jross

Checks and balances prevented Trump from getting the wall done.

1986 is when many people formed the opinion that Trump could do what the government could not. https://www.nytimes.com/1986/11/15/nyregion/about-new-york-pssst-here-s-a-secret-trump-rebuilds-ice-rink.html Donald J. Trump refurbished the Central Park -skating rink two and a half months ahead of his own speedy six-month schedule and $750,000 below his own projected $3 million budget, having taken over the project after the city spent six years and $12 million unsuccessfully trying to get the job done. ... ''He built the most fabulous rink I have ever seen,'' said Vera Banchet, watching her daughter skate. ''I saw Trump on TV again last night. If I may say so, he is not one to hide his light under a bushel.'' ... At the opening a few potential mayoral candidates showed up to wonder aloud why the city couldn't do the job. ... ''I don't really care about Trump's ego or the attention he's grabbing,'' said George Rinaldi, a skater at the rink, who echoed the sentiments of many others. ''It's a great rink and he is a great man. Anybody who can get anything done right and done on time in New York is a bona fide hero. He should get a ticker-tape parade.''

@BobDole The IP Address suggestion came from personal experience. Several years ago, I encountered a situation where I couldn’t connect to a specific vendor's services using my phone. This issue seemed to be linked to a specific location. Frustrated, I stopped using the vendor's services. Later, I found out that the vendor had actually banned a whole IP block, which affected my ability to connect from that particular tower.

Thanks for your patience. The first guidelines were meant so you (anyone) could answer. I went back and answered several questions directly, and updated hypothetical guidelines to better match the answers.

Hypothetical Forum Guidelines Acceptable Behavior: Respectful Communication: Be polite and avoid insults. Instead of saying, “You’re always wrong,” say, “I disagree because…” On-Topic Contributions: Keep comments relevant to the discussion. If the topic is tech, stick to that subject. Constructive Feedback: Focus on the idea rather than the person. Instead of saying, “You never get it,” say, “This approach might not work because…” Unacceptable Behavior: Personal Attacks: Do not belittle or insult others. Avoid statements like, “You’re an idiot.” Trolling: Refrain from making inflammatory statements designed to upset others or start arguments. Reporting Misuse: Do not report posts just because they offend you personally. Provocative statements and opinions that are not personal attacks should not be reported. False/Defamatory Accusations: Accusations without evidence, especially those involving illegal behavior or personal attacks, are not allowed. Posting Harmful Information: Posts that promote dangerous actions, such as drinking bleach for weight loss, will be removed. Pornography: Posting pornography is strictly prohibited and will result in immediate removal and potential banning. Illegal Activity: Any posts or discussions promoting, endorsing, or engaging in illegal activities are strictly prohibited and will be removed. *Annoying Behavior (Bob's Law): Any behavior that excessively disrupts, nags, annoys, or provokes others, creating an unbearable atmosphere, will be addressed. Consequences: Warnings: Members who violate these guidelines may receive warnings. Removal: Posts that breach the guidelines may be removed. Banning: Repeated violations or severe breaches may result in a temporary or permanent ban. Community Discussion: Members may be allowed a community discussion to potentially restore their rights after a ban. Public Statements: In cases involving false accusations or significant issues, a public statement may be issued to clarify facts and reinforce community standards. *Annoying Behavior (Bob's Law): Posting Too Much: Flooding the forum with too many messages. Going Off-Topic: Posting about unrelated subjects in the wrong threads. Asking Repeated Questions: Repeating questions that have already been answered. Arguing Aggressively: Getting into heated arguments that disrupt discussions. Trolling: Making inflammatory comments to provoke others. Personal Attacks: Insulting or attacking other members personally. Ignoring Etiquette: Not following basic forum rules or manners. Spamming: Posting the same content multiple times. Bumping Old Threads: Bringing old discussions back to the top without a good reason. Bob’s Law: Any behavior that particularly bothers Bob the moderator. --- This builds on the principles of "Be Respectful" and "Don't be a dick." If you don’t follow these guidelines, you might find yourself "Off to the Zoo" or have your membership "Put to Pasture."

