Moderation on "What Is a Woman?" Post

snoopydoop on 03/06/2023 - 12:22
Last edited 03/06/2023 - 12:55

On recommendation from a moderator, I'm writing here to discuss/clarify on what I feel is inconsistent and insufficient moderation on this controversial post.
Please be civil in these comments - I don't want arguments, and am posting this in good faith in order to hopefully improve the site - not start fights.

There are two main issues I wanted to bring up here:
1) Inconsistency with deal being allowed to be posted in the first place
2) Genuinely problematic comments not being moderated effectively enough on a post which is clearly going to generate them.

Inconsistency with deal being allowed to be posted

The reason that a moderator gave in the comments as to why this deal was allowed is a "documentary which is not usually free thus meets the standards for a deal".

This inspired me to search for an almost identical circumstance (but intentionally not a political/inflammatory one). I truly posted what I would perceive a deal in the same vein. It was a documentary about YouTuber MrBeast, which has been professionally created by streaming service Curiosity Stream. It is available paid on their streaming service, and even has an official IMDB page.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt17008854/

Curiosity Stream has uploaded this for free to their YouTube channel - a documentary which is usually paid for, which is now available for free, thus qualifying for a deal under posting guidelines.
My post was immediately moved to the forums, then removed, and I even received an account warning for posting. ("Trolling level 1")

I personally see no differences between these two posts - this I Am A Woman documentary has been posted specifically to generate comments and outrage, and is by its nature no less genuine a documentary than the MrBeast one on Curiosity Stream's subscription service.

This makes me feel like the reason it has been kept up is for some sort of political point, or moderation bias. I'd love some clarification for whether this is not the case - but I do not see how my own post could have been seen as "trolling" or "inflammatory", when this original post is arguably one of the most inflammatory "troll" posts that has ever been posted on the site. Which brings me to point 2….

Problematic Comments on the Post

When the media posts an article that could attract inflammatory comments, due to the 2021 High Court ruling puting the onus on publications for comments published on their website, they ensure that they have full moderation capabilities to ensure there are no hateful comments. When this moderation capability is no longer available, comments are closed, either temporarily while they catch up, or for good.
However, given there has been moderation for the duration this post has been up (eg. on my post), there has been some level of moderation capacity during this time, despite it being Friday/Saturday.

There are quite a few substantially hateful comments in this thread. I am specifically talking about comments that are genuinely hateful.

Probably the biggest is there are a large number perpetuating the conspiracy theory that the LGBTQIA+ community as a whole grooms children.. This is a view with neo-Nazi roots, and is well documented.
I mean, there is a comment up there right now saying "Destroy pedo freaks", a slogan that the neo-nazi group recently held up in Melbourne.
This is absolutely not the only comment that is blatantly hateful, there are many like it there. Perhaps others can point out the worst offenders. (EDIT: Removed ~2.5hrs after commented - plenty more with similar rhetoric that have been up for a long time)

If it is OzBargain's decision that posts like these are allowed to be up there - they absolutely need to make sure that the comments published are not hateful, and are well moderated. Otherwise it certainly comes across as acceptance of these comments. This is not very welcoming of LGBTQIA+ members of this website.
It was clear from the get go that the decision to keep this post up would require incredible amounts of moderation, given it was posted with the intention of aggravation, and keeping comments such as this one up there is upsetting to see that OzBargain is happily publishing these comments.

TLDR: I am disappointed in OzBargain's decision to leave this post up, their decision to give me an account warning for a far less inflammatory version of the same type of post, and the fact that there are many hateful comments rooted in neo-Nazi ideology currently on the website, still not moderated. To be clear - I am not talking about all comments in favour of this as a deal, I am talking very specifically about the blatantly hateful comments.
Site Discussion

Comments

          • capslock janitor on 03/06/2023 - 19:08

            @snoopydoop: is this a major news org

          • ozhunter on 03/06/2023 - 21:43

            @snoopydoop: Hours old. Maybe no one reported them because it's not hate speech.. Or only the same person who thinks everything is hate speech.

          • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 00:47

            @snoopydoop:

            The suggestion is to write here. This is the post.

            And we do appreciate the feedback.

            I also posted in talk with a mod but they have not responded and the auto message said don't bother and post here instead.

            It's the weekend. As per our Talk with a Moderator Guidelines:

            A moderator will usually respond to you within 24 hours, but turnaround may be longer for weekends or public holidays.
            If 48 hours has passed and you have heard no response, please bump the thread.

            • snoopydoop on 04/06/2023 - 00:48

              @neil: Thanks mate, didn't really factor in the longer period during the weekend.

        • capslock janitor on 03/06/2023 - 19:08

          Does any website have real-time removal of comments?

          facebook

      • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 00:44

        But there has been complete silence on this from the site which makes me feel like they condone everything.

        Silence? You linked to my comment in the OP.

        Moderation isn't going to be perfect, no, which is why in this post I suggest that if something is clearly controversial comments should be paused while they are moderated, then restarted, or comments should be closed if they don't have the capacity to remove hate speech.

        We don't have any mechanism to pause comments. Best to use the report link.

        • snoopydoop on 04/06/2023 - 00:47
          +1

          I meant silence regarding the inconsistency between my situation and the other one - but obviously the weekend has affected things here.

          Well that's definitely a feature that I think should be looked into, particularly for periods where there is low moderation capability.
          The largest problem here was the neo-nazi rhetoric that remained up for hours, I really want ozbargain to have the tools to combat those sorts of comments.

  • cameldownunder on 03/06/2023 - 18:17
    +2

    Generally speaking if someone does not like an opinion, then it calls it homofobic, racist, sexist, racial slander, culturally inappropriate, insulting.

    • snoopydoop on 03/06/2023 - 18:24
      +9

      Specifically speaking, I gave a very strong and specific example as to what was considered hate speech and gave sources for why it is.

      Again, for the countless time I've had to write it, I am not speaking about the many comments I disagree with in that thread. I am speaking specifically about hate speech.

      Please read threads properly and in full before engaging.

      • djsweet on 03/06/2023 - 18:37
        -8

        The rainbow flag is a good example of a hate symbol if you’re looking for any further examples.

        • Deals For Days on 03/06/2023 - 18:48
          +14

          Idiot comment. Like, you're genuinely a stupid person if you believe the pride flag is a hate symbol. Pride exists because historically people in the LGBTQ+ groups have been marginalised because of who they are, and they shouldn't be. It's very straightforward.

          And I'm afraid you really must be quite a slow person if you can't grasp that and instead comment brain-dead takes like 'the rainbow flag is a hate symbol!'. I assume you're a troll because if not it would basically guarantee you're dumb.

        • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 18:48
          +12

          A symbol designed to include multiple marginalised communities, many who've been incarcerated for it until only fairly recently and bashed in bathrooms for decades is…a hate symbol? Can you elaborate?

          • chepsk8 on 03/06/2023 - 18:53
            +5

            @MessyG: There is no thought behind shit like this that's said, it's just inflammatory, don't bother engaging with it.

          • djsweet on 03/06/2023 - 19:02
            -5

            @MessyG: It’s symbolises a deep-seated discomfort with reality and hate of those who uphold the truth. It is inclusive of the those who are an enemy of truth, and exclusive, bigoted and hateful towards those grounded in reality.

            • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 19:05
              +1

              @djsweet: Wot I thought it was just to tell people who were gay, intersex, trans etc that they included and safe. What on earth are you talking about?

            • Aureus on 03/06/2023 - 19:24
              +6

              @djsweet: You have lost the plot.

              • HangryCakeStore on 03/06/2023 - 22:12
                +3

                @Aureus: It’s often the ones who sit in the basement too long that have lost the plot, they digging too deep into the hole

            • Eeples on 03/06/2023 - 19:47
              +2

              @djsweet: Terrible comment.

              What truth?

