Because he's a good poster.

Yeah? Care to list them?

I always thought that Politics was a containment forum.

That violates how many of your rules when posting? Oh that's right - all this will change now as you have seen the error of your ways all of a sudden.

Just wanted to add that I appreciate this being allowed, to the extent that it's necessary. Like, we cannot refute a claim that the politics forum is delusional/hive minded/etc without showing why that claim is wildly inaccurate... and since the claim is based on political discussions happening in a thread in the politics forum, the only way to do so is by getting into politics.

So thanks for letting us have a little rope on this one.

no one loves ATF politics threads more than I do!

This is why there can't be an actual "politics" section with you moderating. For starters, everything you have said and done towards me has been to "immediately dismiss" me out of hand. The "patriarchy" is a conspiratorial myth that we live in a society that has men oppress and dominate women. It's a simplistic and bitter view of the world. It's also incredibly harmful to everyone, especially women. That's not even up for debate in your view. That makes me "deplorable". That also shows who "immediately dismisses" who

Your explanation here is so simple, childish, and emotional, that its nearly impossible to actually have dialogue. Like you are so intolerant that your silly world view and oppression narratives aren't even up for debate. Everything about this post, the post about all conservatives have to offer is racism, and your "body of work" is ridiculous levels of intolerance, hubris, bitterness, and resentment. Never mind that your "body of work" contains nothing insightful or clever. I point to Well Named often because he is a shining example of someone who I strongly disagree with that demonstrates intelligence. He actually brings to the table research and formulates a detailed POV. You're just a hammer looking for a nail. We have had extensive debate and that clearly devolves in to us irritating each other. But at least the dialogue happens and a ton of information is exchanged. That hasn't happened from you personally or in your forum for ages. It's an echo chamber of like minded people who mob and attack any opposing view. The forum actually exhibits your level of intolerance. It's the culture you created. I'm the guy who failed to convince Chezlaw to remove low content attacking posts. Here we are with Mason basically explaining to you that your moderation has lead to a toxic environment that he is considering blowing up

Imagine a mod suggesting I stand up for "white supremacy". That's a strong claim and very insulting. The good news is we have a record of everything. When I call you terribly biased, I link to your actual posts. Go ahead and validate your claim here. You made a very serious claim about my "white supremacy" (I really hope my GF doesn't find out about this)

i keep trying to wash my mind and hands of all this, but partially because it's supposed to be my job and partially because it just keeps pulling me back, i can't let it go.

but i think it's been distilled down to one question for me:

are the exiled posters just trolls? is it that simple? they don't care about the positions they take. they just come to disrupt?

fly annoys me a lot. and one reason he annoys me is that i think he's put me in a box i don't fit in. otoh, he doesn't post that much and his jabs at me, while annoying, also prod me into thinking about where i really stand on some things and who i really am.

i'm stumped as usual. and really honestly asking questions. not the fake news part. that was a joke.

That is why you are here as a moderator of ATF if I recall - that and Mat's great hope that you would have taken on the moderation of an alternative politics forum.

thread.

that's going to be the part of the solution it seems. see my location if you want my opinion about the solution.

The hours and hours on ATF (for you and me both) that you'd hope that we were being a little bit more than trolls and somehow had a point about politics which is being realised now finally.

He's a good poster because he's consistently informative, insightful, and entertaining.

Not in this thread.

But I hope you find a somewhere to go.

I don't understand what you are saying.

Smears and out of hand dismissal, right on cue.

But ok, here's one:

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/2...k#post50874916

Your whole body of work in that thread is a clinic on everything I listed.

People are going to have other opinions, but I would say it's not quite that simple, especially if by trolling you mean specifically insincere disruption.

It is true that they are pretty universally disruptively bad posters. Some are undoubtedly insincere, but not all. I have no opinion on El Lobo Gordo's sincerity at this point, for example. My impression is that Juan sincerely holds the views he expresses, but I have often complained to him that he argues badly for them and is frustrating to interact with. Bundy's attitude towards the forum strikes me as genuine also, like I don't think pure trolls are typically as invested (obsessed?) as he is.

I think in the politics forum "argues badly" is usually taken to be trolling regardless of intent. Hence people also call SenorKeeed a troll because they think he argues badly. Arguing badly for objectionable* views gets people exiled pretty quickly. There's no doubt that the second part is also important: Ikes was never banned. Keeed isn't banned. Inso isn't banned. Wookie's post about juan isn't just focused on him being a sophist, it's about him being a sophist in support of racist views. When these decisions are discussed some people focus on the first part, and others on the second, but they are both factors.

* from the point of view of the majority of forum participants. Obviously some of the biggest disagreements between liberals and conservatives in the US right now are about what views on race, gender, immigration, and so on are legitimate and which are bigoted. So Mason may be primarily concerned with civility but Juan is not; he's engaged in the larger culture war on those issues.

These are just facts I learned from alt-right hate monger Don Lemon

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...frican-americ/

The correlation between single motherhood and poverty is astronomical. It's completely color blind. The damaging outcomes on children raised by single mothers aside from poverty are undeniable. Everything from education to crime. It's all bad. The stats are also color blind. There is an epidemic of black kids growing up without a father. It's as if I'm the one with actual compassion and actually cares about black children here. I'm the one speaking up and heartbroken at the idea of a kid growing up without a father and having another mountain to climb. You're the one shouting down people addressing the problem. Don Lemon also faced a ton of backlash from simpletons

On top of that, in case you were following along and not mentally challenged, none of that actually points to any sort of "supremacy". Are you slow?

Are these appropriate responses to someone fabricating a narrative and calling you a white supremacist? I have a lot harsher tone I would like to express but I guess I'm no angel

And if you think that missing black fathers are a problem that falls squarely on the shoulders of black people, you are looking at statistics to justify your biases rather than thinking deeper about why that may be the case.

But he can still do all that without the abuse, no? So why hasn't that changed after all the years you have been mod?

Well Named as mod of an alternate politics forum - what a good idea, wish I'd thought of it.

I think you do. Both you and I know of better things we can be doing with our time.

He's gotten generally more abusive these last few years as I generally ran a looser ship.

Shame that what is occurring in politics now is a little too late for your forum. It would have sat nicely as a centre left forum with as an objective to reach the centre.

The typical flippant attitude of one that believes he's done enough to save the sinking ship.