Official thread to discuss moderation policies

Don't know about the posters, but 75% is quite an accurate estimate of the leaning of the mods. As rojo likes to point to his two liberal mods, and they seem to have about 10 in total (including the two conservative founders and the conservative super mod).

That sounds about right regarding the moderators, based on my subjective observations. (I have no inside information.) I suspect with the posters it is closer to 50/50, maybe even majority left. Assuming the average poster on the site is white and college educated, they cannot help but skew somewhat left. A lot of left-wing posters would balk at this, but I think many of them are not used to conservative voices being allowed in the spaces they inhabit. It’s somewhat shocking for them to see those ideas being openly discussed. It’s part of the value of this site.

But if this site were to go the direction I advocate, the politics of the moderators would become less important. Only posts that are pornographic, threatening, doxxing, or critical of high school runners would be deleted. Removing a post or thread because “it’s stupid” or “I don’t like the politics” would be strictly prohibited.

As it sounds like it’s time to open letsmikeh33.com. As the first person to sign up, as I’d like to request the username rojo.

Done and done!

What’s the status? I’ve been advised there is a certain mod that does 95% of the thread deleting. Is this accurate? If yes, why is it permitted?

I can also understand not wanting repetitive political threads, but too often the overzealous moderators delete reasonable threads rather than just merging them into one. It's clearly possible to merge because it's done all the time on running threads.

Rojo, why was my thread comparing pasta to ramen that I filed under the “nutrition” category deleted?

YET YOU LEAVE A THREAD UP ABOUT MUSTARD IN TUNA SALAD AND A THREAD PROPOSING A MAXIMUM AGE TO FATHER CHILDREN

Borderline racism I think

Is anybody still reading this thread? Robert, Weldon should start another one.

I don’t know if Weldon/Robert read this thread, or have any plans to start another one. In any event, a week or so ago I started a thread about whether it is acceptable to have a bowel movement at a neighbors house during a party. The thread was quickly deleted, and my account was banned for three days for making a low/no content post. I thought that was a little severe for a post that was just silly, but whatever. It’s Weldon/Robert’s site.

So I took a look around at what the moderators deem to be relevant content. These are all relatively recent threads that have passed the moderator’s “bar” for relevance.

And my personal favorite, a thread where posters literally physically threaten each other.

My advice is not to delete those threads (with exception of the physically threatening posts).

Instead, moderators should not be allowed to delete threads based on their personal opinion of what is “low content.” It’s clear that every moderator has a different opinion. Let’s face it, there is no way to get everyone on the same page as to what constitutes “low content.”

Even in the current political season, running threads and running related posts far out pace any other kind. There is really no reason why LRC can’t allow some silly posts and a little bit of nonsense provided it isn’t threatening or pornographic.

I’m not sure why my links are not making a thumbnail. Here are the titles of all the threads I linked to.

“At what age, do you stop wanking?”

”Biggest Male Sex Symbol in Running?”

“Has anyone given their wife Viagra? I want to consider this.”

“Is it OK to discuss Athlete's Penis Size because that's what one is doing”

“If room 226 at the Porterville Motel 6 is rocking, please don't come a'knocking.”

And of course the thread with the physical threats.

“Married men: who do you feel has more power in your relationship, you or your wife?”

Names of Moderators should be public knowledge and no moderator should be able to delete anything that criticizes them or their actions.

Any deletions should be done by a secondary, impartial moderator

I find it hilarious that my list of links has been downvoted. I mean, it’s a list of links to LRC threads. They’re real. What is there to downvote?

I’m beginning to think the brojos don’t care what you, Mike, or any of their users think.

Listen brojos, it is very simple:

As 99% of all disgusting posts came from unregistered users, against you can do basically not much, to clean up your forum requires only registered users. It is still anonymous but not so as before. Also that makes ignoring/reading a post easier if you know a user. This here with the unregistered cowards has no personality and will never get any.

99% of posts and clicks come from unregistered users. If the Brojos require registration, then the site’s income craters. If they require registration, the they would also have to require subscriptions and we all know how cheap runners, teens, and troll farms are when it comes to that.