Should 'excessive hyperbole' as a moderation option exist?

[fhtagn]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

Just because you personally think content is "bad" (and let's be real, you really just mean content you disagree with), doesn't mean it's actually bad and needs to be removed.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

Just because you personally think content is "bad" (and let's be real, you really just mean content you disagree with), doesn't mean it's actually bad and needs to be removed.

That's true. I wouldn't want S019 anywhere near moderating tools.

[Bacon King]

When I was a mod, I upheld freedom of speech and rarely acted.

translation: "I WAS LAZY AND INACTIVE"

[Senator Incitatus]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

They could change your password.

[S019]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

They could change your password.

This is quite frankly a troll suggestion, and as such I don't need to provide any further comment

[bagelman]

If the hyperbole is excessive enough to moderate, it's probably trolling.

[fhtagn]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

They could change your password.

This is quite frankly a troll suggestion, and as such I don't need to provide any further comment

So are your suggestions about forum moderating policies and bans.

[Senator Incitatus]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

They could change your password.

This is quite frankly a troll suggestion, and as such I don't need to provide any further comment

Sorry to hear this will be your last comment on the forum, but it is for the best.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

They could change your password.

This is quite frankly a troll suggestion, and as such I don't need to provide any further comment

Sorry to hear this will be your last comment on the forum, but it is for the best.

RIP

[Santander]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

Just because you personally think content is "bad" (and let's be real, you really just mean content you disagree with), doesn't mean it's actually bad and needs to be removed.

That's true. I wouldn't want S019 anywhere near moderating tools.

I don't want him anywhere near the Post button.

[The Dowager Mod]

Removing the "excessive hyperbole" option will not change the way i moderate one little bit, I will just use another option, maybe even the mystical rarely used "other" option.

[S019]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

Just because you personally think content is "bad" (and let's be real, you really just mean content you disagree with), doesn't mean it's actually bad and needs to be removed.

That's true. I wouldn't want S019 anywhere near moderating tools.

I don't want him anywhere near the Post button.

Surprised why people hate me, when people like Yellowhammer are far worse, but whatever...

[Santander]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

Just because you personally think content is "bad" (and let's be real, you really just mean content you disagree with), doesn't mean it's actually bad and needs to be removed.

That's true. I wouldn't want S019 anywhere near moderating tools.

I don't want him anywhere near the Post button.

Surprised why people hate me, when people like Yellowhammer are far worse, but whatever...

Just because he's bad, doesn't mean you can't be either.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

Just because you personally think content is "bad" (and let's be real, you really just mean content you disagree with), doesn't mean it's actually bad and needs to be removed.

That's true. I wouldn't want S019 anywhere near moderating tools.

I don't want him anywhere near the Post button.

Surprised why people hate me, when people like Yellowhammer are far worse, but whatever...

People don't "hate" you. They're just annoyed with your behavior,

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

the fact that this option exists is a crime on par with the destruction of the Great Library of Alexandria

[Nightcore Nationalist]

Lol no. 

And overmoderation is/was a noninsignificant factor on the slow death of online forums..

[Libertas Vel Mors]

My deeply held beliefs, posted in good faith, are incorrectly moderated as "excessive hyperbole" all the time. Most Atlas mods pretend that roughly a third the country and their opinions just don't exist, and that attempting to argue them must be just "trolling" or "hyperbole."

Dude, so much this. Say that I support executing abortioneers? "No one can possibly think that, you must be trolling." It's unbelievable sometimes.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

Just because you personally think content is "bad" (and let's be real, you really just mean content you disagree with), doesn't mean it's actually bad and needs to be removed.

That's true. I wouldn't want S019 anywhere near moderating tools.

I don't want him anywhere near the Post button.

Surprised why people hate me, when people like Yellowhammer are far worse, but whatever...

YH is an outright chad and the hate he gets is among the most unmerited in the forum. He does not use bigoted language. He stays polite. He simply expresses views that are very different than yours, and you for whatever reason cannot accept that.

