I've been infracted for calling Torie a genius. For reals.

[© Tweed the Younger]

So, we can't talk about drinking anymore, because it's illegal in Saudi Arabia (and, therefore, not legal everywhere)?

You really bent over backwards to try and miss the point, didn't you?

or rather, 'the point' looks a lot different depending on which side of the gun you sit.

[greenforest32]

There's a difference between talking about things that are off topic like sports and movies, and discussing things such as off topic such as "screwing 16-year-olds," an act that is not legal everywhere. It sets off a lot of alarm bells to a school administrator reviewing our site.

Just what do they think their students are talking about at lunch, then? Not screwing sixteen year olds?

It's different when the poster is an old man...

So sex becomes immoral once a certain age gap is reached between people who are at/above the age of consent?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

So sex becomes immoral once a certain age gap is reached between people who are at/above the age of consent?

look, bud, if stating you wear your wife's panties on your head is against the TOS, then certainly it is against the TOS to talk about committing fornication with someone underage.

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

So, we can't talk about drinking anymore, because it's illegal in Saudi Arabia (and, therefore, not legal everywhere)?

You really bent over backwards to try and miss the point, didn't you?

or rather, 'the point' looks a lot different depending on which side of the gun you sit.

Guys, stop fantasizing about integrating schools. You know it's not legal everywhere! - Moderator, ca. 1957

[© Tweed the Younger]

the thought of jmfcst as a fetishist of any sort makes me a bit disquieted.  can't totally articulate why.

[greenforest32]

So sex becomes immoral once a certain age gap is reached between people who are at/above the age of consent?

look, bud, if stating you wear your wife's panties on your head is against the TOS, then certainly it is against the TOS to talk about committing fornication with someone underage.

Why would that be against the TOS?

[© Tweed the Younger]

because it is 'sexually oriented'.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

look, bud, if stating you wear your wife's panties on your head is against the TOS, then certainly it is against the TOS to talk about committing fornication with someone underage.

Why would that be against the TOS?

probably because it offends the homosexuals 

[greenforest32]

because it is 'sexually oriented'.

Hmm maybe I overlooked it but where is this mentioned? Is there a single TOS for the forum or is there one for each sub-forum/board?

[© Tweed the Younger]

I'll defer to the Moderastrocracy on this one

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

There's a difference between talking about things that are off topic like sports and movies, and discussing things such as off topic such as "screwing 16-year-olds," an act that is not legal everywhere. It sets off a lot of alarm bells to a school administrator reviewing our site.

Just what do they think their students are talking about at lunch, then? Not screwing sixteen year olds?

It's different when the poster is an old man...

So sex becomes immoral once a certain age gap is reached between people who are at/above the age of consent?

Talk to the superintendant at your local school district and get back to me.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

because it is 'sexually oriented'.

Hmm maybe I overlooked it but where is this mentioned? Is there a single TOS for the forum or is there one for each sub-forum/board?

The ToS applies to hte whole forum.

[greenforest32]

There's a difference between talking about things that are off topic like sports and movies, and discussing things such as off topic such as "screwing 16-year-olds," an act that is not legal everywhere. It sets off a lot of alarm bells to a school administrator reviewing our site.

Just what do they think their students are talking about at lunch, then? Not screwing sixteen year olds?

It's different when the poster is an old man...

So sex becomes immoral once a certain age gap is reached between people who are at/above the age of consent?

Talk to the superintendant at your local school district and get back to me.

In other words, yes.

because it is 'sexually oriented'.

Hmm maybe I overlooked it but where is this mentioned? Is there a single TOS for the forum or is there one for each sub-forum/board?

The ToS applies to hte whole forum.

Where is it located?

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

Here's a copy of it: http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=108181.0

[greenforest32]

Here's a copy of it: http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=108181.0

You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, adult material, or otherwise in violation of any International or United States Federal law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless you own the copyright or you have written consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. Spam, flooding, advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are also forbidden on this forum.

