Couldn't be bothered to find my mod objections

[Tails82]

I'm vindicated

You said on 7/20/2013 12:00:33 PM

I want you to read this.

A moderator can lie about me, imply I'm gay, deraIl my topics, and my recourse is...nothing. I get in trouble for pointing it out. Guess I'm just supposed to sit back and take all the smears.

That's gamefaqs for you!


A Mod/Admin replied on 7/20/2013 1:18:14 PM

Actually, the reason this got taken down was because you linked to potential violations which has always been against the rules. You were not modded for the message behind your post. Posting links to things that you seem to consider as possible violations is seen as attempting to circumvent the marking system put in place to handle such things and also serves to provoke the users on the other end of the links you provide.

[Tails82]

Another bad move from an administration which has made a series of bad moves.

3kl offensive

[Tails82]

You said on 8/6/2013 7:11:37 AM

Right, because as soon as the almighty Obama administration changes its mind, it must be approved without question.

A Mod/Admin replied on 8/6/2013 9:52:50 AM

Stating that gay couples should be discriminated against is obviously not appropriate.

You said on 8/7/2013 8:34:29 AM

I'm sorry you have a problem. How long has America been "discriminating" against them? How long has the world been? Why did the Obama administration do it the entirety of his first term? Why were people allowed to get away with approving of the Obama administration when it's full of bigots? Why was a single message approving of Obama allowed to be posted? You guys really dropped the ball on that one.

EVERY LAW discriminates. Marriage currently discriminates against pedophiles and polygamists. Someone might think that's unfair too. But that doesn't mean anyone who disagrees with them is censor-worthy.

Let's cut the nonsense and admit offensive is just being used as a euphemism for "politically unpopular" views, that's all. Unpopular ON THIS SITE (not the country - the majority of Americans and over 30 states reject the left's anti-marriage philosophy EVERY TIME it's put up to a vote) unpopular here because a few aspiring authoritarians want to stifle speech, and you enable it. You don't allow a debate. Once Obama flip flops we all must freeze into the new position. This is the intolerant "bigotry" I see.

It isn't against the terms to disagree with gay marriage, I've gotten mods to admit that, so I don't know what the problem is.

Meanwhile this is from the PM files

I thought I'd bring you an update of my latest run-in with Wally since you know his reputation very well.

This morning I posted a positive and inspiring story on 261 about a police officer in Columbia saving a potential suicide victim from killing himself. I included no wise-ass remarks or comments in my commentary. I simply wrote "Pretty inspiring."

A few minutes late wally pipes in with the snide remark "BobGeorge topic." So I asked him if he had a problem with me posting positive news stories about police officers?

Well about 10 mins later I get a notification that my topic was deleted for being "Off-topic." So while dozens of other non-political stories about bad cops still remain, he had the audacity to remove mine.

[Tails82]

I was hoping to finally hear back from the admin but

Oh look, another batch of extremists who claim to represent me and everyone. I was told we're the 99 percent, and Newsweek said "we are all socialists now" in praise of Barack...I'm running out of space on my card. I can accept that this is probably how the artist thinks, trapped in a bubble of friendly fellow voices and telling everyone else THIS IS HOW YOU MUST THINK.

I am not Trayvon, and will never be Trayvon if I have a say in it. I am not a pot-smoking, drug-dealing violent thief like he was. Trayvon finally ended up attacking the wrong person, and he paid for it with his life. Was it a tragedy? Sure, and I'll tell you why: It's a shame everyone gave him a pass for his previous crimes...he could be getting help right now if his school didn't look the other way to keep their books looking nice. And it's a shame no one cared about him before his death. But given his criminal behavior and disgusting actions, there was probably a reason for that.

3kl offensive

My response to a mural that displays graphic content (the intended reason for the offensive criteria). So you know, show a lie about Zimmerman shooting someone in cold blood and empty slogans about consensus, that's ok. Don't criticize the lie though. It's okay to make up stories and form a lynch mob against creepy ass crackers. But don't tell the truth about a hoodie-wearing, drug-dealing self-described no limit nigga who attacks random crackers and tries to kill them.

[Tails82]

Going to the end of mod #1

A Mod/Admin replied on 8/7/2013 11:41:39 AM

This isn't a discussion about gay marriage, this is a discussion about treating humans who are homosexual the same as treating humans who are not. You are complaining that the laws are now requiring that we treat all people the same in regards to getting visas. To complain about that is to say that homosexual people are less worthy of things than non-homosexual people. That's the offensive part.

You said on 8/9/2013 5:38:01 PM

So I'm being modded by Democrat talking points.

Opposition to Obama is not equal to hating gays. Else every time some politician gave a speech where he mentions how he loves his country, I suppose we'd have to mod any critics who said the speech was bad for any reason, because they must hate the country. If one of our public figures said we needed to stop terrorists and someone disagreed with how they wanted to do that, we'd have to mod them for being pro-terrorist.

I'll give another example.

Early in his term Obama ended the "r" word in government documents. Some critics, I'm one of them, opposed it. Not because we think the intellectually disabled should be hated on all the time.

These are little feel-good measures so people can think they're special. And those guys on the other side, well, they should feel bad because they're bad persons. We say they hate you so, be offended. "I'm offended" - the biggest non-argument one could make here.

