[Discussion/Announcement] NSG's "Wing" Megathreads

[Diarcesia]

However, it does reveal an inconsistency within the ruling system - if these more obviously rude posts are tolerated, then why isn't intentionally "misgendering" someone?

It isn't inconsistent at all. Rudeness is rudeness, while trolling is trolling. I shouldn't really need to emphasise tautologies like that, but here we are...

Not really, some equate the two. You can see reports like those in Moderation. Rudeness is not actionable. Trolling is.

[Cekoviu]

Well, the last couple reports on moderation are on right-wing people, is that mod-bias, or right-wingers break the rule more often?

Or am I just dumb at the forums and can't tell who's right-wing or who's left-wing?

Reports don't reflect moderator bias, they reflect user bias. Actions taken on reports reflect moderator bias. Looking at all of the unique reports (so not megathreads like spam/etc, since those rarely have any biased actions) on the last page of moderation, action was taken on the following users:

• Washington Resistance Army (7-day ban for trolling)
• Hrythingland (warning for trolling)
• Saranidia; North German Realm (warning for flaming/flamebaiting respectively from the same exchange)
• Cekoviu; Rugged Ruggedists (3-day ban for trolling, DEAT for being a DOS respectively)
• United England n Wales (unofficial warning for spamming moderation, though apparently DEATed later for unknown reasons)
• The Cazistan (warned for trolling)

It should be noted that the majority of threads on the first page resulted in no explicit moderation action. Users who were reported with no action taken are as follows:

• Rugged Ruggedists (reported prior to being spotted as DOS, no action taken on that report)
• Alcala-Cordel
• Hrythingland
• Federal Republic Of America And The Cari
• Purpelia
• Eurasies

So now we should figure out the political orientations of these users. I'll use a combination of personal observations and information in signatures to determine this.

• Washington Resistance Army - Broadly authoritarian, centrist or center left economically.
• Hrythingland - unclear. Self-proclaimed ethno-nationalist, but no clues whatsoever that I can find as to authoritarian/libertarian leanings or economic opinions and I haven't personally spoken to that user.
• Saranidia - Broadly center-left.
• North German Realm - Anarchist, last I checked.
• Cekoviu - Authoritarian leftist.
• Rugged Ruggedists - Unclear, since DOS.
• United England n Wales - Centrist.
• Alcala-Cordel - Leftlib.
• Federal Republic Of America And The Cari - Apparently centrist.
• Purpelia - Authright or authcenter, not sure.
• Eurasies - Unclear

Now, let's map moderation decisions by political position. We will collect users of a particular political persuasion and examine the ratio of actionable reports to non-actionable reports. They map onto the political spectrum like this (redder = higher ratio):

As it turns out, there were no reports against clearly economically right-wing users period on the last page, much less any actionable ones. If anything, this would indicate that moderation applies harsher-than-average judgment to economically left-wing users and lighter-than-average to centrists. So your perception seems to be severely skewed here.

(I should note that the trends above are not actually fair to use as representative, as they are from such a small sample size; to be clear, I am making no point about the actual biases of moderation.)

[La Xinga]

Well, the last couple reports on moderation are on right-wing people, is that mod-bias, or right-wingers break the rule more often?

Or am I just dumb at the forums and can't tell who's right-wing or who's left-wing?

Reports don't reflect moderator bias, they reflect user bias. Actions taken on reports reflect moderator bias. Looking at all of the unique reports (so not megathreads like spam/etc, since those rarely have any biased actions) on the last page of moderation, action was taken on the following users:

• Washington Resistance Army (7-day ban for trolling)
• Hrythingland (warning for trolling)
• Saranidia; North German Realm (warning for flaming/flamebaiting respectively from the same exchange)
• Cekoviu; Rugged Ruggedists (3-day ban for trolling, DEAT for being a DOS respectively)
• United England n Wales (unofficial warning for spamming moderation, though apparently DEATed later for unknown reasons)
• The Cazistan (warned for trolling)

It should be noted that the majority of threads on the first page resulted in no explicit moderation action. Users who were reported with no action taken are as follows:

• Rugged Ruggedists (reported prior to being spotted as DOS, no action taken on that report)
• Alcala-Cordel
• Hrythingland
• Federal Republic Of America And The Cari
• Purpelia
• Eurasies

So now we should figure out the political orientations of these users. I'll use a combination of personal observations and information in signatures to determine this.