For the record, I also disagree with YH on certain issues. I think his stance on the Confederacy is unmerited and wrong, and that if it is truly liberty he seeks to focus on, the American Revolution or the Texas Revolution are far better exemplars of those principles. I think he takes a slanted and ignoble view of the values that America still stands for today, and I think his refusal to fully align himself with the Republican Party, despite it being a far better representation of the principles that I believe we both stand for, is also foolish and stuck in the past. But do I hate him for any of that? No, because mere disagreement is not a cause for hatred, when that disagreement is not truly evil (ie, being a Communist). It's a lesson most of this forum could stand to learn. A hundred more posters like Dule, lfromnj, and YH would make this forum an infinitely better place.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

It should exist.  How often it should be used is something reasonable minds can certainly differ about, but I see no reason not to have it available.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

Just because you personally think content is "bad" (and let's be real, you really just mean content you disagree with), doesn't mean it's actually bad and needs to be removed.

That's true. I wouldn't want S019 anywhere near moderating tools.

I don't want him anywhere near the Post button.

Surprised why people hate me, when people like Yellowhammer are far worse, but whatever...

YH is an outright chad and the hate he gets is among the most unmerited in the forum. He does not use bigoted language. He stays polite. He simply expresses views that are very different than yours, and you for whatever reason cannot accept that.

For the record, I also disagree with YH on certain issues. I think his stance on the Confederacy is unmerited and wrong, and that if it is truly liberty he seeks to focus on, the American Revolution or the Texas Revolution are far better exemplars of those principles. I think he takes a slanted and ignoble view of the values that America still stands for today, and I think his refusal to fully align himself with the Republican Party, despite it being a far better representation of the principles that I believe we both stand for, is also foolish and stuck in the past. But do I hate him for any of that? No, because mere disagreement is not a cause for hatred, when that disagreement is not truly evil (ie, being a Communist). It's a lesson most of this forum could stand to learn. A hundred more posters like Dule, lfromnj, and YH would make this forum an infinitely better place.

Dule and lfromnj does not deserve to be thrown into the same bad as YH.

And if you're saying that being a communist automatically makes one "truly evil", then having strong pro-Confederate sympathies, which, whether you admit it or not, is essentially being on the side of the people who waged bloody a war in order to secure their right to own other people, is truly evil too. Would anyone believe a guy saying he'd be rooting for the Axis powers during the WW2 that he's not essentially pro-Nazi?

[Libertas Vel Mors]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

Just because you personally think content is "bad" (and let's be real, you really just mean content you disagree with), doesn't mean it's actually bad and needs to be removed.

That's true. I wouldn't want S019 anywhere near moderating tools.

I don't want him anywhere near the Post button.

Surprised why people hate me, when people like Yellowhammer are far worse, but whatever...

YH is an outright chad and the hate he gets is among the most unmerited in the forum. He does not use bigoted language. He stays polite. He simply expresses views that are very different than yours, and you for whatever reason cannot accept that.

For the record, I also disagree with YH on certain issues. I think his stance on the Confederacy is unmerited and wrong, and that if it is truly liberty he seeks to focus on, the American Revolution or the Texas Revolution are far better exemplars of those principles. I think he takes a slanted and ignoble view of the values that America still stands for today, and I think his refusal to fully align himself with the Republican Party, despite it being a far better representation of the principles that I believe we both stand for, is also foolish and stuck in the past. But do I hate him for any of that? No, because mere disagreement is not a cause for hatred, when that disagreement is not truly evil (ie, being a Communist). It's a lesson most of this forum could stand to learn. A hundred more posters like Dule, lfromnj, and YH would make this forum an infinitely better place.

Dule and lfromnj does not deserve to be thrown into the same bad as YH.

And if you're saying that being a communist automatically makes one "truly evil", then having strong pro-Confederate sympathies, which, whether you admit it or not, is essentially being on the side of the people who waged bloody a war in order to secure their right to own other people, is truly evil too. Would anyone believe a guy saying he'd be rooting for the Axis powers during the WW2 that he's not essentially pro-Nazi?

