[R] Threadtrawl, Ukraine thread

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

Gonna need a brief threadtrawl from this page onwards because of Tarsonis, UMN and WRA flaming, trolling and baiting eachother over a threadjack.

[Punished UMN]

Don't blame WRA and I, Tars is the one that went out of his way to seize on a chance to take a jab at the Allied powers.

[Fahran]

One trawl, coming right up!

[Fahran]

viewtopic.php?p=42200874#p42200874

And done. It'll take awhile for me to implement everything, but I made an effort to be as thorough and as fair as possible.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=42200874#p42200874

And done. It'll take awhile for me to implement everything, but I made an effort to be as thorough and as fair as possible.

I would like to appeal.

A major justification behind the international support for Ukraine has been that the Russian invasion of Ukraine disrupts the rules-based liberal world order and that democracies must thus cooperate in defence of this order. Consequently, debates about whether that order really exists and, if so, whether it is meaningfully better than alternative orders (such as, for example, the Soviet socialist international order), are absolutely pertinent to the issue at hand.

No political issue exists in isolation. Our views on the Russo-Ukrainian war depend on the priors we assume as we approach the issue and the premises we consider in our analyses. It is not possible to debate the differences in our opinions to any meaningful extent if we are not permitted to criticise each other's priors and premises that led to those differences in opinion.

[Fahran]

Second opinion flare sent up.

[United Calanworie]

https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?p=42200874#p42200874

And done. It'll take awhile for me to implement everything, but I made an effort to be as thorough and as fair as possible.

I would like to appeal.

A major justification behind the international support for Ukraine has been that the Russian invasion of Ukraine disrupts the rules-based liberal world order and that democracies must thus cooperate in defence of this order. Consequently, debates about whether that order really exists and, if so, whether it is meaningfully better than alternative orders (such as, for example, the Soviet socialist international order), are absolutely pertinent to the issue at hand.

No political issue exists in isolation. Our views on the Russo-Ukrainian war depend on the priors we assume as we approach the issue and the premises we consider in our analyses. It is not possible to debate the differences in our opinions to any meaningful extent if we are not permitted to criticise each other's priors and premises that led to those differences in opinion.

Your Appeal has been considered by a Moderator uninvolved in the original decision, and denied.

Your only recourse is a Final Appeal, which should only be requested when you believe a significant injustice has occurred. Please read through the Appeals Process prior to submitting any Final Appeal, and note that requests for a Final Appeal that are judged to be frivolous, such as for minor warnings and bans, may result in further warnings being added to your nation.

[Luminesa]

Want to appeal the “official” versus “unofficial label” for my warning. I was, admittedly, as guilty of jumping into the pile as some of the boys who got their “unofficial warnings”. So I want to understand why mine was escalated when I haven’t been warned officially for anything in 6-ish years.

[Fahran]

Second opinion flare go pop.

[Punished UMN]

I would like to appeal.

A major justification behind the international support for Ukraine has been that the Russian invasion of Ukraine disrupts the rules-based liberal world order and that democracies must thus cooperate in defence of this order. Consequently, debates about whether that order really exists and, if so, whether it is meaningfully better than alternative orders (such as, for example, the Soviet socialist international order), are absolutely pertinent to the issue at hand.

No political issue exists in isolation. Our views on the Russo-Ukrainian war depend on the priors we assume as we approach the issue and the premises we consider in our analyses. It is not possible to debate the differences in our opinions to any meaningful extent if we are not permitted to criticise each other's priors and premises that led to those differences in opinion.

Your Appeal has been considered by a Moderator uninvolved in the original decision, and denied.

Your only recourse is a Final Appeal, which should only be requested when you believe a significant injustice has occurred. Please read through the Appeals Process prior to submitting any Final Appeal, and note that requests for a Final Appeal that are judged to be frivolous, such as for minor warnings and bans, may result in further warnings being added to your nation.

I think NSCR's point is nuanced and well-argued enough it deserves an explanation as to why it isn't being taken into account instead of just being told to shut up or get more warnings because he pointed out that the threadjacking warnings were issued for pertinent discussion. If we aren't allowed to talk about the historical and ideological underpinnings of the conflict then what is left besides being a news feed?

[Godular]

Want to appeal the “official” versus “unofficial label” for my warning. I was, admittedly, as guilty of jumping into the pile as some of the boys who got their “unofficial warnings”. So I want to understand why mine was escalated when I haven’t been warned officially for anything in 6-ish years.

I'mma pop in here and say that I concur with Fahran's official warning, primarily on the basis that the unofficial warnings were largely handed out to those who were contributing to the threadjack. Official warnings went to those who not only contributed to the threadjack but also engaged in another activity that was considered actionable in the process. In your case, flamebait via 'botnaming'. The post in question did not contribute meaningfully outside of making a jab at the other poster, even in the context of that tangential-at-best discussion.

For this, I uphold Fahran's ruling on the matter and deny the appeal.

You may of course request a final appeal, if you believe it to be warranted.

[Luminesa]

Want to appeal the “official” versus “unofficial label” for my warning. I was, admittedly, as guilty of jumping into the pile as some of the boys who got their “unofficial warnings”. So I want to understand why mine was escalated when I haven’t been warned officially for anything in 6-ish years.

I'mma pop in here and say that I concur with Fahran's official warning, primarily on the basis that the unofficial warnings were largely handed out to those who were contributing to the threadjack. Official warnings went to those who not only contributed to the threadjack but also engaged in another activity that was considered actionable in the process. In your case, flamebait via 'botnaming'. The post in question did not contribute meaningfully outside of making a jab at the other poster, even in the context of that tangential-at-best discussion.

For this, I uphold Fahran's ruling on the matter and deny the appeal.

You may of course request a final appeal, if you believe it to be warranted.

I suppose that makes enough sense. No worries, I just wanted to understand the distinction.