MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > Are there any mods left here?

Are there any mods left here?


There have been quite a few political discussions under General Discussion that have been popping up lately and are still there.

reply

We probably don’t have too many ‘reporters’ here. If There’s no report I doubt the Mods are inclined to act, it’s not a paid gig and they probably have bigger stuff to do everyday.

reply

I don't know. I've reported you on average 3 times a day and nothing has been done.

reply

Somebody up there likes me.

reply

But how about down there?

reply

Paul Newman?

reply

We get about 20-30 reports per day. Every report is reviewed, usually within 30 minutes of it being sent. Rarely are more than one or two posts removed as a result, and it has nothing to do with our level of interest. Quite the opposite, in fact -- we are very interested in maintaining an open discussion forum. That doesn't involve deleting every post that might be marginal.

reply

-- we are very interested in maintaining an open discussion forum. That doesn't involve deleting every post that might be marginal.


👍

reply

Thanks for the info.

reply

👍

People have the ignore/block function, which is the best way to deal with "new" trolls. Or just people who annoy the hell out of you.

I think this site is fine. Especially the layout.

reply

Excellent answer mod5 :)

reply

"Quite the opposite, in fact..."

Hah! Even the Mods see that the opposite of what you claim is what's true, accurate.

reply

He said "probably". That's not a claim.

reply

Another failed attempt on your part at trying to appear cerebral and a very obvious one. When someone says "probably", it's definitely a "claim" pertaining to something, just not one of being 100% convinced.

reply

probably adverb

prob·​a·​bly | \ ˈprä-bə-blē , ˈprä(b)-blē \
Definition of probably
: insofar as seems reasonably true, factual, or to be expected : without much doubt

If I say "db20db is probably a pedo", then I will be able to walk out of court a free man.

reply

Oooh, I must have really hit a nerve in order to get such a quick, desperate, absolutely vicious, below-the-belt response, lifted directly from the playbook of your evil puppet master, you #1 ass kisser. Did I bother you with my spot on observation? And you punks want to whine when I refer to you as a "sickening clique." (eye-roll)

reply

I didn't say you were a pedo, I gave an example of where I said you could possibly be a pedo.

Did I bother you with my spot on observation?

Sounds like I bothered you. Once again playing the "everyone is after me" act without admitting the common factor here is you.

reply

Like hell you didn't! You suggested it big time, just like others in your sickening clique desperately have when boxed in during an argument with me. It's not only slander, but vicious slander, and could also be construed as libel since you're posting it on the internet. You wouldn't stand a chance against me in a court, you malicious lowlife!

reply

Slander
A false statement, usually made orally, which defames another person. Unlike libel, damages from slander are not presumed and must be proven by the party suing.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/slander

To reiterate: I never said you were a pedo, I don't know you. I used you being a pedo as an example.

Also, I don't know your real name. How can I have ruined your character under a fake username?

reply

To further prove how wrong you are, this is exactly what I wrote:


If I say "db20db is probably a pedo", then I will be able to walk out of court a free man.

It's a clear example that I'm giving. It's obvious by the use of the word "if".

reply

Nice to see you've remained silent about this. It's good to see you now understand what an example is.

reply

Everyone of note has this guy’s number, this one is embarrassing itself at this point.

Just avoid this one if you can.

reply

Now he's having trouble understanding what an example is just so he can come off like a victim.

reply

For a ‘big tough athletic guy’ in it’s youth it sure turned out to be a cranky old wimp.

reply

At least for the majority of my life, I've been a tough, athletic guy, a claim you could never make, slug. And I remember how incensed and bitter you were when some early defectors to filmboards suggested you were a pedo. I guess that's what inspired you to use that allegation against me.

reply

No one called you a pedo.

reply

Keep crying like a baby ‘tough guy’😭

reply

Whaaa, the terrible commute, the rat race, the mortgage, retirement in Florida seems so far away...etc. etc.

reply

Retirement isn’t too far away, I planned well in advance for an early one, but nice try😎

reply

I unexpectedly got an early one and you're a jealous pos because of it.

reply

‘Unexpectedly?’

So you stumbled into it while most of us are working, saving and planning for it…good for you!

Did you drop a heavy box on your foot and sue your employer you klutz?

reply

No, "somebody up there likes me" and wanted me to be free. And you're the longtime, admitted "klutz" here, projecting once again.

reply

There’s a lot wrong with you, you got early retirement because they figured it’d be better to write a check than to put up with you everyday you angry weirdo😉

reply

Jeez! All the threads are starting to end up looking the same, lol.

reply

Everyone of note you fake, pretentious prick? I have a good rapport with everyone of note, wannabe Big Man on Campus.

reply

👍

reply

Where can I purchase tickets to see your comedy show? I feel guilty getting all this comedy for free.

reply

Naw, your style has always been to try to absolve yourself of guilt, responsibility, to save face.

