What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

***Official PSF Moderation Thread*** (5 Viewers)

parasaurolophus said:
Got a link for this?

I am not actually being serious, just making a point at how dumb your link requests are and I think are genuinely just trolling.

You ask people for links in bad faith, not just fact finding missions. It isn't like somebody posts the US population is 750 million and you ask for a link. If somebody says democrats are in favor of open borders, you ask for a link. You aren't asking for a link supporting why they think that. You are asking for a link to all democrats saying "I want open borders". When you of course don't get the link saying "I want open borders" you act like you just proved the person wrong. When somebody says the ACA is a redistribution of wealth, you ask for a link, :lmao:  When somebody says AOC is a socialist you ask for a link. Those aren't statements based on data points. Opinion, or at least to a large extent, is almost always implied in such statements.  

Somebody posts quoted text from an article and you ask for a link and criticize them when all you need to do is copy the first line of the article and search it and voila!  

Somebody says more violent rhetoric comes from the left, you ask for a link. This is stupid. What are you expecting? The organization of Official Violent Rhetoric to have a spreadsheet documenting all statements of rhetoric with an empirical rating scale?  

People make obvious hyperbolic statements and you ask for a link(which is of course why I specified that I wasn't being serious when I said half your posts were asking for links because as we both know, that is the kind of "can I have a link" you would pull.)

Also just so you don't ask for a link, I made up the whole "office of violent rhetoric" thing. 

You get mad when people sarcastically ask you for links and say "that was my opinion" even though you technically made a definitive statement. (Something you did in this thread just a few posts ago). Just like above bolded. I know you cant provide empirical data proving that such a theory has been destroyed since you don't have access to what is reported and not reported to the mods. I understand that your opinion was implied in such a statement and that asking for a link is just a stupid troll job. 
Click to expand...
:own3d: :goodposting:

 
toshiba said:
It might be, and I say this seriously, if someone doesn't respond to a question they get hounded for ignoring that question.  I know it has happened to you in the past, so maybe a response like that is better than no response.  
Click to expand...
Pretty much...it has zero to do with a last word.  Someone took the time to write out that long of a post.  It deserved a response.  I had a long rebuttal written up and decided it was best to just say I disagree and walk away.  @parasaurolophus is a good poster.  I don't agree with a lot of what he says...but a good poster who I just don't agree with.  It deserved some acknowledgement. 

 
toshiba said:
It might be, and I say this seriously, if someone doesn't respond to a question they get hounded for ignoring that question.  I know it has happened to you in the past, so maybe a response like that is better than no response.  
Click to expand...
Fair enough. One could respond with saying that they don't wish to discuss further. Agree to disagree. Starting out with "I disagree with nearly everything your wrote" or just responding with "No", is just being disingenuous. 

And yes, I have had it happen to me. Multiple people ask multiple questions of me, I try to answer them all to the best of my ability. But, I've seen many of my questions go unanswered. If a poster continues down the conversation path with a different poster, I will remind them of my question. Otherwise, I let it go. 

 
sho nuff said:
Pretty much...it has zero to do with a last word.  Someone took the time to write out that long of a post.  It deserved a response.  I had a long rebuttal written up and decided it was best to just say I disagree and walk away.  @parasaurolophus is a good poster.  I don't agree with a lot of what he says...but a good poster who I just don't agree with.  It deserved some acknowledgement. 
Click to expand...
Agree to disagree seems better than "You're wrong" (but I don't think you deserve the courtesy of me explaining why I think you're wrong).

Just my opinion. And I've been known to be wrong.

 
KCitons said:
toshiba said:
It might be, and I say this seriously, if someone doesn't respond to a question they get hounded for ignoring that question.  I know it has happened to you in the past, so maybe a response like that is better than no response.  
Click to expand...
Fair enough. One could respond with saying that they don't wish to discuss further. Agree to disagree. Starting out with "I disagree with nearly everything your wrote" or just responding with "No", is just being disingenuous. 

And yes, I have had it happen to me. Multiple people ask multiple questions of me, I try to answer them all to the best of my ability. But, I've seen many of my questions go unanswered. If a poster continues down the conversation path with a different poster, I will remind them of my question. Otherwise, I let it go. 
Click to expand...
I am not sure I agree with your thought that it is being disingenuous, sometimes the effort isn't worth the payout.  I have, at times, just posted a reply that was not fair to the thought out question that was asked.  But I just don't want to devote the time it would take to give a good response, so I just post that I disagree or something else quick.  Sometimes, for me, it is just that; not wanting to devote the time and energy when I know it won't make a difference anyway.

