players of the game..and the "townsfolk" and their eccentricities so to speak.


.....Which considering you guys operate dupe accounts so you can walk among the plebes (Something I think is genuinely disturbing speaks to some serious authoritarianism. No one can be honest about anything if they don't know if the person they're talking to is a mod dupe or not). shouldn't be an issue here..nor an excuse raised.

Honestly the people on our sister sites will always see us as evil nazis no matter what we do, just because we're to the right of them.

Faux civility is what kills forums..worrying about what people who will never let up in their vendetta against you is the hallmark of desperation for a restoration of acceptance in that group.

It's not even appeasement..its begging Isil and Thanatos and Octavian and all the members of the lunatic brigade on all those splinters to take you back...at the expense of the community built here.

It is the mindset of a battered spouse, abandoning her children to return to the man who knocks teeth out of her mouth every time she botches a sandwhich.

 

[Spartan303]

Honestly the people on our sister sites will always see us as evil nazis no matter what we do, just because we're to the right of them.

Yes they will and we cant help that. But that doesnt mean supplying them with ready made ammunition. And honestly, all we are saying is that we are enforcing the rules everyone agreed too.

 

[LordSunhawk]

Which is perfectly understandable. My issue isn't with that, that goes without saying and all you have to do is make a mod post in that thread to the effect of "SMH dudes, next time report this nonsense".

Everyone, their mother and the kitchen sink is objective to the implementation of a new policy, one that reads like an Orwellian nightmare and was proven by Ships antics to be subject to the emotional whims of the staff...one that mandates a culture of informing.

That is why many people are here...to not have to be subject to such abuses by policy.

I have had my subscriptions cancelled purely out of prejudice by the site owner, solely because the site owner takes umbrage with the fact that I'll stand up to what I see as misconduct being hidden behind rules...Given the beliefs of the site owner and the things I know said owner has been subjected too by Isilzha and others..the fact that said owner thought it was morally acceptable to treat me with the same level of exclusionism solely as an excuse to feel better about the fact that there wass face loss involved..speaks to a dangerous level of either hypocrisy or a lack of self awareness.

And frankly, after still being subjected to that abuse with no reversal in course, purely out of what I can only surmise is vindictiveness. Because I have been given no honest explanation otherwise..makes me question how much anyone can trust such a policy.

Simply put, you've already got people saying they're shutting their accounts down..and nothing is being done to disprove the concerns of the people therein.

the public examples that Zoe made of many of us for no legitimate reason..outweigh the responsible moderating done by some of you and it's not unreasonable to expect people to be irate, mistrusting and feeling more than a little betrayed




When one of the people making the comment spams images like the ones I used to spam after making the comment. If the people making the reports, anyone who does not recognize that both parties are being sarcastic is not someone whose reports are worthy of consideration?

I've never truly understood this argument "Sarcasm doesn't translate well over text" has always read like a moderator cop out..A justification for laziness, or an unwillingness to familiarize themselves with the players of the game..and the "townsfolk" and their eccentricities so to speak.


.....Which considering you guys operate dupe accounts so you can walk among the plebes (Something I think is genuinely disturbing speaks to some serious authoritarianism. No one can be honest about anything if they don't know if the person they're talking to is a mod dupe or not). shouldn't be an issue here..nor an excuse raised.

Look, I understand. I love Zoe as a sister, and I understand where you are coming from.

Just the problem is that there are people who simply put are bad actors, who are here trying to constantly test the limits, and who cannot seem to comprehend the concept of 'civility' as applied to them. This entire situation is down to them, not to you, not to regular posters, not to people who simply post passionately. It's on the trolls and edgelords who just want to make trouble.

You know the phrase a bad apple spoils the barrel? That's the case here, we have a few bad apples, so it's forcing a crackdown that has the good apples nervous. Don't be, just continue as you have, and I promise that you will know if you are near the edge.

99% of you will be just fine.

 

[Deleted member 1]

Which is perfectly understandable. My issue isn't with that, that goes without saying and all you have to do is make a mod post in that thread to the effect of "SMH dudes, next time report this nonsense".

Everyone, their mother and the kitchen sink is objective to the implementation of a new policy, one that reads like an Orwellian nightmare and was proven by Ships antics to be subject to the emotional whims of the staff...one that mandates a culture of informing.

That is why many people are here...to not have to be subject to such abuses by policy.

