POTWR: Inaugural Address 2019

[Cubo de Sangre]

Greetings War Room Sherbros,

Welcome to the first Presidential sticky-thread of 2019, and the first of the Cubo/Chris term. Initially here I'd like to do two things. The first is to establish the thread rules moving forward, and the second is to get an idea of what types of threads you're most interested in seeing.

Here's a rough draft outline of the rules.

• No insulting the other posters
• Certain words should be avoided to describe someone's position/ideas (stupid, dumb, retarded)
• Don't refer to groups as libtards or conservatards
• Stay on topic
• Humor is fine, but if your post is nothing more than a joke then don't post it
• Posts that don't comply will be removed and the poster will be issued a reply ban
• All questions over deleted posts and reply bans please direct privately to @Cubo de Sangre

Let me know what you think. What to add? What to make more clear?

As you can see, there's a poll attached. Please use that to indicate your thread preferences. If you don't see something you'd like then let us know. All thoughts and opinions are welcome.

The first thread is tentatively scheduled to open on Saturday. It will be a round-table discussion on police shootings and interactions with the public, hosted by @nhbbear. The panel will be comprised of board members who have worked or currently work as a law enforcement officer or in the legal field.

Happy New Year,

Cubo


EDIT: To be clear, potentially anyone can host a thread topic. Volunteers are needed for this little experiment to be the best it can be. Got a thread you wanna start that would be better under the proposed rule-set? Now's your chance. Let's hear those ideas.

PS: As a one-time thing, you may have been tagged in because you voted in the final round of the election. Moving forward please keep an eye on the sticky-section.

 

[Lord Coke]

I want to see @Jack V Savage and @Greoric have a one on one debate thread. There fight are always so savage no pun intended.

 

[Lead]

I want to see Jack and Greoric have a one on one debate thread. There fight are always so savage no pun intended.

Id like that but the topic choice would be important.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I want to see Jack and Greoric have a one on one debate thread. There fight are always so savage no pun intended.

Did you get a tag notification?

 

[meauneau]

What topics are we allowed to discuss here or which are we not allowed? Is this for political topics only? What's the criteria by which we determine if a topic is political and accepted in the WR or not?

 

[Fawlty]

Seems odd that you are so intent on silencing people whose comments you don't like, given that you have always claimed to have the opposite point of view. Care to square that? Because you come off like a liar there. I think a 180 like this deserves an explanation.

 

[Lord Coke]

Id like that but the topic choice would be important.

That is very true.

Did you get a tag notification?

Yes.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

What topics are we allowed to discuss here or which are we not allowed? Is this for political topics only? What's the criteria by which we determine if a topic is political and accepted in the WR or not?

Socio-political topics is what I envision. Ultimately I'll decide what's accepted. @Lowmanproblems and @JDragon have volunteered to help select and organize the specific threads and posters hosting them.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Seems odd that you are so intent on silencing people whose comments you don't like, given that you have always claimed to have the opposite point of view. Care to square that? Because you come off like a liar there. I think a 180 like this deserves an explanation.

Having civil discussion in these threads was my platform from day one. Viewpoints are silenced. You just need to state them without being your usual insults.

If you wanna be a dick to somebody then reply to them in the lounge thread.

 

[Fawlty]

Having civil discussion in these threads was my platform from day one. Viewpoints are silenced. You just need to state them without being your usual insults.

If you wanna be a dick to somebody then reply to them in the lounge thread.

I understand that your platform was already planned to be the exact opposite of your alleged point of view. It's not as if this wasn't easily seen coming. I believe just a day or two ago you passive-aggressively spat that people should just use the ignore button rather than complain about trolling. I can quote you if you like.

Just to clarify, your standards and pov are completely reversed now, right? That is, you no longer believe in a close to absolute version of free speech, and instead, you now believe in autocratic censorship. Yes? It's important to be clear about that, because you're going to have and cause some headaches here with your blatant hypocrisy.

 

[meauneau]

Socio-political topics is what I envision. Ultimately I'll decide what's accepted. @Lowmanproblems and @JDragon have volunteered to help select and organize the specific threads and posters hosting them.

For consistency's sake you will have to lay out the criteria by which you will objectively decide what is or isn't accepted.

Not everyone will trust that you will be fair and impartial when it comes to topics and whether you accept them or not.

 

[HereticBD]

Oh' look, NOT the Vice President of the War Room is filling up this thread with his salty tears already.

 

[Fawlty]

Oh' look, NOT the Vice President of the War Room is filling up this thread with his salty tears already.

I believe this reply is an example of what should receive a reply ban, correct Cubo? It's a good chance to clarify your position and follow through with your reversal of attitude.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Yes.

Now I'm confused. @Lead, Coke says he got a tag and @sniper says he didn't. lol

I understand that your platform was already planned to be the exact opposite of your alleged point of view. It's not as if this wasn't easily seen coming. I believe just a day or two ago you passive-aggressively spat that people should just use the ignore button rather than complain about trolling. I can quote you if you like.

Just to clarify, your standards and pov are completely reversed now, right? That is, you no longer believe in a close to absolute version of free speech, and instead, you now believe in autocratic censorship. Yes? It's important to be clear about that, because you're going to have and cause some headaches here with your blatant hypocrisy.

This isn't about free speech. Nor is it about how the board as a whole should operate. It's about a different approach and standard of conduct in these specific threads. If you want to further discuss my personal ethics you can send a PM. Otherwise please contribute as requested.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

For consistency's sake you will have to lay out the criteria by which you will objectively decide what is or isn't accepted.

Not everyone will trust that you will be fair and impartial when it comes to topics and whether you accept them or not.

There is no objective criteria. We're flying by the seat of our pants. If someone thinks I'm being unfair I'll gladly address it.

Oh' look, NOT the Vice President of the War Room is filling up this thread with his salty tears already.

Not acceptable. Thanks.

 

[Fawlty]

This isn't about free speech. Nor is it about how the board as a whole should operate. It's about a different approach and standard of conduct in these specific threads. If you want to further discuss my personal ethics you can send a PM. Otherwise please contribute as requested.

No, we'll discuss it here, because the central part of your address is the standard of discourse. That is in fact your main point. It won't be shuffled off to PMs, but rather you'll be given the opportunity to clarify, and your double standard is noted.

That's all for now, I think it's very clear.

 

[HereticBD]

Not acceptable. Thanks.

Oh' okay, I wasn't sure. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

No, we'll discuss it here, because the central part of your address is the standard of discourse. That is in fact your main point. It won't be shuffled off to PMs, but rather you'll be given the opportunity to clarify, and your double standard is noted.

That's all for now, I think it's very clear.

We'll discuss the rules here. Not my broader personal ethics. Thanks.

 

[Lord Coke]

No, we'll discuss it here, because the central part of your address is the standard of discourse. That is in fact your main point. It won't be shuffled off to PMs, but rather you'll be given the opportunity to clarify, and your double standard is noted.

That's all for now, I think it's very clear.

We do have the Lounge which is pretty much a discuss anything thread. Imagine if there were no mods the war room would turn into 4chan which I personally don't like.

 

[Jesus H. Sherdog]

I’m liking it so far. Congrats @Cubo de Sangre, the rules look fair to me and there seem to be some good choices in the poll. I’ll vote later. And thanks @Fawlty for keeping our president on his toes in an intelligent manor.

This sub (and the presidency) would be kind of boring without a little bit of thoughtful opposition right? Someone’s gotta make the President answer tough questions.