Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
Michael Hardner

Moderation Question - Is cutting/pasting from other sites now ok ?

Recommended Posts

I ask because this post:
 

 

Seems to appear in a LOT of posts on the web.  Here's the search:

 

https://www.google.ca/search?q="Justin+Trudeau+and+his+Liberals+are+committing+treason+on+a+scale+so+incredibly+vast%2C"&oq="Justin+Trudeau+and+his+Liberals+are+committing+treason+on+a+scale+so+incredibly+vast%2C"&aqs=chrome..69i57.1626j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

In the past we didn't allow reposting on MLW.  Has that changed ?  Thanks for your attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SHORT VERSION:   I disagree with your assessment.  I do not believe it is a cross-posting violation.

 

 

On 1/5/2018 at 3:53 PM, Michael Hardner said:

In the past we didn't allow reposting on MLW.  Has that changed ?

No.  Cross-posting is against the forum rules and guidelines. If you encounter what-you-believe-to-be-cross-posting, do not respond to it. Certainly, do not report it after you have fed it.

Please do not feed what you want censored. 

 

 

We are not taking down posts that solicit oodles of discussion by the person reporting the alleged violation.  Moderation is unwarranted here for that reason.

On 1/6/2018 at 7:03 AM, 9-18-1 said:

There are only two sources in your post: this website, and the various Youtube affiliates which utilize the same content feeds on different hosts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, well mea culpa I guess.  I realize now that I should NOT have posted on the cross-posted thread.  But in my defence I didn't realize it was cross posted until the day I reported it.  I did not let the post sit unreported knowing it was in violation, nor did I comment on it knowing it was in violation.  In the past cross-posts were taken down without moderators discussing it as I recall, but ok.

Your "Please do not feed what you want censored" is a subtle dig at me wanting censorship.  In fact, I don't want to shut down ideas on MLW but I do want you to kick out low-quality participants such as 9/11 truth folks.  I would thank you to not take sides when I ask a question, and I in return will not bring your particular world view into the discussion when you go out of your way to allow crackpots, and conspiracy theorists to thrive and dominate this once amazing board.  Thanks.

The other alternate fact you offer is this phrase: 'what you believe to be cross posting'.  It is an odd term.  We already have had problems with the subjective definition of 'trolling' in the past, now you seem to be saying 'cross posting' can be a subjective thing?  You can find the identical post here, if you keep scrolling down to a post 'lifting the veil' from 3 weeks ago.

https://gotube.site/video/ghr-JMq1VT0

Are you saying that if I had not posted on the thread in question, giving you an excuse to keep this poster around, you would NOT have assessed what he did as cross-posting ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not understand the rule or the verbiage above. I do understand that the rule, as applied, has caused me to be suspended a few times. Which is why you don't see me here that often.

Edited by jbg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the moderator is one of the crackpots, you expect something different?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If rules had changed about that one, that's good.

Posters shouldn't be infracted, or punished for re-posting their views, what more when they're reposting their topic on this site.

Forums don't have the very same members so naturally, some folks just want to get the response from various forums.  Especially when you don't have a busy board (with only a few regulars, not to mention hardly any viewers)........who would spend a great deal of time trying to compose an original OP??

 

Get real.  How many among the active few here are prolific in starting threads?  Not that there's anything wrong if they're not into starting topics.  But you need topics!  Topics started by "fly-by-night" posters aren't appealing!  These posters tend to disappear from the radar, and they abandon their own threads!   They're not aiming to discuss, by the looks of it.  Check them out.  They smell like "bots."

 

This forum should take what topics they can get (of course I'm referring to decent ones) just to help generate some activity..........and stop being petty. 

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pettiness, is what's killing this board.  By members, and the authorities that be.

At times, it's like being around snotty-nosed brats who can't keep from whining about anything!

 

That includes, pettiness with usage of features that are supposedly being given to its members - like, usage of colors and fonts!  AND, emojis!  Well, ladida....either you're offering them, or not!

 

Don't offer them and turn around to tell me,  "don't use them!"

 

This makes me fume.  Taking a break again. 

I'm joining forums to enjoy myself.  Going off to spend my time where I can use the features that are offered.

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, I'm glad you're leaving.  Your observation that 'bots' don't repost (ie. bots post one time on MLW while real posters post over-and-over again all over the web) is a typically deficient observation.  These types of observations increase the noise level on here to the point where posters looking for real conversation have less and less to pick over.

