Monthly: Ask your moderation questions here

The boilerplate rule you copied & pasted says posts that "threaten, or harass other people" will be removed.

If I were to make a post on LRC saying "transwomen are men" like JK Rowling has done on X/Twitter - or I say Biden cabinet member Rachel Levine is a man the way JKR has called prominent British trans activists men - does that count as me "threatening or harassing people"?

Please consider the difference between this statement of yours:

I'm fine with someone calling Lia Thomas a biological male. That's what she is. You can call her a male as well. Some would get offended at that and says she is a female. Which she isn't.

And this way of rephrasing it:

I'm fine with someone calling Lia Thomas a biological male. That's what he is. You can call him a male as well. Some would get offended at that and says he is a female. Which he isn't.

What's objectionable about my rephrasing? Why?

When discussing Caster Semenya's claim that "having testes doesn't make me any less of a woman," why do I have to say "her testes"?

When discussing the issue of women and girls (the female kind) being distressed about males who say they are trans going into women's locker rooms, loos, spas, changing rooms, etc and exposing their genitals or worse, why should posters have to use terms like "her penis," "her testicles" "her willy" and "she had a stiffy"?

How does using sex-based pronouns when discussing males who say they "identify as" the opposite sex and behave in reprehensible, sexually harassing, threatening, abusive, predatory, violent ways towards girls and women (the female kind) qualify as "threatening or harassing" the men - oops, I mean the "transwomen" - I'm talking about?

Don't you see that your rules make it more difficult for girls and women - and the men who are on our side - to speak plainly and clearly about the harassment, threats, abuse, predation, violence and disrespect that we get from males, including some males who claim to be women ?

Why do I need to go? I occasionally respond to Rekrunner, no more than a few others do.

The mods generally are going to see individual posts. Sometimes we need to take a step back and if a thread is getting a lot of posts, try and take a look at the thread as a whole instead of just the individual posts.

But on the surface we are fine with people discussing Frank or Cranny.

I really can't believe that some people are using this time to specifically call out other posters by name. This is equivalent to children tattling on each other. As much as I disagree with some posters here, I would never "tell" on them to daddy and advocate for their banishment. This is childish behavior. What a bunch of whiny babies.

Moderation is necessary on any site. But the moderators on this board operate capriciously. They shut down debate, eliminate humor, and I think sometimes use their power to target posters they don’t like. There is no uniformity or logic to what they won’t allow, except of course any criticism of moderation which they usually attack and eliminate quickly. Conservative moderators eliminate liberal opinions. Liberal moderators eliminate conservative opinions. Moderators eliminate criticism of some runners, but not others. They decide some humorous threads are bad for whatever reason and remove them.

The first time my account got suspended was for criticizing moderation…on a thread you actually dedicated to discussion about moderation. You overturned that ban, but it’s illustrative of moderate her behavior and lack of accountability. That thread, which went on for over 30 pages of complaints about moderation, was a hotbed of moderator activity. They couldn’t delete the entire thread, but they could go in and delete enormous numbers of posts in order to dilute its impact. Lack of accountability again.

You need to rethink the entire enterprise. You might find, if you think about it, that some of your moderators have a very different vision for what the site is than you do. Certainly there appears, from my vantage point, a dramatic gap between what you say you want, and what the moderators are giving you.

we will add it

rojo will have to answer this one

I understand the sentiment and that's why we are more lenient with this especially in the abstract. If Caitlyn Jenner was on here obviously out of respece you should not call her Bruce. Pronouns usually are only used when the person isn't present so i don't think that would come up.

Also good!

I don’t want to just complain without offering you some sort of idea or plan. Here is what I think Moderation should look like on this site.

1. Instruct the moderators to ONLY delete posts or threads that are violent, threatening, doxxing, pornographic, or openly racist. That means use of racist words, not alleged innuendo or whatever.

2. Do not allow moderators to delete posts critical of certain runners, unless the post meets the requirements in #1. The ONLY exception is for runners still in high school. They are still kids and should not be asked to handle heavy criticism online. Everyone else is fair game. It’s the price of being great.

3. Do not allow moderators to delete a thread just because they think it is silly or stupid or trolling. See #1.

4. Do not allow moderators to delete posts or threads because they disagree with the political viewpoint being expressed. That is not their job, see #1.

5. Do not allow moderators to ban anyone unilaterally. The decision to ban should rest with the brothers. Moderators make recommendations, that is all.

6. Review every moderators work quarterly. Ensure that they are abiding by these rules. If not, get new moderators.

Well according to the wokes here, discussing any Kenyan (or other East African - but it’s mainly Kenyan) doping or discussing crime is automatically racist. What does that say about them, their soft bigotry of low expectations? 🤔

Hahahaha!

How about restricting all these Free-Shelby, Shelby-ran-a-sub4-in-training, Shelby-will-be-back-soon, Shelby-didn't-really-dope, Shelby-just-ate-a-burrito threads to the one and only Shelby thread? Couple of weeks ago, some trolls started 2-3 of those per day...

What does "out of hand" mean?

It means that when a Letsrun mod goes to room 226 at you know where, there's too much to fit in one hand (when he's deleting posts with the other hand).

Weldon why not create a board where dipsh*ts like this guy aren't welcome.

Let's play a game and guess who it is. It's certainly not Fisher or Nuguse as I've seen basically no criticism of them outside of Nuguse pulling out of a couple of 2021-2022 races. I'd be shocked if it's Hiltz for the entirely opposite reasons (they seems like a friendly person and if I knew them I'd try to use 'they/them' to refer to her, but I think she'd have the biggest issues with the threads about them). Similar-ish reasons with Rupp as the brojos had to install a filter to ban the useage of the words Rupp / gay in the same post after Alberto / Vin complained to them. I'd also be very surprised if it's Lagat or Young though I haven't seen the posts attacking the latter in the past month. Ditto to burrito girl

I'd be shocked if it's a non American as well. So who does that leave? Kincaid? Klecker? But I haven't seen any actual attacks about them, only jokes about Clicker needing pure hate from Kincaid clipping him to run fast

This doesn't make any sense. I always explain in the comment box that I am reporting the thread because it is falsely classified as running-related. Do you think your mods are incapable of understanding this?

Please do not "just reclassify" these threads. This provides no disincentive to those who intentionally misclassify non-running threads as running-related. If you simply delete misclassified threads in a timely manner, people will stop misclassifying their threads.

How do you find your mods? Do you hire by going to Antifa protests and finding mods on Grindr?