              Yours?

        • morse on 04/06/2023 - 21:31
          +1

          Who exactly is the rainbow flag hating on?

          • ozhunter on 04/06/2023 - 22:46

            @morse: Biology and reality.

            • morse on 05/06/2023 - 08:01
              +2

              @ozhunter: Hmmm, I suppose you’re right it is a symbol that stands against bigotry and repugnance. Not sure if I’d classify I has hate though.

      • Protractor on 03/06/2023 - 21:17
        +1

        It's your head, but I think you have found a seriously thick brick wall. I admire your tenacity nonetheless.

      • cameldownunder on 04/06/2023 - 12:10

        "Generally speaking" look it up !

  • Deals For Days on 03/06/2023 - 18:51
    +16

    Mods really are just doing a terrible job all around on this whole issue. First, allowing an obvious 'culture war' post under the guise of a deal, and second, allowing clearly hateful/troll comments to stay up en masse. Will be sure to remove ozbargain tracking from any links I click on.

    • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 19:05
      +3

      Agree, if they're afraid of being accused of censorship, why not just move it to the forum given the discussion it has sparked? And then just deleted the obviously offensive discussion?

      • Protractor on 03/06/2023 - 20:44

        afraid of censorship? Or enabling.

      • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 00:51

        Agree, if they're afraid of being accused of censorship, why not just move it to the forum given the discussion it has sparked?

        It meets the standard for a deal (limited time free video) thus it wouldn't be put into the discussion forums.

    • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 00:50

      Which guideline did it break? Again you are asking staff to arbitrarily remove posts. If the community wants certain multimedia to be banned, then so be it but let's have a clear list of things so we can act consistently.

  • MKBHD on 03/06/2023 - 18:58

    I don't know why people are so mad when the site doesn't even allow basic rights to us eg. to delete posts or comments.

  • AusBargains on 03/06/2023 - 18:58
    +1

    Will we be seeing the "journalists" reporting on ozbargain tomorrow? Some random 21k+ follower twit is trying to get the activist journalists involved: https://twitter.com/stilgherrian/status/1664794582624911360

    Usually the way it works is the media writes a few articles making ozbargain look bad, then the ozbargain admin will capitulate to the demands for censorship and remove this deal and then the leftists win.

    If you positively upvoted this deal and have publicly identifiable information, be prepared to get doxxed too.

    • Motek Benzona on 03/06/2023 - 19:26
      -1

      The leftists are so pathetic. HERE INTERVIEW ME!!!

      • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 19:56
        +2

        They're not the ones posing as experts being interviewed in these docos but go off

  • AusBargains on 03/06/2023 - 19:36

    Someone tries to make a post about this deal on leftist/green party supporter owned /australia/ subreddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/13z0l8a/local_ba…

    The post is deleted for whatever reason.

    The person who made that post appears to be centrist to "center left" (tax the rich, anti big corp, anti corruption in govt, pro vaccine mandate, anti abortion) based on post history.

    • chepsk8 on 03/06/2023 - 19:53

      Ok, and?

  • drfuzzy on 03/06/2023 - 19:56
    +8

    TLDR of the TLDR: I am unhappy and want to have a whinge.

    • franco cozzo on 04/06/2023 - 04:11
      +1

      also i am the main character, ok?

  • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 20:18
    +2

    The funny irony is that if they HAD of posted the original deal in the forums, it would still be at the top due to the amount of discussion, but now it's just been lost to oblivion off the main page. Ah karma. She's a good cat.

    And you know @snoopydoop - if we let this post die down, the whole thing will be lost the 24 hour news amnesia cycle. Good times.

    • lostgoat on 03/06/2023 - 20:25

      If you haven't noticed it is deliberately being push to front pages so a Super Hero Scotty can erase it .
      Or at the very least forum it .