I know you get frustrated with the accusations that you are ignoring when I would guess you just have a hard time defending your positions on 100 different fronts.  You don't have an easy task, due to the makeup of this board.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
KCitons said:
sho nuff said:
Pretty much...it has zero to do with a last word.  Someone took the time to write out that long of a post.  It deserved a response.  I had a long rebuttal written up and decided it was best to just say I disagree and walk away.  @parasaurolophus is a good poster.  I don't agree with a lot of what he says...but a good poster who I just don't agree with.  It deserved some acknowledgement. 
Click to expand...
Agree to disagree seems better than "You're wrong" (but I don't think you deserve the courtesy of me explaining why I think you're wrong).

Just my opinion. And I've been known to be wrong.
Click to expand...
I would agree with this though!

 
toshiba said:
I am not sure I agree with your thought that it is being disingenuous, sometimes the effort isn't worth the payout.  I have, at times, just posted a reply that was not fair to the thought out question that was asked.  But I just don't want to devote the time it would take to give a good response, so I just post that I disagree or something else quick.  Sometimes, for me, it is just that; not wanting to devote the time and energy when I know it won't make a difference anyway.

I know you get frustrated with the accusations that you are ignoring when I would guess you just have a hard time defending your positions on 100 different fronts.  You don't have an easy task, due tot he makeup of this board.
Click to expand...
Agree with both of your paragraphs. If that makes sense. 

Perhaps I'm taking it too much from personal experience. My assumption is that people are here to have an honest conversation. When I spend the time to respond honestly to everyone, I expect the same in return. That's why I feel it could be disingenuous. Results may vary for other posters.

 
KCitons said:
Agree with both of your paragraphs. If that makes sense. 

Perhaps I'm taking it too much from personal experience. My assumption is that people are here to have an honest conversation. When I spend the time to respond honestly to everyone, I expect the same in return. That's why I feel it could be disingenuous. Results may vary for other posters.
Click to expand...
I dont think he was being disingenuous. Its funny, you hang around these boards long enough you learn to take certain posts from people certain ways(although obviously misinterpretations can still occur). I think sho knows that if I took the time to write a long post like that and he probably remembers each of the instances I brought up so he knows I didn't just pull those out of thin air and put some time into it, that I was actually trying to make a legit helpful criticism rather than just be a jerk to him even though he may ultimately disagree with the criticism. I wouldn't put that kind of effort into criticism of somebody that never provided content. He knows I made the point about sarcasm earlier in the thread and so he knows I was intentionally laying things on thick. 

I also know sho well enough to know that a reply like that from him wasn't a lack of respect, but rather it was respectful. Rather than a continuous loop on the topic(which we are all capable of being stubborn with the last word), it is simply politely closed. I wish more discussions went that way to be honest. 

 
parasaurolophus said:
I dont think he was being disingenuous. Its funny, you hang around these boards long enough you learn to take certain posts from people certain ways(although obviously misinterpretations can still occur). I think sho knows that if I took the time to write a long post like that and he probably remembers each of the instances I brought up so he knows I didn't just pull those out of thin air and put some time into it, that I was actually trying to make a legit helpful criticism rather than just be a jerk to him even though he may ultimately disagree with the criticism. I wouldn't put that kind of effort into criticism of somebody that never provided content. He knows I made the point about sarcasm earlier in the thread and so he knows I was intentionally laying things on thick. 

I also know sho well enough to know that a reply like that from him wasn't a lack of respect, but rather it was respectful. Rather than a continuous loop on the topic(which we are all capable of being stubborn with the last word), it is simply politely closed. I wish more discussions went that way to be honest. 
Click to expand...


KCitons said:
Results may vary for other posters.
Click to expand...

 
toshiba said:
It might be, and I say this seriously, if someone doesn't respond to a question they get hounded for ignoring that question.  I know it has happened to you in the past, so maybe a response like that is better than no response.  
Click to expand...
This is a passive aggressive attack on KCitons. Just call him out directly next time, guy. 

 
Politician Spock said:
toshiba said:
It might be, and I say this seriously, if someone doesn't respond to a question they get hounded for ignoring that question.  I know it has happened to you in the past, so maybe a response like that is better than no response.  
Click to expand...
This is a passive aggressive attack on KCitons. Just call him out directly next time, guy. 
Click to expand...
It really wasn't.  How can @KCitons be expected to answer every question he is asked?  He is out numbered here and it seems like to me he makes an effort.

