About the Moderators' recent efforts on the Illegal Alien threads: keep an open mind

January 7th, 2003 | Sabertooth

[Sabertooth]

You may have observed the recent effort in the forum by the Lead Moderator to scrutinize and regulate the Illegal Alien threads, which started over here.

I’ve mixed it up a lot on these threads in the two-plus year I’ve been at FR, as I have some strong feelings about the subject of Illegal Aliens. While I like to think I’ve generally kept my cool, there have certainly been occasions when I haven’t.

That said, there have been plenty of occasions where I’ve attempted to engage sincere posters who did not share my opinions, only to have them jumped on by angry posters who did. In the past I’ve made posts on threads and requests by Freepmail requesting that the more aggressive posters cool their jets… to mixed results.

I’ve also seen posts suggesting that the borders be mined, which I think is stupid, hyperbolic spleen, or posts referring to the President as “Jorge Arbusto,” which stopped being funny years ago, and is now just antagonistic. It doesn’t matter that Vicente Fox once called him that in a friendly fashion, no one on the fence regarding Illegals is going to be persuaded by ad hominem rhetoric.

On the other hand, I’ve also observed a shifting coalition of posters who are less than sincere on the other side of the debate; who are prone to using Democrat talking points to smear posters who are concerned about Illegals as anti-immigrant and closet racists. When reading their posts, one half-wonders if they aren’t moles for the L.A. Times.

Their perceptions of “bigots, bigots everywhere” and posts in that vein have also been toxic to the Illegal Alien threads, and such was often the purpose of their baiting. Success was measured in flame wars, bannings, suspensions, and getting threads nuked or moved to the backroom.

It’s been my contention, and I’ve made the point to the Moderators on a number of occasions, that moving threads to the backroom only rewarded those who don’t want Illegals discussed in this forum, and encouraged their trolling behavior.

I’ll stipulate again that my own hands haven’t always been clean in picking fights and thread jumping. I’ll also reveal that about a year or so ago I attempted to organize a call, via Freepmail, for some self-restraint on these threads. Toward that end, I contacted eight fairly high-profile posters, not all of whom were regulars on the Illegal threads, and whose opinions varied widely on the issue, with the idea of some sort of joint letter. The response was uniformly positive, but the details proved to be unwieldy, however, and the effort died on the vine.

Since then I would come and go from the Illegal Alien threads, and observe the ebbs and flows of all of the behavior I saw above.

A few months ago, I took a different tack, and got into a running conversation over my concerns with the Lead Moderator, through Freepmail.

Last week an Illegal Alien thread was moved to the Backroom, in another episode of the process I described above. This irked me a little more than usual, given the imminence of President Bush’s announcement of a new direction in immigration policy, and I ranted a little more than usual to the Lead Mod.

He was receptive to some of my criticisms, and decided to try the new approach that is now the matter at hand. He posted his account last night (emphasis added)…

---

To: All

I just got a Freepmail. Without posting it or who it was from, the gist of it was as follows:

1) That the timing of this effort was suspicious.

2) That this person feels the actions taken have shifted the emphasis of the forum from conservative oriented to party oriented.

I wanted to share with you my response:

I am being evenhanded on the matter. There have been those on one side of the issue have been warned about personal attacks and baiting. There have been those on the other side who have been warned about the same.

There has been one suspension, of someone who decided he was going to repost things which had been pulled. He has no one to blame but himself.

There has been one banning, of a person who said that there was no way he was going to abide by the way things are going to be. Once again, it was his choice and if he changes his mind he can mail Jim and his account will be restored.

The timing, you can have whatever suspicions you want. The fact is that for months, someone who is mostly on your side of the issue tried to get me to do more on these threads, hating how they get pulled when they turn into flame wars and how they get backroomed when they turn into flame wars. He would point to examples of baiting. He would point to personal attacks. Sometimes I would point out the things going the other way. Finally, he convinced me and I decided to give this approach a try.

To be honest, I think it is hilarious that some think I had some idea that some policy was coming out of the White House. It is good to be thought of as that well connected, I guess, but it sadly has no basis in reality.

I am going to post my reply on the thread. I won't quote your mail or your name, although I will paraphrase it.

Regards, LM

That is all.

262 posted on 01/06/2004 6:03:37 PM PST by Lead Moderator

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies | Report Abuse | link ]

---

So, if it’s not clear already, the Lead Moderator’s statements in this post are 100% accurate and legitimate. The timing of this effort was a direct result of my conversation with him, and was not the result of some conspiracy by Free Republic higher-ups, or Karl Rove, or Vicente Fox, or whatever current dark speculation is now popular.