    • snoopydoop on 03/06/2023 - 20:29
      +2

      Until the next time something similar occurs if they don't change anything

    • zubzub on 03/06/2023 - 20:36

      But the votes have spoken ;)

      • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 21:29

        Oh loud and clear. As have the comments. But still gone from the main page and forgotten in a week, when it could have lived on in forum form for far longer. Sweet sweet karma. The news cycle is far more censoring than any mod.

        • ozhunter on 03/06/2023 - 21:44

          Lol, the forums get much less views and comments than the deals page.

          • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 22:26

            @ozhunter: Yeah but the deal has quickly disappeared off the deals page from other deals, but this could have been pumped up in the forum for much longer. Love the irony.

            • ozhunter on 04/06/2023 - 22:43

              @MessyG: In a day it's got more interaction than any forum post…

  • Senatekill on 03/06/2023 - 20:26
    +6

    Leftie - i don't like it, censor it!

    Thats not the australian way….

    • snoopydoop on 03/06/2023 - 20:32
      +6

      Once again, I've needed to comment this countless times. Please thoroughly read the content you are responding to.

      I articulated the difference very clearly between the many comments I don't like there, and the hate speech I'm referring to.

      On top of that, I wouldn't personally call it censorship, but why aren't you concerned that my post was actually removed and "censored"? Half the post is discussing this.

      It would be ironic for you to disagree with this post, if absolute free speech with no exceptions is actually your opinion.

  • RADICALIST on 03/06/2023 - 20:36
    +2

    This is what is wrong with society. You people want to cancel everything that doesn't agree with your views….not everyone has to agree with YOU and that is ok….

    We don't live in communist Australia so you can control our media intake

    • snoopydoop on 03/06/2023 - 20:39
      +7

      Mate, you can relax. I've been very clear in the post and countless comments I was speaking about a few specific comments, which I was very clear about. Not talking about all the comments I disagree with, of which there are many. I would highly recommend properly reading the content you are replying to.

      If this is truly your opinion, half the post is talking about how my post was removed immediately. Why do you not disagree with the action of my post being removed, if "censorship" is truly your issue?

      • MKBHD on 03/06/2023 - 22:44

        You will not be able to engage in a civil debate with someone whose whole premise is "bad faith argument". I have tried to engage in some of the ideas on wokism (not censorship related in OZB) and so far they fail to acknowledge the reality and pick on some words while ignoring the fact in agenda. Sadly, I see no cure for these people, they have to face some situations in their life by themselves to be able to understand the fact and data based reality.

        • 1st-Amendment on 04/06/2023 - 11:37
          +1

          so far they fail to acknowledge the reality

          Reality requires evidence and you can't provide any. This is where you are going wrong.

          the fact and data based reality

          Please provide these facts and data because I asked you multiple times in the other thread and you constantly avoided doing so.

          It's ironic that you claim to be on the side of facts while never ever being able to present any…

          This is precisely how ignorance works. Just keep saying stuff, but never ever produce supporting evidence to back it up, then claim you are right. It truly is retarded thinking…

          • MKBHD on 04/06/2023 - 13:21

            @1st-Amendment: Did you see the Stanford University paper I had to Google for you? I won't be replying to you anymore mate because you have called me an idiot, a child, and other countless profanity which I do not consider civil way to engage with someone. Good luck.

            • 1st-Amendment on 04/06/2023 - 15:57

              @MKBHD:

              Did you see the Stanford University paper I had to Google for you?

              No because you are still haven't figured out how to link to it…

              I won't be replying to you anymore mate because…

              So let the record stand that your crazy racist ideology exists in your head and you have presented zero evidence to support it.

              Roger that.

  • sintro on 03/06/2023 - 20:36
    +2

    Probably the biggest is there are a large number perpetuating the conspiracy theory that the LGBTQIA+ community as a whole grooms children.

    The above in itself is the conspiracy theory.

