Kansas Crimson

it was the absolute wrong time in history. to run with the harris/walls ticket.

all psych has done is hate and disparage Harris…quite literally

hypocritical garbage, but no surprise

do better

pdub wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 11:30 am
Right.
Just letting it known, in the foreseeable future, i'm not going to let unreliable/unsourced info be spewed onto the site.
I'm just tired of it.

I'll be bouncing from the poli-bored pretty soon but posters here can be free to flag a post if it is clearly attempting to be poised as a factual statement ( particularly since media embeds are back on the table - so trashy twitter posts are probably the biggest culprit here ) but has the complete opposite of validity - i.e. a conspiracy or a total lie.

If that type of posting continues to happen, then you will be breaking our newer up-to-date bored rules, and you'll get to go to timeout and then, eventually, lobster'd.

Fuck yea!

About god damn time!

Tho part of me wants to just avoid this board altogether, part of me is now tempted to post regularly again here, in an ends-justify-the-means kinda way, so as to expedite the weeding-out of the toxic behavior that continues to be an issue across boreds, but particularly this one, and could be mitigated by enforcement of this new administrative policy.

And just generally, you guys, be aware the pols board has made every single one of us loose our minds.

I don’t think it is the bored that has caused people to loose their minds.

I mean, it’s prob the political climate as a whole, but the pols bored is a microcosm of the political climate as a whole. The relative cover of anonymous internet accounts doesn’t help.

And the political climate being the political climate, folks seem more than ever inclined to believe only what they wanna believe, to the point they may attempt some bad-faith measures to dismiss differing opinions.

BiggDick wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 1:56 pm

pdub wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 11:30 am
Right.
Just letting it known, in the foreseeable future, i'm not going to let unreliable/unsourced info be spewed onto the site.
I'm just tired of it.

I'll be bouncing from the poli-bored pretty soon but posters here can be free to flag a post if it is clearly attempting to be poised as a factual statement ( particularly since media embeds are back on the table - so trashy twitter posts are probably the biggest culprit here ) but has the complete opposite of validity - i.e. a conspiracy or a total lie.

If that type of posting continues to happen, then you will be breaking our newer up-to-date bored rules, and you'll get to go to timeout and then, eventually, lobster'd.

Fuck yea!

About god damn time!

Tho part of me wants to just avoid this board altogether, part of me is now tempted to post regularly again here, in an ends-justify-the-means kinda way, so as to expedite the weeding-out of the toxic behavior that continues to be an issue across boreds, but particularly this one, and could be mitigated by enforcement of this new administrative policy.

And just generally, you guys, be aware the pols board has made every single one of us loose our minds.

I'll also note that reporting a post because someone said something slightly mean to you does not count as:

"clearly attempting to be poised as a factual statement ( particularly since media embeds are back on the table - so trashy twitter posts are probably the biggest culprit here ) but has the complete opposite of validity - i.e. a conspiracy or a total lie."

pdub wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 2:46 pm

BiggDick wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 1:56 pm

pdub wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 11:30 am
Right.
Just letting it known, in the foreseeable future, i'm not going to let unreliable/unsourced info be spewed onto the site.
I'm just tired of it.

I'll be bouncing from the poli-bored pretty soon but posters here can be free to flag a post if it is clearly attempting to be poised as a factual statement ( particularly since media embeds are back on the table - so trashy twitter posts are probably the biggest culprit here ) but has the complete opposite of validity - i.e. a conspiracy or a total lie.

If that type of posting continues to happen, then you will be breaking our newer up-to-date bored rules, and you'll get to go to timeout and then, eventually, lobster'd.

Fuck yea!

About god damn time!

Tho part of me wants to just avoid this board altogether, part of me is now tempted to post regularly again here, in an ends-justify-the-means kinda way, so as to expedite the weeding-out of the toxic behavior that continues to be an issue across boreds, but particularly this one, and could be mitigated by enforcement of this new administrative policy.

And just generally, you guys, be aware the pols board has made every single one of us loose our minds.

I'll also note that reporting a post because someone said something slightly mean to you does not count as:

"clearly attempting to be poised as a factual statement ( particularly since media embeds are back on the table - so trashy twitter posts are probably the biggest culprit here ) but has the complete opposite of validity - i.e. a conspiracy or a total lie."

Where are these new rules posted, please? I’d like to make sure I’m in compliance.

Don’t troll.
Don’t dox.
Don’t be overtly racist or profane—ie something so awful that it would get you kicked out of a bar.

And now don’t post clearly fake news and pretend that it’s real. Obviously this will come with leeway but if it becomes a pattern, then bye.

pdub wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 2:46 pm

BiggDick wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 1:56 pm

pdub wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 11:30 am
Right.
Just letting it known, in the foreseeable future, i'm not going to let unreliable/unsourced info be spewed onto the site.
I'm just tired of it.

