I think it’s important to discuss the state of the community every now and then - feedback for mod behaviour, what’s going wrong, what’s going right, what news is interesting, what news is boring, what should there be more of, what should there be less of.
Mods feel free to remove this post if it violates rules, but I think it’s an important discussion to have.
It is somewhat opaque how sometimes the rules apply and sometimes they don’t, like news sources on rule 1, and iirc rule 3 in general. Deleting content should have the mod informing the user and the rest community what happened and have a way for the users to manage mistakes, be it either accidental rule breaks by the user or wrongful modding.
This is a good point and we’ll take it under consideration. Unfortunately, sometimes we do have to make a judgement call, but if there are any particular cases you’d like to discuss please mention them here.
Sources like The Guardian, Reuters, Telegraph, CNN, BBC are sometimes allowed and sometimes removed on rule 1.
The latter case is usually evident while lurking and finding a deep long comment thread. Sometimes one user there has deleted messages and there’s another’s rule 3 content comments left. Apparently these cases seem to usually be mutual rule 3 but it looks like they’re treated differently.
I do think we don’t have a clear policy on opinion pieces and that’s absolutely something we should work towards. Right now it’s more of a case-by-case basis.
If you could point to some specific examples that would be great!
I’ll try to see if I catch examples happening
Mods are a bit too trigger happy on the libs sometimes. Many are just uninformed and don’t necessarily have bad intentions. This person getting banned seemed uneccessary. Having a discussion with these people would be more beneficial as long as they don’t resort to using slurs.
Calling all Black people monkeys isn’t ok, but calling all Chinese person slaves is?
The first claim is just straight plain old racism, while the second reeks of confused lib. Either way, calling someone a slave in this context is almost certainly meant as an insult to the political organisation of the state and not to its people. This distinction is important with respect to moderation.
I consider the proletariat of capitalist societies to be slaves by definition. Thus if I were convinced that the PRC was capitalist, I could stand behind this sentiment.
I love justifying racism too don’t worry
How was I racist? Seems to me that your retort targets some untrue idea in your head about who I am rather than what I actually wrote.
I also do not understand why you made this post if you do not actually make an attempt at trying to understand the replies in return.
Who isn’t a slave of their government these days? Western country have wagies slaving their life away while the government prints money to make housing unaffordable.
The word slave in this context refers to him thinking that only Chinese people are economically extorted. Not because of their ethnicity but because of their government structure.
Informing a person is a lot more helpful than just flat out banning them.
Anyone thinking bourgeoisie extortion is fundamentally different from that of feudal lords need to reexamine the process of appropriation of surplus value.
There’s too many boring US/China news stories. Just because an article talks about the US or China (superpowers) does not make it interesting on its own.
