p.s. - I've read IP answer to me. I was making a joke; but I stand by me statements anyway (and if you really want to, I can easily prove that - be cautious with what you ask though).
Regarding whether there's a liberal bias on our staff, it's true that most of the people restricted from the Current Events forum (which is less than a half-dozen people) are conservative. However, I think that's more coincidental than anything else. I don't think anybody, for instance, would accuse me of a liberal bias, and I've agreed with each of the restrictions put on members.
However, if you feel that we've been unduly harsh on conservatives, or unfairly lenient towards liberals, it's actually a discussion I welcome.
(As for your own restriction, as has been noted, the staff is willing to give almost anybody a second shot at the forum, depending upon the severity of their offense). As I recall, you didn't want to have your access rights restored, but the staff is willing to revisit that decision if you'd like.)
Oh no, it's not about my access rights; I just wanted to make the joke.
And of course there's a double-standard. I mean, just an example, I can point examples of liberals making offensive personal remarks, like calling individuals "dumb" and "clown", which is an explicit violation of the rules, without even being warned; while if someone writes something like "Hello socialism, goodbye freedom" or "These ideas are laughable" (being a conservative) that poster is banned. These are just examples, there are even worse and more evident cases.
I wasn't even aware this bias was disputed; I thought it was just assumed by everybody.
Everytime we ban someone from the current events forum, or the entire forum for that matter, there is a discussion. We all have our say. We come to an agreement through discussion, and we make a choice. I do not know how much better we could do it. If you have a problem with something I said, something a mod said, in any thread, just hit the report abuse button. We'll look at it, and we'll give it fair consideration. I do not know what else we could offer.
Oh, I didn't question the formal procedures, rather I'm accusing you (the mods overall) of being biased (the fact that you can't understand you're biased doesn't make you less biased, just unable to understand your own bias).
I can't hit the report abuse button because the forum isn't available to me; besides I was banned precisely for accusing a mod of being inconsistent via PM.
Anyway, if you want a prove of your own bias, just check the "Major News Outlets....Biased?" topic, for example (although there are better ones). You justify banning the poor guy who wrote "Hello socialism, goodbye freedom" equating what he said to someone saying, and I quote ad verbatim your example, "Fox news spews biased partisan propaganda for the radical right". According to you, writing something like that would be wrong, unacceptable, a self serving cheap shot and lead to an immediate banishment.
However, when someone said "
Rush Limbaugh and all of the right wing talk show crazies. I want Hannity and all of the hate mongers and veiled racists at Fox News.
And lastly, you'll also have to throw in the purveyors of right wing drivel on what purports to be Boston sports radio, starting with Gerry Callahan and his boss, Glenn Ordway, who reminds me of Jabba the Hut: the same beady eyes, the same jowls etc. etc.", it suddenly stopped being unacceptable and it passed without mention.
I can give plenty of more examples if you wish so. Once again, I'm not question your good faith; it seems to me that it's just the well-known inability individuals and groups have to perceive their own bias.