 
Politician Spock said:
This is a passive aggressive attack on KCitons. Just call him out directly next time, guy. 
Click to expand...
Sorry you feel that way. 

If you haven't paid attention, I get asked questions by 10 posters, and then asked to shut up by 10 others. (at times, you're both)

Perhaps we remove the middle man and you guys can just be angry at each other. 

Politician Spock said:
I was referring to him hounding others for not answering his questions. 
Click to expand...
I can think of a handful of times that I've hounded someone for an answer. You being one of them. Sorry I hurt your feelings by doing that.

I think it's best we just agree to disagree and go about our lives. 

 
toshiba said:
It might be, and I say this seriously, if someone doesn't respond to a question they get hounded for ignoring that question.  I know it has happened to you in the past, so maybe a response like that is better than no response.  
Click to expand...
I got hounded and ridiculed for not giving an acceptable response to if you are right why do so few people agree with you here, as if there is not a huge anti-Trump bias on this forum.  I am really surprise I was not asked for a link for suggesting such.  

 
jon_mx said:
toshiba said:
It might be, and I say this seriously, if someone doesn't respond to a question they get hounded for ignoring that question.  I know it has happened to you in the past, so maybe a response like that is better than no response.  
Click to expand...
I got hounded and ridiculed for not giving an acceptable response to if you are right why do so few people agree with you here, as if there is not a huge anti-Trump bias on this forum.  I am really surprise I was not asked for a link for suggesting such.  
Click to expand...
I think there is a huge anti-Trump bias in general, but he deserves it.

 
jon_mx said:
I got hounded and ridiculed for not giving an acceptable response to if you are right why do so few people agree with you here, as if there is not a huge anti-Trump bias on this forum.  I am really surprise I was not asked for a link for suggesting such.  
Click to expand...
There is also a huge anti-Hitler and anti-Manson bias on this board.  If you feel that you are unfairly singled out for the opinions expressed on this board, maybe you should consider the possibility that those opinions are either:  1)not very informed; 2) poorly reasoned; and/or 3) morally indefensible.

 
jon_mx said:
I got hounded and ridiculed for not giving an acceptable response to if you are right why do so few people agree with you here, as if there is not a huge anti-Trump bias on this forum.  I am really surprise I was not asked for a link for suggesting such.  
Click to expand...
Among other things you compared asking a foreign power for help in discrediting a political opponent to "opposition research." There aren't many places where an opinion like that will escape unchallenged. 

Not all opinions are created equal.

 
jon_mx said:
toshiba said:
I think there is a huge anti-Trump bias in general, but he deserves it.
Click to expand...
Yes, but that bias is far heavier in the forum than it is in general.  90 percent of this forum is rabidly anti-Trump.  
Click to expand...
I would say anti-Trump might be close to that number for the Political Forum participants (not all FBG Forums) , rabidly would be probably much less than that though.

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
There is also a huge anti-Hitler and anti-Manson bias on this board.  If you feel that you are unfairly singled out for the opinions expressed on this board, maybe you should consider the possibility that those opinions are either:  1)not very informed; 2) poorly reasoned; and/or 3) morally indefensible.
Click to expand...
Yes.  Exactly the extreme bias I was referring to.  Comparing Trump to Hitler is way to typical in this place. 

 
If 90% of a community can't decide whether you're disingenuous, stupid, or both maybe complaining about the bias of the community isn't the most useful response.  I'm sure there are other communities where those opinions are more mainstream.  

 
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
There is also a huge anti-Hitler and anti-Manson bias on this board.  If you feel that you are unfairly singled out for the opinions expressed on this board, maybe you should consider the possibility that those opinions are either:  1)not very informed; 2) poorly reasoned; and/or 3) morally indefensible.
Click to expand...
No, I don't think this is accurate. There's a heckler's veto at work on this board, and it has nothing to do with the appropriateness of the counterarguments presented, nor of reasoning. It's really simply an exertion of political will; nothing more, nothing less. That someone as bright as yourself might have missed that possibility strikes me as willful, to a degree.

 
roadkill1292 said:
Among other things you compared asking a foreign power for help in discrediting a political opponent to "opposition research." There aren't many places where an opinion like that will escape unchallenged. 