    How can it be that the LGBTQIA+ community as a whole grooms children when there are actually gays against groomers?

    https://www.gaysagainstgroomers.com/faq

    Gays Against Groomers Frequently Asked Questions

    Our organization faces many of the same questions on a regular basis. We hear you! Sadly, it’s just not possible to answer every single one of you. We would have to have members dedicated to replying to comments day in and day out! Instead, we’ve taken a more practical approach. Here are some of the top questions we are most frequently asked about our stance on issues orbiting our mission to end the sexualization, medicalization and indoctrination of children:

    Why is GAG so against education on LGBTQ+ subjects?

    School is not the place for underage children to be bombarded with information that could exacerbate their natural inner turmoil. Growing up is hard enough as it is. We do not believe they should be exposed to and pressured into contemplating ideologies that prioritize sexuality and identity above real world skills. Children need to be focused on learning pragmatic skills like math, how to be a good friend, setting boundaries, basic communication and how to be a team player. Queer theory and gender ideology are not necessary for development or self discovery; they certainly weren't necessary for ours. When children are exposed to overly sexual material too soon, it can cause behavioral issues that lead them to dangerous situations.

    Why is GAG so against youth having access to puberty blockers and gender affirming surgeries?

    In order to become healthy critically thinking adults, normal puberty is essential. Puberty blockers are a risky and unnatural way of teaching a child to deal with something every human being naturally goes through. The risks include loss of bone density, slowed or stunted brain development, stunted sexual development, and sterility. Removing body parts of healthy children before they’ve grown into them is child abuse, plain and simple. Rather than enabling children to wage war on their own bodies, we believe they should be taught how to love themselves as they are until they can make a clear and informed decision as an adult. Even chest binding is a destructive behavior that damages breast tissue in a way that could lead to mandatory surgery. We are against these practices because they have the potential to do more harm than good.

    What is GAG’s stance on gender vs. sex?

    We believe biology matters. The two terms have been used interchangeably to refer to biological sex until recent years. Gender ideology is not universally accepted, and the majority of the world sees two genders, with a neutral space frequently provided for trans individuals. Sex is not assigned, but observed and recorded by doctors who understand the differences between male and female. Separating the two and introducing advanced concepts to children at a young age while they’re still learning to navigate the world is both overwhelming and confusing. Additionally, people with intersex conditions are frequently used as a bait to misconstrue the dual nature (and reality) of biological sex, and this has been further used to promote gender ideology as well. We do not support such politicization of scientific definitions and realities that in turn misinform children and harm their growth.

    What is GAG’s stance on “the bathroom issue”?

    While we understand there is an ongoing discussion regarding trans adults and which spaces are most appropriate for them, our mission is focused on children. There are nuances to consider when it comes to adults in public spaces, like needing to use an empty male restroom as a pregnant female because the need is too strong to think about any potential dangers. Many passing trans adults have used the restroom they externally identify with in peace without confrontation. There are risks present for all using public spaces. Predators exist in every scenario, and children should be supervised and safeguarded while in their most vulnerable state. Several countries have had gender neutral bathrooms for some time. When it comes to trans adults, gender neutral single stalls are usually available and preferable when possible. We believe public spaces like schools should maintain the binary bathroom model to reduce possible harm to minors, and provide separate single stalls for safety.

    Why won’t GAG denounce the T entirely?

    Being gay is not the same as being transgender, or transsexual. Who you love is not the same as how you choose to present yourself. That being said, trans people are still human beings deserving of compassion, and their voices are vital in exposing how transitioning can affect a child. They have first hand experience with the medications and procedures that we as gay people do not. We must work together to end the transing of children being done in our names. The protection of children comes first. It is not realistic to wage war on transgenderism as a whole, nor is it fair to accuse all trans people of being predators. We are focused on protecting children from these mature concepts until they are consenting adults who are free to make their own choices, and we welcome trans voices that align with our mission.

    Why is GAG so against drag queens?

