RPGnet's decay (TBP madness)

[jeff37923]

Between the woke left and the Trump right America is being torn apart. They're both fucking insane, toxic and destructive.  We need a radical, extreme moderate movement of the people in the middle to join up and basically crush the extremists on both sides.

I had a much longer post I was going to present, but I decided instead that perhaps it might be more useful if you could perhaps describe what this Moderate platform looks like?

Similarly, just what do you believe the far Left and Trump right actually believe?

I feel that having terms defined here might be extremely beneficial to the discussion as it wouldn't be useful for me to throw out a reply in relation to what I think you mean, only for it to not actually be what you meant at all.

So, to repeat, could you define what Moderate, Far Left and Trump Right mean to you in terms of policies?

OK since you seem to be able to post reasonably and without just throwing shit, like a certain carcharodon themed user who is nothing but a shitthrower, I will broadly define woke left, Trump right and moderates. These are very broad definitions.

Woke left.  Claims to support freedom and liberty but actualy supports extreme censorship of views that are offensive to the far left standards of offensive speech. Wants to force ''respect and acceptance of all'', except those seen as 'privileged '' by being white males, with a censorship policy enforced by threat of job loss, social ostracism,  denial of access to media,  fines if possible and similar means. Believes you can address  past wrongs against various groups by curtailing the rights of the current members of the group that oppressed and abused them. Ignores the fact huge numbers of white males were and are impoverished, disenfranchised,  exploited and otherwise abused by the elites just as much as minorties and women are. Wants a disasterous and discredited economic model based on radical socialism that is very likey to produce economic disaster.


The Trump right claims to champion' freedumb' and 'libirdy' while advocating fascism when it doesn't get it's way in every election. Claims to adhere to the constitution while subverting it with court packing, gerrymandering,  voter suppression, obstructionism ,etc. Blames 'the left' for crises while obstructing any effort to alleviate them.  Believes in law and order for most people as a tool of oppression and quelling protest while allowing the rich to do as they please. Accuses the left of violence while openly endorsing brutal oppression of protest, assassination of enemy political leaders,  violent actions against any who resist them, etc.  (Trump called on people to use the second amendment if they lost an election while miming firing a rifle) Supports a proven failure of an economic model called supply side economics, I. E.  Trickle down econimics, reaganomics, voodoo economics, etc. A
policy that has been forced on America since 1980 and has driven down wages, wealth, standards of living,  job security,  etc for the majority of Americans while making those Already wealthy far, far richer . This has been proven by 40 years Of experience.

Both extremes ignore science, facts, truth abd even reality when it disagrees with their views. The woke left ignores the fact that while most of the elite and powerful are white males the vast majority of white males are not part of the elite and powerful. They ignore the fact holding  most modern white males somehow accountable for the actions of the elite white males of decades past will engender hostility and is a form of injustice and iniquity in itself that will perpetuate  anger and division. They ignore that a wholly socialist economic model is likely to fail terribly based on existing evidence.

The Trump right ignores the fact  there has been and still is institutional injustice in the system,  they ignore the fact that climate change is real, that most Americans favor many policies that it deems 'socialist' such as affordable healthcare and housing, higher wages for workers, more taxes on the extremely rich, etc. They ignore the fact an unregulated capitalist free market system has caused tremendous harm to most Americans over 40 years and continue to advise and advocate the same failed policies constantly.


Moderates support in general terms equal rights, fairness, justice and opportunity for all but do not support pushing down the percievced advantaged as a way to deal with  wrongs from decades past. It belives in mostly free speech and expression while placing limits on things like open advociaton of murder and violence against targeted groups based on race, gender, ethnicity,  orientation,  etc. They support by and large a blended economic model that incorpares elements of what it generally considered to be capitalism and what is generally considered to be socialism to produce a model that allows free enterprise while preventing massive consolidiation of wealth and therefore power into the hands of very few while  impoverishing and disempowering the vast majority. They believe there are things that should not be left wholly to the 'free market' but subjected to controls meant to keep them accessible to all. Medical care , nutrition, housing, utilities all should be price controlled and regulated as they were in America for decades. Non essential goods should have fewer controls.

Thats a broad summation on the factions as I see them.

Thank you! That was a good laugh! Thank you again!

You are just saying that everyone's views suck except yours, which must come down from mount as if being carried by Moses himself, even though there is a lot of pure bullshit in them.

