Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
No bio...
User ID: 297
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
11hr ago
You'd be surprised how many Motte Karens there are.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
13hr ago
I just warned you, and I also banned @satanistgoblin for similar low-effort sarcastic sneering.
Your record is not as bad as his, but it's getting there. You at least have AAQCs as a mitigating factor, but I still think you need to go take a breather for a day. This case seems to be getting everyone amped up. Come back less emotional.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
14hr ago
This is pure culture warring. If you want to make an earnest argument for accelerationism, do so, but this is just "Ha ha more flames!"
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
14hr ago
Your low-effort, sarcastic, disingenuous comments are not appreciated and contribute nothing.
You've been warned repeatedly and told consequences would escalate. Your pattern seems to be, ramp it up until you get a tempban, then disappear for months before you come back to start the cycle again.
The cycle ends now. Permabanned, pending discussion with other mods.
I notice you haven't reported her post.
What, specifically, do you think was against the rules?
ETA: To expand on this, @2rafa's comment was belligerent (in a general, undirected way) and arguably "mean." She wasn't attacking anyone personally (except maybe the woman who was killed) nor explicitly saying anyone should die. The implicit message is definitely that the woman deserved to die, but people say "Such-and-such is antisocial behavior and people who do it deserve what's coming to them" quite often. IMO it was heated (and did draw some reports) but then, so was @Chrisprattalpharaptr's response (which also drew reports).
Generally speaking, this comment thread is turning into kind of a trainwreck because everyone is rushing out their most belligerent hot takes.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
Well then you'll love this. You have one of the longest mod records here. You are one of those users whose list of warnings and tembans (with zero AAQCs) requires the scroll button. You have been told specifically to knock it off with the ankle-biting "Waaaah! The mods are leftist and biased!" whining.
Basically, everything I told you before.
Because it's been a while, and because we generally dislike banning people for attacking mods or criticizing moderation (even when they really, really deserve it) I am not permabanning you. But you can take a month off, and if you don't come back, I doubt you will be missed.
For everyone else:
Here's yet another tedious exchange we have all the time on the Motte:
Culture Warring Poster: "I HATE MY ENEMIES! BOO MY ENEMIES! MY ENEMIES SUCK! CAN WE KILL MY ENEMIES?"
Mod: "Don't talk like that. This is not what the Motte is for."
Tiresome Anklebiter: "But I agree with him! His/my enemies do suck! Obviously the mod sympathizes with my enemies!"
If you haven't internalized the idea that we discuss the culture war (and the multifarious ways in which your enemies suck) but this isn't a place for rallyng the troops or consensus building, let alone talking about how much you want to curb-stomp your enemies, then you are being intentionally obtuse.
Fwiw, IMO @sulla's post would have been okay until the last paragraph.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
This is only partially true.
The goal was to disrupt federal employment as something people think of as stable and secure. The administration knew that they had to do something damaging enough that the next administration can't just undo it in the new president's first month in office. This has certainly been accomplished. Many of the "voluntary" reductions were because of the fear of imminent layoffs and the administration making it clear that those who didn't take the deal would be facing involuntary termination.
The assumption that federal employment is stable and secure (let alone a "sinecure") is no longer valid.
The deal feds used to implicitly be offered was lower pay and benefits in exchange for stability- layoffs were very rare and of course being terminated is difficult (though not as difficult as some people think). Now they get lower pay and benefits, and the current administration has made it very clear they want to get rid of as many of them as possible and will do what they can to accomplish this. They may or may not be successful, but the intention was to go right for the feds who had the attitude last time that they could just wait Trump out.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
1d ago
Is this an argument? A rebuttal? Or just a low-effort grunt?
but they get huge pensions
The old pension system which only boomers have was fairly generous (though still not "huge"), but the current one gives you at most 33% of your highest annual salary after 30 years of service, and requires around a 6%4.4% contribution.
stable employment
Have you been paying attention to Trump's second term?
top tier healthcare packages
Feds get access to Blue Cross/Blue Shield and Kaiser and a bunch of other health plans, but generally not "top tier" ones (or if they take the top tier it's very expensive). The government pays an employer contribution but it's not like feds are getting free or executive-level health care.
and other perks
Nothing that isn't pretty standard (and often better) in private industry.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
2d ago
You would see the same if they found their partner was having sex with dogs. This would greatly upset them but they would state the reason is something to do with animals being unable to consent, which of course is not the real reason.
Come on. I am pretty sure that most women, feminist or not, would be disgusted at the thought of their partner having sex with dogs and would not need "Animals can't consent" as a justification for their disgust.
"Women only hate porn because they're jealous of hotter younger women" is also very uncharitable and probably not true, or at least their stated reasons for hating porn are also genuine, even if insecurity about hotter younger women plays a part.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
2d ago
You've been warned and banned many times for personal attacks. For someone using "reddit" as an epithet, you are acting like a redditor.
One week ban.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
3d ago
You know, I opened up all the warnings on your mod record (five of them), prepared to link to them, and then realized the following:
- I do not believe you do not remember your previous warnings.
- I definitely do not believe that pointing out your previous warnings will lead to you saying "Oh, right."
Rather, I am absolutely certain that pointing out your previous warnings will lead to you arguing that (a) they were unjustified; (b) this warning is unjustified; (c) this situation is different.
You were warned in the past, you are being warned now, stop doing this.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
3d ago
You've been warned before about low-effort boo posts, and "I want to kill all my enemies" is definitely not something we encourage here. If you have nothing else to say, better you say nothing.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4d ago
Okay, so like Dean said, how would you know I'm not lying? Do you think that's how it works? You can catch a fed by asking them a question they aren't allowed to answer?
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4d ago
I have no idea what Dean does or does not know. I do know that regardless of what "everyone knows," the number of people who actually know the answers to questions like that is pretty small. No, there's no general law applying to US citizens regarding Israel.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4d ago
Oh, stop making assumptions and stop being paranoid. Anyone who's ever brushed up against the military or government contracting knows how classified information works.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4d ago
If he isn't allowed to say it in a public forum, then he shouldn't be arguing the subject in a public forum, right?
You can make arguments based on things you can't prove. Other people can point out that your argument depends on something unverified.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4d ago
I don't want to ban you.
But if the Jews on the Motte can cope with all the Joo-posters saying "The Holocaust didn't happen and it's good that it did," you can cope with some misogyny without losing it every time.
Amadan
Letting the hate flow through me
4d ago
I told you already, argue without the condescension and ad hominems.
And you do realize that someone who is actually in a position to know the real answer to "Does Israel have nuclear weapons?" would not be allowed to say so in public forum, right?
This sarcasm does not further the discussion.
More options
Context Copy link