    We don’t hate drag queens! We hate children being exposed to raunchy and erotic behavior, things drag queens are notorious for. We’re all for adults attending drag shows for fun on their own time. It is common sense to preserve the innocence of children by keeping them out of adult spaces like strip clubs, gay bars, and drag shows. Once again, predators can be found anywhere at any time. No group is exempt from scrutiny. There are so many ways to teach children kindness, self expression and acceptance without relying on a man dressed as a woman. In addition to being age-inappropriate and highly sexualized, are also inherently one-sided as there isn’t enough (or hardly any) representation of drag kings. Drag, as seen in 2023, is innately misogynistic and completely adult-oriented in its essence. This is why we think it’s totally inappropriate for children, and we believe that all sorts of drag performance let alone ‘story-hours’ could easily promote harmful stereotypes in these young minds. This is not age appropriate education. We suggest sticking to hiring princesses, story characters, puppet shows, musicians and clowns. The recent bill passed in Tennessee is a great example of classifying drag as adult cabaret entertainment to keep minors separated from the experience. Well done Tennessee!

    What is GAG’s stance on religion?

    We are a non-partisan group of LGB and T individuals from all walks of life. We don’t let our personal spiritual beliefs get in the way of our mission to work together to end the indoctrination, sexualization and medicalization of children. Not only is this a non-partisan issue, it is something everyone should care about regardless of spiritual beliefs. We respect religious freedom and the rights of parents everywhere to decide what their children are exposed to. Not all parents want their kids to learn about queer ideology and gender theory, nor do all parents have the time or ability to homeschool their children. While we find the erasure of gay people an impossible notion, we respect religious rights to believe homosexuality is wrong. You don’t have to like us, just know that we don’t like the LGBTQ+ agenda being pushed onto children, either.

    • snoopydoop on 03/06/2023 - 20:44
      +4

      This organisation does not seem that reputable, I guess people can make their own minds up. Here's the wiki.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gays_Against_Groomers

      Regardless I provided a clear resource on this conspiracy theory and its origins, and plenty more resources online for those who want to find.

      • Protractor on 03/06/2023 - 20:53
        -1

        How do you (anybody) know this site isn't fake?

        • sintro on 03/06/2023 - 20:58

          It's legit but feel free to verify it for yourself over time by contacting them or following them.

          https://twitter.com/againstgrmrs

          • Protractor on 03/06/2023 - 21:04
            +2

            @sintro: Yeah, so are unicorns, apparently.
            Climate change is legit. So is covid.
            So is the efficacy of vaccinations.
            So is the legitimacy of govt.
            Twitter? Elons pet project where all the principled folk were either culled (or as today) have snatched it.

            https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-02/twitter-safety-chief-…

            Twitter has been poisoned since Musk grabbed it. He's the same fwit who accused a hero in Thailand of being a pedo.

            Isn't the default position to be AGAINST grooming?
            How dose Trump score on that given his 'bestie' pics with Epstein?

            • sintro on 03/06/2023 - 21:11
              +2

              @Protractor: You are totally missing the point.
              Don't bring up other unrelated topics unless you want to start a new post.

              Stay on topic, read the Gays Against Groomers FAQ and tell me which point you disagree with.

              • Protractor on 03/06/2023 - 21:14
                +1

                @sintro: Are you are mod now? That's another issue here.
                I just pointed out twitter is a cess pool, after you linked an 'alleged' legit group there.
                If I am off topic, you drove it there.

                • payton on 03/06/2023 - 21:28
                  +1

                  @Protractor:

                  I just pointed out twitter is a cess pool,

                  Irrelevant w/rt whether the organisation is legit or not. You just suggested its fake with no basis, went off tangent with various diatribe then tried to weasel out of answering sintro's q.

                  Pretty amusing for someone with 'science!' for an avatar.

                  • Protractor on 03/06/2023 - 21:32

                    @payton: Wrong.
                    I said twitter is a cess pool. (it is and in the matter of admissable links, that MATTERS) The site cintro linked was on twitter, which has as much credibility as ppl defending hate speech. [Oh wait.]

                    I'm not interested in giving haters oxygen, espexcially when they they play the bully card, so you you and your mate cintro, are CANCELLED.
                    (Charley Pickering reference)

                • sintro on 03/06/2023 - 22:43

                  @Protractor: Why would I be mad?
                  It's just drivel to me, stay on topic protractor.