[Battlemaster]

Sigh. Jeff I keep hoping a covid virus with your name on it ends up tettibg drawn into that ever open mouth of yours. You do nothing but throw shit into the world and it would be a less awful place if you were removed from it.

[Pat]

Woke left.  Claims to support freedom and liberty but actualy supports extreme censorship of views that are offensive to the far left standards of offensive speech. Wants to force ''respect and acceptance of all'', except those seen as 'privileged '' by being white males, with a censorship policy enforced by threat of job loss, social ostracism,  denial of access to media,  fines if possible and similar means. Believes you can address  past wrongs against various groups by curtailing the rights of the current members of the group that oppressed and abused them. Ignores the fact huge numbers of white males were and are impoverished, disenfranchised,  exploited and otherwise abused by the elites just as much as minorties and women are. Wants a disasterous and discredited economic model based on radical socialism that is very likey to produce economic disaster.

This is a rational position.

The Trump right claims to champion' freedumb' and 'libirdy' while advocating fascism when it doesn't get it's way in every election. Claims to adhere to the constitution while subverting it with court packing, gerrymandering,  voter suppression, obstructionism ,etc. Blames 'the left' for crises while obstructing any effort to alleviate them.  Believes in law and order for most people as a tool of oppression and quelling protest while allowing the rich to do as they please. Accuses the left of violence while openly endorsing brutal oppression of protest, assassination of enemy political leaders,  violent actions against any who resist them, etc.  (Trump called on people to use the second amendment if they lost an election while miming firing a rifle) Supports a proven failure of an economic model called supply side economics, I. E.  Trickle down econimics, reaganomics, voodoo economics, etc. A
policy that has been forced on America since 1980 and has driven down wages, wealth, standards of living,  job security,  etc for the majority of Americans while making those Already wealthy far, far richer . This has been proven by 40 years Of experience.

This is not.

Okay, admittedly I'm not Chris, but I can't seem to get back to sleep at the moment and I still feel like I can try to be polite or at least not a COMPLETE asshat while still giving my honest opinion on this post. Hopefully the more people add their thoughts the more points get considered. As a heads up, I consider myself probably a right wing moderate, though a registered independent, and not really in the way you define right wing here. (Since you outlined your stances, I'll open myself up for commentary and learning as well, though I may be about to piss a lot of people off, or at least get some depressed head shakes. I'm a Fiscal Conservative, support decentralized power mostly, care pretty deeply about an honest interpretation of the Constitution as it is written rather than oligarchy via judicial fiat and unnecessary legislating from the bench, consider it a way to protect the individual both from outright unjust and unequal government action and delineate what each level of government can and cannot do, more a cosmopolitan in part than just a pure political realist on the international stage, and I do think there are times when intervention economic political or even potentially militarily can be justified both morally and strategically, not a huge fan of raw neoliberalism in trade or a believer in unlimited globalism or global governance that includes authoritarian shitbags and the like, believe we need more than just unilateral action and bilateral alliances though there is a place for both, believe we can help the poor without destroying the free market or undermining America with poverty traps like binary welfare cutoff lines, and that racial and other inequality can be reduced by pro-poor and economic mobility and opportunity policies without discrimination on the basis of race or sex, which should be legally protected against regardless of alleged privilege level, religion, speech, race or sex. I also have a somewhat controversial belief that megacorps and the like should not be able to refuse services solely on the basis of political affiliation, because that way lies oppression and cultural tyranny.)

This is a rational position.

I don't agree with either of you on many details, but except for BM's rant about Trump, you both seem to fall within the "can talk to other people without frothing" category. But why are you both posting this in a thread about bad moderation on another forum?

[KindaMeh]

Woke left.  Claims to support freedom and liberty but actualy supports extreme censorship of views that are offensive to the far left standards of offensive speech. Wants to force ''respect and acceptance of all'', except those seen as 'privileged '' by being white males, with a censorship policy enforced by threat of job loss, social ostracism,  denial of access to media,  fines if possible and similar means. Believes you can address  past wrongs against various groups by curtailing the rights of the current members of the group that oppressed and abused them. Ignores the fact huge numbers of white males were and are impoverished, disenfranchised,  exploited and otherwise abused by the elites just as much as minorties and women are. Wants a disasterous and discredited economic model based on radical socialism that is very likey to produce economic disaster.

