hawkhkg11
Enlightened
OVERVIEW
You can interpret these threads however you like. In my opinion, all of these threads at least proves some injustice or inequity. But remember, my original argument needed no evidence. It was asked of me so I complied and provided some evidence. If you think this evidence isn't enough, or is "lame", then think that way. But my logic tells me intuitively that those threads show some partiality to moderator power. My original argument is basically this. Since Sasha and David are basically the only moderators that work on political posts in the Cafe, there is embedded inequity simply because of unconscious feelings toward whoever did the posting. Because of this, it's an A PRIORI example of why there is bias. I've argued this over and over. It's the same as if O'Rielly were the moderator on this board. When a figure who has the power to control discussion has an open ideological slant, then the truth becomes self-evident no matter how fair they claim to be.
Onto...The evidence:
Can we talk here?
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=361261&page=1&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
There is not much going on here, except I believe there should have been a warning to 2dogs, which there was not. If you look at his empty rhetoric and angry, unsubstantiated remarks, you'll see what I mean.
Also, Sasha states that it is not the right that keeps posting controversial topics. To the contrary, it is always the right that posts controversial topics, as I've shown below. It is simply that there is less disagreement and conflict because most of those who reply are conservative as well.
Arnold Wins!!!
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=358347&page=2&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
Now this one kind of makes me angry because I don't know what I did to "bait" anyone. I merely cited two articles and then wrote some small commentary, which was true, and not just some assertion (DieselDave even agreed with me on it). Then, David comes up and tells me that the Sacramento Bee is not a good source. This leads me to believe that the source doesn't really matter, as long as it conforms to an ideology the moderators agree with. Do you guys seriously consider Newsmax to be fair and unbiased media? Because you guys use that as a cite all the time. So this is what I'm talking about when I say inequitable.
Arianna Huffington Drops Out!
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=351894&page=5&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
This one is just blatantly offensive to me. 2dogs is the perpetrator again, and it seems that aboslutely no action was taken against him. He writes:
"She is an arrogant female dog who refused to answer questions like why is it OK for you to ride in an SUV but not the little people. She thumbs her nose at the peasants."
Then all the moderators proceed to agree. Now if I had said that about Bush would the thread be locked and me warned about baiting? YES. Another example of inequity.
Has France become our enemy?
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=342004&page=6&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
This one is in regard to RevDavid. He writes:
"France seems less willing to sacrifice, more willing to criticize and interfere, and in general, more cowardly than most nations on the earth today. I think more highly of them than nations that harbour terrorists, but not much more highly, as they seem content to pursue a course of action that does nothing to discourage the kind of problems the US is trying to deal with in the world...
...They have very little gratitude for the precious blood of American and English soldiers that was spilled in their land to liberate them from tyrrany. They are long on criticism and short in memory."
No one even mentioned that post because it was pro-conservative. Personally I'm offended by that, because I frankly think the same about the United States. That is his opinion. If I had posted that about the U.S., I would have been asked to stop baiting, and to prove my assertion with facts. Neither of those laws have been applied to him. Another example of inequity.
Telling the truth in Iraq
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=314164&page=20&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
Another example of moderator inequity here. This one is by Silviron, a moderator himself:
"Well, I know that if Hillary gets elected president I hope some foreign army invades and frees me from her despotic rule.
I'm only half joking."
Now, if I had said that about Bush, I would have been asked to stop baiting, again.
And the half joking part. Didn't David and Sasha just teach me that just because you use a smilie or a joke doesn't cover up for a bait?
I think fairness is again lost here because of partisan leaning.
Go F#$% Yourselves!
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=302303&page=23&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
This one needs no explaining. David's actions and words were reprehensible in my opinion, and after that I believe he no longer has the right to tell us what is good behavior or not.
Saddams boys are toast...
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=294692&page=24&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
Read this one for yourself. Here, both sides have done some baiting, and that is up to interpretation how much it is. Both sides also make some blanket assertions. But only I and the liberals have been accused of doing these things. The conservatives are left unscathed. Another example of inequity.
