Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

I'm sick and tired of macrumors forum…

VisceralRealist said:
It's not against the site rules to insult politicians/celebrities in the Politics News space. We've had this discussion before. Calling another user a Nazi would be modded. Calling Elon Musk a Nazi would not.
Click to expand...

You missed the mark entirely. Pro-Elon comments, even measured, substantive ones tied directly to the topic are consistently moderated out, while bitter anti-Elon posts, like those branding him a Nazi, frequently dodge scrutiny despite offering zero meaningful contribution, as anyone scrolling can see.

This isn’t moderation in any defensible sense; it’s deliberate, pattern-driven suppression targeting one side. The issue isn’t that Elon criticism exists, extreme or not, it’s the glaring double standard applied with no apparent logic. If you’ve got a concrete explanation for why irrelevant hate gets a pass while relevant support doesn’t, I’m listening - But your reply ducks the problem and offers nothing to dispute the obvious inconsistency.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4k78, Digital Skunk and icanhazmac
Giving credit where credit is due, the mods just cleaned up about a half page of off-topic, political crap in a thread not tagged as such. Well done! Now, if MR would just follow that example and not tag threads as "political" when not necessary, we would be left with threads that are on-topic and not full of virtue signaling crap.
 
Last edited:
BenTrovato said:
You missed the mark entirely. Pro-Elon comments, even measured, substantive ones tied directly to the topic are consistently moderated out, while bitter anti-Elon posts, like those branding him a Nazi, frequently dodge scrutiny despite offering zero meaningful contribution, as anyone scrolling can see.

This isn’t moderation in any defensible sense; it’s deliberate, pattern-driven suppression targeting one side. The issue isn’t that Elon criticism exists, extreme or not, it’s the glaring double standard applied with no apparent logic. If you’ve got a concrete explanation for why irrelevant hate gets a pass while relevant support doesn’t, I’m listening - But your reply ducks the problem and offers nothing to dispute the obvious inconsistency.
Click to expand...

I'd have to see specific examples to judge that then. I find it hard to believe that comments removed from the Political News section were even-measured, fair, and without any animus directed toward other users, let alone that it demonstrates a recurring pattern of bias on the part of the moderators. I've seen similar complaints from others that the mods have the exact opposite bias. In both cases I'm skeptical. Yet repeatedly when I see examples of removed comments, there's often some kind of underhanded insult directed at other users, i.e. the kind of thing that is sure to be modded if it's reported.

You're claiming that the mods, with very explicit intent, target anyone who supports Elon Musk and dares to defend him in these forums, remove posts that do so, and that is the sole reason said posts are removed. That is a bold claim. I have yet to see evidence backing it up. Your original post stated that posts calling Musk a Nazi should be removed because it's an "unfounded accusation". But that is not against the site rules (at least in the Political News section), so not removing such posts for that reason is not indication of bias (and that is what my quoted comment was referring to).

What would indicate bias: two equally political statements, one pro-Musk, one anti-Musk, both reported, neither targeting other users, yet only the pro-Musk comment is removed. If that has happened, then yes, it's an unfair, uneven application of the rules.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe, arkitect, turbineseaplane and 2 others
svenmany said:
I wish we could move beyond the closing sentences that characterize others as "virtue signaling" or part of an "echo chamber". Why devalue an otherwise good post by ending it with an insult?
Click to expand...

I am not insulting anyone by claiming they are "virtue signaling", I am using the accepted and accurate usage, see below.

What would you call it when a group of members purposefully derail a thread about a specific technology with non-stop, inappropriate and off-topic Nazi references? These members often do not address the proper topic of the thread in any way, shape or form, that is virtue signaling by definition.


Every single Elon adjacent article is a race to use the word Nazi first and as often as possible with little to no contribution to the thread or topic of the article. These posts, IMHO, violate several rules of this forum:
  • Hoaxes. Purposely misleading other members to their detriment. Giving advice you know to be incorrect or harmful. Sensationalism.
  • Trolling. Do not post in order to anger other members or intentionally cause negative reactions. For a given post, this can be a subjective call, but a pattern of such posting or an especially egregious case will get you banned.
  • Hate speech and group slurs. Discrimination, abuse, threats or prejudice against a particular group, for example based on race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation, in a way that a reasonable person would find offensive. This rule does not apply to political parties, members of political parties and movements, political memberships, affiliations, and allegiances, and those with particular political ideals or beliefs. Negative comments about political groups are acceptable when stated without trolling and in a way that fosters discussion, subject to the other forum rules.
  • Off-topic posts. Off-topic posts will be deleted/edited.
  • Repeated problems. Any ongoing actions that make more work for the moderators and administrators or regularly annoy other members and require moderator action. We have hundreds of thousands of forum members to serve and can't spend a disproportionate amount of time dealing with problems caused by any one member. If your membership is an ongoing detriment to our community then your membership may be terminated.
I would argue that derailing threads with unfounded accusations violates all of the above.