This is a rational position.

The Trump right claims to champion' freedumb' and 'libirdy' while advocating fascism when it doesn't get it's way in every election. Claims to adhere to the constitution while subverting it with court packing, gerrymandering,  voter suppression, obstructionism ,etc. Blames 'the left' for crises while obstructing any effort to alleviate them.  Believes in law and order for most people as a tool of oppression and quelling protest while allowing the rich to do as they please. Accuses the left of violence while openly endorsing brutal oppression of protest, assassination of enemy political leaders,  violent actions against any who resist them, etc.  (Trump called on people to use the second amendment if they lost an election while miming firing a rifle) Supports a proven failure of an economic model called supply side economics, I. E.  Trickle down econimics, reaganomics, voodoo economics, etc. A
policy that has been forced on America since 1980 and has driven down wages, wealth, standards of living,  job security,  etc for the majority of Americans while making those Already wealthy far, far richer . This has been proven by 40 years Of experience.

This is not.

Okay, admittedly I'm not Chris, but I can't seem to get back to sleep at the moment and I still feel like I can try to be polite or at least not a COMPLETE asshat while still giving my honest opinion on this post. Hopefully the more people add their thoughts the more points get considered. As a heads up, I consider myself probably a right wing moderate, though a registered independent, and not really in the way you define right wing here. (Since you outlined your stances, I'll open myself up for commentary and learning as well, though I may be about to piss a lot of people off, or at least get some depressed head shakes. I'm a Fiscal Conservative, support decentralized power mostly, care pretty deeply about an honest interpretation of the Constitution as it is written rather than oligarchy via judicial fiat and unnecessary legislating from the bench, consider it a way to protect the individual both from outright unjust and unequal government action and delineate what each level of government can and cannot do, more a cosmopolitan in part than just a pure political realist on the international stage, and I do think there are times when intervention economic political or even potentially militarily can be justified both morally and strategically, not a huge fan of raw neoliberalism in trade or a believer in unlimited globalism or global governance that includes authoritarian shitbags and the like, believe we need more than just unilateral action and bilateral alliances though there is a place for both, believe we can help the poor without destroying the free market or undermining America with poverty traps like binary welfare cutoff lines, and that racial and other inequality can be reduced by pro-poor and economic mobility and opportunity policies without discrimination on the basis of race or sex, which should be legally protected against regardless of alleged privilege level, religion, speech, race or sex. I also have a somewhat controversial belief that megacorps and the like should not be able to refuse services solely on the basis of political affiliation, because that way lies oppression and cultural tyranny.)

This is a rational position.

I don't agree with either of you on many details, but except for BM's rant about Trump, you both seem to fall within the "can talk to other people without frothing" category. But why are you both posting this in a thread about bad moderation on another forum?

Yanno, I originally thought I had an answer to that question. I think maybe Battlemaster was trying to argue for an uprising of moderates to counteract authoritarian rule and woke thought policing on places like RPG.net and American society more broadly. Also, I think this stuff was originally related to definitions like what is the woke left, why do people think the "Trump Right" is "equally as bad" or whatever, and what does that mean for stuff like online debate and the cultural zeitgeist. I went more or less off topic responding to their post and trying to clarify my own stance (for background) first instead of jumping into my thoughts on the above. That said, I think I kinda have a tendency to go off topic sometimes. I also should not have solicited responses to what I had posted without considering the effects on the direction of the thread.

[KindaMeh]

To drag things back on topic, I guess, since I sent them careening, I wonder if given what I said about increasing polarization in a given political affiliation potentially leading to more people being able to get behind united fronts and moderates not having that, could moderates ever exercise tyranny like the left does on RPG.net? I guess maybe if they had a much smaller team of moderators to present a united front, but IDK even then. Also, this might then mean that for real political reform, you to some extent need polarization and not just moderates? I dunno, though, cuz I guess maybe "moderates" rather than being lukewarm wafflers could alternatively be organized to have a coherent set of policy stances that they call moderate but that actually are polarized along various political questions to produce a coherent platform. If woke liberals came from a distortion or usurpation of the word and platform historically, maybe one day we could see what today would be termed moderates oppressing those who go against them in speech, assuming nobody fixes corporate censorship, refusal to tolerate real free speech in society and on the net, and the like.