The difference is, there are legitimate reasons to support the Confederacy's right to secede. There is none to support the Nazis. Yes, the Confederacy wanted to secede so that they could continue to own other people, a despicable practice which we can all agree is despicable. But fundamentally, there are two major distinctions to understand:

1. The Confederacy was right to assert that they had the right to secede. The United States is a voluntary union of 50 different nations come together. The Confederacy's secession was illegitimate not because they simply tried to secede, but because they didn't let everyone (ie African Americans) vote on whether or not to. Otherwise, I'd perfectly agree with their right to secede, even if I didn't agree/fair terms could be agreed on.

2. Confederacy romantics like YH tend to do so not as an expression of true hatred, but generally as a result of disillusionment with more socialistic aspects of the current US and a misunderstanding of the truth behind the Confederacy's rhetoric of freedoms and liberty. If YH supported the Confederacy because he thought owning slaves was funny and wanted to kill black people, I'd judge him, and I'd judge him just as hard as I would any communist or other tyrant. But it is an important distinction for me that YH supports certain aspects of the Confederacy mainly as a mix of a protest against certain US policies/a mistaken belief that the true reasoning behind the Confederate secession was actually to ensure their individual freedoms against centralized government. YH is reaching the wrong conclusion (sympathy for the Confederacy) but for the right reasons (strong beliefs in individual freedoms and personal liberty). Even if I don't agree, his beliefs are worthy of debate, and I deeply respect the courage it takes to articulate them. No matter your disagreements, you cannot say that he is a racist, you cannot say that he is a bigot, and you cannot say that he goes along with the crowd. Those are all qualities to be prized and valued, under any fair measurement, so yes, without a hint of a doubt I say YH is one of my favorite posters on the site.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Excessive hyperbole is essentially a subcategory of trolling that at the time it was added as an option, there existed a consensus among the mods that it was something to be curbed on the Foum, but not that it met the classic definition of trolling because and thus shouldn't be infracted as that.

It's been long enuf since it was created that perhaps it's no longer needed because of a consensus now that such posts constitute trolling. If so, it's not needed as a separate option, but I think such posts should still be infractable lest we be literally overwhelmed with overwrought, inaccurate comparisons to Hitler, Stalin, Napoleon, Norton I, and other historical figures with imperial ambitions.

[S019]

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

Just because you personally think content is "bad" (and let's be real, you really just mean content you disagree with), doesn't mean it's actually bad and needs to be removed.

That's true. I wouldn't want S019 anywhere near moderating tools.

I don't want him anywhere near the Post button.

Surprised why people hate me, when people like Yellowhammer are far worse, but whatever...

YH is an outright chad and the hate he gets is among the most unmerited in the forum. He does not use bigoted language. He stays polite. He simply expresses views that are very different than yours, and you for whatever reason cannot accept that.

For the record, I also disagree with YH on certain issues. I think his stance on the Confederacy is unmerited and wrong, and that if it is truly liberty he seeks to focus on, the American Revolution or the Texas Revolution are far better exemplars of those principles. I think he takes a slanted and ignoble view of the values that America still stands for today, and I think his refusal to fully align himself with the Republican Party, despite it being a far better representation of the principles that I believe we both stand for, is also foolish and stuck in the past. But do I hate him for any of that? No, because mere disagreement is not a cause for hatred, when that disagreement is not truly evil (ie, being a Communist). It's a lesson most of this forum could stand to learn. A hundred more posters like Dule, lfromnj, and YH would make this forum an infinitely better place.

The Texas Revolution was literally driven by slaveholding US transplants. It was really no secret that the occupation of Texas was a plot by the slaveocracy to snatch one more slave state. Also I'd argue that being a Neo-Confederate and supporting a nation that stood for slavery is evil, that might just be me though, but then again, it might not...

It, along with trolling, should be removed as a category, and I have said so in the past.

So, then how exactly are the moderators supposed to regulate bad content? We can’t make it even harder for bad content to be infracted.

Just because you personally think content is "bad" (and let's be real, you really just mean content you disagree with), doesn't mean it's actually bad and needs to be removed.

That's true. I wouldn't want S019 anywhere near moderating tools.

I don't want him anywhere near the Post button.