 

Thanks for your contribution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Thanks, I'm glad you're leaving.  Your observation that 'bots' don't repost (ie. bots post one time on MLW while real posters post over-and-over again all over the web) is a typically deficient observation.  These types of observations increase the noise level on here to the point where posters looking for real conversation have less and less to pick over.

 

Thanks for your contribution.

Taking a break again. 

See why we need large fonts and colors???  smiley.gif

 

Of course, you got creamed debating with me.  I don't blame you if you're too excited to see me gone. I would be too, if I were you.  giggle.gif

 

You tend to want to shut out people when you can't win.  Didn't you brag, "I put an actual PHD on ignore today !"   I can just imagine why.

Anyway....I thought you're happy with your clubs?  I promise, I won't even try to join.  You're safe there. 

And  .....btw.......why not keep me on ignore? 

 

Ciao. 

 

 

PS.  I call them "bots"....because I don't know the appropriate term to call one-time-topic-creating posters.  They usually disappear too, after posting their OPs.  

Though it's unappealing to respond to new posters for the said reason  (speaking for myself) - they still can help  generate traffic.   I don't see any reasons why a member can't repeat stating his views on this site.  So, I agree with CA on this one.

 

 

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, betsy said:

Taking a break again. 

See why we need large fonts and colors???  smiley.gif

 

Of course, you got creamed debating with me.  I don't blame you if you're too excited to see me gone. I would be too, if I were you.  giggle.gif

 

You tend to want to shut out people when you can't win.  Didn't you brag, "I put an actual PHD on ignore today !"   I can just imagine why.

Anyway....I thought you're happy with your clubs?  I promise, I won't even try to join.  You're safe there.  And  .....why not keep me on ignore? 

 

Ciao. 

 

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Thanks, I'm glad you're leaving.  Your observation that 'bots' don't repost (ie. bots post one time on MLW while real posters post over-and-over again all over the web) is a typically deficient observation.  These types of observations increase the noise level on here to the point where posters looking for real conversation have less and less to pick over.

You have an unfortunately narrow view of 'real' conversation which appears to be limited to themes you're interested in.

Edited by Argus
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Argus said:

You have an unfortunately narrow view of 'real' conversation which appears to be limited to themes you're interested in.

Well, whether or not that's true (it isn't) it has nothing to do with the excerpt you quoted.  Also, I am interested in a lot anyway.  Not just God and Muslims.  Or Trudeau and Muslims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well, whether or not that's true (it isn't) it has nothing to do with the excerpt you quoted.  Also, I am interested in a lot anyway.  Not just God and Muslims.  Or Trudeau and Muslims.

That's fine, but saying you're glad someone's leaving because they were interested in God and religion is kind of, uh... narrow minded, I think. Lots of people have their hobby horses and as irritating as that might be you don't have to go on those topics if they don't interest you. You won't catch me on 911 topics, for example. And I don't care what people do on them.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Well, whether or not that's true (it isn't) it has nothing to do with the excerpt you quoted.  Also, I am interested in a lot anyway.  Not just God and Muslims.  Or Trudeau and Muslims.

 

OK, but why chase away other members who are interested in such topics ?   Just ignore their content, regardless of "cutting/pasting".  

The OP appears to be just a petty tactic to attack members/posts that you disagree with.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Argus said:

That's fine, but saying you're glad someone's leaving because they were interested in God and religion is kind of, uh... narrow minded, I think. Lots of people have their hobby horses and as irritating as that might be you don't have to go on those topics if they don't interest you. You won't catch me on 911 topics, for example. And I don't care what people do on them.

 

Uh... no.  If they are interested in 'just God and Muslims' (my quote) then they aren't interesting to me.  I thought you just condemned me for only being interested in a narrow number of themes ?  Whose side are you on anyway ?  

Anyway, shallow and ill-considered opinions aren't my range of interests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

OK, but why chase away other members who are interested in such topics ?   Just ignore their content, regardless of "cutting/pasting".  

The OP appears to be just a petty tactic to attack members/posts that you disagree with.

I wish I could chase people away who have ill-considered opinions and aren't able to debate properly.  Then we would attract more interesting posters here.

The OP is about a poster who spammed the board, IMO, which is against the rules usually.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I wish I could chase people away who have ill-considered opinions and aren't able to debate properly.  Then we would attract more interesting posters here.

The OP is about a poster who spammed the board, IMO, which is against the rules usually.