[Pat]

That said, I think I kinda have a tendency to go off topic sometimes.

So do I.

Regarding the moderates, or at least those who make up the large and indifferent middle, inflation and gas prices seems to be energizing them. The rest of the culture war seems to have passed over their heads. Some of that is just not caring about issues beyond the kitchen table, but a significant part is the obfuscation of the media, which has bend over backwards to present one extreme as normal ("fiery but mostly peaceful"...), while demonizing comparable or far less extreme behavior on the other side ("insurrection"). This has turned pockets with a certain political bias, like the TBP, into ravenous extremists, because there are no outside checks to the perpetual cycle of outrage against their political opposition.

The media gets a lot of blame for polarization, but I don't think the blame they get is anywhere near enough.

[jeff37923]

Sigh. Jeff I keep hoping a covid virus with your name on it ends up tettibg drawn into that ever open mouth of yours. You do nothing but throw shit into the world and it would be a less awful place if you were removed from it.

*GASP!* I thought that you were a peace loving Bill Maher Sheep, I mean Democrat! I am shocked, yes, shocked and dismayed that you would wish ill will against someone such as myself! I suppose that you are just mostly peaceful, like those riots we had.

Besides, causing people to laugh at you makes this world less awful! 

[Battlemaster]

Woke left.  Claims to support freedom and liberty but actualy supports extreme censorship of views that are offensive to the far left standards of offensive speech. Wants to force ''respect and acceptance of all'', except those seen as 'privileged '' by being white males, with a censorship policy enforced by threat of job loss, social ostracism,  denial of access to media,  fines if possible and similar means. Believes you can address  past wrongs against various groups by curtailing the rights of the current members of the group that oppressed and abused them. Ignores the fact huge numbers of white males were and are impoverished, disenfranchised,  exploited and otherwise abused by the elites just as much as minorties and women are. Wants a disasterous and discredited economic model based on radical socialism that is very likey to produce economic disaster.

This is a rational position.

The Trump right claims to champion' freedumb' and 'libirdy' while advocating fascism when it doesn't get it's way in every election. Claims to adhere to the constitution while subverting it with court packing, gerrymandering,  voter suppression, obstructionism ,etc. Blames 'the left' for crises while obstructing any effort to alleviate them.  Believes in law and order for most people as a tool of oppression and quelling protest while allowing the rich to do as they please. Accuses the left of violence while openly endorsing brutal oppression of protest, assassination of enemy political leaders,  violent actions against any who resist them, etc.  (Trump called on people to use the second amendment if they lost an election while miming firing a rifle) Supports a proven failure of an economic model called supply side economics, I. E.  Trickle down econimics, reaganomics, voodoo economics, etc. A
policy that has been forced on America since 1980 and has driven down wages, wealth, standards of living,  job security,  etc for the majority of Americans while making those Already wealthy far, far richer . This has been proven by 40 years Of experience.

This is not.

Okay, admittedly I'm not Chris, but I can't seem to get back to sleep at the moment and I still feel like I can try to be polite or at least not a COMPLETE asshat while still giving my honest opinion on this post. Hopefully the more people add their thoughts the more points get considered. As a heads up, I consider myself probably a right wing moderate, though a registered independent, and not really in the way you define right wing here. (Since you outlined your stances, I'll open myself up for commentary and learning as well, though I may be about to piss a lot of people off, or at least get some depressed head shakes. I'm a Fiscal Conservative, support decentralized power mostly, care pretty deeply about an honest interpretation of the Constitution as it is written rather than oligarchy via judicial fiat and unnecessary legislating from the bench, consider it a way to protect the individual both from outright unjust and unequal government action and delineate what each level of government can and cannot do, more a cosmopolitan in part than just a pure political realist on the international stage, and I do think there are times when intervention economic political or even potentially militarily can be justified both morally and strategically, not a huge fan of raw neoliberalism in trade or a believer in unlimited globalism or global governance that includes authoritarian shitbags and the like, believe we need more than just unilateral action and bilateral alliances though there is a place for both, believe we can help the poor without destroying the free market or undermining America with poverty traps like binary welfare cutoff lines, and that racial and other inequality can be reduced by pro-poor and economic mobility and opportunity policies without discrimination on the basis of race or sex, which should be legally protected against regardless of alleged privilege level, religion, speech, race or sex. I also have a somewhat controversial belief that megacorps and the like should not be able to refuse services solely on the basis of political affiliation, because that way lies oppression and cultural tyranny.)