• Washington Resistance Army - Broadly authoritarian, centrist or center left economically.
• Hrythingland - unclear. Self-proclaimed ethno-nationalist, but no clues whatsoever that I can find as to authoritarian/libertarian leanings or economic opinions and I haven't personally spoken to that user.
• Saranidia - Broadly center-left.
• North German Realm - Anarchist, last I checked.
• Cekoviu - Authoritarian leftist.
• Rugged Ruggedists - Unclear, since DOS.
• United England n Wales - Centrist.
• Alcala-Cordel - Leftlib.
• Federal Republic Of America And The Cari - Apparently centrist.
• Purpelia - Authright or authcenter, not sure.
• Eurasies - Unclear

Now, let's map moderation decisions by political position. We will collect users of a particular political persuasion and examine the ratio of actionable reports to non-actionable reports. They map onto the political spectrum like this (redder = higher ratio):

As it turns out, there were no reports against clearly economically right-wing users period on the last page, much less any actionable ones. If anything, this would indicate that moderation applies harsher-than-average judgment to economically left-wing users and lighter-than-average to centrists. So your perception seems to be severely skewed here.

(I should note that the trends above are not actually fair to use as representative, as they are from such a small sample size; to be clear, I am making no point about the actual biases of moderation.)

RR is probably a Right-winger from his/her posts. Eurasies is probably too.

From the way I notice, not saying they are biased from that way, most of the mods are Athiests and Liberals.

[Reploid Productions]

most of the mods are Athiests and Liberals.

Nope.

[La Xinga]

most of the mods are Athiests and Liberals.

Nope.

About half of the mods are in the top 10% for secularism, pretty high in political freedom most of them too, look at their nation classifications.

[Reploid Productions]

Nope.

About half of the mods are in the top 10% for secularism, pretty high in political freedom most of them too, look at their nation classifications.

In-game nation statistics are not indicative of any player's actual beliefs.

[Dominioan]

Nope.

About half of the mods are in the top 10% for secularism, pretty high in political freedom most of them too, look at their nation classifications.

...NS stats aren't always views. Look at mine =/

[La Xinga]

About half of the mods are in the top 10% for secularism, pretty high in political freedom most of them too, look at their nation classifications.

In-game nation statistics are not indicative of any player's actual beliefs.

Aren't they usually?

[Dominioan]

In-game nation statistics are not indicative of any player's actual beliefs.

Aren't they usually?

No.

[The New California Republic]

In-game nation statistics are not indicative of any player's actual beliefs.

Aren't they usually?

No. It's fallacious to link nation specifics as being indicative of the person behind the nation's beliefs. For instance I've had a few puppets that would make your eyes water in terms of their policies, and even my main does too, but that doesn't mean I subscribe to those beliefs.

[La Xinga]

Aren't they usually?

No. It's fallacious to link nation specifics as being indicative of the person behind the nation's beliefs. For instance I've had a few puppets that would make your eyes water in terms of their policies, and even my main does too, but that doesn't mean I subscribe to those beliefs.

If you look at a nation on NSG, the nation usually has the views.

[Diopolis]

Well, the last couple reports on moderation are on right-wing people, is that mod-bias, or right-wingers break the rule more often?

Or am I just dumb at the forums and can't tell who's right-wing or who's left-wing?