 

But the purpose of an open forum is not to "chase away" people who have opinions that you consider to be ill considered.   Could not the same claim be made about your own (or my) posts ?   

If I understand the poster to which you are referring, his/her content is actually quite thorough and well cited, in keeping with forum rules.

Even if a member is docked for cross-posting, the penalty is not death (banishment from the forum).

And for the record, I could easily cite instances where posts from that "refugee forum" are duplicated here or elsewhere...no big deal.

Bottom line:   this appears to be an attack on a poster/content to the point of wanting to silence them...not cool.  

Edited by bush_cheney2004
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I wish I could chase people away who have ill-considered opinions and aren't able to debate properly.  Then we would attract more interesting posters here.

The OP is about a poster who spammed the board, IMO, which is against the rules usually.

 

Inflated egos...we could try and chase them away...but they often get stuck in the door.

Edited by DogOnPorch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Uh... no.  If they are interested in 'just God and Muslims' (my quote) then they aren't interesting to me.  I thought you just condemned me for only being interested in a narrow number of themes ?  Whose side are you on anyway ?  

Anyway, shallow and ill-considered opinions aren't my range of interests.

I didn't condemn you for having a narrow number of interests, but for being so judgmental about what OTHER people like to talk about.

As for 'sides', I'm really not on a side atm. I'm not even very fond of the conservatives. I suppose they're better than the others, but that's a low bar given how bad the others are. Maybe I should move to the UK, except the Tories are all screwed up over there and Labour is batshit crazy. I could go south, but ... Trump... and the Democrats have a lot of wack jobs which might take over. Hell, they might have their own talk show host as leader. :huh:

I haven't found a side anywhere  worthy of my support so much as my contempt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Uh... no.  If they are interested in 'just God and Muslims' (my quote) then they aren't interesting to me.  I thought you just condemned me for only being interested in a narrow number of themes ?  Whose side are you on anyway  

Anyway, shallow and ill-considered opinions aren't my range of interests.

What do you mean by that, "whose side are you on anyway?"

 

How does "taking sides" enter into this?

 

If you're the type who'll uphold your friends' wrong opinion just because they're your friends, then we really have to question your credibility!

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

You can find the identical post here, if you keep scrolling down to a post 'lifting the veil' from 3 weeks ago.

https://gotube.site/video/ghr-JMq1VT0

 

3 weeks old post?  That's a lot of scrolling down, too.

Just curious.....how the heck did you ever come across his post?

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Argus said:

I didn't condemn you for having a narrow number of interests, but for being so judgmental about what OTHER people like to talk about.

 

'You have an unfortunately narrow view of 'real' conversation which appears to be limited to themes you're interested in.' is what you said, so sorry if I got confused by that.  I don't need to agree with what other say but in fact my issue is both with the flawed way people discuss issues and, yes, the narrow interests of some people on here who just want to talk about Muslims and Trump.  

I concur that I am judgemental and have an opinion.  I am sorry for people who are offended, but those are good attributes to bring to a forum after all. 

 

8 hours ago, Argus said:

As for 'sides', I'm really not on a side atm. I'm not even very fond of the conservatives. I suppose they're better than the others, but that's a low bar given how bad the others are. Maybe I should move to the UK, except the Tories are all screwed up over there and Labour is batshit crazy. I could go south, but ... Trump... and the Democrats have a lot of wack jobs which might take over. Hell, they might have their own talk show host as leader. :huh:

The 'sides' comment was a joke on my part.  I'm shocked to see you unhook yourself from 'the conservatives'.  I unhooked myself from all parties myself and am proud to say that I admire different aspects of the Conservatives, NDP and even the Liberals but overall find party politics disheartening.

 

8 hours ago, Argus said:

I haven't found a side anywhere  worthy of my support so much as my contempt.

Good for you.  You hold others to a high standard as you should.

 

10 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

But the purpose of an open forum is not to "chase away" people who have opinions that you consider to be ill considered.   Could not the same claim be made about your own (or my) posts ?   

I wouldn't say that the 'purpose' of a forum differs from my own purpose from coming here.  I can discuss with people and I give people a chance.  If someone made a claim about my posts I would listen, and in fact listening is the first casualty in my discussions with deficient posters here. 

My latest solution to keep my sanity is to try to get posters to be better.  If they can't, I wish them goodbye and move on.  This latter action seems to offend a few, I guess, and not just the deficient posters I am sending off but long-time posters like you and Argus.  

