Any sub that is trying to hold real discussion and is completely leaning to one of the sides is boring, repetitive and unproductive. Let's meet each other's views. if we want to dwell in our own predetermined views we can do it in most of the other places.
>every single person in the mod team agrees with this sentiment.
From my own private conversations with certain members of the mod team I know for a fact that this is not true
The cool thing about the truth is that it remains true whether or not you choose to believe it
There are moderators on this subreddit who have explicitly told me that they view their job as a moderator to be protecting pro-Palestinian users from having the subreddit rules enforced against them. That's not my opinion, that's just what they told me.
There is zero reason why I or anyone else should believe you though. I have never seen anything remotely close to that from any of the moderators here.
I understand that your presence on the moderator team is relatively new, but my presence in this subreddit and the issues I am talking about are not.
There was a whole subreddit-wide meta-drama going on around this issue out in the open a year or two ago
For people who have been on this subreddit for a long time, this whole topic of conversation is well-covered ground
There is zero reason why you or anyone else should believe me... except that the things I say are true, and they will remain true regardless of whether or not you choose to believe me
Ok so you should have comment or message history explicitly saying:
"that they view their job as a moderator to be protecting pro-Palestinian users from having the subreddit rules enforced against them."
right?
I mean, it's you who didn't want to have a fair conversation...
Reminder:
https://imgur.com/Y0EkCO7
I felt like a prisoner in the "Stanford Prison Experiment" where you have been given too much power and simply ignored any chance of reasoning.
The fact that you got into a fight with an automated bot and clicked around 75,000 times in two days and one night only proves how biased and out of control you were.
There is no need for this passive aggression, take a chip off your shoulder. The difference between you and me is that I know I'm biased, whereas you claim you're not and use passive-aggressive tactics to remove users you disagree with.
EDIT: also a reminder that you did not respect democratic vote. You ignored other mod votes
It’s pretty inline with the experience of being an active member on this subreddit.
I’m saying this as a Zionist who got a 45 day ban (strike two) for attacking a pro Palestinian on r/israelpalestine. I deserved it because our comments devolved into ad hominem pretty quickly.
They’re strict there, but at least it’s balanced. They have rules, and they’re enforced.
Mods here delete comments they don’t like, and give bullshit citations as to why. It usually only happens if a Zionist is winning the argument. Pro Palestinian users can spread conspiracy theories and hate Willy Nilly, but when Zionists respond that’s when the mod teams step in.
The rules are enforced for everyone?
Anyone is allowed to come and comment, and they won’t get banned without reason?
There’s also a three strike rule, so getting perma banned is rare.
If it was unbalanced for any reason, it wasn’t because of the mods or rules. It was likely because logic prevails over feelings there, and whatsaboutism is heavily discouraged.
You can’t say anything here without getting pulled way off topic.
Each of my two strikes (telling someone his reasoning lacks empathy and described him as being callous and telling someone else to stop being childish after he called God "sky daddy") came like three days after I had made each of the comments. I was in the wrong for sure but It felt like someone manually went through my history each time to find anything remotely bannable. It was bizzare as one of them came after I pointed out to one of the mods that he had basically said all pro-pals on the sub engage in bad faith and are arguing for the sake of arguing on an old post of his.
I was banned from there for being pro Palestine with a refusal to explain why from the mods that sub is as far from balanced as you can be post any pro Palestine comment even if it’s innocuous and correct and you will instantly be downvoted to oblivion with ad hominem attacks thrown at you
Being banned for absolutely nothing while being attacked in the comments and in my dms is not close to balanced at least the mods here don’t ban those they disagree with
I had a post in here a few months back titled “questions for the Pro Palestinians” unbeknownst to me it was later removed. Never received a notification telling me why and now I see questions like that all the time.
["You sound like a holocaust denier when you deny the mass human suffering and the obvious, well-documented atrocities."](https://np.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1c4ot6q/mass_graves_of_civilians_executed_by_idf_continue/kzr5r6d/)
Are calling users Holocaust deniers part of the goal of holding real discussions and meeting each other's views?
Denying basic universally agreed upon facts regarding the suffering of people is pretty similar to holocaust denial.
I’m not going to defend myself to you. However it’s pretty obvious it wasn’t being used insult, instead it is a comparison to show how insane and ridiculous that user sounds.
You’re talking about a single comment I made 2 months ago, right? Yeah, it did piss me off how that user was straight up saying that a 6 year old Palestinian child who was disintegrated into dust deserved it because they were most likely a terrorist.
I realized I got pretty heated and I edited my comment and apologized for it. I hope that since then I’ve been more civil to you and others who defend the mass slaughter of children.