I have had my subscriptions cancelled purely out of prejudice by the site owner, solely because the site owner takes umbrage with the fact that I'll stand up to what I see as misconduct being hidden behind rules...Given the beliefs of the site owner and the things I know said owner has been subjected too by Isilzha and others..the fact that said owner thought it was morally acceptable to treat me with the same level of exclusionism solely as an excuse to feel better about the fact that there wass face loss involved..speaks to a dangerous level of either hypocrisy or a lack of self awareness.

And frankly, after still being subjected to that abuse with no reversal in course, purely out of what I can only surmise is vindictiveness. Because I have been given no honest explanation otherwise..makes me question how much anyone can trust such a policy.

Simply put, you've already got people saying they're shutting their accounts down..and nothing is being done to disprove the concerns of said people.

the public examples that Zoe or others made of many of us for no legitimate reason..outweigh the responsible moderating done by some of you and it's not unreasonable to expect people to be irate, mistrusting and feeling more than a little betrayed.

Or to be less "hostile" what I'm saying is, you guys are now introducing rules that intimidate your base..Your base is your bread and butter and telling them to go fuck themselves and deal is most counterproductive.




When one of the people making the comment spams images like the ones I used to spam after making the comment. If the people making the reports, anyone who does not recognize that both parties are being sarcastic is not someone whose reports are worthy of consideration?

I've never truly understood this argument "Sarcasm doesn't translate well over text" has always read like a moderator cop out..A justification for laziness, or an unwillingness to familiarize themselves with the players of the game..and the "townsfolk" and their eccentricities so to speak.


.....Which considering you guys operate dupe accounts so you can walk among the plebes (Something I think is genuinely disturbing speaks to some serious authoritarianism. No one can be honest about anything if they don't know if the person they're talking to is a mod dupe or not). shouldn't be an issue here..nor an excuse raised.



Faux civility is what kills forums..worrying about what people who will never let up in their vendetta against you is the hallmark of desperation for a restoration of acceptance in that group.

It's not even appeasement..its begging Isil and Thanatos and Octavian and all the members of the lunatic brigade on all those splinters to take you back...at the expense of the community built here.

It is the mindset of a battered spouse, abandoning her children to return to the man who knocks teeth out of her mouth every time she botches a sandwhich.

I have restored you to the Hetman and Obozny User Groups, free of charge. Let me know if you don't get any of the privileges, and I'll work in the administrative system to add them. The intent was to remove your ability to give the company money, and in making a business decision to do that, I should have given you those privileges complementarily, but I didn't, and I apologise for that.

 

[The Immortal Watch Dog]

Yes they will and we can help that. But that doesnt mean supplying them with ready made ammunition. And honestly, all we are saying is that we are enforcing the rules everyone agreed too.

But no one is advocating Nazism be tolerated...Unless you let me call them wellfare kweens and Teen mom fetishists 🤣 🤣

No, but seriously no one is saying "Lets tolerate guys who babble about blasting cops" and more "Buddy, ammunition for them is the simple act of you reading my EFC fanfic and liking it"

You could wish Duke Nukem good morning and that is enough proof of fascism in their minds and they'll just start photoshopping evidence again...like they did before if it isn't

@LordSunhawk Congradulating me on being off the nose candy will somehow be interpreted as him being evil and wanting to put me in a death camp

Just the problem is that there are people who simply put are bad actors, who are here trying to constantly test the limits, and who cannot seem to comprehend the concept of 'civility' as applied to them. This entire situation is down to them, not to you, not to regular posters, not to people who simply post passionately. It's on the trolls and edgelords who just want to make trouble.

Loathe as I am to engage in open mouth brigade speak..But isn't this the rhetoric Nightwatch used on B5?

And to be clear, Nightwatch had a legitimate point at the start...Look where it went and look at how swiftly it went that way? We already have an S mod being duped into banning a dude in a blatant maneuver to discredit the rules before they're even old and an S mod taking it hook line and siunker.

You know the phrase a bad apple spoils the barrel? That's the case here, we have a few bad apples, so it's forcing a crackdown that has the good apples nervous. Don't be, just continue as you have, and I promise that you will know if you are near the edge.

I really don't want to be going with the Nightwatch theme...Especially so soon after burying the hatchet with you...but come on dude..You have to have realized how what you typed can be taken?

For the record.. I'm not even against reporting fuckheads who think it's a genius move to go "Yo lets shoot up cops"

Had the dude simply said "When police officers stop protecting the citizenry and enforce laws designed to harm the citizenry then they stop being your neighborhood bobbies and start being a hostile occupying force" he'd have probably gotten called an edge lord like I've been called but he wouldn't be on vacation.