This is a rational position.

I don't agree with either of you on many details, but except for BM's rant about Trump, you both seem to fall within the "can talk to other people without frothing" category. But why are you both posting this in a thread about bad moderation on another forum?

OK so with no support or rationale you say my position on the Trump  right is not rational, but agree when I critiqu.e the left. I feel my view on the trump right is fairly accurate, show ne where it is inacurrate.

Also in Re to other statements I never said that I thought tge woke left and Trump rifht were equally bad, the trump right is worse. They're the ones advocating mass murder of people based on political, religious,  social and sexual issues.

Also the right just can't accept that the 2020 election was a national reffendum on Trump right vs woke left, and it had tge largest turnout in American history.  The Trump right was rejected and Biden won with tge most votes in history . He beat Trump by 7 million votes after Hillary beat him with 3 million.

So of course it's ''STOLEN ELECTION!  VOTER FRAUD! REVOLT! ''

[Visitor Q]

Sigh. Jeff I keep hoping a covid virus with your name on it ends up tettibg drawn into that ever open mouth of yours. You do nothing but throw shit into the world and it would be a less awful place if you were removed from it.

I'm loving the early 2000s keyboard warrior energy but wishing someone died of a disease is a bit strong isn't it?

[jeff37923]

Woke left.  Claims to support freedom and liberty but actualy supports extreme censorship of views that are offensive to the far left standards of offensive speech. Wants to force ''respect and acceptance of all'', except those seen as 'privileged '' by being white males, with a censorship policy enforced by threat of job loss, social ostracism,  denial of access to media,  fines if possible and similar means. Believes you can address  past wrongs against various groups by curtailing the rights of the current members of the group that oppressed and abused them. Ignores the fact huge numbers of white males were and are impoverished, disenfranchised,  exploited and otherwise abused by the elites just as much as minorties and women are. Wants a disasterous and discredited economic model based on radical socialism that is very likey to produce economic disaster.

This is a rational position.

The Trump right claims to champion' freedumb' and 'libirdy' while advocating fascism when it doesn't get it's way in every election. Claims to adhere to the constitution while subverting it with court packing, gerrymandering,  voter suppression, obstructionism ,etc. Blames 'the left' for crises while obstructing any effort to alleviate them.  Believes in law and order for most people as a tool of oppression and quelling protest while allowing the rich to do as they please. Accuses the left of violence while openly endorsing brutal oppression of protest, assassination of enemy political leaders,  violent actions against any who resist them, etc.  (Trump called on people to use the second amendment if they lost an election while miming firing a rifle) Supports a proven failure of an economic model called supply side economics, I. E.  Trickle down econimics, reaganomics, voodoo economics, etc. A
policy that has been forced on America since 1980 and has driven down wages, wealth, standards of living,  job security,  etc for the majority of Americans while making those Already wealthy far, far richer . This has been proven by 40 years Of experience.

This is not.

Okay, admittedly I'm not Chris, but I can't seem to get back to sleep at the moment and I still feel like I can try to be polite or at least not a COMPLETE asshat while still giving my honest opinion on this post. Hopefully the more people add their thoughts the more points get considered. As a heads up, I consider myself probably a right wing moderate, though a registered independent, and not really in the way you define right wing here. (Since you outlined your stances, I'll open myself up for commentary and learning as well, though I may be about to piss a lot of people off, or at least get some depressed head shakes. I'm a Fiscal Conservative, support decentralized power mostly, care pretty deeply about an honest interpretation of the Constitution as it is written rather than oligarchy via judicial fiat and unnecessary legislating from the bench, consider it a way to protect the individual both from outright unjust and unequal government action and delineate what each level of government can and cannot do, more a cosmopolitan in part than just a pure political realist on the international stage, and I do think there are times when intervention economic political or even potentially militarily can be justified both morally and strategically, not a huge fan of raw neoliberalism in trade or a believer in unlimited globalism or global governance that includes authoritarian shitbags and the like, believe we need more than just unilateral action and bilateral alliances though there is a place for both, believe we can help the poor without destroying the free market or undermining America with poverty traps like binary welfare cutoff lines, and that racial and other inequality can be reduced by pro-poor and economic mobility and opportunity policies without discrimination on the basis of race or sex, which should be legally protected against regardless of alleged privilege level, religion, speech, race or sex. I also have a somewhat controversial belief that megacorps and the like should not be able to refuse services solely on the basis of political affiliation, because that way lies oppression and cultural tyranny.)

