Should 'excessive hyperbole' as a moderation option exist?

[SevenEleven]

Also, legendary thread here:

https://talkelections.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=122436.0

On Page 6, Dave arrives to debate "excessive hyperbole" with Libertas.

Well, after much laughter, I finally got to the part where Joe Republic apparently "gets a kick" out of giving tourists wrong directions and I lost it and had to stop reading.

[NewYorkExpress]

I think that the infraction itself should be maintained (and enforced more vigorously), but there honestly is no reason to have a descriptor that specifically says "excessive hyperbole".

Maybe it should be renamed to something that actually fits the post being infracted (which probably means a mod would have type out the actual infraction, but that's the least of the bad ideas I've ever come up with).

So for example half our Republican posters (and some of our Democrats) would now be infracted for "hate speech, menacing etc."

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

No. Hyperbole is the language of our age.

[Fuzzy Bear]

So, as someone who has actually had a post moderated for "excessive hyperbole," I support this rule staying in place. My post deserved to be infracted, and if posts of that nature remained on the forum, the forum would be a much worse place.

Does it not set off alarm bells when people openly admit that it's a category set up to ban one particular poster? 

There's an inherent unfairness in a rule that's, in fact, aimed at one person.  Indeed, that's grounds for grievances (and even lawsuits) when imposed in the workplace.  "This isn't the workplace!" isn't an argument that makes such rule-making any less unfair than it it is now.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I think really bad cases of excessive hyperboles can be covered by simple "trolling".

[Virginiá]

Does it not set off alarm bells when people openly admit that it's a category set up to ban one particular poster? 

There's an inherent unfairness in a rule that's, in fact, aimed at one person.  Indeed, that's grounds for grievances (and even lawsuits) when imposed in the workplace.  "This isn't the workplace!" isn't an argument that makes such rule-making any less unfair than it it is now.

I don't know about that. Rules evolve over time. It's likely that Dave thought that because Libertas pushed things so far, that a new rule was needed. It's also possible that Dave never intended to allow "excessive hyperbole" in the first place, but never created the moderation category because it was never that big of a deal beforehand.

The only reason anyone is saying this was about one person is because it was set up in reaction to that person, but it doesn't mean it was just for them. I'd give Dave far more credit than that...

[Tender Branson]

The moderators on here are borderline fascists and pseudo-Nazis/Stalinists anyway, the regulations are too extreme and strict.

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

These times are over. Freedom is under attack (and not just here) !

[Virginiá]

The moderators on here are borderline fascists and pseudo-Nazis/Stalinists anyway, the regulations are too extreme and strict.

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

These times are over. Freedom is under attack (and not just here) !

And you were de-modded for threatening someone and then acting like it was a joke (which evidently flew over everyone else's head somehow!)

[Tender Branson]

The moderators on here are borderline fascists and pseudo-Nazis/Stalinists anyway, the regulations are too extreme and strict.

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

These times are over. Freedom is under attack (and not just here) !

And you were de-modded for threatening someone and then acting like it was a joke (which evidently flew over everyone else's head somehow!)

I didn’t „act“ like it was a joke. It was a joke, which was a lame excuse to silence me. I was put into a online gulag by the Forum Stalinists, who then continued with their cause to destroy liberty.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

The moderators on here are borderline fascists and pseudo-Nazis/Stalinists anyway, the regulations are too extreme and strict.

Tender can't post every picture he likes = Nazism and Stalinist combined.

You are a modern day Andrey Sakharov and will, one day, have a prestigious human rights award named after yourself.

[Tender Branson]

I also have seen numerous threads deleted without notice for being „inappropriate“.

What does „inappropriate“ even mean ?

I posted a thread about my „dream Black girl“.

Deleted for „inappropriate“ ...

BRTD posts a similar thread. Doesn’t get deleted ...

[Tender Branson]

The moderators on here are borderline fascists and pseudo-Nazis/Stalinists anyway, the regulations are too extreme and strict.

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

These times are over. Freedom is under attack (and not just here) !