Nor is there any overarching effort to censor a wide-ranging debate on Illegals, as far as I’ve seen. In the context of the current effort underway on the Illegal Alien threads, I haven’t received even the slightest hint that there are subjects that are off limits to me in this regard, nor have I been given the impression that there can’t be vigorous debate, and I’m hardly a party-liner in this.

Now, I’m certain that some will find it to be an abomination that I would cooperate with a Moderator, or he with me, but, as a friend of mine likes to say, there you have it.

As for the results, they’ve been a bit mixed so far, in my estimation. Not, however, because the Mods haven’t made an effort to be evenhanded. I’ve seen a few folks I warned to keep cool get swift warning when they didn’t, and I’ve seen some of the usual baiters get cease and desist orders. I’ve seen nothing to indicate that the effort to raise the tone of the debate on the Illegal Aliens isn’t sincere.

Are the Mods doing things exactly as I’d like? Nope, nor do I expect them to do so. I’ve got strong opinions and subjectivities here, so the standard of my assessment is the combined words and deeds of the Mods on these threads to correct all offenders. Things look promising thus far.

However, I do think that there are posters of diverse opinions who need to reconsider their ways, and take this effort to heart.

[Lead Moderator]

I just got a Freepmail. Without posting it or who it was from, the gist of it was as follows:

[snopercod]

I really can't think of any reasonable scenario where shooting down an off-course airliner would be the best - or even a good - course of action. But this thread is not the place to argue that.

I do think the Posting Guidelines should be clarified regarding violence. The word "materials" should be removed.

[wallcrawlr]

Of course when the world is one race one culture of one mind under one leader then there will finally be peace

I agree. Lord Jesus come...

[Rebelbase]

see 100

[Howlin]

Howlin, I don't see anything wrong with what Junta said, but I think I could be said in a more refined manner:

Which was my exact point; filled with hyperbole and jingoism.

[BOBTHENAILER]

Well said.

[Mo1]

but what about my cross-border catapult idea, for use in returning illegal aliens to their country of origin? Isn't that a cooler idea?

*L* .. Not sure that would work

But I'll give you an A+ for creative thinking ;0)

[Columbine]

I'll say it once again. Bush is a neocon of the likes Ronald Regan would have spit from his mouth.

I have no doubt that Reagan might be appalled at some of the spending that's going on but let us acknowledge that Reagan granted amnesty to illegal aliens during his term in office.

And I think it also is fair to acknowledge that Reagan would probably applaud President Bush's foreign policy.

[Mo1]

anger and frustration is one thing; racial epithets, vicious attacks, and the like are another.

Exactly!

[GraniteStateConservative]

I'll post what I posted on the first Lead Moderator thread. Why does it matter what the subject matter is. We don't care if a rapist was a rapist because he was distraught over being from a broken family. We punish him for being a rapist. Period.

Here's the rule: Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts.

Just enforce the rule!

Treat everyone equally. No prejudice based on the topic of the thread. Just delete the post and then delete the poster for a string of deleted posts.

Is it just that it's too much of a headache for the Mods? Is this an easier way to deal with it without really dealing with it?

[Lead Moderator]

"To: CWOJackson; Lead Moderator; Texasforever We anti-illegal immigrationists would appreciate your explaining the new rules governing civility on illegal immigration threads on FR to CWOJackson and Texasforever, LM.

CWOJackson has contributed more than 10 posts that are nothing more than bait to draw FReepers on the other side of the issue into a full-out flame war and that's exactly what this thread is beginning to degenerate into.

I call your specific attention to CWOJackson's #22 "I guess that beats menopause.", LM.

Count the number of times CWOJackson and Texasforever resorted to name-calling and personal attacks in the first 79 posts on this thread for yourself, LM.

If the new rules don't apply to FReepers on both sides of this issue, than nobody's going to follow them.

How many attempts at baiting anti-illegal immigration/anti-amnesty Freepers does the other side get before you sit them down, too?

81 posted on 01/07/2004 12:02:20 PM EST by 4Freedom (America is no longer the 'Land of Opportunity', it's the 'Land of Illegal Alien Opportunists'!!!)"

Thanks for the question, 4 Freedom.

I think a bit of history behind this effort is in order to give an explanation. First, you can review what Sabertooth posted at the top to get how it came to be.