Direct answers 1. What would Intermat's role be if someone starting falsely posting on here using your real name that you were a pedo? Immediate Review: Moderators may notice or respond to flagged posts to see if they break the rules. False accusations like calling someone a pedophile are unacceptable. Post Removal: If the claim is false and defamatory, the post should be removed right away to stop any harm. Consequences for the Poster: The person responsible could be banned. Community Notification: The member name, consequence, and reasoning with as much detail as appropriate may be posted to clarify the facts and reinforce the forum's rules. Legal Cooperation: If the situation is serious, the forum may need to work with legal authorities. 2. Would you want it censored or just let it go even though it was false information? I would want the information community noted or otherwise censored with the link / comment to the community notification details. 3. At what point should a person be censored for spreading false information on this website? When the moderator notices that the person is in violation of the guidelines with unacceptable posted behaviors 4. You have legal options against whom? I could work with legal to determine who the anonymous internet troll is through the use of IP Addresses, Previous commentary, contact information, and through other unposted means. No options against the Intermat. 5. Say there is a health emergency and a respected poster claims his cousin who is a doctor told him to drink 8oz of bleach and it will cure it. He even claims he did it. Then you suggest it to your spouse and they die. Would you want that censored or are we just going to weed out the idiots who believe that stuff? It’s our own responsibility to research what we put in our bodies. Bleach is toxic and should never be ingested. I was taught from a young age to avoid drinking chemicals, and I’ve always read labels carefully. Even if the CDC says heavily diluted bleach might be used in emergencies, drinking bleach is still dangerous and dumb. It’s not the forum’s job to stop everyone from making such poor choices. However, forums can remove posts that suggest harmful actions. I think community notes on X.com, where misinformation gets visibly addressed, is a good approach. 6. Who decides if someone has went against these guidelines? Maybe I feel someone went over them, while Willie says no that's fine. This isn't a 55mph speed limit, this is "reasonable speeds should be taken at all times." We aren't always going to agree on what a reasonable speed is. The moderator. Here is how... Clear Guidelines: Clarify what reasonable means (pick something). Moderation Team: Run decisions by the team if there is ambiguity and history of similar decisions causing negative community response. Appeal Process: Members should be able to appeal moderation decisions. Documentation: Publicly post the moderation actions and reasons to help ensure decisions are transparent and consistent. This also informs the community with acceptable behavior. Community Input: For contentious issues, involving the community can help with alignment. 7. How do we make guidelines to not be annoying? Define it with examples... Posting Too Much: Flooding the forum with too many messages. Going Off-Topic: Posting about unrelated subjects in the wrong threads. Asking Repeated Questions: Repeating questions that have already been answered. Arguing Aggressively: Getting into heated arguments that disrupt discussions. Trolling: Making inflammatory comments to provoke others. Personal Attacks: Insulting or attacking other members personally. Ignoring Etiquette: Not following basic forum rules or manners. Spamming: Posting the same content multiple times. Bumping Old Threads: Bringing old discussions back to the top without a good reason. Bob's Law: Any behavior that particularly bothers Bob the moderator. 8. Should we censor annoying people who are intolerable to visit? Yes because being annoying is hypothetically an unacceptable behavior that violates the posted guidelines. 9. Tending to social media is not an easy job and I can't even imagine what goes on an the big dawgs. Do we let people be idiots and potentially ruin our product or do we censor people? Please define idiot. The type of idiot that posts harmful information is in violation. The idiot that lacks reasoning should probably stay... These people won’t or can't explain their reasons for their beliefs or decisions. They might come off as unreasonable, closed-minded, or low IQ. The do not know how to think critically and or make no attempt to. It certainly annoys me but I'm an idiot that wants to educate. 10. Do we (Intermat) censor posts accusing someone of inappropriate relations with athletes? This was something that came up a year ago when some people were saying a coach was doing some bad things. There was no evidence, but at what point do we stop the accusations? Yes. The guidelines mention that false and defamatory accusations may be reviewed and potentially removed. This includes unfounded claims about a coach or anyone else being involved in inappropriate relations. 11. It boils down simply, how much garbage will you dig through to find what you want? 12. Are you will to sift through accusations of bad behavior, annoying posters trying to start fights, and topics about cats to find what you want to read? Personally yes. I have eight members on 'ignore.' This helps me manage the forum experience. And I have browser plugin tweaks that replaces specific member images and member names. This turns my annoyance into a chuckle. I support more member right moderation to the zoo. It works. 13. If you want what you believe is truly freedom of speech, this place would be intolerable to come and discuss topics at. Drawing the line is easy to say, but the act of doing it makes it a squiggly line and nothing like you believe in your head. This is true. Reddit is a moderation disaster. When Twitter went heavy on conservative moderation and ignored behavior in progressive content, I dumped it and tried out Gab. Gab goes way beyond my line of acceptability. I reported issues, was ignored, and I left. I've never reported issues anywhere but on Gab. X is doing it best. 14. You also did not address people who are just making this place unbearable to come to. They don't always post negatively, but nag, annoy, and provoke others to be annoying. Is there a rule for that or do we just allow it until no one comes here? Yes -- it is unacceptable behavior in the hypothetical guidelines. 15. So accusing others of illegal behavior is something you would allow? What about posting of pornography? Do you want that allowed? False accusations was covered... Add porn to the not okay list... no nudity, no drug content, no sexual content ---stopping here for brevity. will update hypothetical guidelines in a future post.

