Poll of the Day > Lmaooo we can't post about politics here anymore

(+) Yeah! (+)

I've been saying for years that if you aren't allowed to express one side of a discussion then discussion is not actually allowed. I see GameFAQs has finally clarified that they don't allow you to express your political beliefs. Now about all the the other subjects I've been suspended for having an opinion on. Will GameFAQs prevent discussion of those by both sides as well?

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

I've been saying for years that if you aren't allowed to express one side of a discussion then discussion is not actually allowed. I see GameFAQs has finally clarified that they don't allow you to express your political beliefs. Now about all the the other subjects I've been suspended for having an opinion on. Will GameFAQs prevent discussion of those by both sides as well?

Solution: close down all the boards.

Some people just want to see the world burn

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

I've been saying for years that if you aren't allowed to express one side of a discussion then discussion is not actually allowed.

Generally speaking, the discussions in which one "side" isn't permitted are discussions no decent person should ever want to have. Nine times out of ten, "I'm being persecuted for having an unpopular opinion" means something along the lines of "people didn't like me suggesting that the world would be improved if all the gay people died," which just isn't an opinion that has enough value to justify how clearly inflammatory it is. I've seen the line tossed around that "calling bigotry an opinion is like calling arsenic a flavour," and putting aside the technicality that arsenic is flavourless, I think it makes a good point: It is, technically, an opinion/flavour, but it does significantly more harm than good and there's therefore no reason to think that way or bring it up unless you're trying to hurt people.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

I've been saying for years that if you aren't allowed to express one side of a discussion then discussion is not actually allowed.

I've never seen anyone banned for expressing a political opinion.

I've seen people banned for discrimination, hatred, advocating violence, and misinformation, but unless you feel those are political views, that's not what this is about.

darkknight109 posted...

I've never seen anyone banned for expressing a political opinion.

I did have some rather lengthy suspensions for that.

darkknight109 posted...

but unless you feel those are political views, that's not what this is about.

I've been suspended for answering this previously.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

I did have some rather lengthy suspensions for that.

Having seen some of the things you were suspended for in the past, no, you weren't.

Thank god Duckbear wasn't here to see this. RIP to a real one.

I'll be interested to see if this turn in convo gets the topic removed or just their posts.

What constitutes "political" posts? If a trans person posts about being trans or someone talks about using contraception, is that too "political"?

My guess is that would acceptable but discussion of government policy regarding those things wouldn't be.

agesboy posted...

raising the karma limit on CE (which people on CE were largely supportive of), mentions, youtube/twitter/imgur/etc embedding, the shift to https, an actual fucking functioning profanity filter instead of having to asterisk yourself out in specific ways, the optional multi-paged FAQ format (it doesn't work everywhere, but it's way better for some guide writers and types of guides), block feature, flairs and flair filtering, better quoting, signatures changed to being live (I got a sigwipe back in the day because they changed the rules and then deleted years of old posts...), and probably some more stuff are all things that happened under sballen in the past decade or so that are just straight up good things. since he's stepped down a year ago, literally all that has happened is the removal of the politics board and now this shit

the only thing I can remember that got massive backlash and is still poorly received is the revamped moderation system (doesn't affect me, but it's still dumb to not have multiple eyes look over a moderation). sballen admits he could have done more (especially more contests dude) but he did listen to feedback and implement ideas or rollback changes based on it

meanwhile I suspect fandom's trying to ship of theseus us into a primarily younger, more monetizable demographic because they just don't like gamefaqs like users do

None of those changes were good.

SKARDAVNELNATE posted...

I did have some rather lengthy suspensions for that.

I've been suspended for answering this previously.

Lmfao

Revelation34 posted...

Yeah retroactive moderations are bullshit.

Ex post facto enforcement of rules is unjustifiable and kind of Orwellian if you think about it.

Oh shit I'm being political.

Revelation34 posted...

None of those changes were good.

You used the quote feature to make that comment.

ForsakenHermit posted...

Ex post facto enforcement of rules is unjustifiable and kind of Orwellian if you think about it.

Oh shit I'm being political.

I mean, it isn't like you are going to get a judge or jury for any of these moderations anyways, it is more like a dictator's whim. Granted, now a days the mods are more lenient, but I have had some absolutely stupid ones in the past, like get a mod for using the word "frack". They called it a censor bypass, but it is mostly a Battleship Galactica reference if anything. What a bunch of losers, not even knowing about Battleship Galactica

Jen0125 posted...

I'll be interested to see if this turn in convo gets the topic removed or just their posts.

Probably the post since its easier And it seems Gamefaqs just wants things to be easier

DragonClaw01 posted...

Well... Even as a BSG reference, it would still be a 4 letter word.

Frack(ing) refers to a form of shale gas mining. Although under the current rules, it might be too much of a political issue.

adjl posted...

You used the quote feature to make that comment.

Revelation34 posted...

None of those changes were good.

DragonClaw01 posted...

I mean, it isn't like you are going to get a judge or jury for any of these moderations anyways, it is more like a dictator's whim. Granted, now a days the mods are more lenient, but I have had some absolutely stupid ones in the past, like get a mod for using the word "frack". They called it a censor bypass, but it is mostly a Battleship Galactica reference if anything. What a bunch of losers, not even knowing about Battleship Galactica

There was the one where I got modded for linking to the dodo
Wikipedia page during a discussion about extinct animals on and got modded for "insulting users"

Nichtcrawler-X posted...

