Just turn it down if offered.

In his defense, he did invite me to co-mod and look what that's done for him? I sort of imagine that my responses to some of this stuff has caused him and whosnext some consternation :P But in my own defense I was surprised by the poll results and it made me question a few things.

I think chez has been pretty willing to listen to my disagreements at least.
In any case, I wouldn't say that it's impossible to work this stuff out. I just said I'm not sure I'm super comfortable with ignoring the majority of the forum on this.

That would require whosnext to visit and read this forum, so probably not.

It is 100% possible to sort this out, and Keed has already told us what the solution is:

Hey hey ho ho ElliotR has gotta go!

well named at least writes like a normal ****ing person and responds to questions that are asked of him. Maybe a change could be made where there's a rule all moderators should do that?

When people feel free to not worry about crossing lines, that freedom expands their possible thoughts in more than just the direction of the line. Insults are some part of what adds the heat to heated debates, the picante punctuation of political speech if you will. Politics is inherently divisive, and insults are a way to define your political enemy which has no real substitute. We have a president who trolls the country on twitter. The masks are pretty much off IRL, let alone the internet.

^^ The disappearance of Deuces's 9/11 thread is yet another tragic casualty of the chezzstapo.

The observably negative impact is a subjective evaluation that starts from the view of what a person wants from a forum and measures contributions to the extent that they facilitate those wants. Now in fairness you kinda acknowledge this in your last comment but I think your hopes for this forum, in as much as I understand them, are overly optimistic. Rebranding the forum doesn't alter the fact that many contributors here are banned from Alpha and have a history of bad posting. This will have a much greater impact on how discussions go down here than moderators decisions on what is and isn't acceptable.

I favour containment threads along with monthly poo threads, and threads where the OP is in charge of modding, at least the aspect of determining what is on topic. If anyone should determine the confides of a discussion, it should be the OP. Also, never posted in the 9/11 thread, but no reason to shut it down. Conspiracy theorists aren't a bother as long as they aren't pushing their conspiracy theories in other threads, which if they do not have a place to post their own, they are more likely to do. It's like, you know, I don't like personal insults, but is having no containment for it going to actually fix it? Not really. You'll just get random posters on tilt doing tilty things.

The 9/11 thread still seems to be there.

I don't think it was ever zapped but if it was then its been unzapped (or I'm suffering from too much sun )

And nobody wants to participate in it anymore.

I hope you're a pro at writing php, because that functionality doesn't exist in the forum software.

Well, yeah. But I mean it's like saying this **** sandwich tastes pretty good, if you like ****. :P

This is obviously true. And I was even already trying to account for that! But yeah, that's why I said I was willing to go along with what people want, more or less.

I agree. I think I've said as much on several occasions actually. I never expected people to change the way they posted, I was just under the impression that the level of vitriol that already existed in the "content threads" prior to my becoming a mod was satisfying everyone, since the !!! threads were mostly dead. I was wrong.

I am a pro at writing PHP (maybe I should be more embarrassed about this) and we still can't do it :P

I think it's more akin to saying if someone is determined to put a burning **** sandwich through my letterbox I'd rather stamp on it than eat it if you know what I mean.

Thing is the whole !!! thing was misguided. We have mongidig in the exchange leading up to his response to you accuse all leftists of mental illness. Now because he seemed to be talking generically he gets to label a ton of posters and yet we can't actually specify his idiocy rather we have to launch a broadside at all rightists in order to adhere to the rule of the forum and personally I like my digs to be specific.

Just part of chez's vision of a high-content and thought-provoking debate

Even before this discussion I would have had no objection to people identifying the idiocy specifically when it's on-topic for the thread. I've tried to clarify this a few times.

Cool but if the all leftists are mental line is okay a discussion about whether to allow personal attacks seems moot.

What does "if the all leftists are mental line" mean?.................b

I could have punctuated but I'm kinda lazy and it's kinda obvious to anyone reading the thread

tbph I'm so used to seeing this kind of stuff my eyes just scroll on past it and it never occurs to me to take it personally. I agree that's inconsistent, but then I'm on board with not really moderating "personal attacks" too heavily, as was my intent anyway? My idea was always more to just clean up/move the 78 posts in a row of A calling B an ignorant slut, or whatever. Not because I care that A called B an ignorant slut, but because that's like 70 posts too much of it while I'm trying to talk about something else :P

Anyway, as this thread has progressed I've gotten more on board with what I suggested in #21, but I'm not the only person whose opinion counts.

Yeah I'm good with the recommendations of #21

Are the mods any closer to getting this new personal attacks bill (APA) passed. If so, how long will it take for the new bill to be signed into law?

Make PUC great again so I can periodically troll with relative impugnity.

^^ if DiB isn't given an outlet here, he'll tard up politics alpha or OOT. This was one of the key benefits of PU.