Is the Intermat Forum protected by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which means it isn't liable for user posted content? Even with this protection, dealing with lawsuits would be expensive and time-consuming; not worth it. It’s your forum, so you should do what you think is right. I’m just discussing it since the topic came up. Being transparent about your rules and actions is key to managing concerns and minimizing risks. This is a small community that doesn't really have major problems; just embarrasses itself from time to time with jerkish member behavior. Less that than of a high school... Its cool to keep doing what Bob wants when Bob wants. Its nice to have a like-minded community (wrestling) to chat about whatever whenever. There is name calling and annoying behavior... but there isn't much censorship... the ignore feature works...

Have you looked into the logs for user accounts to determine if there is a common IP pattern? Combining IP lookup services, reverse DNS, ASN information, and behavioral analysis can indicate if a member is on a mobile phone, home network, work network, etc. Users with the savvy to mask their connection type and location are unlikely to be the members that nag, annoy, and provoke on a wrestling forum. Members are likely to connect from a phone most often near work or home. The same cell tower and perhaps IPs will hit more often during certain hours. Perhaps there is a pattern for AT&T, etc. for folks at home. You wouldn't want to do this for PSU university or a large corporation with lots of potential members. You wouldn't want to ban IPs that multiple members share. If there is any consistent pattern over days for a user, and you block that IP address, the user will become frustrated and may move onto a different vice. If there is no pattern, its a waste of time. I assume the need for this is few and far between. I have 8 people on my ignore lists... a smallish number considering the overall member count. I wonder if you can turn a trick like making certain members login five times to gain access. Certain members are required to utilize dual authentication and validate they are not a robot. You configure the system to slow down and annoy them to move to a different vice. Scam the scammer (if only that easy).

How good are the Invision moderation features? How often do you get reports about comments and blogs? Some behaviors and language patterns might be possible for auto moderation. Content or members might have automatic consequences based on the number of reports, etc. Who are some regulars that are trusted posters? Ask them to take on restricted moderation responsibility such that they address problems according to the forum behavior guidelines. Nobody needs to check every message but coverage through responsible members that ready most things anyway would spread the moderation load. If you ever go this route, I'd encourage a pinned discussion on Moderation. The post description could list content and moderation expectations. The comments allows open discussion for moderators, the accused, and the members with transparency in most cases. Moderation isn't a fun task. Thank you for doing it. You know I wonder if you can run a report that indicates which members are ignored by the most members. This is a good start list for which members to consider restrictions on, etc. Any new member that shows up quickly on the ignored list is auto flagged.