I would ask you to visit this thread: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ink-connectivity-for-free-until-july.2449082/

Look at the very first post, and please tell me, how this post is on-topic and how it contributes to the overall conversation about Starlink or TMobile?

If you have a better way of describing the act of posting off-topic, sensationalistic, hyperbolic comments like I have described I am all ears.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hobowankenobi, BenTrovato and rmadsen3
icanhazmac said:
I would ask you to visit this thread: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ink-connectivity-for-free-until-july.2449082/

Look at the very first post, and please tell me, how this post is on-topic and how it contributes to the overall conversation about Starlink or TMobile?
Click to expand...

It might be worth considering why it was over 2:1 folks liking that post

It's the moment right now and what's going on in the world

You're not going to be able to pull that out --- tech runs everything and touches our lives in all capacities and people are going to have strong feelings about that, which will come out

That's why that thread is in Political News
 
  • Like
Reactions: bousozoku and Scepticalscribe
icanhazmac said:
I am not insulting anyone by claiming they are "virtue signaling", I am using the accepted and accurate usage, see below.

What would you call it when a group of members purposefully derail a thread about a specific technology with non-stop, inappropriate and off-topic Nazi references? These members often do not address the proper topic of the thread in any way, shape or form, that is virtue signaling by definition.


Every single Elon adjacent article is a race to use the word Nazi first and as often as possible with little to no contribution to the thread or topic of the article. These posts, IMHO, violate several rules of this forum:
  • Hoaxes. Purposely misleading other members to their detriment. Giving advice you know to be incorrect or harmful. Sensationalism.
  • Trolling. Do not post in order to anger other members or intentionally cause negative reactions. For a given post, this can be a subjective call, but a pattern of such posting or an especially egregious case will get you banned.
  • Hate speech and group slurs. Discrimination, abuse, threats or prejudice against a particular group, for example based on race, gender, religion, or sexual orientation, in a way that a reasonable person would find offensive. This rule does not apply to political parties, members of political parties and movements, political memberships, affiliations, and allegiances, and those with particular political ideals or beliefs. Negative comments about political groups are acceptable when stated without trolling and in a way that fosters discussion, subject to the other forum rules.
  • Off-topic posts. Off-topic posts will be deleted/edited.
  • Repeated problems. Any ongoing actions that make more work for the moderators and administrators or regularly annoy other members and require moderator action. We have hundreds of thousands of forum members to serve and can't spend a disproportionate amount of time dealing with problems caused by any one member. If your membership is an ongoing detriment to our community then your membership may be terminated.
I would argue that derailing threads with unfounded accusations violates all of the above.

I would ask you to visit this thread: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ink-connectivity-for-free-until-july.2449082/

Look at the very first post, and please tell me, how this post is on-topic and how it contributes to the overall conversation about Starlink or TMobile?

If you have a better way of describing the act of posting off-topic, sensationalistic, hyperbolic comments like I have described I am all ears.
Click to expand...

Hey, I like your posts, whether or not I agree with them. Adding the assertion that people who are expressing their opinions are virtue signaling ("an attempt to show other people that you are a good person" per your link) is a negative assertion about their intentions.

So I'll rephrase my wish as

I wish we would move beyond categorizing a dissenting opinion in a way that attempts to devalue it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe and arkitect
turbineseaplane said:
It might be worth considering why it was over 2:1 folks liking that post
Click to expand...

There is not much to consider besides the fact that many folks apparently don't mind liking or posting off-topic, inaccurate and hateful comments. Personally I find that sad. I guess we all have a point where enough is enough, and tossing the word Nazi around all willy-nilly should be one of those points.

Honestly, in another context I would like that post too, who doesn't hate Nazi's? My issue is the flippant and inappropriate use of the term to label someone who is simply become a political opponent to those doing it.

icanhazmac said:
Look at the very first post, and please tell me, how this post is on-topic and how it contributes to the overall conversation about Starlink or TMobile?
Click to expand...

No one seems to want to answer this simple question.

turbineseaplane said:
That's why that thread is in Political News
Click to expand...

But it doesn't need to be, tagging an article is a choice made by MR. As an example, MR chose not to tag the recent "project red" article as political and yet at least half a page of similar, off-topic posts were made and subsequently moderated. The thread went from a mess of virtue signaling to a discussion about the topic at hand. It all happened very quickly and efficiently, and left the rest of us with a better experience. That thread still has a bit of fun and snark to it, some from you, but is largely on-topic.


I find it interesting that I was called out in this thread for my old "FU DMA" avatar but others can falsely label someone a Nazi.