I'll be bouncing from the poli-bored pretty soon but posters here can be free to flag a post if it is clearly attempting to be poised as a factual statement ( particularly since media embeds are back on the table - so trashy twitter posts are probably the biggest culprit here ) but has the complete opposite of validity - i.e. a conspiracy or a total lie.

If that type of posting continues to happen, then you will be breaking our newer up-to-date bored rules, and you'll get to go to timeout and then, eventually, lobster'd.

Fuck yea!

About god damn time!

Tho part of me wants to just avoid this board altogether, part of me is now tempted to post regularly again here, in an ends-justify-the-means kinda way, so as to expedite the weeding-out of the toxic behavior that continues to be an issue across boreds, but particularly this one, and could be mitigated by enforcement of this new administrative policy.

And just generally, you guys, be aware the pols board has made every single one of us loose our minds.

I'll also note that reporting a post because someone said something slightly mean to you does not count as:

"clearly attempting to be poised as a factual statement ( particularly since media embeds are back on the table - so trashy twitter posts are probably the biggest culprit here ) but has the complete opposite of validity - i.e. a conspiracy or a total lie."

Noted.

Users simply saying something “mean” to me is something I’ve accepted as me just having to “deal with it” here. (tho so many other online forums so effectively moderate precisely that to so much benefit of the forum experience as a whole)

I’m more specifically thinking of the habits some users maintain like…after I post a view with a reliable source linked, other users respond like, “no you’re just making this up in your head, the facts say otherwise,” thus satisfying the clearly attempting to be poised as a factual statement language of the policy.

However, they don’t provide any sources for these “facts,” not to mention completely disregarding the sources I provided.

So then I ask them to provide reliable sources for their facts, and they fail to do so, instead offering something like, “actually I’d rather just go golfing today instead,” thus satisfying the complete opposite of validity element.

But maybe those instances won’t receive any administrative action, either. I think the policy as a whole will be difficult to administer objectively, and remains vulnerable to subjective and arbitrary and knee-jerk sorts of enforcement.

Not that I’m not glad you at least established it in writing, don’t get me wrong, thanks for that!

who knew victimhood tasted so good?

I don’t mean to play the victim here!

But at some point trad it’s up to you to realize that bitterness only tastes bitter.

Overlander wrote: ↑Mon Oct 28, 2024 2:32 pm

randylahey wrote: ↑Mon Oct 28, 2024 2:30 pm Beginning to look like trump might not just win enough swing states to win the election, he might win ALL swing states

Probably going to win EVERY state!
By hundreds of millions of votes!
MAGA!

As I told you. Trump won all the swing states. Lol. Your echo chamber failed you in seeing what was obviously about to happen

Where is Gutters’ signature at?

Congratulations to Psych and Randy, obviously, the smartest guys in the room.

pdub wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 2:54 pm Don’t troll.
Don’t dox.
Don’t be overtly racist or profane—ie something so awful that it would get you kicked out of a bar.

And now don’t post clearly fake news and pretend that it’s real. Obviously this will come with leeway but if it becomes a pattern, then bye.

“Online harassment is another umbrella term that can be applied to many different kinds of comment. Pew Research Center categorizes toxic comments into six types: purposeful embarrassment, OFFENSIVE, NAME-CALLING, physical threats, stalking, sustained harassment, and sexual harassment.”

dolomite wrote: ↑Fri Nov 15, 2024 11:48 am

pdub wrote: ↑Mon Nov 11, 2024 2:54 pm Don’t troll.
Don’t dox.
Don’t be overtly racist or profane—ie something so awful that it would get you kicked out of a bar.

And now don’t post clearly fake news and pretend that it’s real. Obviously this will come with leeway but if it becomes a pattern, then bye.

“Online harassment is another umbrella term that can be applied to many different kinds of comment. Pew Research Center categorizes toxic comments into six types: purposeful embarrassment, offensive, name-calling, physical threats, stalking, sustained harassment, and sexual harassment.”

Seriously!?

No way!

C'mon, man!

I think a few posters on this bored, according to that definition of online harassment which includes purposeful embarrassment, online harass themselves...a lot.

zing!

now, without even discussing the Pew's specific online harassment types like offensive, name calling, and sustained harassment, let's instead clarify the policy specific to KCrim.

If the policy is "don't be overtly profane—ie something so awful that it would get you kicked out of a bar," is it worth specifically quantifying that "overtly?"

In other words, exactly how many refrains of "fuck you" can one patron direct toward another before getting kicked out of the bar?

just last can’t help yourself, can you

child

not sure what trad said as I obliged his suggestion to ignore, but I'll go out on a limb and bet it not only falls under one or more of the types of online harassment identified by Pew, but would also be the kind of thing you prob couldn't say, or continue to say, to another bar patron without getting kicked out.