Reports don't reflect moderator bias, they reflect user bias. Actions taken on reports reflect moderator bias. Looking at all of the unique reports (so not megathreads like spam/etc, since those rarely have any biased actions) on the last page of moderation, action was taken on the following users:

• Washington Resistance Army (7-day ban for trolling)
• Hrythingland (warning for trolling)
• Saranidia; North German Realm (warning for flaming/flamebaiting respectively from the same exchange)
• Cekoviu; Rugged Ruggedists (3-day ban for trolling, DEAT for being a DOS respectively)
• United England n Wales (unofficial warning for spamming moderation, though apparently DEATed later for unknown reasons)
• The Cazistan (warned for trolling)

It should be noted that the majority of threads on the first page resulted in no explicit moderation action. Users who were reported with no action taken are as follows:

• Rugged Ruggedists (reported prior to being spotted as DOS, no action taken on that report)
• Alcala-Cordel
• Hrythingland
• Federal Republic Of America And The Cari
• Purpelia
• Eurasies

So now we should figure out the political orientations of these users. I'll use a combination of personal observations and information in signatures to determine this.

• Washington Resistance Army - Broadly authoritarian, centrist or center left economically.
• Hrythingland - unclear. Self-proclaimed ethno-nationalist, but no clues whatsoever that I can find as to authoritarian/libertarian leanings or economic opinions and I haven't personally spoken to that user.
• Saranidia - Broadly center-left.
• North German Realm - Anarchist, last I checked.
• Cekoviu - Authoritarian leftist.
• Rugged Ruggedists - Unclear, since DOS.
• United England n Wales - Centrist.
• Alcala-Cordel - Leftlib.
• Federal Republic Of America And The Cari - Apparently centrist.
• Purpelia - Authright or authcenter, not sure.
• Eurasies - Unclear

Now, let's map moderation decisions by political position. We will collect users of a particular political persuasion and examine the ratio of actionable reports to non-actionable reports. They map onto the political spectrum like this (redder = higher ratio):

As it turns out, there were no reports against clearly economically right-wing users period on the last page, much less any actionable ones. If anything, this would indicate that moderation applies harsher-than-average judgment to economically left-wing users and lighter-than-average to centrists. So your perception seems to be severely skewed here.

(I should note that the trends above are not actually fair to use as representative, as they are from such a small sample size; to be clear, I am making no point about the actual biases of moderation.)

WRA has always come off to me as right wing, albeit an eccentric one, as opposed to centrist/center left.

most of the mods are Athiests and Liberals.

Nope.

I have no trouble believing this, but I'll note that of the mods who are active in general they all seem to be leftwingers(with the notable exception of Arch).
I don't think there's any kind of systemic mod bias, though. I'm just pointing out why the perception that the mods are overwhelmingly liberal exists.

[Cekoviu]

WRA has always come off to me as right wing, albeit an eccentric one, as opposed to centrist/center left.

In terms of approach he is right-wing, but I think his economics as of late have been sliding towards the left. I haven't spoken to him a ton, so I could be wrong.

[The Reformed American Republic]

Not everyone thinks "right-wing" is defined by support for free market capitalism and pro-billionaire tax loopholes.

[Lysset]

No. It's fallacious to link nation specifics as being indicative of the person behind the nation's beliefs. For instance I've had a few puppets that would make your eyes water in terms of their policies, and even my main does too, but that doesn't mean I subscribe to those beliefs.

If you look at a nation on NSG, the nation usually has the views.

And yet, NSG is still only a portion of the overall userbase. It doesn't account for nations that never post in NSG and entirely stick to roleplay forums like F&NI, GE&T, NationStates roleplay, International Incidents, or Portal to the Multiverse, let alone nations who post only in the various World Assembly forums, the Gameplay forum, Got Issues?, Arts & Fiction, and Forum 7. And that still doesn't account for nations who never touch the forums at all and just log in to answer issues.

In short, your assertion is fallacious because it asserts that nations on NSG make up the entire userbase, when that, in reality, only makes up a fraction of the total userbase.

[Diopolis]

WRA has always come off to me as right wing, albeit an eccentric one, as opposed to centrist/center left.

In terms of approach he is right-wing, but I think his economics as of late have been sliding towards the left. I haven't spoken to him a ton, so I could be wrong.