That's an example of trolling and unacceptable behavior.

Kamala and Donald are not good people; they are politicians. John Kruk was no athlete, he was a ball player! But John could hit a baseball. The Donald can get things done. I'm voting FOR the Trump Republican Platform (link) Seal the border and stop the migrant invasion Carry out the largest deportation operation in American history End inflation, and make America affordable again Make America the dominant energy producer in the world, by far! STOP OUTSOURCING, AND TURN THE UNITED STATES INTO A MANUFACTURING SUPERPOWER Large tax cuts for workers, and no tax on tips! Defend our constitution, our bill of rights, and our fundamental freedoms, including freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and the right to keep and bear arms Prevent world war three, restore peace in Europe and in the middle east, and build a great iron dome missile defense shield over our entire country -- all made in America End the weaponization of government against the American people Stop the migrant crime epidemic, demolish the foreign drug cartels, crush gang violence, and lock up violent offenders Rebuild our cities, including Washington DC, making them safe, clean, and beautiful again. Strengthen and modernize our military, making it, without question, the strongest and most powerful in the world Keep the U.S. dollar as the world's reserve currency Fight for and protect social security and medicare with no cuts, including no changes to the retirement age Cancel the electric vehicle mandate and cut costly and burdensome regulations Cut federal funding for any school pushing critical race theory, radical gender ideology, and other inappropriate racial, sexual, or political content on our children Keep men out of women's sports Deport pro-hamas radicals and make our college campuses safe and patriotic again Secure our elections, including same day voting, voter identification, paper ballots, and proof of citizenship Unite our country by bringing it to new and record levels of success There are potential Democrat platform items that may interest me... waiting for Kamala to provide policies. Stop interfering with other countries, stop spending money we don't have, prioritize helping needy US citizens before spending a dollar on non citizens, stop illegal immigration, increase legal immigration, defer state law on abortion, treat marijuana the same as alcohol with law consideration, ban congress from trading individual company stocks, make college education affordable, provide accountability behind benefits... RFK JRs has some good polices (link) but no chance to win. If Kamala came out with identical policies as Trump, I'd vote for the person that has a proven track record of getting things done and playing hardball in negotiations. That's Trump.

Yes, exactly. Instead of resorting to insults, you could say: “Drinking bleach as a cure for cancer is dangerous and incorrect. Please consult reliable medical sources for accurate information.” Then, ignore the person spreading harmful advice. Darwin’s law wins.

I joined a Wrestling Forum on Facebook and was appalled by the TMZ-like sensationalism over a senior member’s DUI. When I criticized this gossip, I was banned. I encountered similar behavior on Twitter and was blocked by the same man for calling it out. It’s a stark reminder of a conversation I once had with college students at a gym: When does a man truly become a man? It’s not just about having the physically developed mind at 25 years old; it’s about taking responsibility and guiding the next generation. Sadly, many people, even in their 50s, behave like children, despite having their own kids.