Not all opinions are created equal.
Click to expand...
I am confused at what the big difference really is.  Would it be wrong for Pelosi to ask Putin about Trump?  Seeking the truth should not illegal.  

 
rockaction said:
No, I don't think this is accurate. There's a heckler's veto at work on this board, and it has nothing to do with the appropriateness of the counterarguments presented, nor of reasoning. It's really simply an exertion of political will; nothing more, nothing less. That someone as bright as yourself might have missed that possibility strikes me as willful, to a degree.
Click to expand...
I would like a link for each of these assertions. Tia

 
jon_mx said:
I am confused at what the big difference really is.  Would it be wrong for Pelosi to ask Putin about Trump?  Seeking the truth should not illegal.  
Click to expand...
He wasn't seeking truth...but anything he could use politically.

Yes...if Pelosi on here own contacts Putin and asks him to investigate Trump...and for Putin to contact her personal lawyer...that is wrong.

I will ask again...do you honestly believe Trump was asking about Biden had anything to do with National Interest or National Security?

 
jon_mx said:
I am confused at what the big difference really is.  Would it be wrong for Pelosi to ask Putin about Trump?  Seeking the truth should not illegal.  
Click to expand...
The correct analogy would be if Pelosi asked Putin for damaging information about a Republican running against Pelosi for Congress in her district- and Pelosi offering to lift sanctions against Russia if Putin provides it. 

 
timschochet said:
The correct analogy would be if Pelosi asked Putin for damaging information about a Republican running against Pelosi for Congress in her district- and Pelosi offering to lift sanctions against Russia if Putin provides it. 
Click to expand...
You are assuming there is a link between the two which has not been established.  Asking for facts is not criminal.

 
sho nuff said:
He wasn't seeking truth...but anything he could use politically.

Yes...if Pelosi on here own contacts Putin and asks him to investigate Trump...and for Putin to contact her personal lawyer...that is wrong.

I will ask again...do you honestly believe Trump was asking about Biden had anything to do with National Interest or National Security?
Click to expand...
No, but politicians just need plausible deniability.  

 
jon_mx said:
You are assuming there is a link between the two which has not been established.  Asking for facts is not criminal.
Click to expand...
Common sense should tell you that if he’s asking about Biden, Trump’s motivation is winning the 2020 election. If Trump defenders attempt to make the argument that you’re making- “we don’t know for sure why he asked about Biden-“ they’re going to lose public opinion. Badly. Because it’s absurd, frankly. 

 
sho nuff said:
It doesn't have to be criminal for it to be impeachable.
Click to expand...
That is a really low bar then to overturn an election.  This is a moderation thread, let's not pollute this fine thread about the horrors of PSF moderation with Trump-hating discussion which is already in 24 front page threads. 

 
jon_mx said:
No, but politicians just need plausible deniability.  
Click to expand...
And its quite obvious it wasn't about National Interest and National security.  He can try to deny it...but there is nothing plausible about the denial.  Thats the point.  Its clearly in the wrong.  Even you admit it wasn't about those things.  That is part of what makes it impeachable.

 
jon_mx said:
That is a really low bar then to overturn an election.  This is a moderation thread, let's not pollute this fine thread about the horrors of PSF moderation with Trump-hating discussion which is already in 24 front page threads. 
Click to expand...
Its not overturning an election.  Its punishing the man for improper actions.  And its what impeachment is there for.

Though, I agree its a moderation thread.

 
rockaction said:
No, I don't think this is accurate. There's a heckler's veto at work on this board, and it has nothing to do with the appropriateness of the counterarguments presented, nor of reasoning. It's really simply an exertion of political will; nothing more, nothing less. That someone as bright as yourself might have missed that possibility strikes me as willful, to a degree.
Click to expand...
The mob is always right.  

 
jon_mx said:
That is a really low bar then to overturn an election.  This is a moderation thread, let's not pollute this fine thread about the horrors of PSF moderation with Trump-hating discussion which is already in 24 front page threads. 
Click to expand...
Agree with your second point but one last item: impeaching and removing Donald Trump is NOT overturning the election. Hillary would not be the next President; Pence would. 

 
sho nuff said:
And its quite obvious it wasn't about National Interest and National security.  He can try to deny it...but there is nothing plausible about the denial.  Thats the point.  Its clearly in the wrong.  Even you admit it wasn't about those things.  That is part of what makes it impeachable.
Click to expand...
Only if it was truly tied to aid.  But that is a topic for 24 other threads, not this one. 

 
rockaction said:
I mean, for someone as smart as Ramsey not to even consider that possibility strikes me as a glaring omission, at the least.
Click to expand...
Political bias gets to everyone.  As a rule though, whenever anyone lays out 'all' the possibilities they usually intentionally leave out the ine they don't want to consider.

 
I really don't care one way or another if Trump gets impeached. The next boss will be just as bad. Which is also how I felt about Hillary.