I don't understand this cognitive dissonance that opposing gay marriage is okay, but opposing this measure in particular is moddable on grounds that it isn't nice to deny things to homosexuals. He says that, well, that's gay marriage but this isn't about that. Hm? Everything in the topic is about gay "spouses." You might want to read that over again, lead mod, because you're wrong there. And this is NOT about treating "all people the same in regards to getting visas," either, lead mod. The change clearly says couples considered to be married will continue to be treated differently than non-married applicants. And is it really your job to do that? Must we accept complete equality in the visa applications process? If you really wanted no differences for anyone, must everyone else believe that and anyone who AGREES with Obama's current decision (married > non-married on applications) must be modded too? What you believe must be forced on everyone else?

But anyway, what's the difference? They already call it "marriage equality" and say it's discrimination to deny things like marriage to homosexuals. So are you saying it's okay to discriminate there, if we're to accept that's discriminatory, but not here? I really don't understand the distinction being made here between legit gay marriage debate and being "offensive" to gays because I criticized Barack Obama. It smacks of logical incoherence to me.

Here's what the law says: the federal government does not recognize gay marriage. To carve out special privileges to these couples without a vote is DISCRIMINATORY. They are not married yet they are being treated as if they were. We don't do that to anyone else. We don't let a single guy say he's married to himself and treat that the same as marriage, when the law says it isn't, but that's what is being done here. This is one of those executive end-runs around Congress that Obama's famous for. But I guess to some people the ends justify the means? God forbid anyone ever criticize failed policies and unconstitutional moves, as long as the guy in charge says he has good intentions!

Let's say gay marriage is law tomorrow. Obama signs an executive order. Does it now become moddable to oppose that? You aren't this strict on anything else. Marijuana's currently illegal but people talk about that issue all the time. When they complain that Obama's raided dispensaries, where are our moderator friends? Obama has made up his mind, and we can't criticize that, after all.

Ultimately, political censorship is what's going on here. The heck do you care what my political opinions are? Why do I have to debate this here instead of on the boards? You want to tell me that a message critical of Barack Obama is too offensive for any 13 year old's eyes to see? This is the same problem behind that seven-day suspension I got for saying the boy scouts shouldn't get a federal bailout. If I opposed one guy's speculation on THAT I was a homophobe too. Because I guess they deserve government money for changing their minds and it's bad to say no to that. Can't oppose theoretically-proposed, politically-targeted bailouts to friends based on what they think. I suppose it's moddable to post the old scout policies on gamefaqs now, for being discriminatory. The day after the change happened, no one could say the old guidelines were better! I don't know if the new policies are okay to post, because I still hear they discriminate against gay adults. Maybe they're acceptable NOW, but in the FUTURE if they ever change their mind on THAT we can't ever discuss it again and anyone who does will get suspended. I really don't know. My expectations of mod logic are so low they're practically nonexistant at this point.

A Mod/Admin replied on 8/13/2013 1:01:25 PM

This isn't about politics. It's about whether a homosexual person should be allowed to do something that a straight person is allowed to do. Stating that it's a "bad move" to allow this equality is the same as saying that homosexuals don't deserve equal treatment, which is offensive.

[Tails82]

www.gamefaqs.com/boards/573081-/66979891

Wow it hasn't been locked yet.

[Chromeo]

error1355.com/img/gfaq/hh/tails82modcomplaint.png

error1355.com/img/gfaq/hh/tails82modcomplaint1.png


ohgod lol this is some funny shit

[Tails82]

Thanks~

[Tails82]

Hmm what's this one about?

Oh! That's right. I posted on Hellhole. Oops!


TaiIs82 Posted

"Wait, so there was just a user on AtM complaining that conservatives weren't getting modded because there's only one liberal mod, and now stating you're conservative is worthy of a warn?"

Are you referring to my topic?

There are liberals on the board who believe mods aren't activist enough, for "social justice" or whatever because they aren't banning enough people for their opinions. As you may know from their topics here, this includes pushing for things like a blanket ban of all accounts below a certain level. When their demands are not met, they take it as a sign that the mods are either silent toward "conservatrolls," or are even helping them. One claim used to back up their grievances comes from wally (M) who has said he's the only real liberal mod on the site. Of course wally says a lot of things. Like how he's claimed I'm a homosexual and have a bunch of banned accounts (neither of which are true).* My topic was part of an effort to get to know the mods better and collect more accurate evidence, rather than relying on an anecdotal and statistically-miraculous statement from a known liar.

*I've tried linking to these claims here, but was modded for "trolling" because I linked to these "potential violations" which were never acted on while they were active messages.

3kl trolling

[Tails82]

Hmm and another topic was locked.

[Chromeo]

Jul 14, 2013 6:57:29 GMT -5 Tails82 said:

lol is Chromes surprised by that? It's an obvious one.

I'm guessing it was over Zimmerman and this is the first time you said it that it happened? If it was over something else, it coincides with Zimmerman and you know these big events, the mods make the board radioactive.

[Chromeo]

www.gamefaqs.com/boards/261-politics/67141290

the system works!

[Chromeo]

ugh i got warned for saying that the pro gun crowd loves to know that their rifle of choice can mow down a classroom in less than a minute even though that's obviously true (just look at the spikes in AR-15 sales every time there's a massacre with it)

[Tails82]

"# of times that fed govt was shut down -- Reagan: 8 // Obama: 1"

Why was Reagan subjected to that many? Maybe because he was white.

nkl offensive

[Tails82]

What did Jake say about the Jews this time?