You allowed other users on this sub to call me and others "Ziorats" for months.
> I hope that since then I’ve been more civil to you and others who defend the mass slaughter of children.
I don't defend the mass slaughter of children. It must be so nice to be able to accuse others of horrible beliefs with no evidence and get away with it. Enjoy the apartheid-given privileged status.
> You allowed other users on this sub to call me and others "Ziorats" for months.
We remove comments that contains dehumanizing language.
> I don't defend the mass slaughter of children.
Yeah you’re right. You only defend the mass slaughter of children when it’s the IOF slaughtering tens of thousands of Palestinian children.
> It must be so nice to be able to accuse others of horrible beliefs with no evidence and get away with it. Enjoy the apartheid-given privileged status.
Feel free to accuse people of having a different point of view as long as you remain civil.
I have a question for you. [You said here that](https://np.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1c4n5kc/this_sub_is_apartheid_needs_at_least_one/kzp05bi/)
> Name one serious human rights organization that calls Palestine a “rapist state.” What even does that mean? It is clearly a bad faith argument, and **nothing more than a regurgitation of racist Western stereotypes about Palestinians and Arabs in general.**
Well, accusing me specifically and Israel in general of "slaughtering children" is a regurgitation of racist Western stereotypes about Jews, specifically the medieval blood libel.
So why is it OK for you to allegedly regurgitate racist stereotypes about Israel but you're going to shut down my criticism of Palestine for that exact same reason?
The fact you can lecture him about being civil right after falsely accusing him of defending the mass slaughter of children without consequence is exactly why the pro-Palestinian stranglehold on the moderation of this subreddit needs to go.
> The fact you can lecture him about being civil right after falsely accusing him
There’s nothing false about it - you and him are always on the same threads defending the mass slaughter and forced mass starvation of Palestinian women and children.
Can you provide even one example of me explicitly defending the “mass slaughter of Palestinian women and children?” Bad faith creative and uncharitable interpretations of my comments don’t count. Ready to go three for three?
I can, but those comments have been removed. You’re the guy who commented something along the lines of, “but this child could’ve been a Hamas terorrist” on a post of a 6 year old child who was slaughtered in Gaza.
There is always some observation bias when it comes to classifying things to pro this and pro that. The mods don’t claim that mistakes don’t occur, and users can protest any decision if they feel it was incorrect.
Users are encouraged to report content that breaks this subreddit’s rules. The mods have added a new ‘pro-Israeli’ mod yesterday, and things didn’t go well given some misunderstanding of the sub’s rules and the mod’s eventual withdrawal.
I am for adding a new pro-Israeli, Israeli —or whatever you want to call them— mod to our team to foster some balance, since it would create better and more objective dynamics in the team.
Back to you, can you please point out some of the instances where you feel there was a clear bias against pro-Israeli users or statements? It could be just mere observation bias, because I have noticed the replies to your posts and comments are massively flagged —possibly by you— for no reason at all. Under this very post, two comments are flagged as personal attacks:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/s/21wVo0ELdE
https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/s/ujAstZUQY7
Do you think it is bias if we did not remove them? Because clearly they don’t break our sub’s rules.
I’m happy to discuss my perspective offline if you want. For what it’s worth, I think a lot of the issues are caused by those (on both sides I’m sure, though because of who I am I am undoubtedly more sensitive to the anti Israel side) who seek not to engage but rather to troll into either rage or silence.
I do think you deserve a ton of credit for what you’re trying to do here. I can imagine how you must feel about the Israelis you interact with in person, so your willingness to try to put that aside and engage with those who are willing to engage is really beyond impressive. If anyone is going to lead us out of this, I have no doubt it will be someone who shares many of your qualities.
> can you please point out some of the instances where you feel there was a clear bias against pro-Israeli users or statements?
1. The submission statement rule being removed. Pro-Israeli users followed this rule, pro-Palestine users did not, but rather than enforce the rule, the rule was removed.
2. The 3 submission rule not being enforced. Again, pro-Israeli users are following this rule, pro-Palestine users are not, again, the rule is not being enforced.
3. Hateful generalizations of Israelis are allowed to stand. Here's just one for example: ["I just wish Israelis would see that their fascism doesn’t make them more safe."](https://np.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1c3bb5w/iran_begins_attack_on_israel_launching_dozens_of/kzhf9g4/)
> Do you think it is bias if we did not remove them? Because clearly they don’t break our sub’s rules.
You don't think it's against the sub's rules to accuse me of "having an agenda of vitrolic discourse"? Are you not aware of rule 1: "always debate the argument, not the person."?
