this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
750 points (97.5% liked)

Murdered by Words

1540 readers
1 users here now

Responses that completely destroy the original argument in a way that leaves little to no room for reply - a targeted, well-placed response to another person, organization, or group of people.

The following things are not grounds for murder:

Rules:

  1. Be civil and remember the human. No name calling or insults. Swearing in general is fine, but not to insult someone else.
  2. Discussion is encouraged but arguments are not. Don’t be aggressive and don’t argue for arguments sake.
  3. No bigotry of any kind.
  4. Censor the person info of anyone not in the public eye.
  5. If you break the rules you’ll get one warning before you’re banned.
  6. Enjoy the community in the light hearted way it’s intended.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The “Readers added context” feature is the only good thing about Twitter.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social -3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

~~Dude, we've had discussions before and I'm all for you going somewhere else and suddenly complaining about how you had a bad time with me not providing you a genuine discussion, but when your whole comment reiterates my point, what are you expecting to happen? You just described that you were told XYZ happens and that's exactly what I said would happen.

Its becoming pretty fucking clear from my interactions with you that you don't understand honest discussions.~~

Edit: I realized a few minutes after posting it was another mod with a similar name. Came back to correct it. I got ahead of myself.

The rest of it still stands though. The behavior you were told would occur is the exact behavior I'm describing.

[–] SomeoneElseMod@feddit.uk 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I genuinely don’t know what you’re talking about, but I do know you’re becoming aggressive and not only is that completely unwarranted, it’s against the rules of this community. I think it’s best we don’t interact with each other at all, outside of moderating.

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah, I was actually coming back to apologize. It was a different mod with the same first half of your name. After posting, I was "wait... was it that mod?" I won't name them fully but their name also started with "someone".

Edit: realized I said I came back to apologize but never finished. So apologies. That was my mistake.

Edit: but the original concept still stands. You said you were told to expect the behavior I described. I don't understand how that would prove anything against my point.

[–] SomeoneElseMod@feddit.uk 5 points 1 year ago

Apology accepted.

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social -1 points 1 year ago

I will admit, it'd be funny if you blocked me. Cause then I could demonstrate how blocking works and that I can still see your comments and reply, etc.

In regards to moderating, I nice set of tools that they could implement is a moderator view of the community that would override any of your block-preferences. So your normal surfing could be edit from blocking, but when you go to mod, you could effectively override them temporarily.

[–] bermuda@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

you don't understand honest discussions

Ironic

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I confused them with another mod named "someone" who had made a prejudiced comment, got banned, and then complained that no one would have an honest discussion instead of banning first. It was relatively recent so it was still in my head, but not recent enough that I remembered the full name correctly.

That being said, being asked to to replicate a behavior that I already predicted literally would prove my point. Like, they were actually asking me to do something that they were told would produce the exact behavior I described. I honestly don't know how else to phrase "that would prove my point." It wasn't being flippant. It was being literal.

[–] bermuda@beehaw.org 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The issue isn't about proving your point, it's that OP didn't ask for a debate. You seriously need to consider that not everybody is trying to debate you.

OP was genuinely confused on how blocking worked and wanted you to block them so they could see how it worked on the "victim" end. They weren't arguing with you about anything!

[–] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The issue shouldn't be about someone getting to tell someone else what to do. It should be about the topic at hand.

[–] bermuda@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

But they didn't tell you what to do! They literally asked you.

it should be about the topic at hand.

Well sorry, but tough shit! This is an open forum where anybody can talk.