Can't help but notice that even you called for some civility: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/acceptable-insults.2427346/ (Post #33) and the fact that you red faced me in post #58. While this thread was in reference to insulting members, the logic of your comment rings true and is sound.

Per your post #33:

"That said, there's no place for those types of comments here as it all it does is foster anger and polarization while adding nothing.

People need to be held to some standards of politeness and respect for others and calling you a "stupid old man" as that poster did .... does not meet that bar of required conduct here.

We can't have intelligent and respectful discourse on the forum if folks are allowed to just take low brow personal shots at others. I'm glad that is not allowed and is usually always correctly moderated away."
 
Last edited:
svenmany said:
I wish we would move beyond categorizing a dissenting opinion in a way that attempts to devalue it.
Click to expand...

I can't "devalue" a post that has no value. What value does that post provide to the topic of the article? I have been begging someone to answer that question. The post is not a "dissenting opinion" it is an off-topic statement.

If someone wants to post "Elon is a horrible CEO and Starlink is a crap product", I have no issue with that. The post is a bit reductionist, but it contributes to the overall conversation. The first post in the Starlink/TMobile thread serves no purpose other than to, by definition, virtue signal and provides nothing else to the topic of the article/conversation.
 
icanhazmac said:
I can't "devalue" a post that has no value. What value does that post provide to the topic of the article? I have been begging someone to answer that question. The post is not a "dissenting opinion" it is an off-topic statement.

If someone wants to post "Elon is a horrible CEO and Starlink is a crap product", I have no issue with that. The post is a bit reductionist, but it contributes to the overall conversation. The first post in the Starlink/TMobile thread serves no purpose other than to, by definition, virtue signal and provides nothing else to the topic of the article/conversation.
Click to expand...

If you don't like a post then respond with an explanation why. Criticize the appropriateness of the post or the reasoning. But you are criticizing the intentions of the person who made the post, without any evidence of those intentions.

Personal attacks, like attacks on the character of a poster, are often the reason why people are banned. Consider one of the particularly egregious example from the OP:

"It seems I'm getting responses from youngsters who throw up answers they found on google or didn't bother to try and understand the issue in the first place"

"Virtue signaling" is so much less severe, but it's still an attack on the poster, not the post. If you respond to a post by claiming the poster is virtue signaling, your chance of influencing their thinking decreases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe and arkitect
svenmany said:
If you don't like a post then respond with an explanation why. Criticize the appropriateness of the post or the reasoning. But you are criticizing the intentions of the person who made the post, without any evidence of those intentions.

Personal attacks, like attacks on the character of a poster, are often the reason why people are banned. Consider one of the particularly egregious example from the OP:

"It seems I'm getting responses from youngsters who throw up answers they found on google or didn't bother to try and understand the issue in the first place"

"Virtue signaling" is so much less severe, but it's still an attack on the poster, not the post. If you respond to a post by claiming the poster is virtue signaling, your chance of influencing their thinking decreases.
Click to expand...

Allow me to switch up, do you see any value in the first post of that thread? Is it on-topic? Does it contribute to the greater conversation regarding Starlink and TMobile?

Or

Is it a drive by insult, and a heinous one, against some random person? The posting member didn't indicate who the post was directed at making it even more off-topic. Were they just referring to Nazi's in general? Were they referring to employees of either company? We don't know, the post is completely random.

svenmany said:
If you don't like a post then respond with an explanation why.
Click to expand...

That would also be off-topic. How can I, within the rules, ask another member about their Nazi post when Nazi's literally have nothing to do with the topic at hand?

I have been suspended for engaging off-topic posts in the past, so I am hesitant to do so.

Just because an article is tagged "political news" doesn't, or shouldn't, mean you can just spew random political based attacks and derail a thread. Off-topic is still off-topic.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy
svenmany said:
If you don't like a post then respond with an explanation why. Criticize the appropriateness of the post or the reasoning. But you are criticizing the intentions of the person who made the post, without any evidence of those intentions.

Personal attacks, like attacks on the character of a poster, are often the reason why people are banned. Consider one of the particularly egregious example from the OP:

"It seems I'm getting responses from youngsters who throw up answers they found on google or didn't bother to try and understand the issue in the first place"

"Virtue signaling" is so much less severe, but it's still an attack on the poster, not the post. If you respond to a post by claiming the poster is virtue signaling, your chance of influencing their thinking decreases.
Click to expand...
Virtue signaling is a comment in the post. Consider this:
1. You’re a troll
2. You’re trolling the forums

Not the same. Calling out a post is not against the rules. “This is virtue signaling” I doubt is against the rules.
 
I7guy said:
Virtue signaling is a comment in the post. Consider this:
1. You’re a troll
2. You’re trolling the forums

Not the same. Calling out a post is not against the rules. “This is virtue signaling” I doubt is against the rules.
Click to expand...