I remember when you had a pattern of whining that others were constantly and falsely accusing you of being racist. After awhile, I began to wonder...if you experience that so often, maybe there's something to those allegations. After all, it's not much of a stretch to surmise that a misanthrope would also be a racist.

reply

I also said that everyone has been accused of being racist at some point that the word has lost its meaning. And again, I never said you were a pedo.

reply

"Once again, it can't be a lie if I'm giving an example."

Here, in your usual snake-in-the-grass style, you're indirectly saying it's true, while simultaneously trying to sugarcoat it as an "example", hence my accurate observation that you try to absolve yourself of responsibility.

It's a malicious allegation, borne of desperation, and I wouldn't expect anything less from an admitted hater of people like you.

reply

I had to come up with something that would be plausible in a courtroom to show you the difference between fact and probability. It's not my fault you don't understand that.

reply

" I had to come up with something..."

That comment proves the desperation I've been pointing out.

reply

Desperation or accusation? Pick one.

reply

Both and fuck you, lowlife.

reply

Oh, you're so sweet.

reply

Gentlemen! You can’t behave like that in here. This is the movie room! 😀

reply

THE DOUCHEBAG HAS INFORMED ME OF YOUR INVOLVEMENT IN HIS SICK CRIMES...YOU GUYS ARE GOING DOWN FOR THIS SHIT!🚓👮🏾

reply

There is no crime. I never called him a pedo, I only used that as an example.

reply

Like hell you didn't! You desperately followed suit with your puppet master 'cause you "had to come up with something."

reply

Read it again. There is nothing you have said that would make me say that you're a pedo. It was clearly an example to show you how "probability" would work in court.

reply

That vicious allegation IS based on something I said, something very innocuous years ago. I posted that I was enjoying a tranquil spring evening, the happy sounds of my neighbor's children playing being a part of that. Your evil puppet master, out of hateful desperation, put a despicable slant to that.

reply

AT LEAST YOU UNDERSTAND THAT I AM samoanjoke's PUPPET MASTER AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND...BRAVO.👏🏾

reply

I understand that you are a puppet, a wannabe. End of story, you human garbage!

reply

I ENJOY TALKING TO YOU...THAT IS A FACT...I HAVE NEVER BEEN ANGRY WITH YOU...THAT IS ALSO A FACT...YOU'RE A FUNNY DUDE...I WISH YOU WOULD BE NICER...BUT I STILL CONSIDER YOU A FRIEND.🌺

reply

I don't know about that conversation. That's between you and him.

reply

I THINK HE IS.🙂

reply

SO?....I HEARD YOUR'E A PEDOPHILE...THAT'S NOT COOL,BRO.

reply

You know, I could stoop to your level and make insinuations about you and your "close" relationship with your teenage daughter, lowlife.

reply

YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A DICK ABOUT IT...YOU DID A BAD THING AND YOU GOT CAUGHT...TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR YOUR ACTIONS.🙂

reply

I think you're projecting. No wonder you want to stay stoned-out, avoiding reality.

reply

ACTUALLY I STAY STONED OUT TO KEEP ME FROM AVOIDING REALITY...MY DOCTOR AGREES.IT MAKE A REAL DIFFERENCE TO MY BRAIN CHEMISTRY...BUT DON'T CHANGE THE SUBJECT...ARE YOU GONNA GET ARRESTED?...I THINK YOU SHOULD TURN YOURSELF IN...IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO...I WON'T LIKE YOU BUT I WILL RESPECT YOU FOR IT...IT'S THE INTEGRITY MOVE.

reply

One of the "punks" from the "sickening clique" has revealed himself. I hope this makes punk-ass, name dropping joes somewhat happy.

reply

samoanjoke IS THE WORST...I HATE THAT GUY...WAS HE INVOLVED IN YOUR CRIMES?...IF SO I SAY YOU RAT HIM OUT...TAKE THAT NEXT LEVEL SCUMBAG DOWN WITH YOU...IT COULD BE LIKE A SMALL PIECE OF REDEMPTION FOR YOU.

reply

You experience arguments with posters all week long. What do YOU surmise from THIS?

reply

Yadda, yadda, yadda. You can do nothing but constantly put a distorted slant to my comments, 'cause you never have anything substantive to counter me with. You have to desperately resort to wild, hyperbolic, bald-faced lies and slander out of desperation. And you've now completely contradicted your "claim" that the word "probably" is not a "claim". You're definitely a sickening snake-in-the grass.

reply

Once again, it can't be a lie if I'm giving an example.

reply

There you go again, with that "everyone" allegation, you completely deceitful prick. A clique is a small segment of "everyone." You haven't learned that yet, wanabe brainiac?

