Every member that I wanted opinions from as a writing partner ended up banned before I could ask or leaving shortly after. Does wanting honesty encourage some kind of bad behavior or is it just generally a higher standard on WF?
I can't think of anyone who's been banned that I really wanted an opinion from. To be honest I can't think of that many people who've been banned. Anyone else noticed this? EDIT: On a hunch I went to see if LordWarGod had been banned. Turns out he has. I wonder why I had a hunch it might have been him?
I have no idea of the specifics of this thread. But as someone who is in charge of a couple of groups in meatspace, I'll just add that it can be a completely different perspective. You have to consider the whole group and you see things that the regular members have no idea of. You see the whole picture of their effect on the group, not just parts of it. For example, some people are very disruptive. Upfront and/or behind the scenes, their name comes up attached to unnecessary trouble and hassle too often. If you went around explaining all of it to third parties who aren't involved, you'd just be feeding into the drama. You can't allow one person to have too much negative influence on the larger group. So you just quietly invite them out. If that helps...
I rarely miss the banned. And honesty doesn't require bannable behavior. I myself am slowly sliding down a slope of being less productive and more honest-in-an-unproductive-way. If I were a moderator, I'd have doubts about me. I'm going to make a sort of New Year's resolution to make "coldly civil" the worst end of my behavior spectrum. These days I shift now and then to "contemptuously snarky".
If I may ask, what happened with LordWarGod cause the few times we talked he seemed like a nice guy? I imagine he said something "offensive" (or slightly demeaning to our Lord and Savior Hillary) and got shitcanned?
Honesty is not to be conflated with the kind of behavior that eventually gets people removed from the group. You can be dead honest without being an ass about it. Seriously, you can. In the days before digital engagement, we had no choice but to practice modes of interaction that didn't get us popped in the mouth, not because of the particular message being delivered, but its mode of delivery, which is a horse of another color. Nope. We don't do that here. Suffice to say that something that should have been minor escalated well past any rational attempt to de-escalate. Hillary had nothing to do with it.
IDK. What I do know is that I was a bit of a shit when I started on here, but I cleaned up my act and got with the program. Had no idea about LordWarGod, I remember the last person to get banned was over some kinda creepy stuff. Though I miss Moon, he just up and disappeared, at least I hope he didn't get banned. Though IDK the dude was kinda out there at times.
I'll take that as a yes then... Real Talk: I just kind of assumed so, when I saw he'd been banned, because the like two times I mentioned in separate threads I was not worshiping at the Church of Jesus Christ in Obama, the next ten posts were "ORANGE MAN BAD!" chants lol (and I can already feel the ban hammer heading towards me now...but whatever I'll face my death with no fear) So like what did he say exactly? Or was it like something actually relevant, like some kind of plagiarism or something? Cause with all due respect to the guy I read over a lot of his stuff and he kinda ripped a LOT off from Warhammer 40,000 and I was thinking "this isn't a copyright problem, right?"
If conservative or neoconservative politics got you banned here, there are a whole lot of people who would be gone. You're spinning conspiracy theories. (Which also don't get you banned, as far as I can tell.)
My "conspiracy theories" are based on the fact I lost two Twitter accounts in rapid succession, both of which because a total of a half-dozen White Liberals demanded proof that I was "really" Black (one postulating I was actually a Russian AI created to "trick" minorities into voting Republican) and when I promptly gave them said proof (i.e., a pic of me flipping them the bird) I was called a "house slave" and told I was an embarrassment to my race and then promptly reported for "harassment". To say nothing of the times I've had people spit in my face or throw beer bottles and rocks at me because I dared to wear a MAGA hat in public. Oh and the fun, fun, fun times that I used the word EMPIRICISM in a discussion and was told that I was misspelling IMPERIALISM and then when I offered this chick a dictionary definition for the word, she asked if it was "some crazy new religion" that Republicans were in to. So no offense but I'm kinda on guard.
Well let's put it to rest: No one gets banned for their political lean. No one. People get banned when they behave in ways that incite general discord, regardless of if said people are Red or Blue, Conservative or Liberal, Religious or Secular, Gay, Straight, Bisexual, Trans, Ace, etc. No one gets banned for any of those things because none of those things are remotely bannable concerns. People who don't know how to behave in an adult fashion, these are the people who get banned. I have banned innumerable people over the last decade who 100% sided with everything I hold to in realms of political lean. Agreement is always optional; adult behavior is not. That's the answer to the original question in this thread. So before things go down the road we all know this is leading to...
