I Thought No Politics

[Max Rockatansky]

NE2 likes to inject politics into discussion that previously had no issues. While I don't like SP Cook's beliefs, he always seems to be on topic, and he's usually stating his own beliefs rather than making personal attacks on others.

You mean like this post here? Or how about starting a topic deliberately in bad faith?

At what point do we actually quit saying "abide by the rules or GTFO" and start saying "this person is literally incapable of following the rules, so we should force them out?"

Isn't that kind of what happens already?  The whole forum turned against people like Crash_It, MMM and P13.

[Molandfreak]

NE2 likes to inject politics into discussion that previously had no issues. While I don't like SP Cook's beliefs, he always seems to be on topic, and he's usually stating his own beliefs rather than making personal attacks on others.

You mean like this post here? Or how about starting a topic deliberately in bad faith?

At what point do we actually quit saying "abide by the rules or GTFO" and start saying "this person is literally incapable of following the rules, so we should force them out?"

Isn't that kind of what happens already?  The whole forum turned against people like Crash_It, MMM and P13.

Yes, but why hasn't it happened with either of these two? I get enough unprovoked complaining about "random taxers" from uneducated rednecks on Facebook. Why should it be happening here, in a space that supposedly doesn't allow politics?

If your politics are so radical that you cannot restrain yourself from posting this kind of stuff unprovoked on here, you just don't belong here.

[webny99]

I don't want to continue harping on this, but it's really, really important that the first sentence gets isolated and dealt with separately, because letting it stand puts the integrity of the entire forum in jeopardy.

I don't know what integrity has to do with this situation to be honest. Any I don't think that anything on this forum is really, really important. YMMV.

It's not "really, really important" to me personally, but to the forum.

As to integrity, a comment was made that would unquestionably be deleted and/or removed from public view if it was a standalone post. 9 times out of 10 the entire posts gets deleted too, but the moderation team made the decision in this case to keep the entire post public. Based on both my personal views on content deletion *and* the public explanation that was given, I support that decision, but there is part of the post that cannot be left in public view under any circumstance based on both previous longstanding precedent and the need to ensure that the forum remains a welcoming place for all.

I get all that, and don't inherently disagree with any of it. That said, ::valedictorian hat on:: Oxford dictionary defines integrity as 'the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles'. I don't think the decision to leave the post in full is a) dishonest nor b) immoral. That was the point I was trying to make. Some people here get pedantic about road stuff; I get pedantic about vocabulary I suppose.

I was actually referring to the other definition of integrity (the state of being whole and undivided) since I was referring to an object (the forum). The definition you cited could have only applied if I was talking about an individual, which to be very clear was not the case at all. I apologize if it was interpreted that way and hopefully this helps clarify my point.

[Henry]

Here's a quote from NW_Irish96 in a series of "I don't care if this gets me banned" threads that caught my attention:

If you voted for Donald Trump, I just want to say fuck you and I hate you.

Unless the reason you voted for him was that you wanted to make billionaires wealthier, he isn't going to do any of the things you actually want him to do.

Myself and hundreds of thousands of other Federal employees are living a nightmare right now. Our jobs are in jeopardy for really no reason other than they want reallocate our salaries to tax cuts for the wealthy. Even worse, millions of people who are one or more of non-Christian, non-white and non-straight are in fear for their lives.

If I do actually get banned, adios. It's been fun.

Everybody's entitled to their own opinions, but I don't just go around and say "fuck you" to anyone who disagrees with what I have to say. Somehow, someone has to stand up and say that this foolishness has to stop right here, right now. A simple lock may not be enough, so this is one of these situations where a three strikes system would work. I've proposed it before, but here it is again: Strike one, a warning; strike two, a temporary ban; and strike three, you're out of here. Simple as that.

[Scott5114]

Dude just found out he might be losing his job because of political bullshit he's not involved in. I don't blame him for being pissed and lashing out. I was pretty pissed when I lost my business because of political bullshit I wasn't involved in. I ended up being pissed enough that I moved to another state over it! And that was due to a completely different political figure and issue. So I get where he's at.

