A poster wants a rule change

[PhilFish]

Nope I proved your shadow bans - You banned a poster over the last weekend and it never was posted until that fact got around AFTER that poster returned.

Even in the post you finally made about it you admitted that fact when you did post it saying - "Retro... [user name ommited] was banned a couple days back for telling a mod to gfy. " A clear admission that the post was not put up until much later, ie. it was a shadow ban. Who knows how many others there have been? You can claim that you just forgot to make the post but it was still a shadow ban. You made two claims in this thread already:

1) That I, the greatest poster here had not been banned since 2019. Clearly that has been proven false. You've admitted this.

2) That there are no shadow bans. That is proven false also using your own words and the timing of that post.

Call it what you will. It was a shadow ban in my book whether it was deliberate or not.

Have a good day to you too.

Singular.


Good luck...and thank you for bearing witness to your long list of publicly recorded bans. Good work

 

[ObamacareForever]

Moderation is needed. Without a doubt, this site is not seeing the traffic it once did. There is a reason. Just saying. Hopefully, there will be a way to see some improvement.

The Trump years were a boon for the hawt take economy.

The Biden years people are marked by less divisive rhetoric.

 

[PNWest]

Singular.


Good luck...and thank you for bearing witness to your long list of publicly recorded bans. Good work

At least you are now willing to own up to the facts. The long list of my publicly recorded bans can be argued as proof of the double standards being applied.

A suggestion for future bans: Why not quote the comment that a user is being banned for directly rather than paraphrasing the offending comment? That way everyone could make their own judgements as to the fairness of the ban. Of course this would also make it quite obvious if any bias were occurring or if similar comments did not result in any action. Admittedly more work for the moderators but certainly more transparency.

 

[PhilFish]

At least you are now willing to own up to the facts. The long list of my publicly recorded bans can be argued as proof of the double standards being applied.

A suggestion for future bans: Why not quote the comment that a user is being banned for directly rather than paraphrasing the offending comment? That way everyone could make their own judgements as to the fairness of the ban. Of course this would also make it quite obvious if any bias were occurring or if similar comments did not result in any action. Admittedly more work for the moderators but certainly more transparency.

The fact were always the facts. Not your made up facts.

There is a long list of public bannings, no shadow bannings, as crafted by you and whatserface.. only one missed posting of a ban. One. All validated by you. Thanks.

 

[Dawg]

The Trump years were a boon for the hawt take economy.

The Biden years people are marked by less divisive rhetoric.

rhetoric is better than 7.5%+ inflation

 

[PNWest]

The fact were always the facts. Not your made up facts.

There is a long list of public bannings, no shadow bannings, as crafted by you and whatserface.. only one missed posting of a ban. One. All validated by you. Thanks.

Convenient for you that there is no way to verify that. Glad to help.

 

[PhilFish]

Convenient for you that there is no way to verify that. Glad to help.

Um...didn't you go cut and paste from the list?

Duh.

 

[Dawg]

Convenient for you that there is no way to verify that. Glad to help.

My gawd Almighty/////////////
Why are you so invested in this
IMO it's your lust of braindead leftist that follow you as they Massa
Damn....it's clear you don't get much attention at home from ya wife and seek it here with leftist

 

[PNWest]

Um...didn't you go cut and paste from the list?

Duh.

No - much like many of the anti vaxxers here I did my own research. Unlike the anti-vaxxers I actually searched the Penalty Box thread to prove that you mis-spoke and made the shadow ban comment which evidently hit close to home by looking at the last entry on the Penalty Box thread. Probably a bit too much work for the typical Yabba Dabba but I did it to see for myself.

As I have acknowledged I have been unable to find out if or when anyone has been banned other than myself other than what is shown on that thread and what I may find out from other sources first hand. Presumably the Penalty Box thread was intended to be a comprehensive list of all bannings and until a couple of days ago I thought this was the case.

As to the cutting and pasting of the links to the many times I have been banned I had to do this in order to prove that you were incorrect in making a claim that I hadn't been banned since 2019. Obviously I proved you wrong. No harm, no foul, everyone makes mistakes.

As a big believer in the philosophy of "work smarter, not harder" I have created many tools to simply my interactions with forums like PJ. You have obviously been involved here long enough to have seen the standard what-about-ism spewed out by the righties almost every time a post is made about some republican wrong doing. Hense my patented Instant Republican rebuttal tool. Likewise you have seen the obvious KOOK, propaganda and disinformation sites used by righties here and elsewhere online to support obvious non-sense. That is what my famous list is for. These things are despised by the righties because they are very quick and easy ways of pointing out their lack of coherent arguments. Certainly if you feel that I have placed some source on the my list that is in fact a legitimate news source - please post it and tell me why. I'll be glad to remove anything on that list that can be shown to be a legitimate information source. I doubt if you or any of the righties here will but go ahead and look at the list and see for yourself. I've been lenient. Fox News, The NYPost , the Wall St Jounal are no where to be found on the list as they are legitimate news sources (for the most part).