Last I discussed with him he was a fascist whose biggest(of multiple) problem with capitalism was that it tended to promote vice and prevent virtue and saw a replacement system as one that necessarily would have to be constructed as possible(as opposed to planned out ahead of time) when capitalism was burned down, and was strongly anti-communist to boot.
I'm not saying he couldn't have changed, just that that's a very right wing anti-capitalist viewpoint.

[Grenartia]

That seems to be a pattern I've noticed with a lot of right wingers here. If they disparage you, its "civil debate". If you make reasoned, logical arguments against them, its "toxic and rude".

I'm a right-winger, and I believe that's not the case, at least by me and some others.

That's why I said "a lot of" and not "all".

However, I fail to see how intentionally "misgendering" is a character attack. (Whether one is biologically a male or female is not intended to be insulting, nor is it intended to dismiss/devalue an argument.)

It is a personal attack.

Well, the last couple reports on moderation are on right-wing people, is that mod-bias,

Mods don't make reports.

or right-wingers break the rule more often?

I'd go with that. As I've said before, if you have an ideology that sees a group of people as "subhuman", you're more likely to break the rules here, because the rules here tend not to look kindly on insulting other people and calling them subhuman or whatever other insults one may feel the need to shout at someone else. And, undeniably, the vast majority of ideologies that categorize any group of people as subhuman are clustered on the right.

Which isn't to say that lefties are immune to rule-breaking, or that all rightists subscribe to dehumanizing ideologies.

WRA has always come off to me as right wing, albeit an eccentric one, as opposed to centrist/center left.

In terms of approach he is right-wing, but I think his economics as of late have been sliding towards the left. I haven't spoken to him a ton, so I could be wrong.

I would definitely consider him a right-winger.

[La Xinga]

If you look at a nation on NSG, the nation usually has the views.

And yet, NSG is still only a portion of the overall userbase. It doesn't account for nations that never post in NSG and entirely stick to roleplay forums like F&NI, GE&T, NationStates roleplay, International Incidents, or Portal to the Multiverse, let alone nations who post only in the various World Assembly forums, the Gameplay forum, Got Issues?, Arts & Fiction, and Forum 7. And that still doesn't account for nations who never touch the forums at all and just log in to answer issues.

In short, your assertion is fallacious because it asserts that nations on NSG make up the entire userbase, when that, in reality, only makes up a fraction of the total userbase.

We can't prove otherwise either.

[La Xinga]

I'm a right-winger, and I believe that's not the case, at least by me and some others.

That's why I said "a lot of" and not "all".

However, I fail to see how intentionally "misgendering" is a character attack. (Whether one is biologically a male or female is not intended to be insulting, nor is it intended to dismiss/devalue an argument.)

It is a personal attack.

Well, the last couple reports on moderation are on right-wing people, is that mod-bias,

Mods don't make reports.

or right-wingers break the rule more often?

I'd go with that. As I've said before, if you have an ideology that sees a group of people as "subhuman", you're more likely to break the rules here, because the rules here tend not to look kindly on insulting other people and calling them subhuman or whatever other insults one may feel the need to shout at someone else. And, undeniably, the vast majority of ideologies that categorize any group of people as subhuman are clustered on the right.

Which isn't to say that lefties are immune to rule-breaking, or that all rightists subscribe to dehumanizing ideologies.

In terms of approach he is right-wing, but I think his economics as of late have been sliding towards the left. I haven't spoken to him a ton, so I could be wrong.

I would definitely consider him a right-winger.

Liberals are more accepting, and I say that as a right-winger. NS is accepting to LGBTQ+ stuff and stuff like that, so it makes sense.

[Drop Your Pants]

Well, the last couple reports on moderation are on right-wing people, is that mod-bias,

Mods don't make reports.

They do if they're active participants in the thread and they see rule breaking behaviour but can't rule in case it's seen as a bias. Which isn't an official rule so you have to commend the mods for being able to step back and let another mod deal with it.