                  Which points do you disagree with the Gays Against Groomers FAQ? Or do you disagree with them all?

      • MessyG on 03/06/2023 - 21:30
        +3

        I agree. The idea of gays against groomers sets up the idea that any gay person who doesn't join must be with groomers simply because they are gay. It reeks.

        And if people truly were against groomers, they wouldn't be going after the gays. Check out the prison demographic of pedophiles and we can see them all hiding in plain sight, shouting 'look over there at those people'!

  • morse on 03/06/2023 - 20:37
    +15

    I agree, I didn’t follow this post closely but have posted similar feedback recently on other posts. OzBargain is becoming uncomfortably overloaded with these kind of posts. I don’t think it’s reflective of the majority of users, but perhaps reflective of people with the most empty and hateful time on their hands.

  • Protractor on 03/06/2023 - 20:39
    +2

    "there are many hateful comments rooted in neo-Nazi ideology currently on the website, still not moderated." Nailed it.
    This site will be actively monitored for sure.

  • Kamsi on 03/06/2023 - 20:44
    +3

    people got too much time on their hands in this forum, I hope this forum doesn't turn into a whingepool and it become over moderatored.

  • da1andonly on 03/06/2023 - 21:50
    +5

    I say delete the whole forum section, just keep it to bargains. Let other websites do the forum thing.

  • HangryCakeStore on 03/06/2023 - 22:08
    +1

    Big greedy cooperations have succeeded in making the little people fight against each other,
    despite the post it’s the women that lead the way in this messed up woke culture

  • fourofjacks on 03/06/2023 - 22:19
    +3

    Difference between OP documentary and the other one - unlikely OP would have posted theirs if the other one was not posted. Hence it's trolling.

    • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 00:57

      This.

        • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 01:27

          Neither. When someone's intention is not posting a bargain, e.g. a joke post, or a post to prove some point in another thread then it's considered trolling. Nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with subject matter.

          It's similar to how we audit votes, ban sockpuppets, etc to ensure deals are authentic.

            • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 01:40

              @AwesomeSaucem: Answered here

                • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 01:56

                  @AwesomeSaucem:

                  Also just for reference: can you quote the part of the rules/guidelines that say proving a point in another thread is considered trolling?

                  Internal guidelines. However, here is an example.

                  And to make it clear: hypothetically someone posting the given documentaries independently without any indication of it being to prove a point in another thread would be completely fair game?

                  If the intention of a deal poster is to post a good deal then no issue.

                    • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 02:17

                      @AwesomeSaucem: Sure, we can add something in the guidelines if we can explain it non-confusingly.

                    • cookie2 on 04/06/2023 - 15:43
                      -2

                      @AwesomeSaucem: Ran out of negs but your attitude sucks. If this was a face to face, I'd call it harassing. You just keep going with question after question.
                      You think that protesting needs to be written into rule guidelines or else some will assume you can post disingenuous deals as a reaction to another deal they didn't like? You really think that's the issue here and can't understand that the posted deal wasn't intended to share a great bargain with all, but to protest against another deal? I mean the OP acknowledged it.

                        • infinite on 07/06/2023 - 19:49
                          +1

                          @AwesomeSaucem:

                          alongside downvoting discounts for indigenous people

                          If you promote discounts for one specific ethnic group at the expense of all others, you are by definition promoting racism.

                          So are you are racist, angry that they aren't racist, or both ?

  • heal on 03/06/2023 - 23:02
    +1

    I Am A Woman documentary has been posted specifically to generate comments and outrage

    Here I was thinking the OP posted this deal to inform others about the great score, the ability to see this documentary for free rather than through a subscription. I wasn't aware of this prior to the post. But you seem to have an insight into the OP's mind. Please tell me more about this skill.

    I don't want to assume about your motivation for this post. It seems ironic.