I dunno, I figured just a lock and a message that hey, people are going through shit right now, maybe keep that in mind, would be enough. I don't really see the purpose in subjecting the guy to some sort of baseball apparatus; he's probably got more important problems to worry about than his standing on a road forum. I doubt he's going to do it again and if he does, I'll stream myself drinking a gallon of Clearview or something, I dunno.

[LilianaUwU]

I'll stream myself drinking a gallon of Clearview or something, I dunno.

How does one drink a font?

[Scott5114]

I'll stream myself drinking a gallon of Clearview or something, I dunno.

How does one drink a font?

Jake has the technology.

Tratex tastes like lingonberries, if you were wondering.

[Max Rockatansky]

Dude just found out he might be losing his job because of political bullshit he's not involved in. I don't blame him for being pissed and lashing out. I was pretty pissed when I lost my business because of political bullshit I wasn't involved in. I ended up being pissed enough that I moved to another state over it! And that was due to a completely different political figure and issue. So I get where he's at.

I dunno, I figured just a lock and a message that hey, people are going through shit right now, maybe keep that in mind, would be enough. I don't really see the purpose in subjecting the guy to some sort of baseball apparatus; he's probably got more important problems to worry about than his standing on a road forum. I doubt he's going to do it again and if he does, I'll stream myself drinking a gallon of Clearview or something, I dunno.

While horrible the guy is getting laid off, I thought it was super tacky to full on lash out at random forum members over who they may or may not have voted for.  I doubt many on this forum were voting with the hope of getting others here fired from their jobs.  While not IMO ban worthy, it wasn't okay either.

And yes, I've been laid off myself (albeit for non-political reasons).  It is indeed a kick in the nuts, especially if it is from a career job. 

[oscar]

^^^^ I'm with Scott5114 on this one. I'm a retired Federal worker, whose career started with my job in limbo due to a hiring freeze at the beginning of the Reagan Administration, followed by multiple and sometimes prolonged government shutdowns during later administrations. I too would cut a lot of slack with NW_Irish96's frustrations.

It sounds like the bullshit he's facing is much worse than I ever had to deal with, though I'm crossing my fingers the current chaos won't somehow spread to long-retired Feds like me.

[Max Rockatansky]

While bullshit he's facing job challenges it plain isn't okay to hold forum members accountable for that.  Forum members don't have the power or authority to lay off Federal employees.

I'm probably going out on a limb too much here but I didn't vote for either major party candidate.  While I'd agree one of the two options was decidedly worse, neither one was good. 

I'm really tired of road people thinking they can say things like Irish did and getting a completely free pass.  I've been on the receiving end of some political ultimatums from community members over the years and those weren't okay either.  This  political stuff we do here is a cancer and it has chased a lot people away. 

[Scott5114]

I'm certainly not condoning the post, for what it's worth. (If locking it didn't make that clear enough.)

[Molandfreak]

It was clear from the content within that Irish knew the behavior was inappropriate, but allowed themself to be vulnerable on-forum. So I don't really understand what needs to be done further. A ban/post restriction won't really serve a purpose because, again, the user clearly understands that it was a potential consequence of those actions. I certainly wouldn't blame Scott if he wanted to delete the thread, but I do understand the interest in keeping it up for public interest/reference in case someone asks what is happening with Irish.

[jgb191]

Sorry for my ignorance but can anyone inform me what SPUI stands for or means? 

I'm accused of being a Left supporter by the Right and a Right Supporter by the Left.

One college student interning for Mitt Romney for President in 2012, said because I chose not to vote for either Obama nor Romney then,  this girl intern said I was indirectly casting a vote for Barack as my one vote could help put Mitt one vote closer to a win.

Two months ago I got accused of voting for Trump because I made a statement on FB that both Trump and Harris were not qualified to run a simple business let alone a nation.