McCain calls for investigation and security firing
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=284514&page=28&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
Read this one for yourself. It is a classic example of all the moderators ganging up on ikendu because he is left, and not right. If ikendu had done the same thing but with a right agenda, would he be accused of trolling? Read it, and judge for yourself.
Good forum to discuss the WMD?
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=286189&page=8&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
This thread is a bit appalling to me. One person left and one person appears to have been banned. I don't know why that person got banned and am not attributing this to that. But I haven't seen any proof of ikendu trolling or baiting. Brotherscrim looks like he had a very good reason to leave, because DavidW was being quite arrogant towards him.
Even after all of this, no one addresses why he feels that way, and instead show him the door.
UNDERVIEW/FINAL THOUGHT
First of all I would like to thank David and Sasha for letting me post this. I want to thank them for not banning me when I yelled at them, and I want to thank them for taking the time for me to air my greivances towards them. At least in this way...this board has not sunken to what X-Cal and I sometimes say it has. We just don't want it to and are afraid that it might, so we sometimes tend to exaggerate our examples. I want to post a little final thought here about this embedded bias that I talk about.
Bush currently holds office. Therefore there will obviously be a lot more liberals complaining about him than conservatives on this board. You mix that with conservative moderators, and you get hard feelings and possibly biased censorship and moderating. It's a fact of life.
If a liberal Democrat was in office right now, and the same set of moderators were in place, then I think the situation would be reversed. Conservatives would post complaints, possibly bait, and the moderators would let them go by, with the exception of extreme flaming.
Thus, my argument is what I originally posted. The only way this Cafe can be truly fair in terms of political discussion is if either power is balanced by assigning liberal moderators, or if there is a complete overhaul and moderators with no political allegiance (or alliegance to both or apathy to politics) are assigned. That way...no one can censor any political thought. Censorship will only happen when it is truly neccesary to prevent flaming, profanity, or blatant misconduct.
Thank you for taking the time to read what I have written.
I look forward to the responses everyone has and I hope this can be a reasonable and civil discussion.
You can interpret these threads however you like. In my opinion, all of these threads at least proves some injustice or inequity. But remember, my original argument needed no evidence. It was asked of me so I complied and provided some evidence. If you think this evidence isn't enough, or is "lame", then think that way. But my logic tells me intuitively that those threads show some partiality to moderator power. My original argument is basically this. Since Sasha and David are basically the only moderators that work on political posts in the Cafe, there is embedded inequity simply because of unconscious feelings toward whoever did the posting. Because of this, it's an A PRIORI example of why there is bias. I've argued this over and over. It's the same as if O'Rielly were the moderator on this board. When a figure who has the power to control discussion has an open ideological slant, then the truth becomes self-evident no matter how fair they claim to be.
Onto...The evidence:
Can we talk here?
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=361261&page=1&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
There is not much going on here, except I believe there should have been a warning to 2dogs, which there was not. If you look at his empty rhetoric and angry, unsubstantiated remarks, you'll see what I mean.
Also, Sasha states that it is not the right that keeps posting controversial topics. To the contrary, it is always the right that posts controversial topics, as I've shown below. It is simply that there is less disagreement and conflict because most of those who reply are conservative as well.
Arnold Wins!!!
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=358347&page=2&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
Now this one kind of makes me angry because I don't know what I did to "bait" anyone. I merely cited two articles and then wrote some small commentary, which was true, and not just some assertion (DieselDave even agreed with me on it). Then, David comes up and tells me that the Sacramento Bee is not a good source. This leads me to believe that the source doesn't really matter, as long as it conforms to an ideology the moderators agree with. Do you guys seriously consider Newsmax to be fair and unbiased media? Because you guys use that as a cite all the time. So this is what I'm talking about when I say inequitable.
Arianna Huffington Drops Out!
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=351894&page=5&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
This one is just blatantly offensive to me. 2dogs is the perpetrator again, and it seems that aboslutely no action was taken against him. He writes:
"She is an arrogant female dog who refused to answer questions like why is it OK for you to ride in an SUV but not the little people. She thumbs her nose at the peasants."