And you were de-modded for threatening someone and then acting like it was a joke (which evidently flew over everyone else's head somehow!)

For those who are not familiar with the „night of the long knives/red wedding“-style removal of Tender Branson as beloved „Moderator of and for the People“:

After a heated argument, I jokingly said to a poster: „Sh#t up or I’ll fly over 5.000 miles into the US to punch your face.“

Everyone clearly knows that this was meant in a 100% serious manner ... LOL.

[Former President tack50]

It should be removed as an option. If it is trolling it is trolling and if it is a personal attack it is a personal attack.

Honestly Bacon King's post makes me even more against it, since it was designed as an ad-hoc descriptor to be able to ban/report Libertas' posts; who was following the letter of the law

[HillGoose]

moderation options shouldn't exist

[Virginiá]

I didn’t „act“ like it was a joke. It was a joke, which was a lame excuse to silence me. I was put into a online gulag by the Forum Stalinists, who then continued with their cause to destroy liberty.

I guess it doesn't help your case that every day, thousands of people say that kind of internet tough guy stuff non-jokingly. If the only thing that distinguishes your "joke" from a threat is that it seems so absurd that it can't be serious, then you ought to just not post it.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Comparing this place to a gulag is really insulting to the memory of millions who actually suffered in that hell on earth. It doesn't bother me personally, since, as Virginia rightly put it, certain things are just so absurd to be taken seriously, especially on the web, but I hope you're more careful with your words in real life, because hearing it may actually hurt somebody.

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Does it not set off alarm bells when people openly admit that it's a category set up to ban one particular poster? 

There's an inherent unfairness in a rule that's, in fact, aimed at one person.  Indeed, that's grounds for grievances (and even lawsuits) when imposed in the workplace.  "This isn't the workplace!" isn't an argument that makes such rule-making any less unfair than it it is now.

I don't know about that. Rules evolve over time. It's likely that Dave thought that because Libertas pushed things so far, that a new rule was needed. It's also possible that Dave never intended to allow "excessive hyperbole" in the first place, but never created the moderation category because it was never that big of a deal beforehand.

The only reason anyone is saying this was about one person is because it was set up in reaction to that person, but it doesn't mean it was just for them. I'd give Dave far more credit than that...

It's absolutely fine to adjust the law to combat new threats. Fuzzy, think of it as an Atlas Forum "PATRIOT Act", meant to combat a type of terrorism not previously predicted or accounted for in the NatSec apparatus.

[Yellowhammer]

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."

[lfromnj]

I think really bad cases of excessive hyperboles can be covered by simple "trolling".

Doesn't trolling require an intent in most cases to be trolling?

[Tender Branson]

Comparing this place to a gulag is really insulting to the memory of millions who actually suffered in that hell on earth. It doesn't bother me personally, since, as Virginia rightly put it, certain things are just so absurd to be taken seriously, especially on the web, but I hope you're more careful with your words in real life, because hearing it may actually hurt somebody.

I don’t use such words in real life.

I only use it for haters on here.

[lfromnj]

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."

Yup trolling as an option can be cut down too. There are some scenarios where trolling is evident but saying MLK is not an important holiday is not trolling.

[S019]

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."

Yup trolling as an option can be cut down too. There are some scenarios where trolling is evident but saying MLK is not an important holiday is not trolling.

It is an important holiday though, MLK was one of the key leaders in the fight for civilian rights, to say that he isn’t important is akin to saying that civil rights aren’t important, which is a disturbing and inappropriate viewpoint.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Comparing this place to a gulag is really insulting to the memory of millions who actually suffered in that hell on earth. It doesn't bother me personally, since, as Virginia rightly put it, certain things are just so absurd to be taken seriously, especially on the web, but I hope you're more careful with your words in real life, because hearing it may actually hurt somebody.

I don’t use such words in real life.

I only use it for haters on here.

It's good you don't s**tpost in RL. Some people sadly can't help themselves.

[Senator Incitatus]

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

[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.