This is a rational position.

I don't agree with either of you on many details, but except for BM's rant about Trump, you both seem to fall within the "can talk to other people without frothing" category. But why are you both posting this in a thread about bad moderation on another forum?

OK so with no support or rationale you say my position on the Trump  right is not rational, but agree when I critiqu.e the left. I feel my view on the trump right is fairly accurate, show ne where it is inacurrate.

Also in Re to other statements I never said that I thought tge woke left and Trump rifht were equally bad, the trump right is worse. They're the ones advocating mass murder of people based on political, religious,  social and sexual issues.

Also the right just can't accept that the 2020 election was a national reffendum on Trump right vs woke left, and it had tge largest turnout in American history.  The Trump right was rejected and Biden won with tge most votes in history . He beat Trump by 7 million votes after Hillary beat him with 3 million.

So of course it's ''STOLEN ELECTION!  VOTER FRAUD! REVOLT! ''

....

[KindaMeh]

Woke left.  Claims to support freedom and liberty but actualy supports extreme censorship of views that are offensive to the far left standards of offensive speech. Wants to force ''respect and acceptance of all'', except those seen as 'privileged '' by being white males, with a censorship policy enforced by threat of job loss, social ostracism,  denial of access to media,  fines if possible and similar means. Believes you can address  past wrongs against various groups by curtailing the rights of the current members of the group that oppressed and abused them. Ignores the fact huge numbers of white males were and are impoverished, disenfranchised,  exploited and otherwise abused by the elites just as much as minorties and women are. Wants a disasterous and discredited economic model based on radical socialism that is very likey to produce economic disaster.

This is a rational position.

The Trump right claims to champion' freedumb' and 'libirdy' while advocating fascism when it doesn't get it's way in every election. Claims to adhere to the constitution while subverting it with court packing, gerrymandering,  voter suppression, obstructionism ,etc. Blames 'the left' for crises while obstructing any effort to alleviate them.  Believes in law and order for most people as a tool of oppression and quelling protest while allowing the rich to do as they please. Accuses the left of violence while openly endorsing brutal oppression of protest, assassination of enemy political leaders,  violent actions against any who resist them, etc.  (Trump called on people to use the second amendment if they lost an election while miming firing a rifle) Supports a proven failure of an economic model called supply side economics, I. E.  Trickle down econimics, reaganomics, voodoo economics, etc. A
policy that has been forced on America since 1980 and has driven down wages, wealth, standards of living,  job security,  etc for the majority of Americans while making those Already wealthy far, far richer . This has been proven by 40 years Of experience.

This is not.

Okay, admittedly I'm not Chris, but I can't seem to get back to sleep at the moment and I still feel like I can try to be polite or at least not a COMPLETE asshat while still giving my honest opinion on this post. Hopefully the more people add their thoughts the more points get considered. As a heads up, I consider myself probably a right wing moderate, though a registered independent, and not really in the way you define right wing here. (Since you outlined your stances, I'll open myself up for commentary and learning as well, though I may be about to piss a lot of people off, or at least get some depressed head shakes. I'm a Fiscal Conservative, support decentralized power mostly, care pretty deeply about an honest interpretation of the Constitution as it is written rather than oligarchy via judicial fiat and unnecessary legislating from the bench, consider it a way to protect the individual both from outright unjust and unequal government action and delineate what each level of government can and cannot do, more a cosmopolitan in part than just a pure political realist on the international stage, and I do think there are times when intervention economic political or even potentially militarily can be justified both morally and strategically, not a huge fan of raw neoliberalism in trade or a believer in unlimited globalism or global governance that includes authoritarian shitbags and the like, believe we need more than just unilateral action and bilateral alliances though there is a place for both, believe we can help the poor without destroying the free market or undermining America with poverty traps like binary welfare cutoff lines, and that racial and other inequality can be reduced by pro-poor and economic mobility and opportunity policies without discrimination on the basis of race or sex, which should be legally protected against regardless of alleged privilege level, religion, speech, race or sex. I also have a somewhat controversial belief that megacorps and the like should not be able to refuse services solely on the basis of political affiliation, because that way lies oppression and cultural tyranny.)