I have tried to follow a process of 3-strikes for new ones before I ask them to leave.  The paradox is that people are offended if you say you don't like discussing with them, AFTER they have ignored your comments in discussion.  Strange.

 

10 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

If I understand the poster to which you are referring, his/her content is actually quite thorough and well cited, in keeping with forum rules.

Even if a member is docked for cross-posting, the penalty is not death (banishment from the forum).

I don't think we are talking about the same one.  The poster I am thinking of has bad cites.  This forums has never, to my knowledge, had a death penalty but has in the past removed all cross-references posts regardless of how the board administration felt about the content.

 

10 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

Bottom line:   this appears to be an attack on a poster/content to the point of wanting to silence them...not cool.  

I can't 'silence' anybody any more than you can... and I am a little taken aback by the idea that I may have mis-stepped here.  I was going to ask you just now what would you do if you were in my situation but we are not on the same page, you and I, about what this forum means to us individually. 

In summary: I am annoyed by a certain kind of post, and you are not.  My reaction to such posters seems to be antithetical to the open culture of these forums, as I now understand.

Maybe there's an analogy in real world life that you can advise on to tell me what to do.  I'm sincere here - you have never, to my memory, admonished me in this way and maybe I am doing something wrong.  Maybe I am just wrong in my philosophy of what this forum should be, or my expectations are wrong - I don't know. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, betsy said:

Just curious.....how the heck did you ever come across his post?

I developed methods of finding these things from my time as moderator here.  

At first I didn't understand the usefulness of the rule, but eventually I found out that there are many bots who post all over the place for .... reasons.  As moderator, I eventually got a special feeling when I read one of these posts and would use Googly methods to verify.  Since I haven't been a mod I am reading far fewer posts and seem to have lost the sense, as it took me a long time to realize I was responding to a bot.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

20 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

....I can't 'silence' anybody any more than you can... and I am a little taken aback by the idea that I may have mis-stepped here.  I was going to ask you just now what would you do if you were in my situation but we are not on the same page, you and I, about what this forum means to us individually. 

In summary: I am annoyed by a certain kind of post, and you are not.  My reaction to such posters seems to be antithetical to the open culture of these forums, as I now understand.

 

Maybe, but the response or lack thereof would have the same options:

1) Engage the member's content with your own on-topic counterpoints or clarifications

2) Ignore the member's content

 

I agree that my purpose here is mostly for entertainment without any higher calling.    I am not trying to change the world....reality means taking the good with the bad.

More speech/expression is always better than censorship...remember, it was Archie who told Edith to "stifle" herself.

 

Quote

Maybe there's an analogy in real world life that you can advise on to tell me what to do.  I'm sincere here - you have never, to my memory, admonished me in this way and maybe I am doing something wrong.  Maybe I am just wrong in my philosophy of what this forum should be, or my expectations are wrong - I don't know. 

 

I am not telling you what to do....that's up to you.   But as a fellow MLW member, it is important to support free expression for all members regardless of the view presented, within forum rules of course.    Perhaps there is a Canadian tradition that I am unaware of beyond hate speech laws and publication bans.

Edited by bush_cheney2004
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

I developed methods of finding these things from my time as moderator here.  

At first I didn't understand the usefulness of the rule, but eventually I found out that there are many bots who post all over the place for .... reasons.  As moderator, I eventually got a special feeling when I read one of these posts and would use Googly methods to verify.  Since I haven't been a mod I am reading far fewer posts and seem to have lost the sense, as it took me a long time to realize I was responding to a bot.

 

:rolleyes:

 

You go to all that trouble?  Can that be  an example of being mean-spirited?  To waste your time and energy, searching to see if you can get this new poster infracted, or booted out from here?

 

  Btw.  Reality check:  You're not a mod anymore.

 

Just use the Club feature, for crying out loud!   You've got clubs - you can choose your members! 

I just took a quick peek at Clubs.  I don't know why the last activity in your "Sudo Intellectual"  club was in the first week of December.  No wonder you're rampaging here.

Why is your Club dormant?  Unlike MLF (at least it's still alive, even if sputtering and trying to revive), yours  grounded to a halt!  That didn't take long, too. Did it ever occur to you that maybe......... it's because of you?   :lol:

 

Silly, pretentious clubs won't make it.  Like as if sensible people won't see right through it.

 

Look at your club!  It's a good example.  See what happens if MLF do it your way???  It'll be Hara-Kiri!    :D

Edited by betsy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×