It's only my wish that we could be better. It's such a mild insult that it wouldn't violate a rule.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy
icanhazmac said:
Allow me to switch up, do you see any value in the first post of that thread? Is it on-topic? Does it contribute to the greater conversation regarding Starlink and TMobile?
Click to expand...

I see your point; it's a crappy post. I suppose if that person had written "I despise Musk and would never spend money on anything that would benefit him", it would have been more digestible. The scope of a conversation is fluid so it's easy to imagine that some would consider that comment on-topic.

My opinion - that first comment ads no value. People who are angry about Musk enjoy it and are stoked to more anger. People who are not angry about Musk either ignore it, get annoyed, or even get angry. It doesn't provide any input that will influence thinking or educate. And we don't need more anger.

If I were moderating my own forums, I would have removed the post. If it had been rewritten, I wouldn't have.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BenTrovato, I7guy and icanhazmac
svenmany said:
I see your point; it's a crappy post.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

svenmany said:
I suppose if that person had written "I despise Musk and would never spend money on anything that would benefit him", it would have been more digestible.
Click to expand...

Agreed. I would prefer something more substantially on topic, such as: "I despise EM because Starlink Satellites are cluttering the skies", but yes, I wouldn't be challenging these moderation choices as much as I have been if the comments were limited to examples like yours.

Funny thing is that Germany is now sending cops to your home if you insult people online: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/policing-speech-online-germany-60-minutes-transcript/

svenmany said:
My opinion - that first comment ads no value. 😍People who are angry about Musk enjoy it and are stoked to more anger😍.
Click to expand...

Correct, this is why I felt it violates the trolling rules of the site.

svenmany said:
People who are not angry about Musk either ignore it, get annoyed, or even get angry.
Click to expand...

I couldn't care less what anyone thinks of anyone else, including EM. What I take issue with in any EM adjacent thread is the careless and dangerous use of the word Nazi. A few years back, right here on MR, we had a bunch of members that liked to call other members all manner of -ists, based on even mild bucking of the narrative of one political side. Thankfully MR weeded those folks out as carelessly throwing around those derogatory terms doesn't benefit anyone.

svenmany said:
It doesn't provide any input that will influence thinking or educate. And we don't need more anger.
Click to expand...

Very well put, thank you for the civil discourse.
 
Last edited:
svenmany said:
It's only my wish that we could be better. It's such a mild insult that it wouldn't violate a rule.
Click to expand...
To me there is no such thing as a mild insult. Because once a "mild insult" is allowed, the line in the sand keeps creeping forward.

I think some people just spew whatever comes into their mind without a filter. And frankly I'm happy there is some diligence, in the form of moderation, around trying to be civil, even when posters disagrees.

But yeah, some posts are mean-spirited and some add no value and some, imo, are outright trolling.

None of us responding in threads such as this gets their "moderation nirvana" and everything is a compromise.

It could be worse, much worse.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: bousozoku and icanhazmac
I used to frequent a board with an off-topic section that was completely unmoderated. Many here would not have survived there for long.

Think before you post. Are you really adding anything to the topic or just ranting? I really don't care either way because I have a thick skin on these boards. The moderators, and regulars may have a different opinion, and it's their house.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bousozoku and rm5
  • Love
Reactions: bousozoku
M.Brane said:
I used to frequent a board with an off-topic section that was completely unmoderated. Many here would not have survived there for long.

Think before you post. Are you really adding anything to the topic or just ranting? I really don't care either way because I have a thick skin on these boards. The moderators, and regulars may have a different opinion, and it's their house.
Click to expand...
Everything I write in these forums are things that I would say face-to-face.

I've seen some posts that would lead to a physical altercation. Do these people talk that way in public or at work?
 
  • Like
Reactions: icanhazmac, I7guy, turbineseaplane and 1 other person
bousozoku said:
Everything I write in these forums are things that I would say face-to-face.

I've seen some posts that would lead to a physical altercation. Do these people talk that way in public or at work?
Click to expand...
Exactly. I follow the same rule, in addition to one that doesn't apply to forums: I'll never say anything behind your back that I won't say to your face. These two rules keep me on the straight and narrow.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bousozoku
TechRunner said:
Exactly. I follow the same rule, in addition to one that doesn't apply to forums: I'll never say anything behind your back that I won't say to your face. These two rules keep me on the straight and narrow.
Click to expand...
Years ago, I got a call at work from inside the building, the owner of the company asked me a question and I answered it honestly, implicating someone. "Did you know that the speakerphone was on?" "The answer wasn't going to change because the truth is not going to change." I replied.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: I7guy, turbineseaplane and TechRunner
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back