naraburns nihil supernum
1yr ago
(text post)
30318 thread views
Israel-Gaza Megathread #2
This is a refreshed megathread for any posts on the conflict between (so far, and so far as I know) Hamas and the Israeli government, as well as related geopolitics. Culture War thread rules apply.
I have not seen a single pro-Israel comment modded.
It's possible that anybody willing to write comments in defense of innocent civilians in Gaza is not as apt to follow the rules, but still it's somewhat surprising.
My impression is that the open anti-semites who dedicate a lot of time making a ruckus here have been rather thoroughly enjoying the opportunity to go all-out in their criticism of Israel, and the ones who do so while obeying the rules have not gotten moderated for it. My impression of anyone who feels that this forum is either "too pro-Israel" or "too pro-Palestine" is that they must just not enjoy dissenting views being aired openly, because we have numerous good posters here with a genuinely diverse array of views on the matter.
My own impression is that the respectable rules regarding outgroup, light and heat etc which were rather strictly enforced in some cases in the past seem to have been somewhat relaxed in the past couple weeks since a lot of the 'high reputation' regulars have found a group that they really want to boo at for once.
And perhaps I'm being too harsh as I don't expect a lot of forums to be handling these events very well.
Arguably, anti-semites provide a valuable perspective that is (usually) sorely lacking in mainstream media, and it seems that one could hypothesize that taking into account that perspective may help in understanding, preventing and mitigating attacks against jewish populations.
What if the situation was reversed???
I've become blackpilled enough to believe that most jews today,
deep down, want to control the world and nothing less.
Objective statement about hypothetical antisemite self-psychology. Moddable?
"the whole government of Israel uses Israeli civilians as their excuse to genocide the Palestinian people"
Now, you might think, "that's stupid, obviously I'm only saying things that I think." But these are the kinds of locution that put distance between us and the issues we are talking about, and enable people who disagree with one another to speak about matters of disagreement.
It is true that I could have taken more time to add the Israeli government quotes about animals and other things they qualified the Palestinians with, as quoted by other users here. Perhaps my argument would have had more weight to support an existing intent to ethnically cleanse the area or at least dehumanize civilians to enable genocide later.
"but what about these other people" is not especially relevant, except where it helps you to better understand what you did wrong.
Well I do know that reputation matters in how you are treated and I also now understand that if I want to get away with calling for civilian bombing apologetics, some civilians are more fair game than others.
I'm also providing feedback on moderation / site usage for other users, who may or may not agree.
I have not seen a single pro-Israel comment modded. It's possible that anybody willing to write comments in defense of innocent civilians in Gaza is not as apt to follow the rules, but still it's somewhat surprising.
What's surprising is that you're still going on about this. Many people have made perfectly acceptable, unmoderated "defense[s] of innocent civilians in Gaza." It's the rule-breaking stuff that gets moderated, and yes--there are several posters who have decided that people writing criticism of Israel should be exempt from the rules. Well, sorry: you're not.
What if the situation was reversed???
You keep asking this, as though it were a magical talisman. Or as though it even meant something. Reversing the script is a common play here. It happens all the time. The answer here is: "the rules will continue to be enforced."
I've become blackpilled enough to believe that most jews today, deep down, want to control the world and nothing less.
Objective statement about hypothetical antisemite self-psychology. Moddable?
We have literally allowed that sort of thing from people, multiple times, for years. Some are still posting, and are well-known here. Sometimes they make posts like that so much that it becomes annoying, since they are just beating a dead horse instead of actually having a meaningful conversation about the topic, so they get modded for being single-issue posters. But sometimes they stay on the right side of the rules.
I'm also providing feedback on moderation / site usage for other users, who may or may not agree.
Thanks for the feedback. You don't seem to know enough about how things are done around here to offer insightful feedback, but that's okay, we all had to start somewhere. Hopefully you now understand the rules better, and will avoid moderation in the future by sticking to them.
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I have not seen a single pro-Israel comment modded. It's possible that anybody willing to write comments in defense of innocent civilians in Gaza is not as apt to follow the rules, but still it's somewhat surprising.
My own impression is that the respectable rules regarding outgroup, light and heat etc which were rather strictly enforced in some cases in the past seem to have been somewhat relaxed in the past couple weeks since a lot of the 'high reputation' regulars have found a group that they really want to boo at for once. And perhaps I'm being too harsh as I don't expect a lot of forums to be handling these events very well.
Arguably, anti-semites provide a valuable perspective that is (usually) sorely lacking in mainstream media, and it seems that one could hypothesize that taking into account that perspective may help in understanding, preventing and mitigating attacks against jewish populations.
What if the situation was reversed???
Objective statement about hypothetical antisemite self-psychology. Moddable?
It is true that I could have taken more time to add the Israeli government quotes about animals and other things they qualified the Palestinians with, as quoted by other users here. Perhaps my argument would have had more weight to support an existing intent to ethnically cleanse the area or at least dehumanize civilians to enable genocide later.
Well I do know that reputation matters in how you are treated and I also now understand that if I want to get away with calling for civilian bombing apologetics, some civilians are more fair game than others. I'm also providing feedback on moderation / site usage for other users, who may or may not agree.
What's surprising is that you're still going on about this. Many people have made perfectly acceptable, unmoderated "defense[s] of innocent civilians in Gaza." It's the rule-breaking stuff that gets moderated, and yes--there are several posters who have decided that people writing criticism of Israel should be exempt from the rules. Well, sorry: you're not.
You keep asking this, as though it were a magical talisman. Or as though it even meant something. Reversing the script is a common play here. It happens all the time. The answer here is: "the rules will continue to be enforced."
We have literally allowed that sort of thing from people, multiple times, for years. Some are still posting, and are well-known here. Sometimes they make posts like that so much that it becomes annoying, since they are just beating a dead horse instead of actually having a meaningful conversation about the topic, so they get modded for being single-issue posters. But sometimes they stay on the right side of the rules.
Thanks for the feedback. You don't seem to know enough about how things are done around here to offer insightful feedback, but that's okay, we all had to start somewhere. Hopefully you now understand the rules better, and will avoid moderation in the future by sticking to them.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link