Surprised why people hate me, when people like Yellowhammer are far worse, but whatever...

YH is an outright chad and the hate he gets is among the most unmerited in the forum. He does not use bigoted language. He stays polite. He simply expresses views that are very different than yours, and you for whatever reason cannot accept that.

For the record, I also disagree with YH on certain issues. I think his stance on the Confederacy is unmerited and wrong, and that if it is truly liberty he seeks to focus on, the American Revolution or the Texas Revolution are far better exemplars of those principles. I think he takes a slanted and ignoble view of the values that America still stands for today, and I think his refusal to fully align himself with the Republican Party, despite it being a far better representation of the principles that I believe we both stand for, is also foolish and stuck in the past. But do I hate him for any of that? No, because mere disagreement is not a cause for hatred, when that disagreement is not truly evil (ie, being a Communist). It's a lesson most of this forum could stand to learn. A hundred more posters like Dule, lfromnj, and YH would make this forum an infinitely better place.

Dule and lfromnj does not deserve to be thrown into the same bad as YH.

And if you're saying that being a communist automatically makes one "truly evil", then having strong pro-Confederate sympathies, which, whether you admit it or not, is essentially being on the side of the people who waged bloody a war in order to secure their right to own other people, is truly evil too. Would anyone believe a guy saying he'd be rooting for the Axis powers during the WW2 that he's not essentially pro-Nazi?

The difference is, there are legitimate reasons to support the Confederacy's right to secede. There is none to support the Nazis. Yes, the Confederacy wanted to secede so that they could continue to own other people, a despicable practice which we can all agree is despicable. But fundamentally, there are two major distinctions to understand:

1. The Confederacy was right to assert that they had the right to secede. The United States is a voluntary union of 50 different nations come together. The Confederacy's secession was illegitimate not because they simply tried to secede, but because they didn't let everyone (ie African Americans) vote on whether or not to. Otherwise, I'd perfectly agree with their right to secede, even if I didn't agree/fair terms could be agreed on.

2. Confederacy romantics like YH tend to do so not as an expression of true hatred, but generally as a result of disillusionment with more socialistic aspects of the current US and a misunderstanding of the truth behind the Confederacy's rhetoric of freedoms and liberty. If YH supported the Confederacy because he thought owning slaves was funny and wanted to kill black people, I'd judge him, and I'd judge him just as hard as I would any communist or other tyrant. But it is an important distinction for me that YH supports certain aspects of the Confederacy mainly as a mix of a protest against certain US policies/a mistaken belief that the true reasoning behind the Confederate secession was actually to ensure their individual freedoms against centralized government. YH is reaching the wrong conclusion (sympathy for the Confederacy) but for the right reasons (strong beliefs in individual freedoms and personal liberty). Even if I don't agree, his beliefs are worthy of debate, and I deeply respect the courage it takes to articulate them. No matter your disagreements, you cannot say that he is a racist, you cannot say that he is a bigot, and you cannot say that he goes along with the crowd. Those are all qualities to be prized and valued, under any fair measurement, so yes, without a hint of a doubt I say YH is one of my favorite posters on the site.

So what I get from this is that breaking up the union is good and that the Southern secessionists were doing the right thing. Have you even seen the Southern Democratic platform in 1860, or have you even heard how some of the Fire Eaters spoke, a lot of was based in protecting slavery, especially since after the 1850's, and events like Bleeding Kansas and the Ostend Manifesto enraged Northerners, the Southern elite knew that it would be much harder to get new slave states. Also you do realize, that once one state seceded, then secession was now legitimate, and New England could have broken off for minor disputes with like New York. Many consider the Civil War as the true test of representative government, and if the U.S. had lost that war, it's very possible that democratic forms of government could have been discredited in much of the world with the excuse that it could lead to agitators getting too much power and then pushing for disunion.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

literally who cares about the imaginary-ass “right to secession”

State’s rights is a coward’s substitute for real politics.

[OSR stands with Israel]

States do not have the right to secede and even if they did , then the constitution would no longer apply to them and the US would have all the right in the word to declare war against them