reply

You said "you punks" without specifying who these "punks" were.

reply

Yes I have, punk! Again you're sidestepping, trying to distract from the real issue. I'm into truth and facts, not name dropping like you. And it's weird how that juxtaposes to your being a misanthrope, just like being an attention whore.

reply

No you didnt. You didn't specify who the punks were. You can't blame me for saying "everyone".

reply

Good job you didn’t say ‘you people’, phew 😮‍💨

reply

That post elicited good info from a Mod and they affirm what I guessed, there aren’t that many reporters on a site of this size and they are not inclined to interrupt conversation when unnecessary.

reply

I believe Mod5 is still around. They posted not too long ago.

reply

I noticed a recent post of theirs (I also have an idea who Mod5 really is), but I haven't noticed too many Mod5 posts lately.

reply

I also have an idea who Mod5 really is

He's a fan of Mort Sahl.

reply

You said it, not me.

reply

Hey, I didn't say it's BillHicksFan... but a mysterious person that for some reasons likes Mort Sahl. A lot.

reply

I'm relatively new here. But thanks for the info. I know "Morty". 🤣

reply

It's plainly obvious that some posters are taking this lax enforcement as a go-ahead to take swipes at marginalized groups under the guise of "just asking questions". It's a pitiful method of seeking attention.

Here's a question, if one were to make a list of established trolls, how would that be received?

reply

The thing is that they don't take it to the politics board. I've seen posts on General Discussion get nuked for things that have nothing to do with politics. There are blatant political discussions on GD, and they've been staying there. I question that other than Moderator5, if there are any mods left.

reply

Of course they don't take it to the politics board because it's more "fun" for them to annoy users who wish for nothing to do with that drivel.

reply

Unfortunately ^this^

reply

Yes but there are several long time posters who take that as an invitation for a little "fun time". Which is why I think the mods don't delete the racist/homophobic posts . I prefer the silly replies to the people who genuinely respond to these racist/homophobic post.

reply

It can’t be much fun for those that are constantly being attacked in these racist/sexist/homophobic posts though.

reply

I've seen posts on General Discussion get nuked for things that have nothing to do with politics.

well theres are probably several other ways to produce an unacceptable post aside from being about politics

reply

I think it would be a great idea to have a list of established trolls and an agreement with all the regulars to not reply to their postings.

reply

Thank you for the salient response.

I was thinking that such a list might also include a section for users who normally do not post discussion topics but readily respond to blatant troll posts in order to air their own prejudices. I've noticed far too many cases of the same names bumping contentious topics that have been dead for days (or even weeks) to contribute little more than another dose of venom.

reply

Not long ago I saw a low profile film I'm fond of that was Trending.
I start reading all these in depth discussions about the film that are all six years old.
Finally I wondered how it came to be trending, and found the most recent comment.
Turns out essentially no one had commented on this film in years, but some nitwit had to make some dumb and shallow take on the situation on the Southern US border -- just out of nowhere, for no reason.
These people are like measles, an infection we should have been over a long time ago.

reply

I apologise.

reply

Thank you.

For what, I'm not sure, but it's swell of you to Man Up.
But what else should I expect from Mr Blue Sky? (haha - XD)

reply

I think it would be a great idea to have a list of established trolls and an agreement with all the regulars to not reply to their postings.

Hahahaha never gonna happen as they live for feeding them. 🤭🤭🤭🤭

reply

One man's troll is another man's freedom fighter. There could be no consensus on such a list.

reply

There's talk that most of the trolls are sock accounts of Jim and the mods in order to keep the traffic up here on this site as the troll posts are the ones that get the most play.

reply

Good one. 🤣

reply

🙂

reply

It's true! The mods didn't deny it!

reply

That's actually a really reasonable conspiracy theory.

reply

If you want censorship and persecution of people who have the temerity to disagree with you then head over to Reddit.

reply

Not censorship, just take it to the politics board. It's against the rules of the site.

reply

Sure.

reply

General Discussion
Talk about anything here...except politics.

It's pretty clear.

reply

Politics means politics. Parties, elected officials, candidates, etc. If someone posts a "Biden Sucks" thread or a "Trump Sucks" thread, it will be removed.

It does not mean anything that might have a political dimension, like current news topics or contentious social issues. We are not going to police language to that extent. Moreover, topics like that are typically easy to identify by their subject lines, so they are easily avoided by those who do not wish to read them.

reply

I'm not saying that political posts shouldn't exist - just not here in GD. There's a whole board dedicated to Politics, that's why it's there, right?

reply

Politics means politics


Apparently not, by the definition you've just given here.