  • Dack Smith on 04/06/2023 - 00:55
    -1

    Not sure if the mods have ever been consistent, if anything they’ve gone woke more than anything else

    Total joke

    • morse on 04/06/2023 - 04:05
      +3

      Example of how “they’ve gone woke”?

      • chepsk8 on 04/06/2023 - 14:07
        +4

        Probably removed the listing for free nazi flags his buddy was giving out, or something along those lines.

  • resubaehtgnolhcs on 04/06/2023 - 01:00

    Moderators are people, and can make judgements/decisions based on their best interpretation of the things in front of them. As such, this gives to inconsistencies in moderation of this site. I don't know what the answer is, other than to move on with life … it's short enough as it is.

    If it's any consolation, I had to change my user name (years ago) based on a single complaint. There was no discussion and no chance for me to put my case forward, as a moderator had already played the role of judge, jury and executioner. However, it's not the hill I am going to die on - I understand this is a website that has it's rules etc and if I wanted to be a part of it, then I had to abide by the moderators decision.

    • ozhunter on 04/06/2023 - 01:15

      As such, this gives to inconsistencies in moderation of this site.

      Like every site

      as a moderator had already played the role of judge, jury and executioner.

      Who should decide? albo?

    • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 01:23

      If it's any consolation, I had to change my user name (years ago) based on a single complaint. There was no discussion and no chance for me to put my case forward, as a moderator had already played the role of judge, jury and executioner.

      You can certainly make a Talk with a Moderator discussion. We requested you change and you did, just writing the username backwards.

      • resubaehtgnolhcs on 04/06/2023 - 02:02
        +1

        I tried to talk to the moderator and they never replied back to me - just gave me an ultimatum to change my name or they would do it for me, so clearly the moderator was in no mood to discuss or compromise.

        Like I said, not the hill I was going to die on, so I complied and yes changed my name (backwards now). My point is one person complained and 1000's on this site didn't … it's a very slippery slope when we change things as a result of a single complaint.

        • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 02:09

          I tried to talk to the moderator and they never replied back to me - just gave me an ultimatum to change my name or they would do it for me, so clearly the moderator was in no mood to discuss or compromise.

          notwam

          As above, we have no record of you initiating a Talk with a Moderator forum.

          • resubaehtgnolhcs on 04/06/2023 - 02:11
            +1

            @neil: Check my messages and you will see it there …

            Also, I don't want to derail this forum with something that I moved on from years ago … just saying that as humans we can be inconsistent

            • Moderatorneil on 04/06/2023 - 02:19

              @resubaehtgnolhcs:

              Check my messages and you will see it there …

              Private messages are not accessible to moderators. My point is for users to use the Talk with a Moderator forums.

              • resubaehtgnolhcs on 04/06/2023 - 02:22
                +1

                @neil: Well that's how the moderator contacted me and I replied back several times with no response back

  • ssfps on 04/06/2023 - 01:10
    +2

    Calling something "hate speech" is inherently political and should be off-topic.

    • franco cozzo on 04/06/2023 - 04:16
      +1

      who defines 'hate'?

      apparently you can label anyone who disagrees with your MSM endorsed worldview as a bigot, fascist, nazi, homophobe, transphobe, racist, right wing nutjob, anti-vax cooker, conspiracy theorist etc…and thats not hateful at all!!

      • chepsk8 on 04/06/2023 - 14:08

        Ok, then how about you define “hate” in your worldview, since nothing seems to fit that criteria for you.

        • ssfps on 04/06/2023 - 14:14
          +2

          I think you missed the more subtle point, which is that hate is socially acceptable (and in fact a social obligation/object of peer pressure) when it's backed by righteous indignation, and often the people that do this do it under the guise of protecting us from "hate".

  • Tuftsdude on 04/06/2023 - 01:11
    +2

    Post was too long to read but the documentary is a great watch. Highly recommend.

    • franco cozzo on 04/06/2023 - 04:17
      -1

      exactly…would watch again. this drivel….not so much!

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join