I'm a former IC ZZL/P Mod = AMA

  • Thread starter Thread starter SnoopRob
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 772
  • Views: 12K
  • Off-Topic 
UNCatTech said:
Did you keep a running total of everyone that was banned? Were all of them banned by snoop?

Your statement, in general is still false, just because one party was banned more, if they were, that doesn't definitively equate to bias.

Personally, I felt that things were much better until a group of magas showed up after the debate to strut around like they had already won, they brough most of the issues. They could have just as easily had a circle jerk on fox news or Qanon message boards, why did they need to troll the ZZLP?

Yes, there were some liberals that were over the top, I just assumed they were getting banned also, since I never really paid any attention to who was actually banned.

From my perspective, there were far more conservatives there simply to troll and try to get something started, they were not there for any type of reasonable discourse.

I really like it better here, where you can simply choose who you want to ignore, no one has to be banned.

I do believe I am reasonable to an extent. But when people continue to spread lies and make claims that are easily disproved, at what point do we stop being reasonable and just ignore them or hope they go away on their own?
Click to expand...
You were never banned back when you were quite right-wing, were you?
 
heel79 said:
Likely because I could not shed my view as a journalist and belief that all views be accommodated and let the folks figure it out.
Click to expand...
I hate this in journalist.

It's one thing if there is some nuance to the views. But it seems that so many "journalist" will flat out let people lie so that they can claim to be non-biased.

If someone lies, call them out, don't let them lie and spread fake news in an attempt to look unbiased.

And I don't care which party, I don't want those I vote for to lie any more than I want those I don't vote for to lie.
 
Zoo_View said:
You were never banned back when you were quite right-wing, were you?
Click to expand...
No.

I came close once for making a highly religious signature line. But someone warned me, and I removed it.

I was banned from a Christian website for arguing that we should treat gay people as we do straight people.
 
UNCatTech said:
Did you keep a running total of everyone that was banned? Were all of them banned by snoop?

Your statement, in general is still false, just because one party was banned more, if they were, that doesn't definitively equate to bias.

Personally, I felt that things were much better until a group of magas showed up after the debate to strut around like they had already won, they brough most of the issues. They could have just as easily had a circle jerk on fox news or Qanon message boards, why did they need to troll the ZZLP?

Yes, there were some liberals that were over the top, I just assumed they were getting banned also, since I never really paid any attention to who was actually banned.

From my perspective, there were far more conservatives there simply to troll and try to get something started, they were not there for any type of reasonable discourse.

I really like it better here, where you can simply choose who you want to ignore, no one has to be banned.

I do believe I am reasonable to an extent. But when people continue to spread lies and make claims that are easily disproved, at what point do we stop being reasonable and just ignore them or hope they go away on their own?
Click to expand...
Snoop was far and away the name most commonly on the ban thread. Wasn't even close. And I guess we should expect it. He enjoyed it.

Thought he started out as a pretty good mod but after a while he just let his own personal biases override what could have been a much fairer moderation.
 
UNCatTech said:
No.

I came close once for making a highly religious signature line. But someone warned me, and I removed it.

I was banned from a Christian website for arguing that we should treat gay people as we do straight people.
Click to expand...

What was the highly religious signature line?
 
gtyellowjacket said:
Snoop was far and away the name most commonly on the ban thread. Wasn't even close. And I guess we should expect it. He enjoyed it.

Thought he started out as a pretty good mod but after a while he just let his own personal biases override what could have been a much fairer moderation.
Click to expand...
Or maybe it was you.
 
UNCatTech said:
Ultimately you do enforce for the good of the board.

Should there be equal quotas? If a conservative is banned should they have to ban a liberal?

I believe certain viewpoints were not allowed because they were provably wrong.

Someone claiming that it is their opinion that 2 + 2 = 5 doesn't make it fact either.


Just watch the news media. I see magas everyday talking about how horrible the economy is, yet almost every economist I read is amazed at the soft landing that the US was able to pull off. So, their opinion isn't a fact, why should be constantly presented that opinion?

Look at the lies this past week about FEMA. Really? In the middle of a natural disaster people need to present political lies?

And I do recall that most every liberal agreed that Bob Menendez should resign the moment he was accused. I don't recall anyone stating differently simply because of party. That's something I feel liberals are better at, not supporting a crook simply because of party affiliation. We can't say that about maga.
Click to expand...
I'm actually okay with doing things for the good of the board. I just don't think running off all the conservative posters or the folks that are Democrats but aren't willing to adhere to every piece of Democrat ideology is particularly good for the board but ultimately it's their decision if they want to do that. I thought he was steering the Titanic into the iceberg towards the end but there were still some people that liked it.

I personally like this board much better for the exchange of views. Plenty of people I can discuss things with and learn from and if they can't do it without showing their donkeys, I've ignored a couple.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
I'm actually okay with doing things for the good of the board. I just don't think running off all the conservative posters or the folks that are Democrats but aren't willing to adhere to every piece of Democrat ideology is particularly good for the board but ultimately it's their decision if they want to do that. I thought he was steering the Titanic into the iceberg towards the end but there were still some people that liked it.

I personally like this board much better for the exchange of views. Plenty of people I can discuss things with and learn from and if they can't do it without showing their donkeys, I've ignored a couple.
Click to expand...
They ran themselves out.
Not tolerating complete BS isn’t a bad thing.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
I'm actually okay with doing things for the good of the board. I just don't think running off all the conservative posters or the folks that are Democrats but aren't willing to adhere to every piece of Democrat ideology is particularly good for the board but ultimately it's their decision if they want to do that. I thought he was steering the Titanic into the iceberg towards the end but there were still some people that liked it.

I personally like this board much better for the exchange of views. Plenty of people I can discuss things with and learn from and if they can't do it without showing their donkeys, I've ignored a couple.
Click to expand...
I think this is even more annoying than Bo.
 
Back when I was on the All ACC Town Square bulletin board, I was banned for an entire year by a conservative moderator from Maryland for controverting his assertion that that George the Younger's Excellent Adventure In Iraq was like the Korean War by quoting the actual UN Resolution under which the US intervened. Fortunately Don Bosco invited me to the ZZL, bringing me in from the darkness of no boards.
 
Last edited:
Pretty certain that Snoop never banned anyone. IIRC, a mod didn’t have the ban hammer - bans were done by the mods, not “a” mod. Don’t know if the decision had to be unanimous or a majority vote.
 
UNCMSinLS said:
Never banned. Never warned. Had several posts edited or deleted, usually as part of a troll-induced cleanup.
Click to expand...
I was discreetly warned a handful of times as well, mostly for badgering obvious trolls from the TarPit. I deserved the warnings, but in my view, I was giving proportional to what I got.
 
UNCMSinLS said:
Never banned. Never warned. Had several posts edited or deleted, usually as part of a troll-induced cleanup.
Click to expand...
I had lots of post edited.

I sent Snoop a few DMs asking why he had to edit my post. 😎

Snoop also got onto me because I figured out that the filters didn't censor FuckerCarlson. 😁
 
CFordUNC said:
Lmao godalmighty have some damn pride for once in your life and quit your whining and crying about friggin' message board moderation. Jesus Christ, man.

Posters like WMHeel, WaynetheDrain, ZooView, and a handful of other liberal regulars were banned- sometimes multiple times- for violation of board rules. I got warned by PM multiple times that my next same offense would warrant a ban- and I deserved it every time.
Click to expand...
When was Zoo banned, he seems like a very levelheaded guy.

Now Wayne on the other hand... :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top