I agree with every single word you said.  I get labeled both ways...'liberal' by conservatives and 'conservative' by liberals.  I honestly don't think of myself as fitting into either side.  Back in the November 1996, my high school US History teacher did a "pretend" election voting ballot for every student in the same grade I was, the unofficial result was 101 votes for William Clinton, 142 votes for Robert Dole, and one vote for H.R. Perot (I was the only vote much to my shock).  And yes I have generally voted for the 'minor' candidates, much to the disapproval of supporters of both sides.  I've gotten cursed out by Republican voters who view me as helping the Democrats and vice versa.  I vote just for the sake of voting.

I don't trust either of the two major ones.  A vote for a Libertarian Party candidate is a vote for a Libertarian Party candidate, not an "indirect vote" for one of the two major candidates.

[Molandfreak]

Sorry for my ignorance but can anyone inform me what SPUI stands for or means? 

General question, who is this SPUI that you guys keep on talking about?

NE2

[kalvado]

While federal workers are feeling it... Those who are under "employment at will" conditions please raise your hand.

[webny99]

I dunno, I figured just a lock and a message that hey, people are going through shit right now, maybe keep that in mind, would be enough. I don't really see the purpose in subjecting the guy to some sort of baseball apparatus; he's probably got more important problems to worry about than his standing on a road forum. I doubt he's going to do it again

It was clear from the content within that Irish knew the behavior was inappropriate, but allowed themself to be vulnerable on-forum. So I don't really understand what needs to be done further. A ban/post restriction won't really serve a purpose because, again, the user clearly understands that it was a potential consequence of those actions. I certainly wouldn't blame Scott if he wanted to delete the thread, but I do understand the interest in keeping it up for public interest/reference in case someone asks what is happening with Irish.

Reflecting on my previous comments. I can see how I came across as sounding like I wanted discipline for the user. But I understand why that may not be the answer in this particular case, and that's none of my business even if it was.

I just think letting an inappropriate comment addressed to some non-zero number of forum users hang out in public forum space validates it in a way that could make users think that it's OK to say that here, and that is problematic on multiple levels. Again, I understand that there may have been some validity to the rest of the post, but that still doesn't make it acceptable to make inappropriate comments that are directly addressed to other forum users (including lurkers, potential future members, and anyone else who happens to be viewing the site).

[Molandfreak]

I dunno, I figured just a lock and a message that hey, people are going through shit right now, maybe keep that in mind, would be enough. I don't really see the purpose in subjecting the guy to some sort of baseball apparatus; he's probably got more important problems to worry about than his standing on a road forum. I doubt he's going to do it again

It was clear from the content within that Irish knew the behavior was inappropriate, but allowed themself to be vulnerable on-forum. So I don't really understand what needs to be done further. A ban/post restriction won't really serve a purpose because, again, the user clearly understands that it was a potential consequence of those actions. I certainly wouldn't blame Scott if he wanted to delete the thread, but I do understand the interest in keeping it up for public interest/reference in case someone asks what is happening with Irish.

Reflecting on my previous comments. I can see how I came across as sounding like I wanted discipline for the user. But I understand why that may not be the answer in this particular case, and that's none of my business even if it was.

I just think letting an inappropriate comment addressed to some non-zero number of forum users hang out in public forum space validates it in a way that could make users think that it's OK to say that here, and that is problematic on multiple levels. Again, I understand that there was some validity to the rest of the post and sympathize with the situation, but that still doesn't make it acceptable to make inappropriate comments that are directly addressed to other forum users (including lurkers, potential future members, and anyone else who happens to be viewing the site).

Absolutely—I do understand this point as well. But it is also important to note the message that is displayed at the bottom of every page on the forum:

Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.

[JayhawkCO]

I still say that there should be a politics/religion forum and that any discussion outside of that forum is against TOS. If you go there and choose to post, you know what you're getting yourself into.

[kalvado]

I still say that there should be a politics/religion forum and that any discussion outside of that forum is against TOS. If you go there and choose to post, you know what you're getting yourself into.