This is a rational position.

I don't agree with either of you on many details, but except for BM's rant about Trump, you both seem to fall within the "can talk to other people without frothing" category. But why are you both posting this in a thread about bad moderation on another forum?

OK so with no support or rationale you say my position on the Trump  right is not rational, but agree when I critiqu.e the left. I feel my view on the trump right is fairly accurate, show ne where it is inacurrate.

Also in Re to other statements I never said that I thought tge woke left and Trump rifht were equally bad, the trump right is worse. They're the ones advocating mass murder of people based on political, religious,  social and sexual issues.

Also the right just can't accept that the 2020 election was a national reffendum on Trump right vs woke left, and it had tge largest turnout in American history.  The Trump right was rejected and Biden won with tge most votes in history . He beat Trump by 7 million votes after Hillary beat him with 3 million.

So of course it's ''STOLEN ELECTION!  VOTER FRAUD! REVOLT! ''

So, I'm gonna let Pat speak for and expand on his ideas himself, provided he feels it's relevant to the thread. That said, apologies if you feel I misrepresented your stance on Trump right vs woke left in terms of relative authoritarian badness. I thought I was being generous in my assumptions, and sometimes when I put things in quotation marks to paraphrase what I think people say I kinda just wind up whiffing.

That said, I think my prior response (don't remember which paragraph it was exactly) to your stated paragraph stance on Trump Republicans and Republicans more generally touched on this Authoritarian Left vs Right debate a little bit. I'm gonna paraphrase what I said minus some of my Trump condemnations to condense and more pointedly answer the question, and hopefully this doesn't take the thread too far off topic. I don't believe the Right has actively advocated identity based mass murder, and while I never addressed that in my post I also don't think you said that earlier. Also, I feel like the right is more protective than the left of religion specifically in many cases, and that the left discriminates against folks like white males in their own way, which I think you would probably agree with. I do believe most Republicans are legitimately misinformed and deluded about the election, as noted and for the reasons noted, though that's probably an unpopular opinion on this site, and most Republicans like most Americans also believe that rule by vote count is not the same thing as rule by legitimate vote count, in which case it makes sense they would be upset. I believe the protesters were both a minority of Republicans and even Trump Republicans (because there haven't been many protests of that scale or intent since), genuinely deluded, and though they should not have attempted to change vote count by force rather than legal action, or broken any laws (to be clear I hate it when the left or anybody else does this too, even in protest), if they had been right it might have been more morally justified, and they genuinely thought they were right. Likewise, I think both sides of media overexaggerate and amplify violence on the other side, while not holding their own extremists accountable, which sucks. On which note, I feel there are violent extremists who actually do use force unjustifiably on both sides, but that these are not representative of either population, for the most part. I've addressed gerrymandering as something both sides do, albeit Republicans more noticably because they have a more homogenous constituency. I've addressed how making it harder to vote in general is class based discrimination, not race based, and is presumably politically motivated more so than anything else for the politicians, and out of real (albeit potentially statistically unsupported) fear of voter fraud for the average Trump Republican. Likewise, the left wanted to pack the supreme court. Moreover, liberals even who aren't politicians oftentimes practice and promote political discrimination, partly as I touch upon in the COVID thread as regards my thoughts and opinions. Gave my opinion earlier on economics, corporate taxes, regulation, market failures and wealth in various separate paragraphs (scattered throughout) addressed to your post, but I'll avoid reposting because that's probably not super relevant here. Point being, I disagree with several of your specific points. Also, much though I dislike Trump, and his rhetorical abuse of it to potentially incite UNJUSTIFIED rebellion, the 2nd amendment exists for a reason, and part of that reason is to protect the citizenry from unjust rule. Also, if you look at gun ownership figures, seems pretty obvious to me that if Republicans were actually LITERALLY win at any cost, they'd be using their numerical advantage to violent effect. Instead, we seem them being mostly peaceful and complying with the law despite the fact that they see Biden's win as illegitimate. As to whether Authoritarian Republicans (which I feel now that I think of it isn't even necessarily Trump Republicans) specifically or Authoritarian Liberals (admittedly not all liberals, though I think maybe most) are worse, I prefer to say Authoritarian Liberals, but also I'd rather have folks along my own specific political lines than either, by a lot (go figure, I have opinions). Point being, I don't think it's reasonable to cast blame only on one side of Left vs Right, or even mostly or that much significantly more on one side, and while I'll admit I'm probably biased in my own ways despite trying to consume and analyze media and studies from both sides, I think you too could be a bit biased on this topic. My most watched news source is FOX NEWS despite it's low accuracy and quality on some things, because I prefer things critical of the current establishment typically. I'd bet you have your own more liberal media, which as Pat postulates could mean we are being polarized and having our views distorted in opposite directions through little fault of our own. Also, we are human, and have an innate capacity and inclination to seek confirmation of such bias, and to demonize the opposition/the other.