Well... Even as a BSG reference, it would still be a 4 letter word.

Frack(ing) refers to a form of shale gas mining. Although under the current rules, it might be too much of a political issue.

Ah ,yes, shale miners. Most of my enemies are them, the mother shale mining variety

Im not trying to call you out in case Im wrong, but is calling it Battleship instead of Battlestar a reference to something I dont know

I suspected it was spellcheck but mine changes it to Battledress Galactica.

Cacciato posted...

Im not trying to call you out in case Im wrong, but is calling it Battleship instead of Battlestar a reference to something I dont know

You're correct, but my brain can't comprehend what a "battlestar" is, since said battlestar is neither a big ball of burning plasma, nor particularly star shaped, ala, History of the World, Jews in Space. The "battlestar" is quite ship like by my determination, one may even refer to it as a battleship mistakenly

Wikipedia tells me that a Battle Star is an award issued to U.S. Navy ships for participation in battles.

In the show just of it as giving the moniker of star to anything that acts as a carrier ship. Battlestars and basestars.

DragonClaw01 posted...

You're correct, but my brain can't comprehend what a "battlestar" is, since said battlestar is neither a big ball of burning plasma, nor particularly star shaped, ala, History of the World, Jews in Space. The "battlestar" is quite ship like by my determination, one may even refer to it as a battleship mistakenly

All good, dude. I was just checking since I know its a big The Office reference and I never saw a lot of that.

DragonClaw01 posted...

You're correct, but my brain can't comprehend what a "battlestar" is, since said battlestar is neither a big ball of burning plasma, nor particularly star shaped, ala, History of the World, Jews in Space. The "battlestar" is quite ship like by my determination, one may even refer to it as a battleship mistakenly

Just wondering, do you also experience this type of problem with Star Destroyers? After all, they never destroy a single star.

Title and first page: "politics!"
me: oh shit lemme jump ahead and see what this blew up to--
Last posts: "Battlestar Galactica!"

I love nerds.

Revelation34 posted...

None of those changes were good.

I mean, if you preferred the old method of "copy text, paste text on to a separate new post page, italicize text (using manual html tags) because that's just the accepted convention for quoting, hope you don't need to quote more than one post because everything you've written might disappear if you try to go back to the topic," I guess you might have a problem with the quote button, but given that you're using the quote button instead of the manual approach (which is still available), I kind of doubt you actually preferred it.

Revelation34 posted...

There was the one where I got modded for linking to the dodo
Wikipedia page during a discussion about extinct animals on and got modded for "insulting users"

Because you're you, I'm going to guess that your entire response consisted of the link to the Dodo's page, which leaves quite a bit of ambiguity as to whether you're doing that to share information on the page or just to call others "dodos." That ambiguity could have been removed if you gave some context for your link instead of expecting people to read your minds, so I'll say fair, next.

adjl posted...

I mean, if you preferred the old method of "copy text, paste text on to a separate new post page, italicize text (using manual html tags) because that's just the accepted convention for quoting, hope you don't need to quote more than one post because everything you've written might disappear if you try to go back to the topic," I guess you might have a problem with the quote button, but given that you're using the quote button instead of the manual approach (which is still available), I kind of doubt you actually preferred it.

Because you're you, I'm going to guess that your entire response consisted of the link to the Dodo's page, which leaves quite a bit of ambiguity as to whether you're doing that to share information on the page or just to call others "dodos." That ambiguity could have been removed if you gave some context for your link instead of expecting people to read your minds, so I'll say fair, next.

LMAO.

Did I guess wrong that you posted only the link?

adjl posted...

Did I guess wrong that you posted only the link?

It's been years but if I remember right someone said that humans didn't cause any extinctions and I posted the link.

Without any sort of comment to provide context or indicate that you were providing an example and not engaging in a bit of sneaky name-calling?

adjl posted...

Without any sort of comment to provide context or indicate that you were providing an example and not engaging in a bit of sneaky name-calling?

Basically, something like context matters? That said, itd be nice if the mods would also check before jumping right to modding Especially if they wont let us explain

LinkPizza posted...

Basically, something like context matters?

Precisely. Leave it open to interpretation, and people are going to interpret it as insulting and mark it accordingly. Notably, even if they weren't personally insulted, if they want to mess with you they can mark it as flaming and have it deleted accordingly, since the only excuse the mod staff need to remove the post is "somebody was insulted by this." By making an effort to communicate more clearly, you take away that option.

Gaawa_chan posted...

What constitutes "political" posts?

Same thing that constitutes flaming and trolling: moderator discretion.

jonald bidump is a lil fuckin BITCH

is a political post

jonald bidump announced he is making furrys the country mascot

is a political post

jonald bidump looks decent in this suit for once

is an example of a political post AND a hornypost

andrey dolzaev was a terrorist with a deep hatred against russia who was responsibly for attacks against st. petersburg and georgia. he wanted to make abkhazia independent from georgia and russia. he was so driven that he killed himself to destroy a russian made plant in abkhazia. raiden and courtney collins wondered if he did it for his cause or just because he was cornered but agreed that either way it didn't excuse his actions. what do you think about this?

is not an example of a political post because it is actually just a character from metal gear solid and thus, not real life

What about Sundowner longing for the "good ol' days after 9/11" because he misses how aggressively militaristic the US was during that period? That is a character from Metal Gear Rising and thus, not real life, but he is providing commentary on real-life events and the political climate that followed them.