Stress and conflicts from that fenced off area tend to spill and cause a mess all over the place. Adding potentially flammable "mass transit" is probably as far as things should go.

[JayhawkCO]

I still say that there should be a politics/religion forum and that any discussion outside of that forum is against TOS. If you go there and choose to post, you know what you're getting yourself into.

Stress and conflicts from that fenced off area tend to spill and cause a mess all over the place. Adding potentially flammable "mass transit" is probably as far as things should go.

I'm on another forum pretty actively, FlyerTalk, that has such a forum and I haven't seen issues over the years.

[Big John]

While federal workers are feeling it... Those who are under "employment at will" conditions please raise your hand.

Every state except Montana is an "at will" state.

[NWI_Irish96]

The other day someone posted a harsh rant about a political figure head and it wasn't SPUI.

I thought it's forbidden to post anything anti whomever in politics?

I'm assuming this was my post.

I don't regret it. I'm not the one who made my very mundane Federal job political. That was one political party that chose to do so. If you don't like political rants, then perhaps blame the party that is making anything and everything political.

I was trying to shed light on how this election has had severe consequences on regular, ordinary people. If that made you uncomfortable, then I achieved my goal. My situation is serious enough that the opportunity to educate a couple hundred people about what's really going on outweighed forum rules and decorum.

[1995hoo]

I still say that there should be a politics/religion forum and that any discussion outside of that forum is against TOS. If you go there and choose to post, you know what you're getting yourself into.

Stress and conflicts from that fenced off area tend to spill and cause a mess all over the place. Adding potentially flammable "mass transit" is probably as far as things should go.

I'm on another forum pretty actively, FlyerTalk, that has such a forum and I haven't seen issues over the years.

Same here. A UVA sports fansite has a "hidden" political subforum—the link isn't posted anywhere on the site and that subforum has an "anything goes" principle. The people who post there do a very good job of keeping it off the main site, although of course that does depend on personal discipline to some extent. Other members actively jump on rulebreakers, too, partly because the political subforum is called "The Soapbox" and we quickly realized that we could use an acronym to tell people to post there: "Take It to The Soapbox" quickly became "TITS."

But I can certainly understand why the AARoads management would not want to be responsible for running that sort of thing.

[SectorZ]

The other day someone posted a harsh rant about a political figure head and it wasn't SPUI.

I thought it's forbidden to post anything anti whomever in politics?

I'm assuming this was my post.

I don't regret it. I'm not the one who made my very mundane Federal job political. That was one political party that chose to do so. If you don't like political rants, then perhaps blame the party that is making anything and everything political.

The government has made decisions costing private sector jobs before, would it be OK if they came here ranting about the government taking away their jobs.

I was trying to shed light on how this election has had severe consequences on regular, ordinary people. If that made you uncomfortable, then I achieved my goal. My situation is serious enough that the opportunity to educate a couple hundred people about what's really going on outweighed forum rules and decorum.

Don't you work for the IRS now? That's kind of concerning for someone with an axe to grind like yourself threatening people who disagree with you. I don't trust you in that capacity, even if you don't have access directly to things with which you can do harm, and I am not a fan of many things going on right now.

[JayhawkCO]

The other day someone posted a harsh rant about a political figure head and it wasn't SPUI.

I thought it's forbidden to post anything anti whomever in politics?

I'm assuming this was my post.

I don't regret it. I'm not the one who made my very mundane Federal job political. That was one political party that chose to do so. If you don't like political rants, then perhaps blame the party that is making anything and everything political.

I was trying to shed light on how this election has had severe consequences on regular, ordinary people. If that made you uncomfortable, then I achieved my goal. My situation is serious enough that the opportunity to educate a couple hundred people about what's really going on outweighed forum rules and decorum.

Don't you work for the IRS now? That's kind of concerning for someone with an axe to grind like yourself threatening people who disagree with you. I don't trust you in that capacity, even if you don't have access directly to things with which you can do harm, and I am not a fan of many things going on right now.

IIRC, he works for the Census Bureau.