 

[PhilFish]

No - much like many of the anti vaxxers here I did my own research. Unlike the anti-vaxxers I actually searched the Penalty Box thread to prove that you mis-spoke and made the shadow ban comment which evidently hit close to home by looking at the last entry on the Penalty Box thread. Probably a bit too much work for the typical Yabba Dabba but I did it to see for myself.

As I have acknowledged I have been unable to find out if or when anyone has been banned other than myself other than what is shown on that thread and what I may find out from other sources first hand. Presumably the Penalty Box thread was intended to be a comprehensive list of all bannings and until a couple of days ago I thought this was the case.

As to the cutting and pasting of the links to the many times I have been banned I had to do this in order to prove that you were incorrect in making a claim that I hadn't been banned since 2019. Obviously I proved you wrong. No harm, no foul, everyone makes mistakes.

As a big believer in the philosophy of "work smarter, not harder" I have created many tools to simply my interactions with forums like PJ. You have obviously been involved here long enough to have seen the standard what-about-ism spewed out by the righties almost every time a post is made about some republican wrong doing. Hense my patented Instant Republican rebuttal tool. Likewise you have seen the obvious KOOK, propaganda and disinformation sites used by righties here and elsewhere online to support obvious non-sense. That is what my famous list is for. These things are despised by the righties because they are very quick and easy ways of pointing out their lack of coherent arguments. Certainly if you feel that I have placed some source on the my list that is in fact a legitimate news source - please post it and tell me why. I'll be glad to remove anything on that list that can be shown to be a legitimate information source. I doubt if you or any of the righties here will but go ahead and look at the list and see for yourself. I've been lenient. Fox News, The NYPost , the Wall St Jounal are no where to be found on the list as they are legitimate news sources (for the most part).

Yikes. Lots of work there. Your shadow bans is a fiction..as you've demonstrated

 

[PNWest]

My gawd Almighty/////////////
Why are you so invested in this
IMO it's your lust of braindead leftist that follow you as they Massa
Damn....it's clear you don't get much attention at home from ya wife and seek it here with leftist

I am always interested in the truth, especially when it involves me. I've cleared up a few misstatements made and am very willing to let the topic die. However the accusations keep flying.

 

[PNWest]

Yikes. Lots of work there. Your shadow bans is a fiction..as you've demonstrated

No need to do any work yourself. If there is a tool available to cvililians like myself that can see when anyone gets banned then please let us know. I, myself am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that the shadow ban that took place was just a minor oversight. Why do you object to it being called a shadow ban? After all the person was banned and it wasn't posted until after the poster was able to return and word of the ban got out. Let's call it a mistake and end this nonsensical discussion.

Why not spend your energies perusing my list of KOOK sites and helping me to weed out any legitimate sites that I may have inadvertently put on the list. If you find any I'll do as you and say that it was just an oversight but will admit such and remove the non-KOOK site from my list. Everybody wins!

 

[ObamacareForever]

Yikes. Lots of work there. Your shadow bans is a fiction..as you've demonstrated

I think you should change the name of the penalty box to the shadow ban box, it would be much cooler.

 

[PNWest]

I think you should change the name of the penalty box to the shadow ban box, it would be much cooler.

More like the "non-shadow ban box". Shadow bans are when people are banned but not put on the list. The existence of shadow bans is apparently highly debated in some circles.

 

[PhilFish]

No need to do any work yourself. If there is a tool available to cvililians like myself that can see when anyone gets banned then please let us know. I, myself am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt that the shadow ban that took place was just a minor oversight. Why do you object to it being called a shadow ban? After all the person was banned and it wasn't posted until after the poster was able to return and word of the ban got out. Let's call it a mistake and end this nonsensical discussion.

Why not spend your energies perusing my list of KOOK sites and helping me to weed out any legitimate sites that I may have inadvertently put on the list. If you find any I'll do as you and say that it was just an oversight but will admit such and remove the non-KOOK site from my list. Everybody wins!

It was a delayed posting of a ban. The fact that your and her attempt to turn it in to something more fell flat doesn't require any concessions from me that it is somehow nonsensical. It fell flat. Own it and..the end

 

[PhilFish]

I think you should change the name of the penalty box to the shadow ban box, it would be much cooler.

You may be on to something. Can you work jet or ski in to it? Like...shadow jet penalty... Or jet shadow box??

 

[Dawg]

More like the "non-shadow ban box". Shadow bans are when people are banned but not put on the list. The existence of shadow bans is apparently highly debated in some circles.

What difference does it make
NO one missed her other than you evidently for a day

 

[EatTheRich]

@bdtex

Seems there is a desire to go back to policing threadjacking and deliberate tangents by posters. This despite all the whining in the past that there was too much policing.

Couple whiny types don't like it, though demonstrably they themselves are among the top offenders.

What do you think?

Posters should be adults and police themselves. Topic naturally drifts during the course of a free discussion.

 

[EatTheRich]

We've been through this before. The moderators have put out more conservatives than Libby's by far.. fact.

There's another dud of yours blown to hell

Do they commit offenses that meet a certain threshold of egregiousness far, far more often as well?

 

[JuliefromOhio]

You're one of the dumbest and most inconsequential posters that have ever arrived here in these parts...

You've just committed a banning offense.....a personal attack.