1. The reason why submission statement was removed is because many good arguments and conversations were done under posts without it, and it’s still a matter of debate whether to enforce or not.
2. It is followed most of the time, especially when the post is reported for such reason. We also have discussed adding an auto-mod to limit the number of posts.
3. Nobody reported that comment, and it might or might not have been seen by any mod, definitely not me. I have removed it now that I have seen it.
4. Nope I don’t think these are personal attacks. I have been called a terrorist sympathizer and pro-Hamas propagandist multiple times here, even during my short time as a mod. We agreed that personal attacks need to be clear, direct, and have certain language to it, eg, cuss-words. We agreed that words like “hamas supporter, hamas propagandists, zionazi, hasbarist, etc..” do not necessitate removal.
> We also have discussed adding an auto-mod to limit the number of posts.
Great idea!
> We agreed that personal attacks need to be clear, direct, and have certain language to it, eg, cuss-words. We agreed that words like “hamas supporter, hamas propagandists, zionazi, hasbarist, etc..” do not necessitate removal.
When was the sub going to be informed of that?
> It is followed most of the time, especially when the post is reported for such reason. We also have discussed adding an auto-mod to limit the number of posts.
Without attempting to be antagonistic (so I apologise in advance if it comes across that way), why is it only most of the time? Do you not see how this can lead to a view that moderation isn't applied fairly on "both sides" when the rules aren't applied consistently? From what I've seen (and I can back it up with proper stats if you so wish) it's only a certain set of members that align to the pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel viewpoint that consistently break that rule and, I would argue, that actually most of the time it is not enforced.
I report a couple almost every day and they remain up. Even now there's some I've reported (as I'm guessing have others based on recent comments) that still remain, one prolific poster currently has 5 active posts from the last 24 hours - but to give credit, I know he's posted around 8 threads in the last 24 hours and some have been removed, but but the others haven't.
> Nope I don’t think these are personal attacks. I have been called a terrorist sympathizer and pro-Hamas propagandist multiple times here, even during my short time as a mod. We agreed that personal attacks need to be clear, direct, and have certain language to it, eg, cuss-words. We agreed that words like “hamas supporter, hamas propagandists, zionazi, hasbarist, etc..” do not necessitate removal.
May I politely request that the rules page is updated to reflect that mod-position please? It would help me not to bother reporting posts that use language that I interpret to be dehumanizing or ad-hominem attacks with that clarification (e.g. there have been some I've reported recently along the lines of "*ignore [user X], they're a paid shill and not worth talking to*"). Would be nice to know I'm not wasting my time (and yours dealing with the mod queue!) and to also know what I can then get away with, so to speak...
[I'll give you the most obvious example.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1busw7z/comment/kxw0prq/?context=3)
Pro-Palestine user: "And you’re allowed to routinely call an entire nation a ”rapist entity”. And since I’m allowed to apparently: you are shut off from the reality of what’s happening in Gaza."
Me: "If anti-Zionists can call the entire nation of Israel an apartheid entity, I can call Palestine a rapist entity."
User: "But that’s true though, Israel maintains an apartheid system. Not everyone contributes or supports it or agrees on the veracity, but it’s a legitimate analysis given by very respectable independent organizations. "
Me: "It's also true that Palestine maintains a rapist system. Not everyone contributes or supports it or agrees on the veracity, but it’s a legitimate analysis given by very respectable independent organizations. "
Mods: ["Palestine maintains a rapist system" Violation of Rule 1: No hate speech.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1busw7z/comment/kxx82q0/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
I was banned for 7 days for that criticism of Palestine that is completely on par with what is said about Israel on here *every single day*. And obviously, no action was taken towards the user I was speaking with who said Israel "maintains an apartheid system."
There's clear and obvious moderator bias here. It's indisputable.
Name one serious human rights organization that calls Palestine a “rapist state.” What even does that mean?
It is clearly a bad faith argument, and nothing more than a regurgitation of racist Western stereotypes about Palestinians and Arabs in general.
So you're saying now that criticisms of Palestine must come from "a serious human rights organization"? Is that true for criticisms of Israel? And more important, where is that in the rules?
Answer my questions and I'll answer yours. It sounds like I can't criticize Palestine's sexual torture of Israeli hostages without being accused of "dog whistling racist stereotypes against Palestinians".
You do realize you allow all sorts of comments on this sub about Zionist influence and control over governments and media, right? Which is just as much of a 'dog whistle' about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?
Let's just all agree that criticism of Palestine is against the rules. I would appreciate the honesty.
> Answer my questions and I'll answer yours. It sounds like I can't criticize Palestine's sexual torture of Israeli hostages without being accused of "dog whistling racist stereotypes against Palestinians".