And what is the reason for prohibiting making posts that contain curse words or are sexually oriented?

[© Tweed the Younger]

the moderators don't have to answer for that, it's a Leipian Edict.

[Senator Napoleon]

the moderators don't have to answer for that, it's a Leipian Edict.

Boss, should posts that are "inaccurate" be reported?

[© Tweed the Younger]

if I were the authority on any of this a lot of things would change.  within the context of the current system I would argue that 1) the ToS is intended to be simply a legal ass-covering mechanism (which I admit I do not fully understand), and as such only those things which we can reasonably say could be materially damaging to the Forum as an existential concern should be prohibited.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

Here's a copy of it: http://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=108181.0

You agree, through your use of this forum, that you will not post any material which is false, defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, adult material, or otherwise in violation of any International or United States Federal law. You also agree not to post any copyrighted material unless you own the copyright or you have written consent from the owner of the copyrighted material. Spam, flooding, advertisements, chain letters, pyramid schemes, and solicitations are also forbidden on this forum.

And what is the reason for prohibiting making posts that contain curse words or are sexually oriented?

Because he wants the site to be able to be used for educational purposes and fears that allowing those things would lead to potential blocking by school filters.

Don't listen to Tweed... he suffers from the mentality Teddy had, in that he'll often claim he understands the moderation process, and makes baseless claims without any knowledge of what's actually going on.

If you actually want to understand why we do what we do, talk to a moderator or Dave, and don't listen to general posters who are uninvolved with the process.

[Senator Napoleon]

That wasn't very nice, Inks. If calling someone a genius merits infraction points, calling someone a violent autistic couldn't be considered appropriate.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

That wasn't very nice, Inks. If calling someone a genius merits infraction points, calling someone a violent autistic couldn't be considered appropriate.

That's not what I said... I'm referring to Teddy's mentality toward the moderators and the moderation process.

[Senator Napoleon]

That wasn't very nice, Inks. If calling someone a genius merits infraction points, calling someone a violent autistic couldn't be considered appropriate.

That's not what I said... I'm referring to Teddy's mentality toward the moderators and the moderation process.

That is my bad then. Why not ease up though? It is clear that popular opinion is that the forum is over-moderated. (I wouldn't say you are the only one to blame.)

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

Because he wants the site to be able to be used for educational purposes and fears that allowing those things would lead to potential blocking by school filters.

This rule looks good on paper, but the real educational value are Dave's database, not forum. Yes, I know, forum is a part of the general website, but very strict enforcement of this such rules would get rid off any lighter conversation here. I know Inks is not blind fanatic (albeit he tends to be little too strict) and does not intend to too this happening, but I'm worried that very strict interpretation may turn out to be a very harmful precedent in future.

Guys, can you imagine what a horrible place this forum would be if we could only discuss maps and data?

Now, I've been sitting with the moderators on most of the issues, but you must understand a lot of people are legitimately concerned. You can dismiss people like Tweed, who'll bitch regardless of what you'll do, but concerns are far wider than few troublemakers.

[Inks.LWC Supports Chuck Hagel]

That wasn't very nice, Inks. If calling someone a genius merits infraction points, calling someone a violent autistic couldn't be considered appropriate.

That's not what I said... I'm referring to Teddy's mentality toward the moderators and the moderation process.

That is my bad then. Why not ease up though? It is clear that popular opinion is that the forum is over-moderated. (I wouldn't say you are the only one to blame.)

Because the moderators don't form policy at the wills of the forum.  We form policy at the will of Dave, and largely now Nym, as a Mod-Admin.

[Proud Lieberal from Northeast]

Because the moderators don't form policy at the wills of the forum.  We form policy at the will of Dave, and largely now Nym, as a Mod-Admin.

But it's up to a moderator to decide how to enforce these rules. A number of your colleagues are less strict, Inks, and I don't think their approachment ever hurts Atlas.