I think also that my last active post kinda lays out my thoughts on moderates, their potential for authoritarianism both in general and in website moderation, whether they could be authoritarian, whether they can effectively rally around set policy principles and organize as a radical middle, and etcetera, to go back to my understanding of the post you gave before Chris asked your stances on extremism left and right. Out of curiosity, thoughts on my post and Pat's response?

[Pat]

OK so with no support or rationale you say my position on the Trump  right is not rational, but agree when I critiqu.e the left. I feel my view on the trump right is fairly accurate, show ne where it is inacurrate.

Sure, but post it in a thread where it belongs.

[KindaMeh]

Yeah, I took my own mind's distraction bait again. I was totally convinced that I had tied in RPG.net to everything I wrote, and that what I posted should still be in the thread. And then I looked at what Pat just posted, reevaluated, and realized that pretty much my whole second paragraph was entirely unrelated, whereas likewise only the third paragraph directly tied in fully to that topic. Hopefully this does not become a pattern for me within this thread, since now that I think of it I kinda did similar interest-driven topic wandering on statistics involving police and minorities when jhkim's statements peaked my interest. I admittedly have somewhat bad impulse control and occasionally feel I have to speak my piece even on unrelated topics once I get the mental wheels turning. Still, something I can work on, and ideally something I will be more mindful of going forwards.

Weird unrelated question to jumpstart relevant discussion again, but in addition to my rambling thoughts and questions regarding moderates, (still interested in hearing Battlemaster's and other folks thoughts on that and Pat's reply, which I also thought was interesting) are there any right wing sites that favor sketchy moderation and censorship like RPG.net? I haven't really heard of any, except for some false appeals to this one because Pundit moderates threads to some extent on his forum and in his house, so to speak. Primarily to keep them relevant to specific topics of discussion and cetera.

I feel like in terms of a preference for free speech, and a fear of corporate censorship maybe the modern right is more tolerant specifically within a digital moderation context. 

(Also, in instances where nobody has yet replied to my posts and I think they need to be altered to better express what I'm trying to say, I have admittedly edited said posts. I'd assume since it's an option that's mostly okay, right?)

[Armchair Gamer]

I can't see Tangency, so did one of the mods quote the wrong post in Valtiel's infraction?

Because I don't see how this

I earnestly suggest you stop reading Twitter - it's designed to amplify things that make you sad and anxious. I've been noticeably happier since I cut it out. What worked for me is rewarding myself with a sweet or some videogame time or something every single time I thought of going on Twitter and then refrained from it.

This forum is the last bit of social media I use, and while it's definitely more coherent, it's still full of too much pain. I think most of the tangency front-page threads are now hidden from me because I've ignore-listed the users, but it's not really helping that much.

qualifies as "lashing out in panic."

[wmarshal]

I can't see Tangency, so did one of the mods quote the wrong post in Valtiel's infraction?

Because I don't see how this

I earnestly suggest you stop reading Twitter - it's designed to amplify things that make you sad and anxious. I've been noticeably happier since I cut it out. What worked for me is rewarding myself with a sweet or some videogame time or something every single time I thought of going on Twitter and then refrained from it.

This forum is the last bit of social media I use, and while it's definitely more coherent, it's still full of too much pain. I think most of the tangency front-page threads are now hidden from me because I've ignore-listed the users, but it's not really helping that much.

qualifies as "lashing out in panic."

By no rational judgement is Valtiel lashing out in a panic. However, Valtiel's post included criticism of TBP even though the user still visits. Thus the post could not stand, and the ban hammer had to come out regardless of justification.

It's not enough to obey Big Purple. One must love Big Purple.