So..you're right...But all I'm saying is that this could have been handled..not by the creation of new policy, but by reminding users not to be lazy.

And that brings me to my second point..You guys assumed malice on the part of the users for not reporting..as opposed to simply not..reporting for no particular reason...The assumption of malice stinks of post hoc justification.

And you know how that looks..all of you here...know how that looks. You've all been on the receiving end of the abuse that can form a prextext for.

So maybe you should walk back the policy enhancement and go back to telling us to be less lazy?

99% of you will be just fine.

I hope so, I just think you guys are solving a lack of motion problem with Roman style decimation.

I have restored you to the Hetman and Obozny User Groups, free of charge. Let me know if you don't get any of the privileges, and I'll work in the administrative system to add them. The intent was to remove your ability to give the company money, and in making a business decision to do that, I should have given you those privileges complementarily, but I didn't, and I apologise for that.

That's still rather...odd to me seeing as I have done nothing malicious to affect the company's bottom line and yet you blackballed me..That was my whole issue there..it remains an area of confusion. It came off as retaliatory for a loss of public face..And it cast an odd aspersion on me..by implication that's simply factually incorrect. While I appreciate the gesture, I remain in the dark.

My whole issue with this, in this thread..beyond the phrasing is more you guys are trying to put out a brush fire with nitroglycerin. You can keep the overton window from shifting to the "Ein reich, ein teen mom, ein gibz!" crowd...And no one who is mentally well adjusted could blame you for that.

But attempting to forestall a counter cultural shift that's militantly anti PC...Well..that was attempted in the 90's and had the power of multiple Governments behind it..and it failed, dismally and for good reason.

Attempting that by force merely feeds the beast.

Stop me if my point isn't sounding sensical.

 

[Aldarion]

We don't give a damn about "hate speech" as a concept. Nor about what other environments allow and expect.

What we do care about is the environment that we set out to create and maintain. Think of TS as being invited to Thanksgiving at your grandmother's with the whole extended family. You can have frank, civil, and pleasant discussion about controversial topics but even if your grandmother agreed with a slur she would still smack you upside the head for polluting her home with them.

We expect polite and civil behavior.

While I agree with the whole "maintain civil discussion thing", the problem I can see here is a potential for slippery slope. Specifically:

c) Posting inflammatory content in an attempt to bait other users to violate the civility rules.

How do you differentiate content that is inflammatory from content that is intended to be inflammatory?

Look, I understand. I love Zoe as a sister, and I understand where you are coming from.

Just the problem is that there are people who simply put are bad actors, who are here trying to constantly test the limits, and who cannot seem to comprehend the concept of 'civility' as applied to them. This entire situation is down to them, not to you, not to regular posters, not to people who simply post passionately. It's on the trolls and edgelords who just want to make trouble.

You know the phrase a bad apple spoils the barrel? That's the case here, we have a few bad apples, so it's forcing a crackdown that has the good apples nervous. Don't be, just continue as you have, and I promise that you will know if you are near the edge.

99% of you will be just fine.

See above. While I have never gone out of the way to insult someone, I also have a track record of not being able to tell when something might be seen as insulting by other people. How do you differentiate the two?

 

[Deleted member 1]

Well that's a step in the right direction....Thank you

My whole issue with this, in this thread..beyond the phrasing is more you guys are trying to put out a brush fire with nitroglycerin. You can keep the overton window from shifting to the "Ein reich, ein teen mom, ein gibz!" crowd...And no one who is mentally well adjusted could blame you for that.

But attempting to forestall a counter cultural shift that's militantly anti PC...Well..that was attempted in the 90's and had the power of multiple Governments behind it..and it failed, dismally and for good reason.

Attempting that by force merely feeds the beast.

Stop me if my point isn't sounding sensical.

It's not about political correctness. If you want to be taken seriously, then please take me seriously: I sincerely believe that the culture of 8Chan, KF, etc, is completely self-defeating. I sincerely believe that politeness, order, harmony, and niceness are the weapons of conservatism and civilisation... I sincerely believe that the only way to be "based" is to be polite, to not swear, to dress nicely, to act nicely in public. In the case of this webforum, I sincerely believe the only way that conservatives will ever make headway is by demonstrating that we can be polite in promoting our ideals.