Then all the moderators proceed to agree. Now if I had said that about Bush would the thread be locked and me warned about baiting? YES. Another example of inequity.
Has France become our enemy?
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=342004&page=6&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
This one is in regard to RevDavid. He writes:
"France seems less willing to sacrifice, more willing to criticize and interfere, and in general, more cowardly than most nations on the earth today. I think more highly of them than nations that harbour terrorists, but not much more highly, as they seem content to pursue a course of action that does nothing to discourage the kind of problems the US is trying to deal with in the world...
...They have very little gratitude for the precious blood of American and English soldiers that was spilled in their land to liberate them from tyrrany. They are long on criticism and short in memory."
No one even mentioned that post because it was pro-conservative. Personally I'm offended by that, because I frankly think the same about the United States. That is his opinion. If I had posted that about the U.S., I would have been asked to stop baiting, and to prove my assertion with facts. Neither of those laws have been applied to him. Another example of inequity.
Telling the truth in Iraq
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=314164&page=20&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
Another example of moderator inequity here. This one is by Silviron, a moderator himself:
"Well, I know that if Hillary gets elected president I hope some foreign army invades and frees me from her despotic rule.
I'm only half joking."
Now, if I had said that about Bush, I would have been asked to stop baiting, again.
And the half joking part. Didn't David and Sasha just teach me that just because you use a smilie or a joke doesn't cover up for a bait?
I think fairness is again lost here because of partisan leaning.
Go F#$% Yourselves!
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=302303&page=23&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
This one needs no explaining. David's actions and words were reprehensible in my opinion, and after that I believe he no longer has the right to tell us what is good behavior or not.
Saddams boys are toast...
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=294692&page=24&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
Read this one for yourself. Here, both sides have done some baiting, and that is up to interpretation how much it is. Both sides also make some blanket assertions. But only I and the liberals have been accused of doing these things. The conservatives are left unscathed. Another example of inequity.
McCain calls for investigation and security firing
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=284514&page=28&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
Read this one for yourself. It is a classic example of all the moderators ganging up on ikendu because he is left, and not right. If ikendu had done the same thing but with a right agenda, would he be accused of trolling? Read it, and judge for yourself.
Good forum to discuss the WMD?
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB22&Number=286189&page=8&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=all&vc=1
This thread is a bit appalling to me. One person left and one person appears to have been banned. I don't know why that person got banned and am not attributing this to that. But I haven't seen any proof of ikendu trolling or baiting. Brotherscrim looks like he had a very good reason to leave, because DavidW was being quite arrogant towards him.
Even after all of this, no one addresses why he feels that way, and instead show him the door.
UNDERVIEW/FINAL THOUGHT
First of all I would like to thank David and Sasha for letting me post this. I want to thank them for not banning me when I yelled at them, and I want to thank them for taking the time for me to air my greivances towards them. At least in this way...this board has not sunken to what X-Cal and I sometimes say it has. We just don't want it to and are afraid that it might, so we sometimes tend to exaggerate our examples. I want to post a little final thought here about this embedded bias that I talk about.
Bush currently holds office. Therefore there will obviously be a lot more liberals complaining about him than conservatives on this board. You mix that with conservative moderators, and you get hard feelings and possibly biased censorship and moderating. It's a fact of life.
If a liberal Democrat was in office right now, and the same set of moderators were in place, then I think the situation would be reversed. Conservatives would post complaints, possibly bait, and the moderators would let them go by, with the exception of extreme flaming.
Thus, my argument is what I originally posted. The only way this Cafe can be truly fair in terms of political discussion is if either power is balanced by assigning liberal moderators, or if there is a complete overhaul and moderators with no political allegiance (or alliegance to both or apathy to politics) are assigned. That way...no one can censor any political thought. Censorship will only happen when it is truly neccesary to prevent flaming, profanity, or blatant misconduct.
Thank you for taking the time to read what I have written.
I look forward to the responses everyone has and I hope this can be a reasonable and civil discussion.