Religion
Related: About this forumquestion: is the bullying of muslim children in school an acceptable topic of discussion here?
I've been told that it is not.
rug
(82,333 posts)rzemanfl
(29,557 posts)Jim__
(14,075 posts)guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)stone space
(6,498 posts)guillaumeb
(42,641 posts)be a fit subject for this Group. I just read the objection to the post you referenced. I think that if the subject were young atheists being harassed the objection would not have been raised. My opinion only.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)so I have no idea why it's here.
stone space
(6,498 posts)so I have no idea why it's here.
When folks tell us that the bullying of muslim children in elementary schools due to the Trump Effect isn't within the SOP of this group, clarification of the SOP is in order, meta or no.
Otherwise, important and highly relevant topics for this forum will remain undiscussed, due to the misconceptions caused by the objections.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)That's what this is coming to?
There is a process for appealing. Posting your complaint in here isn't part of the process. Take it to ATA if you don't like the result of your appeal to the host.
Keep the meta out of here.
stone space
(6,498 posts)There is a process for appealing. Posting your complaint in here isn't part of the process. Take it to ATA if you don't like the result of your appeal to the host.
I asked a question.
You complained about my question.
If anybody is looking for an appeal, it wouldn't be me, would it?
Instead of posting your complaint here, why not appeal?
There is a process for appealing.
Posting your complaint in here isn't part of the process.
Take it to ATA if you don't like the result of your appeal to the host.
Goblinmonger
(22,340 posts)You started an OP because you didn't like that some people didn't like your other thread. Who cares?
stone space
(6,498 posts)It's not like I expected the posts from this 3 post wonder to last very long, given their content.
No, I don't care what the troll thought about my thread.
I wanted to know whether or not the topic of bullying muslim school children fell within the SOP of this group.
I had been informed by member of long standing here that it was outside the SOP, but that didn't make any sense to me.
This isn't about anybody liking or disliking any thread.
In fact, there was not a single person posting in that thread who expressed a dislike for the thread, except for the troll that MIRT removed, of course, so it was not like the troll was getting any traction there.
Brettongarcia
(2,262 posts)If an OP or comment is removed, I think it's done now by some independent contracted monitor agency. Albeit at the request of a DU member.
If it's the mock elementary art school election shut down by Trump supporters, I'd think Democratic Underground would be positive about discussion.
It's now illegal to question that monitoring agency it seems. AS interfering with their decision.
SO now it's time to take this directly to DU headquarters?
Struggle-4-Progress might know how to do that.
What I know: when a comment is deleted by admin, or their contractors, they send you a notice in your inbox. THe notice offers you the option to challenge their decision.
We had some problems with not impartial in-house monitors. But this independent contractor has problems too. It doesn't seem to understand that in this particular forum, all beliefs, even religious beliefs, are questioned, as long as its in a way consistent with a Democratic perspective.
stone space
(6,498 posts)Not sure what this other stuff in your post is all about.
Brettongarcia
(2,262 posts)stone space
(6,498 posts)I'm not even sure what you are talking about.
Brettongarcia
(2,262 posts)Already covered by an earlier post?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218239561
stone space
(6,498 posts)That OP is not about the SOP of DU's Religion Group, which there may have been had some confusion about.
I think that the confusion has been cleared up now.
It is better to be clear about the rules so as to avoid meta in threads, which tend to hijack OP's.
What happened, I think, is that there was dissatisfaction with the fact that the OP was left standing, and a desire to second guess the moderation process by raising the meta issues directly within the thread itself, instead of accepting or appealing the results.
When this happens due to a misunderstanding of the SOP, it is better to clear up the confusion directly, so that people understand the SOP and don't feel tempted to derail threads with meta when jury decisions don't go their way.
Addressing the SOP directly avoids many of the alerts in the first place, which is better, since then people won't become frustrated when frivolous alerts fail (even frivolous alerts made out of ignorance in good faith), and won't be tempted to hijack the threads with meta to get around the failure of frivolous alerts.