IANAL but I am fairly skeptical that any of this is (legally) actionable. No one knows who you are, and I doubt that site-specific pseudonyms can be libeled (although I think a pseudonymous forum poster can be guilty of libel against actual named persons).

That said, I feel like someone should warn you that, were Mat concerned about this, he's probably more likely to solve the problem by deleting your account than by changing the forum moderation. I'm not endorsing that course of action, I just feel like someone should give you a fair warning that threatening legal action is probably not going to have the results you want.

LMAO, what's he going to sue for? What damages has he suffered? Wookie gets charged treble damages and we get to call him a slow cyclist or inattentive lover for a few days?

I've kind of avoided actually commenting on this topic but I'll +1 that these are good posts. I also feel like this is a problem (and obviously have for a long time), but I also agree that I don't really know what the solution is. I thought Loki was modded in part to try to reign in some of the worst of this, i.e. to step up enforcement of rules against overly personal attacks. I'm not sure why he's no longer a mod, but I thought the idea was a good one.

Kerowo asked for an example. One recent one that comes to mind is Josem. But I also would go further than Loki, I think the politics forum has a reputation and there's plenty of people who do exactly as Mat suggests: they just avoid it because they don't need to make ten posts in there to know how it's going to go.

But there again, my idea for a solution was to try to get some of them interested in an alternative, and that didn't quite happen. Hence why I don't really have a solution better than Mat's. Part of that is just that I continue to think the problem is not primarily about the moderation, although I think the problems have gotten worse over the last year and the moderation plays some role in that. But it's also just a reflection of the political climate more generally, and I doubt you can eliminate that just by changing moderation. And of course it's also the case (IMO) that the increasing hostility or radicalization among left-leaning posters is not without cause, to put it mildly, which makes it more difficult.

It would be interesting to hear from Josem what happened, I don't recall seeing him participate, which doesn't mean he didn't, just means I don't know what happened with him.

I do know that everyone who starts a thread complaining about politics moderation has a history of poor posting in politics.

Hey if they come to a politics forum party wearing those conservative clothes they should expect something might happen to them. I'm not saying it's right but posters will be posters you know?

For those who don't have the benefit of being able to find these in the post report forum and would have to go digging through the thread, here they are:

And yes, the other reported post did call him a rapist, and was deleted.

I created a topic in the political forum once. Got a private message from a forum member that basically said, "Watch out. They're going to find a way to ban you for nothing." Sure enough, the next day ... banned.

I absolutely agree with the OP. The bias on these forums is extraordinary and anyone not falling in line is basically setup to get banned. I don't even waste my time with this forum since being banned after like two posts. The only reason I'm here now is because someone private messaged me about this specific topic.

As far as the left leaning bias goes... just look at the topics to choose from on the forum... looks like Yahoo's front page. A bunch of stuff about Trump sucking, racism, metoo, etc. My favorite one at first glance is the "Profile a Trumper" at 55 pages. The only thing missing is 5 topics about Kardashians.

Also, this notion that conservatives don't gamble and therefore don't visit twoplustwo is absurd. Whoever came up with that nonsense has clearly never had a good time drinking, smoking, and playing cards with a bunch of rednecks.

I visit quite a lot of forums across the political spectrum. Dissenters against the mob usually have a tough time on all those forums. Yet, the twoplustwo politics forum goes a step further and actively tries to silence dissenters.

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/4...rally-1684920/

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/4...?postcount=152

You referenced a thread where 90% of the respondents were trolling me. Ironically the mod says I was the one arguing "in bad faith" and said they would lock the thread. I told him to go ahead and lock it as I was fed up / done. Two hours later after no further posts by me he locks it and bans me. I haven't been back to that forum since.

This was a private message someone had sent to me earlier in that day:

"They aren't going to come right out and state that groups they don't agree with should not have the right to assemble peacefully but that is what they believe. Wookie will ban you soon from politics. If you want to stick around make a post in the high content thread that clovis8 started."