I put this thread up on the 4th. As I stated in it, I started the next day, the 5th. When an immigration thread would go up, I would tack on a little foreward explaining that the thread was going to be monitored and providing a link back to that thread. As my time allowed, I monitored those threads carefully. I didn't pull anything, as it worked out, but I did call out whereever I saw something out of line, on both sides of the issue, as Sabertooth mentions above. If you go back and look at my posts on the 5th, I think you will see examples on all sides of the issue being called out and my reasons explained.

Then yesterday, three things happened. One was my day was busier. I was not around as much. Second, news regarding the issue hit and more threads than I could possibly have given the same amount of attention were going up. And third was that while some were working with me and trying to help out by abiding, a whole lot more were not and were trying to rally people to how unfair everything was- to the point where I was very close to scrapping the whole effort and returning to the recent status quo. I even posted as such on that thread (post 267).

This morning, I did go through and hit some of the threads that had gone up last night, including one where one of the people you named here had mixed it up pretty good with someone else. There were things that were against what we are trying to accomplish from both sides on that thread, and I did call them out. It wasn't the thread you just pointed to. I didn't hit that one because of time (I do have a life, you know) and because I was still burnt out and wondering if I was going to continue this effort.

As I stated on that post 267 I just linked to, this effort is not going to work without considerable assistance from Freepers on all sides of the issue to assist with a healthy amount of self-policing. Hopefully some of that will come out of this thread.

Regards, LM

[Dane]

Bush is a neocon of the likes Ronald Regan would have spit from his mouth.

Now your ignorance is showing. You pit Reagan against Bush, which Ronald Reagan would slap you silly for doing, IMO.

Reagan signed a tax increase, didn't sign one piece of legislation restricting abortion, and signed amnesty for illegal aliens, and yet you try to pit Reagan against Bush.

Does this mean I think that Reagan was a failure as a President, hell no, the failure is with the likes of you who do the liberal playbook of trying to pit people against each other.

[Joe Hadenuf]

I do suspect it has something to do with the outright anger and frustration we feel over the outright betrayal of our country by this administration which I used to admire.

Yep.

I was actually suspended the other day for posting/bumping someone else's post!

Can anyone top that? LOL!

[William Terrell]

I will make an offer, for today and today only.

Does that mean that if I see a removed comment on 1/8 or 1/10 and ask you what it said, you wont' tell me?

(P.S. A lot of times you can get a hint of what was said by posters responding to the comment before it was pulled. Ah, but hints only make the appetite sharper.)

[F16Fighter]

"I’ve also observed a shifting coalition of posters who are less than sincere on the other side of the debate; who are prone to using Democrat talking points to smear posters who are concerned about Illegals as anti-immigrant and closet racists. When reading their posts, one half-wonders if they aren’t moles for the L.A. Times."

LOL, makes me wonder as well...

There is simply one primary point to be made regarding illegal aliens:

Either one supports enforcement of America's sovereign borders in accordance with federal law and the Constitution, OR ignores enforcement.

If it's the latter, the Republic has indeed succumbed to foreign invasion, and thus surrendered to a New World Order -- without a shot being fired.

[rintense]

Ha! I got a newbie apologist asking me 'why so much hate' when I said I should have learned Spanish instead of French. LOL.

[blackie]

Rush is talking about this right now.

[GraniteStateConservative]

The "mexicanization" of Bush with the Vicente Fox mustache is the only thing controversial. I'd probably pull it for that reason. Making it look like he's a white guy as president of Mexico shouldn't make an image delete-worthy.

[dben]

I disagree about the ReAgan comment. Ronaldus Maximus would have understood that post 9/11 required extra bugetary needs.

I will wait until I hear POTUS speak this afternoon before I form opinion about the Immigration issue

[elli1]

I agree w/ the decision to remove the post which amounted to nothing more than an invitation to a juvenile round of ''Let's call George Bush names'' and avoidance of discussion of the substance of what he hasn't even yet said.

[hchutch]

How about you define "Open Borders" first?

As to VDARE, you yourself have said some of their stuff was questionable, have you not? If so, why won't you call them out on it? Why won't Michelle Malkin? Based on past immigration threads, I can only come to conclusions that would not reflect well on you or her.

PRND21 posted the link to VDARE and it was pulled by the Moderators, AS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN, despite his motivations for posting it.

If you want me to believe this thread is legit, then I want to see it reflected with some concrete actions. No more "quips" like calling Bartley a "mole" because he disagrees with you on this issue. Call VDARE and Sam Francis out when they say questionable things in columns or on the web. Otherwise, I will have to assume that you and Mrs. Malkin have no problem with the questionable stuff that comes out of VDARE, and my future posts will reflect that assumption.