(untitled)

I too would like to know. We were having a good discussion there. Perhaps a few silly posts but generally very civil and topical discussion of a very decent OP.

>>11120 Thread was deleted because the OP was a Rule 3 and Rule 4 violation, and there was over 6 reports for Rule 3 violations in the replies. Yes I could have deleted at least 6 of the replies, if not more for Rule 3 violation and warned the OP, but I would prefer if you actually think about what you want to discuss when you want discuss communism because it is one of the many topics that just ends up as a tire fire of bickering and insults rather than discussion., when you don't define the specific conversation / dialogue or discussion you want to have. I suggest you remake the thread, thinking carefully about the OP you write and what you actually want to discuss. Rather than making incorrect assumptions about a topic's fake popularity when it is used to derail another thread into bickering about communism vs capitalism and everyone is retards. That said if too many soykaf communism threads without elaboration and with discussion in good faith are made or spammed, then I will consider adding communism to the list of topics that are unrelated content, based on its inability to be discussed appropriately.

>>11122 >3. Always argue in good faith and avoid using personal attacks. >4. You should always elaborate on your opinions rather than just spilling the soykaf. I find this justification to be really bleak. The OP does not break rule 3 and 4 under any kind of interpretation. The discussion was quite clear and the points in the OP detailed a type of system of which to argue about. You disregarded the effort of many posters, be it in good faith or otherwise. There's no point in making another thread like it and I think I will no longer participate in this community.

>>11122 >I could have deleted at least 6 of the replies you could and did delete all of the replies. You have the power, its your site and you can do what you want. >but I would prefer if you actually think about what you want to discuss I'm not the OP of the thread discussed but I contributed a couple posts. This looked like one of the better communism threads that started out with a fairly well developed OP which was the branching point for (most of) the subsequent posts. >just ends up as a tire fire of bickering and insults rather than discussion Admittedly there was some bickering and insults here but most of the posts were very topical and civil, and in apparently good faith as much as any discussion posts on the board. Some level of insults are plainly part of the culture here, this thread had them but it wasn't excessive. >I suggest you remake the thread, thinking carefully about the OP you write and what you actually want to discuss. I've seen communism threads here before. This OP was one of the better ones. It had a particular topic that wasn't just 'communism' and was trying to be specifically related to lainchan. Most of the discussion within the thread was responding to specific points within the OP. When I saw the thread my first though was basically 'woah, a thread that's trying hard to take appleman's reccomendations about communism threads to heart'. The OP is in compliance with this suggestion of yours; you're not telling him to do anything differently but just to do what he already did again and hope next time you'll be in a better mood. You might as well just add communism to such a list. Unfortunately I don't think that'll stop it from being discussed for plainly its of interest to the community.

>>11124 >When I saw the thread my first though was basically 'woah, a thread that's trying hard to take appleman's reccomendations about communism threads to heart'. I've been here since way before the split. I can't remember the last time I saw a thread with communism as the topic discussed without people fuarrrking it up. Based on the responses, I'm disappointed I missed what sounds like a good post. >there was over 6 reports for Rule 3 violations in the replies. With a controversial topic like communism, I don't feel like it's unrealistic that one or two motivated individuals with a proxy or other methods could report this many times to show more people upset than are really there. But I may be way off on that assessment, I haven't really kept up with the modern protections of imageboards.

A politics thread about communism got deleted from >>>/hum/. I read the rules multiple times and I don't think I broke any. Can a mod explain to me why it got deleted?

>>11123 I am sorry that you feel that and that you think that no longer participating is this correct solution. The OP did break Rule 3 and 4, the discussion wasn't clear and framed , and the replies had already generated into the Purple vs Green arguments that communism vs capitalism threads or just communism threads have done here previously 95 times out of 100. If you don't want an explanation and only want to make rebuttals , then you shouldn't ask for an explanation. If you don't make a new thread, then it has no chance of being moderated differently. >>11124 If the OP had been in compliance, then I would have just deleted the bickering and derailing replies and left the OP, at least until the bickering and derailing replies returned and then I would sweep again, etc for at least 5 times until the maintenance of the thread became to much, just like I do other threads that have bickering replies or Rule 3 and Rule 4 violations calling people retards and morons. The OP only mentioned the what, and then teased at one bonus what of computer aided economic planning, and spent more reference a different thread with a false assumption, and not elaborating on why you want to discuss it, just that you think it is popular based on behaviour in another thread. The OP also failed to frame the discussion or reflect on the how the discussion, and the original poster didn't provide any seed topic or starter topic for reference.