[UENW-Wooloos]

Well, the last couple reports on moderation are on right-wing people, is that mod-bias, or right-wingers break the rule more often?

Or am I just dumb at the forums and can't tell who's right-wing or who's left-wing?

Reports don't reflect moderator bias, they reflect user bias. Actions taken on reports reflect moderator bias. Looking at all of the unique reports (so not megathreads like spam/etc, since those rarely have any biased actions) on the last page of moderation, action was taken on the following users:

• Washington Resistance Army (7-day ban for trolling)
• Hrythingland (warning for trolling)
• Saranidia; North German Realm (warning for flaming/flamebaiting respectively from the same exchange)
• Cekoviu; Rugged Ruggedists (3-day ban for trolling, DEAT for being a DOS respectively)
• United England n Wales (unofficial warning for spamming moderation, though apparently DEATed later for unknown reasons)
• The Cazistan (warned for trolling)

It should be noted that the majority of threads on the first page resulted in no explicit moderation action. Users who were reported with no action taken are as follows:

• Rugged Ruggedists (reported prior to being spotted as DOS, no action taken on that report)
• Alcala-Cordel
• Hrythingland
• Federal Republic Of America And The Cari
• Purpelia
• Eurasies

So now we should figure out the political orientations of these users. I'll use a combination of personal observations and information in signatures to determine this.

• Washington Resistance Army - Broadly authoritarian, centrist or center left economically.
• Hrythingland - unclear. Self-proclaimed ethno-nationalist, but no clues whatsoever that I can find as to authoritarian/libertarian leanings or economic opinions and I haven't personally spoken to that user.
• Saranidia - Broadly center-left.
• North German Realm - Anarchist, last I checked.
• Cekoviu - Authoritarian leftist.
• Rugged Ruggedists - Unclear, since DOS.
• United England n Wales - Centrist.
• Alcala-Cordel - Leftlib.
• Federal Republic Of America And The Cari - Apparently centrist.
• Purpelia - Authright or authcenter, not sure.
• Eurasies - Unclear

Now, let's map moderation decisions by political position. We will collect users of a particular political persuasion and examine the ratio of actionable reports to non-actionable reports. They map onto the political spectrum like this (redder = higher ratio):

As it turns out, there were no reports against clearly economically right-wing users period on the last page, much less any actionable ones. If anything, this would indicate that moderation applies harsher-than-average judgment to economically left-wing users and lighter-than-average to centrists. So your perception seems to be severely skewed here.

(I should note that the trends above are not actually fair to use as representative, as they are from such a small sample size; to be clear, I am making no point about the actual biases of moderation.)

I dont think the mods are politcal bias from what I have seen.
Fyi my main nation was United England n Wales and it was not deatd because of any politcal bias, it was issues with gameside.
Any bias decision they make is just piss poor arbitrary at best.

[Atheris]

-snip snip snippity snip!-

I don't think the answer is that the mods have a left or right-wing bias. I think it's that more left-wing users use the forums than right-wing users, and therefore more left-wing users are going to be warned or acted on than right-wing users more because of the higher quantity of left-wingers.

[Nouveau Quebecois]

About half of the mods are in the top 10% for secularism, pretty high in political freedom most of them too, look at their nation classifications.

In-game nation statistics are not indicative of any player's actual beliefs.

So what are their beliefs? Let's get a moderator census going.

[Katganistan]

Mods don't make reports.

They do if they're active participants in the thread and they see rule breaking behaviour but can't rule in case it's seen as a bias. Which isn't an official rule so you have to commend the mods for being able to step back and let another mod deal with it.

Unless it's something egregious, like someone posting something which is so obviously against the rules as to necessitate its immediate removal, we will file a report just like any other player so there is no question of personal bias.

[The New California Republic]

In-game nation statistics are not indicative of any player's actual beliefs.

So what are their beliefs? Let's get a moderator census going.

And what exactly would that do? Again, their individual beliefs do not affect their rulings; so what would it achieve by knowing them?