Context: Google labels TheDonald.win as "Hacked"
Content that Google claims is "hacked": here
I hope you can understand why I reacted the way I did.
I do.
Suggestion to avoid confusion like this in future, if I or anyone else is banned for a thread, perhaps include the offending thread in the ban message.
This is true. I will change this soon.
I suppose all I'm really asking for is a bit more transparency from the present or future moderation team.
I agree with this. I've just proposed two things to the mods:
- a message being sent to the user when a report that they sent in is dealt with (not necessarily disclosing the decision, but just that it was dealt with)
- a public ban list
Also to address one of the points from your other account - we do filter bad links but that is my responsibility, and not always a priority.
No, you're just not giving the site time to process your comments. Your comments are not removed, as seen in the screenshot.
Is this gonna result in me being banned
No. The post was approved by a moderator as seen by the green tick here, but as you know, you were mistakenly banned a few minutes ago by another mod for another post, hence the post was removed. That ban appeal is how I became aware of this post.
Despite having left Reddit, the call for new mods had a contingency that they needed a verifiable (using metrics we're not privy to) Reddit post history, even though we were founded on the understanding that the majority of Reddit were chicom shills and bots.
Yes, /r/The_Donald history. I don't know whether that was clear in the post, but that was the intention. We either look at history from the Reddit days, or we can't adequately vet candidates because the maximum history that you can have on Win is about a year.
28 mods can't run one site while forums with multiple sections are easily moderated with 1.
28 moderators may be true, but it does not take into account how many are active (a lot less than you would expect), how many are actual content moderators (I, for example, am not a content moderator, but I am on the moderator list).
I don't believe it's fair to take into account how many sections a forum has. A forum with twenty sections and five thousand daily posts is still a whole lot smaller than we are.
Jew hating shills, or black hating shills, don't get deported, even when obviously shitting up the board.
This may be true, I am not aware. We are clearly understaffed right now - we are still working through the process of vetting new moderators. If we are going to make moderation errors, I'd rather we allow content that we shouldn't, as opposed to censor content that we shouldn't.
do you think we'll actually get some fucking answers for a change?
I try to answer any concerns that I see.
Additionally, I've just created a new channel in our mod chatroom where moderators should send links to posts like these so that we can try to always address them.
yet I get banned for calling you mods out because I hurt your little vaginas
You are not banned. I am the most pro free-speech person in this thread. I do not know what you are referring to.
I didn't think TDW would sell out to left wing thinking sights
You thought correctly.
We need section 230 in some form.
any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected;
Amend that part to:
any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of material that the provider or user considers to be lewd, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected;
Having said that, IANAL.
Sophos: reverted
Google: reverted
Winning.