General Moderation Topic



User @bigomega73 suspended for 20 years for disrupting the Seattle Nazi Punch thread. Because 20 years is a good round number.


User @jong has been asked not to return after repeatedly trying to hide whataboutism as rules lawyering while attacking other posters.


Thanks for the cleanup on aisle 9 there. It also amused to get a nice reply on a now gone post with just the badge and a blank area in the notification log.


Responding to a post that is likely going to get deleted is one of those “You knew the job was dangerous when you took it.” things.


Buck-ahhh! [sorry, first thing that always comes to mind]


Oh I am fine with it being collateral damage. Just amused at the nice reply that is blank under the badge.


all of those user icons popping up just above the comment box area as I am trying to make my snark frist … it is so exciting!


I know the feeling:


@barafundle anonymized at user request.


@ssvt has been given a brief timeout for trolling girls on bikes playing saxophones.

Seriously. Ugh.


Maybe he’s going to ride in Paul Allen’s submarine… I for one wish him god’s speed.


It truly is impossible to predict the things I’ll miss out on whenever I go offline for a couple weeks…


@Hyman_Rosen has been asked not to return.

As an aside, if you want to advocate for a position where all speech or all people regardless of intent, consequence, etc. is worthy of protection, fine. It happens to be a neophyte view of the world, usually coming from a place of privilege where your person (or anyone you know) has never felt the consequence of speech or the ideas surrounding bigotry, and you’re going to be eaten alive by our more learned and worldly members, but such naivete is not against our guidelines.

However, when you take that position and use it to derail multiple topics and try to suggest that all actors in a given situation are worthy of equivalent protection regardless of their proven behaviour or actual, real-world results and consequences? Then your naivete goes beyond simply being a teachable moment, and instead becomes a significant source of derailment, distraction, and frankly trolling.

If you’re going to apply your ideas to real-world situations, you need to learn very quickly that there are actual people out there, and for them, protecting nazis isn’t a game without consequence. And people who would choose to ignore that fact have no place here on the BBS.

Blackface halloween costume costs nurse her job


Users aren’t removed without communication from the mod team unless the user is doing something especially egregious. In this case, not only was the user in direct, public conversation with me about their post content, but the user also commented on the mod and flag action in the post. There’s no question the user knew full well the issues listed above.

We routinely issue warnings (official and otherwise) when we feel there’s an issue, and we wouldn’t put someone on ”thin ice” without letting them know that they were, in fact, on thin ice.

This topic exists in part to transparently communicate our thinking when we do take action with established accounts, so I appreciate your questions here. :slight_smile:


I think the rules he was breaking were mostly

  • don’t repeat yourself

  • criticize ideas, not people


The issues surrounded pretty much every facet of item 4:

Stay on topic. Don’t hijack threads, repeat yourself or post generic talking points.

When multiple topics start becoming about a posters offtopic posts instead of the subject at hand, we’re compelled to take action. This isn’t the first time, but most of the users who came before at least tried to correct trajectory once the mod team got involved.


@orenwolf :thinking: Is it possible for one user to remove another user’s posts?


No. But posts and replies are often removed by the mod system (or moderators) in response to flags.