Bungie.net Community
This topic has moved here: Subject: What constitiutes a political discussion?
  • Subject: What constitiutes a political discussion?
Subject: What constitiutes a political discussion?
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Der Todesengel
This doesn't mean I don't still hate you


WorkPLace l Mythics l Regulars

RIP BerserkerBarage DeathPimp72


Posted by: CrazzySnipe55

Posted by: FALSE R3ALITYx

Posted by: Big Black Bear
Posted by: FALSE R3ALITYx
I'm sure there is an "ATF.net" or some other related forum where you discuss gun control to your hearts content.

I prefer to talk about games on a gaming site. Not politics or the end of the world.
There are an endless number of other sites where an endless number of other topics can be discussed. Does that mean that none of them are suitable for discussion here?


I didn't say that. What I'm saying is that if our Hosts don't want us discussing certain topics on their forums, who are we to question or argue?
DeeJ said nothing about guns in his post. The only person who's been an authority on the subject is Foman, and Forum Ninjas can't outlaw nor approve topics.


And you think Fo is locking topics without any direction from his higher-ups?

I'm sure there has been conversation between the Mods and employees on this topic. The only rebel Mod here is Dr. Bob

  • 12.17.2012 1:07 PM PDT

The Forerunner, the Great Journey, and Heaven Theory

[Announcement Trailer] Halo: Forerunner

Posted by: Agustus
I lol'd at the absurd miscommunication that occurs whenever dibbs post something. Perhaps his brain is so highly evolved that he can no longer clearly communicate with lesser life forms, even among his own species.

Posted by: DeeJ
Do you like video games? Discuss...
I like video games but I'm not so sure about the ERSB ratings and the lines used to stratify them...

Wait a minute, was this a trick?

  • 12.17.2012 1:07 PM PDT

Hi I'm RT and I like to argue!

Posted by: dibbs089
Posted by: DeeJ
Do you like video games? Discuss...
I like video games but I'm not so sure about the ERSB ratings and the lines used to stratify them...

Wait a minute, was this a trick?
ESRB was basically created in response to Congress, but it's independently run. As long as you're talking about how it does its work, and not whether or not it should exist, you're safe, I would think. :-P

/pedantry

  • 12.17.2012 1:14 PM PDT

First in social ranked firefight campaign competitive and ODST goose splatters.
My other account is UrbanTwisticle
20,000+ total matchmade goose splatters

Check out my YouTube Channel


Posted by: DeeJ
Seems pretty clear cut to me. A political discussion is a discussion about politics. If you're having a hard time identifying that line, it's probably best to stroll in another conversational direction. There is a lot to talk about here. Stick to games. That's usually safe. Do you like video games? Discuss...
Exactly. We should be talking about video game laws and there sociopolitical effect on children. =D

  • 12.17.2012 1:15 PM PDT

*´¨)---––•(-• Dutchy •-)•–--–-(¨´*
¸.•´¸.•*´¨) ¸.•*¨)••(¨*•.¸ (¨´*•.¸´â€¢.¸
(¸.•´ (¸.•Everything fails•.¸) ´â€¢.¸)


Posted by: CrazzySnipe55
Nobody's views can change, no arguments successfully rebutted, etc.
But that's false. More than a few of my stances on various political issues have changed because of various debates on this website.

  • 12.17.2012 1:52 PM PDT

Tej~

Because gun discussions always end up as Constitution/2nd Amendment discussions.

It's kind of like Goodwin's law, but instead of everyone calling each other National Socialists they just bicker over politics(and mention red necks).

  • 12.17.2012 1:56 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Elder Mythic Member

Keep political discussions in private groups.

  • 12.17.2012 2:12 PM PDT


Posted by: x Foman123 x
just as are any other threads discussing proposed or potential changes to existing laws.

And for the hyperbolists: yes, that includes speed limit laws.


So discussion of any law is political discussion and therefore against the rules?

Yeah, no way that you can enforce that one. I'm calling bull-blam!-.

  • 12.17.2012 4:24 PM PDT

The only reason certain threads have gotten away with it is because a moderator never got on before the thread died; Which is odd because the thread goes up in flames cause nobody reports the damn thread, and instead posts their opinion on the subject. Some even trying to claim "It isn't political it's social" when it clearly is political.