If the only things that qualify as 'political' in the site's view are explicitly partisan politics, or explicitly sloganeering partisan politics, then you don't really have a rule against political discussion at all. You permit almost all discussion that, by any any common sense definition, would be described as political.

I'm not suggesting the policy is wrong. I'm just suggesting the strict limitation in your definition -- a tiny sliver of the topics most people would view as political -- makes the prohibition, at best, misleading and, at worst, disingenuous. Might as well drop it all together.

reply

Yeah, I mean the first one is blatantly political, the second one blames the government in the post, the third one might be okay but could easily end up a political discussion.

https://moviechat.org/general/General-Discussion/62ae1b17314eca082a78fa5d/Do-you-support-abortion-if-the-woman-was-raped

https://moviechat.org/general/General-Discussion/62b123fdc5ba9354f3b176f9/Covid-airportairline-layoffs-now-haunting-travel-industry

https://moviechat.org/general/General-Discussion/629f8f5393b3763a397b47e0/The-police-were-cowards-in-that-Uvalde-shooting

reply

Yeah. There are obviously massive grey areas to what constitutes political discussion. So, in one sense, I can understand wanting to strictly limit the definition of 'politics'. But the definition is far too narrow, so narrow as to basically be useless.

reply

Agreed!

reply

I believe the rule was put in place before you joined the site. It definitely had a significant positive impact on the character of the General Discussion board.

The ideal solution for dealing with marginal cases would be to move them into the Politics board, and so I will again remind Jim that giving mods the ability to do this would make for a happier camp.

reply

I guess the only ones I question not being deleted are Connie93. In the end it doesn't matter because it made for some fun satire/pun threads.

reply

Many of them were borderline. Others were way over the line and were removed. He was warned several times, suspended and then banned for attempting to evade the suspension.

reply

You're right. The rule was indeed in place before I joined. And it has therefore always been surprising to see what is allowed to stand on this board rather than being moved over to Politics. (I'm not advocating for censorship here. Just everything in its right place.)

I don't agree with the narrow definition of what constitutes 'politics' you've proffered here.

However, I do understand that there isn't a right or wrong answer. There isn't a definition that would satisfy all users. And I do accept what others have said here that most topics will or can have a political dimension to them.

And you have, at least, provided some clarity -- so thanks for that.


reply

I'm not trying to slam you guys in this post, it's just that you're the only one I've seen recently and realized that there were a lot of political discussions being left up. I honestly don't recall seeing any other mod in a very long time.

reply

BREAKING NEWS!
Mod5 is probably Mod4.

reply

No worries. I jumped in to address some of the specific points that were raised. It's inevitable that people are going to have different views on these things. Even if we don't agree, the feedback is appreciated.

reply

That's a great point. There is a political dimension to almost any social issue, but taking the 'no politics' to the nth level would tend to quash discussing issues that are primarily cultural - which should be fair game, as long as posters are not -using- the discussion primarily as a vehicle for political axe-grinding.

reply

I agree with both you and M5. There's gotta be some latitude, flexibility here.

reply

The problem is that for Leftists ‘the personal is political’ - they try to politicise everything because they don't want you to ever live without the spectre of their control over you.

It used to be that you could go about your life and scarcely be aware of politics, now everyone has been dragged into the mud-fight, even kids.

reply

Again great answer. I think you guys are doing a great job.

reply

Thank you.

reply

100% agree.

Mod3 retired
Mod4 active
Mod5 active

I’m unaware of any others.

reply

Stay on topic or be ignored.

reply

Concentration!

reply

Extreme leg pain.

reply

Wilsooooooooooooooon!!

reply

We had a Wilson in the early days.

https://moviechat.org/user/Wilson

reply

Wilson was a royal pain.

reply

But at least he was Royal !

reply

Are the rats upset?

reply

You people are a bunch of whiners.

Simply read what you like, and ignore what displeases you.
It's really very simple.

reply

I'm saying that it goes against the rules of the board. Just take the discussion to politics.

reply

I'm saying that it goes against the rules of the board.

Of course it does, but you can't get all people to follow "the rules." Personally, I think it's a stupid rule -- especially if it isn't going to be enforced.

reply

A lot of posters on GD are not looking for the useless arguing and nonsense that comes with politics, there’s a place for that, they should keep it there.

We already have a lot of bickering over general topics here and it can get nasty, NO need to douse the embers with gasoline.

reply

I mostly agree, but what's most obvious around here are the trolls with sock accounts, who regularly shitpost stupid topics only to stir the pot. You can spot these people from a mile away.

reply

The worst thing in MovieChat is that the thread creator's username is not displayed near the thread title before we click.

reply

I notice that on a phone; it doesn't occur on a computer.
I prefer computer all around.

reply

Oh! I've never tried MovieChat on a 'puter. Thanks for the tip!

reply