An attempt at standards. It could be tweaked Acceptable Behavior: Respectful Communication: Be polite and avoid insults. For example, instead of saying, ‘You’re always wrong,’ say, ‘I disagree because…’ On-Topic Contributions: Keep your comments relevant to the discussion. If we’re talking about tech, stick to that topic and avoid discussing an unrelated subjects. Constructive Feedback: When giving feedback, focus on the idea rather than the person. For instance, instead of saying, ‘You never get it,’ you might say, ‘This approach might not work because…’ Unacceptable Behavior: Personal Attacks: Don’t belittle or insult others. For example, avoid saying, ‘You’re an idiot.’ Trolling: Refrain from intentionally making inflammatory statements designed to upset others or start arguments. Reporting Misuse: Don’t report posts just because they offend you personally. For instance, if someone compares a pro-abortion stance to pro-murder, it might be provocative but it is not a personal attack. If someone says that a particular climate change viewpoint is akin to ignoring science, it might be a heated opinion but it’s not a personal attack. Consequences: Violation of these standards may result in being banned or moved to the zoo. The member name, consequence, and reason for consequence may be posted, and you may be allowed a community discussion to potentially restore your member rights. An IP address may be banned. A warning(s), consequence, and member rights restoration are at the sole discretion of Forum moderators.

Liberal sources (less aligned personally) Barack Obama Robert Reich (nuts) Bill Maher Jason Kander Liberal views.. Emmanuel Acho (like...) Matt Tiabbi (like...) Tim O'Reilly Stopped following some wackos with too much TDS. Libertarian (better aligned personally) Ron Paul...

Would you please think critically about what the media is telling you? "You won't have to ever vote again" regurgitates media misinformation. You can watch and listen to the video to understand the context. "Losers and suckers" What bias does the original article author have and why did he use an anonymous source? Later John Kelly supported the article. What is his bias? What is his reputation for mischaracterization and lies? How many and which people have vouched that Trump did not say this? What is their bias? General speaking, does "losers and suckers" seem like something anyone would say, even the draft dodging Trump? How is this matched against positive and negative support Trump has shown the military?

Censorship should be a last resort, reserved for situations where there's a clear and present danger. Feeling offended and being dumb (drink bleach) are not reason enough for censorship. Censoring respected medical experts providing alternatives to Covid vaccinations was over censorship and caused harm.

Who decides what constitutes false information? Who decides what information needs to be censored? In response to your question, I have legal options if I am defamed or falsely accused. To protect itself, Intermat could establish and share transparent guidelines on acceptable behavior and content moderation. If Intermat’s guidelines emphasize respecting privacy, avoiding defamation, and upholding the platform’s reputation, then Intermat should actively monitor and address content that violates these standards. If Intermat fails to address malicious defamation, it will lose members.

Yes, there’s clear right-wing hypocrisy. Trump often lies, and while he faces criticism for it, many people (this forum, right wingers, etc.) question his character. His draft dodging is also a valid criticism, but he didn’t run on his military record, so it’s a separate issue. Walz made a commitment to serve, knowing he might face combat. Retiring when faced with that possibility and the exaggerations about his service for political gain complicate things. His criticism is about both his decision to leave and the misleading claims about his service. While Trump’s draft dodging is a separate known issue, Walz’s situation involves new public awareness to his retirement controversy and his misleading military experience statements. Each deserves its own attention, but understanding both helps explain why Walz is facing current criticism.

Rather than confronting the uncomfortable situation directly, Scourge and others attempt to shift the focus from Walz to Trump and Vance. Deflecting is a childish response; an adult can face issues head-on. It's valid to criticize Trump and Vance, but first, have the courage to acknowledge and address the criticisms of Walz.

“Dangerous freedom is preferred over peaceful slavery.” It shouldn't be the responsibility of corporations or governments to control the flow of information. It is better to let people have open access to diverse information sources, to collaborate, and to make their own choices about what to believe.

Why don't you do the research and come back? You keep posting bullshit based on bullshit. After you've done the exercise, perhaps everyone will learn how to post less bullshit.

Your speech is an example of media spin. RV the Journalist: "Anybody that says anything bad about Trump has an anti-GOP agenda." Problem: over generalization, bias, lack of nuance, misleading... RV just made this shit up.

This same shit occurs on a variety of topics, celebrities, politicians, etc. Your choice: pick the OP instructions to raise your IQ or leverage this list to thicken your bubble.

Fact Check: They go back to 2018... Finding: True. It is also true that Walz has been criticized by his NG peers for stolen valor since at least 2006.