You should know which political subjects I'm talking about.

Posted by: coolmike699
So discussion of any law is political discussion and therefore against the rules?

Yeah, no way that you can enforce that one. I'm calling bull-blam!-.


[Edited on 12.17.2012 4:34 PM PST]

  • 12.17.2012 4:34 PM PDT

Hi I'm RT and I like to argue!

Posted by: coolmike699
So discussion of any law is political discussion and therefore against the rules?

Posted by: x Foman123 x
discussing proposed or potential changes to existing laws.

The answer seems obvious to me.

  • 12.17.2012 6:00 PM PDT

Key

Yes. I post in those threads because I don't believe some of them should be disallowed. Turning a blind eye to some stuff, in my opinion, is not a terrible idea. As long as discussion has not degenerated to 50% ad hominem, I don't see any reason political conversations about guns can't be allowed.
Posted by: Gaara444
The only reason certain threads have gotten away with it is because a moderator never got on before the thread died; Which is odd because the thread goes up in flames cause nobody reports the damn thread, and instead posts their opinion on the subject. Some even trying to claim "It isn't political it's social" when it clearly is political.

You should know which political subjects I'm talking about.

Posted by: coolmike699
So discussion of any law is political discussion and therefore against the rules?

Yeah, no way that you can enforce that one. I'm calling bull-blam!-.

  • 12.17.2012 6:42 PM PDT


Posted by: RighteousTyrant
Posted by: coolmike699
So discussion of any law is political discussion and therefore against the rules?

Posted by: x Foman123 x
discussing proposed or potential changes to existing laws.

The answer seems obvious to me.


The answer is the problem.

  • 12.17.2012 8:35 PM PDT

Shakes Magic 8 Ball

Gun control is a political issue isn't it?

  • 12.17.2012 8:41 PM PDT

Shakes Magic 8 Ball


Posted by: x Foman123 x
And for the hyperbolists: yes, that includes speed limit laws.
These political issues are actual representations of people's lives, so essentially you're prohibiting their life experience with that matter.

Hyperbole complete, you can't talk about life. :)

  • 12.17.2012 8:44 PM PDT

Good, now we hopefully don't get Political AND Blog threads now!

It really is Christmas Season!

Posted by: NorbergK6
Hyperbole complete, you can't talk about life. :)

  • 12.17.2012 8:54 PM PDT

Posted by: Gaara444
The only reason certain threads have gotten away with it is because a moderator never got on before the thread died
Well now this is demonstratably incorrect.

Posted by: x Foman123 x
If you have seen political threads that lasted for a while, it was because no moderator happened to notice, not because they "used to be allowed."
As is this.

  • 12.17.2012 11:57 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Some of you gentlemen have clearly left your senses at the door. No discussion is inherently political. It's entirely possible to discuss any topic in the context of politics and conversely it's possible to discuss any topic without coming close to politics. Gun control is not necessarily a political discussion, if you think it is you're simply wrong. The same goes for them that are posting "THOSE TOPICS WERE SIMPLY NEVER LOCKED BECAUSE THEY SLIPPED THROUGH THE NET".

  • 12.17.2012 11:59 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Destinypedia - The Wiki for Bungie's Destiny
Posted by: DEATHPIMP72
Anyone but Foman. He smells like cheese.

Posted by: Nerd Boi
Posted by: Gaara444
The only reason certain threads have gotten away with it is because a moderator never got on before the thread died
Well now this is demonstratably incorrect.

Posted by: x Foman123 x
If you have seen political threads that lasted for a while, it was because no moderator happened to notice, not because they "used to be allowed."
As is this.
No it isn't.

  • 12.18.2012 12:00 AM PDT

The Wealthy are taxed enough.

Recon saw it.
Tom saw it.
I am pretty sure you saw it without locking it too.

At least 3 seperate moderators saw it, and did not lock it.

Guns in America

Duardo saw it.
Skibur saw it.
Recon saw it (Page 11, mid-way down in a quote, his account that is currently permabanned).

Again, at least 3 seperate moderators saw a thread on the very same subject at hand, and it was alllowed to go on for up to 56 additonal pages after moderators had posted in it.