Sigh, this is a problem I've mentioned that I don't know how to fix without bans--another person whining like fax when you deserved what you got in that thread you posted that I scrolled just now. It's just easier to ban than pointless waste of time engaging. It's not bias when you get quickly proven to be full of crap whether for you that was intentionally or unintentionally.

Yes, lots of them trolled, it's the internet.

That lurker that PM'd you is very weak.

You referenced it first.

So then why aren't they banned and given 20 points every time for "arguing in bad faith"?

And whining? I haven't been back to that forum in over a year. I'm merely providing evidence that OP is correct in his analysis. Stop trying to marginalize my response by calling it "whining" when it obviously isn't. I'm also not sure how i got what i deserved after battling 5-6 pages of people trolling me... but okay. I especially love this response 6 posts down from my original post:

"Great thread. Now watch as we run you out of the forum the same way we ran that clown out of the Common." -zikzak

^^More validity to OPs claim

Now watch as your comments here meet with the same success as your thread.

On the basis of not what is actually right but just what the masses want?

Josem isn't the ex-ps employee I hope

If you're asking about my suggestion that threatening legal action was only likely to get him banned, then I expect that would have everything to do with 2+2 trying to protect its business and nothing to do with "what the masses want". Also of course you should keep in mind I don't actually know what would happen, and I don't represent 2+2 at all. I'm just making an inference from past events.

Sort of reverse 1920s mentality

Conservatives like to go under-ground to play. No respect for any institutions, established businesses, etc.

Don't be the guy threatening libel etc. Unless someone is doxxing you, don't worry about it and don't put the admin in a position to over police the forum. You got a mob of loons hurling abuse at you and we all know how annoying that is but this is not the route to take here
ITT I already listed a bunch of interesting aspects of the topic that isn't being discussed in the echo chamber. It's probably the busiest thread on the site and yet it brought me roaring back because I'm deplorable obviously. Grow up one day
I'm not sure what happened but the actual message suggested the post got deleted. Theres still a link I posted ITT that gives that message. I haven't bothered to look it up
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...43&postcount=8

It took all of 8 posts for a reg that represents the intolerant mob to declare their intent. Imagine someone who didn't declare this looking at the thread and deciding "bad faith". The whole thing is a joke.

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...postcount=1323

I didn't even watch the video but the mod declares over half the population deplorable racists and the ideological tribe mobs anyone that doesn't conform. I bet if you search "bad faith" in the Kavanaugh thread alone you will get at least a dozen posters calling for ban on maybe 3 or 4 different posters with civil disagreement of the narrative. I popped in to see if the hysteria was as bad as expected and people were literally calling mods to check if a poster was a russian troll. The mod was pretty much insulted that they even had to ask him to be searching for an excuse to ban anyone that doesn't agree with the far left narrative

The point is that its not a politics section, its a far left community. That's fine, all people are asking for is an actual politics section and the far left community can exist on its own still. The far left mob is so intolerant that they mob and tard up anyone even trying to have discussion somewhere else. Imagine if posters in the sports betting section asked for an additional section and sports betting posters ranted protest to some new section that will not change the existing one. It's just pure intolerance.

Well, thanks for stopping by to repeat yourself. Is your argument supposed to be that it's impossible for larger numbers/percentages of people to be racist?

well named can still have his politics forum anytime he asks.

he can run it as he sees fit and choose anyone he likes to help him moderate.

No my point is that the statement you made is totally unhinged. Honestly it's to the point of something alex jones would say in a paranoid rant. Yeah half of the united states supports a party that only has "white supremacy and money for the rich" to offer.

With that view it's really easy to see how "bad faith" bannings become really easy. People who don't share your pov are obviously deplorable

Mason has looked at this thread and has asked me to think again about intervening.

given years of failure in this area, i don't expect anything productive, but i would like to point to this post by mrwookie: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...postcount=1323

that's a pretty clear and extreme biased opinion. and it does come from the moderator of the forum. that viewpoint from a mod, by itself, is not problematic for me. it very well might be for mason. but if it means the moderation is biased, that would be a problem for both of us.

Do you think it is possible for someone to have a personal opinion but not have that influence their actions as a mod?