You and lund both have been responsible for trying to promote a specific and narrow view of politics, that for a moment, the world agreed with you on. The Ozma ban was a form of propaganda by omission where you filter what news is made available to try and control a narrative.
That ban was an abuse of mod privileges and Lund should be removed as a mod for it.
And guess what? The world turned, and you are both now on the wrong side of history. We needed to have this serious conversation about Biden’s inadequacy as candidate 9 months ago, and we’ve been trying and you specifically have been trying to use brute force to silence that conversation. You need to be called out for it.
You can’t keep living in denial of the world around you or trying to control the narrative around what is “allowed” to be discussed or not.
The egg has cracked and there is no going back. This is just “the news”. Get over it and maybe self-assess.
It’s not controlling a narrative if someone is spamming a topic, sorry. Just generally sound moderating. Doesn’t matter what the topic is, if someone spammed only news about the Ukrainian childrens hospital, that should also earn a temp ban.
Variety is just important, especially when the community is small. Otherwise, conversation that should be concentrated in a few threads where a lot of interaction can happen gets fractured across a bunch of threads, and this hurts the community overall by reducing the amount of engagement everyone receives.
This is why megathreads for big topics exist, incidentally. To prevent conversation from being splintered. Perhaps you could request a pinned megathread?
It was cited in the ban that it was specifically because of this topic that is now the “only” topic of the news cycle. It was a politically motivated ban to control the conversation.
It could fall under rule 4, reposts, since it literally is all the same topic of “Joe Biden too old, receives calls to step down”, which we totally already knew. Mind you, the media is spamming it too, but that doesn’t make it okay.
That said, perhaps we need a new rule? No exceeding x number of posts on a topic every however long, perhaps. It’s not difficult to scroll the sub and see if a topic already has dozens of threads by other people on it or not.
No I dont think we need a new rule. I think we need moderation that doesn’t confuse their role as moderators with being filters to ensure a specific political view gets through.
Yeah, it seems you really want there to be lots and lots of threads on this, but no. That makes for a shitty community. That’s not conversation, it’s spam. Nobody clicks on every single version of different articles all saying the same basic shit, they just skip it.
🤷
You and lund both have been responsible for trying to promote a specific and narrow view of politics, that for a moment, the world agreed with you on. The Ozma ban was a form of propaganda by omission where you filter what news is made available to try and control a narrative.
That ban was an abuse of mod privileges and Lund should be removed as a mod for it.
And guess what? The world turned, and you are both now on the wrong side of history. We needed to have this serious conversation about Biden’s inadequacy as candidate 9 months ago, and we’ve been trying and you specifically have been trying to use brute force to silence that conversation. You need to be called out for it.
You can’t keep living in denial of the world around you or trying to control the narrative around what is “allowed” to be discussed or not.
The egg has cracked and there is no going back. This is just “the news”. Get over it and maybe self-assess.
It’s not controlling a narrative if someone is spamming a topic, sorry. Just generally sound moderating. Doesn’t matter what the topic is, if someone spammed only news about the Ukrainian childrens hospital, that should also earn a temp ban.
Variety is just important, especially when the community is small. Otherwise, conversation that should be concentrated in a few threads where a lot of interaction can happen gets fractured across a bunch of threads, and this hurts the community overall by reducing the amount of engagement everyone receives.
This is why megathreads for big topics exist, incidentally. To prevent conversation from being splintered. Perhaps you could request a pinned megathread?
It was cited in the ban that it was specifically because of this topic that is now the “only” topic of the news cycle. It was a politically motivated ban to control the conversation.
No, there are other things happening in the world, I’m afraid. Any topic can be over-posted, just don’t do it, try to exercise some moderation.
Or you be guilty of spamming. No matter the topic.
Have you actually read the rules for this sub? They are just to the right. Give them a quick read and tell me where this “rule” exists. It doesn’t.
It was acknowledged in the ban that it was a purely editorial/ political ban.
It could fall under rule 4, reposts, since it literally is all the same topic of “Joe Biden too old, receives calls to step down”, which we totally already knew. Mind you, the media is spamming it too, but that doesn’t make it okay.
That said, perhaps we need a new rule? No exceeding x number of posts on a topic every however long, perhaps. It’s not difficult to scroll the sub and see if a topic already has dozens of threads by other people on it or not.
No I dont think we need a new rule. I think we need moderation that doesn’t confuse their role as moderators with being filters to ensure a specific political view gets through.
Yeah, it seems you really want there to be lots and lots of threads on this, but no. That makes for a shitty community. That’s not conversation, it’s spam. Nobody clicks on every single version of different articles all saying the same basic shit, they just skip it.
Some threads=good. Shitloads of threads=spam.