  • 12.18.2012 12:08 AM PDT

There comes a time in every mans life... and that time is not now.

I think they're allowed as long as the mod that sees it agrees with the OP. Something like that anyway.

  • 12.18.2012 12:08 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Nerd Boi
Again, at least 3 seperate moderators saw a thread on the very same subject at hand, and it was alllowed to go on for up to 56 additonal pages after moderators had posted in it.
I don't think counting Skibur is very fair.

  • 12.18.2012 12:09 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Destinypedia - The Wiki for Bungie's Destiny
Posted by: DEATHPIMP72
Anyone but Foman. He smells like cheese.

Posted by: Nerd Boi
Again, I said no moderator happened to notice it was political discussion, not that no moderator happened to see the thread at all.

Also, the second thread you linked is nearly four years old. It's utterly irrelevant now. The first thread, while certainly right on the borderline of political discussion, is now being taken out of context -- that thread was a discussion connected to discussions around the "Occupy" movement, which I pointed out at the time was not political but rather, at the time, had no definable goals or purpose whatsoever, much less political. Again, yes, the thread was potentially political, but we left it open due to its non-political context. Also, if I'm remembering correctly (and I think I am), we eventually decided to lock it as political discussion.

On the other hand, I can give you numerous examples of me and other moderators (and DeeJ) saying that discussion of pending and/or proposed legislation is political discussion and thus prohibited.

One. Two. Three. Four. Five. Six. Seven.

Disagree with our interpretation of the forum rules if you want (I know some people already do). That's what this thread is for. But you can't argue that we have not made it clear for a very long time now that this is how the rule is interpreted. I think it's misleading to link to one or two old, questionable, out-of-context threads and argue that because of them, the enforcement of the rule is now unclear and/or inconsistent.

[Edited on 12.18.2012 12:49 AM PST]

  • 12.18.2012 12:45 AM PDT

Posted by: Dustin 6047
Troll confirmed. I never even insulted you

Posted by: Dustin 6047
OP - You're a dumbass with the reading comprehension skills of a second grader.


Can someone tell me what's wrong with these two, this made me LOL hard.

I usually think of something political as something controversial. You know, if something controversial pops up, it's going to lead to politics eventually. Everything does, even video games.

  • 12.18.2012 12:47 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: x Foman123 x
Discussion of potential and/or proposed changes to the gun control laws is unquestionably political discussion. This is a black-and-white issue with no gray area, and threads of this nature will be locked, just as are any other threads discussing proposed or potential changes to existing laws.
so this bit is wrong then

  • 12.18.2012 12:58 AM PDT

Posted by: x Foman123 x
This is not a change to the rules; this has been how we have moderated the Flood for years.
Unless you are arguing that the current style of moderation post dates that thread I fail to see the relevance of the age.

But well then. I know we all make jokes about the incompetence of you all at times, but I very much doubt that you are capable of posting in a thread, for the most part as an active participant (see: Skibur driving the latter thread) replying to others, and not notice if it is political or not. As noted the latter thread on firearms is particularly relevant to the present thread, and 2 of the 3 moderators were active participants. I'll give you Duardo, we can happily pretend he made some flippant comment and didn't read the thread. The others did.

They saw the clear political discussion happening in it and they allowed it to continue. Which both bits I quoted stated was not the case, that if a moderator only happened to see it it would have been locked. That did not happen. The polar opposite happened in fact.

For the record, the tax thread was a discussion on everything from taxes (legislation/politics) to occupy to lightbulbs and environmental regulations (legislation). Sure it ended up locked. Almost certainly because whoever did so decided it had gone on far enough. Noone here is doubting that you all say political discussion is not allowed, nor that you do lock threads containing it.

But it is equally clear that political threads continue and thrive even with moderator observation and indeed contribution. Enforcement is inconsistent, it has been for as long as I've bothered to pay attention to politics in the flood, and so long as the most that happens is the threads in question eventually get locked and rac is banned for being himself most folk just move on and accept it as the way things are. But trying to pretend that all political threads are locked on sight is simply wrong.

  • 12.18.2012 1:07 AM PDT