But lets all be honest here. If Trump were an active participant on the FBG forums, he'd be reported more than any other poster for not being excellent, and lead the forum in timeouts. Which would put him in the same group as many of the posters most vocal against him. 

 
rockaction said:
No, I don't think this is accurate. There's a heckler's veto at work on this board, and it has nothing to do with the appropriateness of the counterarguments presented, nor of reasoning. It's really simply an exertion of political will; nothing more, nothing less. That someone as bright as yourself might have missed that possibility strikes me as willful, to a degree.
Click to expand...
If the poster is saying that the board is 90% biased against him, I don't see how that qualifies as a heckler's veto.  That's just the marketplace of ideas working.  Many of the people who more typically post in this particular thread, on both sides, are using a heckler's veto.  That's what the report button and constantly whining about the moderators is.  My personal preference is for everyone to post what they honestly think and let the chips fall where they may,.

And yeah, I'm sure it feels unfair when people dogpile on your opinion.  It's no surprise that I disagree, strongly, with a lot of opinions you've expressed on this board.  You've shown some real willingness to interrogate your reaction to disagreements and how you choose to present disagreements, and consequently the board--me included--are more inclined to try to engage with you and try to take your arguments seriously because you've at least demonstrated enough that we can be sure they are sincere.  

And this is a process.  Out of 70 political issues, IvanK and I probably agree on 5 to 10.  But's it's not as if I just started taking his arguments seriously because he was against Trump.  I knew Ivan was that rare unicorn arguing for a conservative position who was actually telling the truth when he said he was a libertarian.  It's the same with Maurile.  He's been a favorite poster of mine in political threads for close to 20 years and we disagree 8 out of 10 times.  

The thing is, I don't particularly care about civility for civility's sake.  Respect is earned.  And when confronted with the typical Trump supporter's post, I can be pretty sure that it's either free of analysis or citation whatsoever, or that it completely misrepresents what it cites.  In the latter case, when I take the 45 seconds on Google it requires for me to confirm my suspicion, I don't really see the benefit of treating that post like a difference of opinion between rational people.  I'd rather be honest.  And because it's not my board, that means sometimes I'll get a timeout.  Which is fine.  I don't report posts and I don't protest timeouts.  Because Joe or any other moderator doesn't have to share my preferences in this regard.   

 
Well, that's kind of you in certain parts but I respectfully disagree, aside from the poor use of "heckler's veto," which was wrong from the jump on my end.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ramsay Hunt Experience said:
If the poster is saying that the board is 90% biased against him, I don't see how that qualifies as a heckler's veto.  That's just the marketplace of ideas working.  Many of the people who more typically post in this particular thread, on both sides, are using a heckler's veto.  That's what the report button and constantly whining about the moderators is.   
Click to expand...
It is not a bias against me.  Look at the polls taken in this forum.  Like Kavanaugh was over 90 percent against him.  Impeachment would be very similar.  Virtually all the threads are anti-Trump or pro democrat candidate X.  The one thread on AOC which mocks her antics, usually gets lots of pushback no matter how stupid the things she says.  90 percent of the makeup of this forum is filled with the 30-40 percent of the strongest left-leaning segment of our general population.  Ideas which are counter to the leftist ideology get mocked everytime and it is more a function of the bias than it is of the content.  

As far as moderation goes, Joe will tell you a bad post from a conservative will generate 8 reports immediately which gets the mods attention.  That is not the case with a bad post from the liberal side where it will only get 1 or 2 reports and usually ignored by the mods. 

 
apalmer said:
So you fully support the impeachment investigation and efforts to obtain Trump's tax returns?
Click to expand...
I think you have to ask at what cost?  The house has other jobs to do with the taxpayer's money and I think the Dems should be approaching 2020 by focusing on the issues since the Mueller fiasco has shown they are inept at poo slinging.  If Ukraine has a copy of Trump's tax return then by all means post it on the internet for us.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Memphis Foundry
  • Locked
  • Sticky
The Politics Forum Is CLOSED.
Replies
0
Views
3K
Memphis Foundry
Memphis Foundry
HellToupee
The GG Appreciation Thread. The Savior of the PSF
2 3 4
Replies
188
Views
6K
GoBirds
GoBirds
GordonGekko
Twitter Senior Engineer Admits That Platform "Does Not Believe in Free Speech” (5/21/22 23:45 PST)
Replies
29
Views
770
BladeRunner
BladeRunner

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 6 (members: 0, guests: 6)
Top