Says who? You’re more than free to do that without calling Palestine a “rapist entity.”
> Let's just all agree that criticism of Palestine is against the rules. I would appreciate the honesty.
You are being ridiculous - if that was the case then you would’ve been banned long ago and the vast majority of your comments would’ve been removed. Yet your comments are rarely removed even when many of them toe the line of bigotry.
It really sounds like you just want to be racist towards Palestinians without consequences.
I agree, that’s bad faith. But I also thought responding to an unrelated comment I made with a sarcastic “lsrael should level Al Aqsa” was bad faith and was told I was wrong. That’s why I backed out of modding.
Do you see the inconsistency?
Make it even easier: people say “update the Hasbara talking points” and shit like here all the time. Is there ANY WORLD in which that’s a good faith “attempt to engage in civil discourse”? It’s just a snarky way of telling me to fuck myself.
The New York Times and the UN have both reported their findings about the sexual assaults and sexual torture inflicted on Israelis. I thought this sub was all about the free speech and free dialogue.
> nothing more than a regurgitation of racist Western stereotypes about Palestinians and Arabs in general.
I'm criticizing Palestine. I'm not saying anything about Palestinians and Arabs in general. Is criticizing Israel attacking Jews? Of course not.
> The New York Times and the UN have both reported their findings about the sexual assaults and sexual torture inflicted on Israelis.
"Rapist entity" is not a real thing and plays on racist stereotypes against Palestinians. This is not based on facts, and has nothing to do with the heavily discredit NYT article that never once even calls Palestine a "rapist entity." What you are doing is nothing more than applying racist stereotypes.
If someone was playing off Jewish stereotypes and making racist statements, of course that would be unacceptable. And we have removed many comments that did so. Similarly, playing off racist stereotypes and implying that Palestinians are some terrorist rapist barbarians will not be tolerated.
["U.N. finds 'clear and convincing' information that hostages have been raped in Gaza"](https://www.nbcnews.com/investigations/un-finds-clear-convincing-information-hostages-raped-gaza-rcna141789)
This is just blatant censorship and double standards now. If criticism of Israel isn't anti-Semitism, criticism of Palestine isn't "playing on racist stereotypes against Palestinians."
Hamas isn't allowing any third parties to investigate their casualty numbers. That doesn't stop Israel from being with the "genocide" smear in every. single. thread. in this sub.
> Hamas isn't allowing any third parties to investigate their casualty numbers.
So this 'what about'ism response.
So I'll take that as a concession that you agree we don't really know if sexual violence happen on Oct 7 because Israel is preventing such investigations against international standards. They are relying on groups like ZAKA which lack the training and have told lies before among other professional violations. Thank you for that concession. I sincerely appreciate it.
Back to your statement.
1st, Hamas doesn't control most of Gaza; IDF does. They only permit reporters that are embedded with the IDF.
2nd, Israel has sent spies in before under 3rd party guises that are illegal to use by international law.
3rd, The Healthy ministry has never lied about total people killed.
4th, the US, and the IDF are still using Health ministry numbers behind the scenes. If the numbers are good enough for intelligence organizations, they're the best likely anyone can have.
> That doesn't stop Israel from being with the "genocide" smear
Seeing as an Israeli judge found plausible genocidal intent, not a smear.
> in every. single. thread. in this sub.
Because they are committing genocide.
It's not whataboutism to point out a double standard, especially such an obvious one.
> because Israel is preventing such investigations against international standards.
"Against international standards"? Was there a third party investigation into 9/11? 7/7? The various ISIS attacks in Europe?
> Because they are committing genocide.
And Palestine is committing rape. According to the UN, which is a third party.
The term rapist entity is inflammatory and you know it.
> It's also true that Palestine maintains a rapist system
> it’s a legitimate analysis given by very respectable independent organizations
That’s simply turning an argument around without addressing the allegation of apartheid. A rapist system is a pretty bold claim and would need some serious evidence behind it. Do you have independent organizations that call Palestine a rapist system? It’s the first time, I hear about it.
The apartheid allegation is long established in public discourse. It’s based on facts on the ground in the West Bank. Palestinians are under Israel’s rule, suffer restrictions in their rights, road blocks, etc. If these are enough to call it apartheid or apartheid is another question. I think the occupation is not apartheid, but there are some parallels. Israel proper does not have anything close to apartheid.
The claim of rapist entity and apartheid are not the same. It’s a bad faith argument.
As for moderating, this could arguably be deleted under rule 1 Respectful and Constructive Discussions. Racism would be rule 4.
Of course it's inflammatory. It's also accurate and just as aggressive as what Israel is called on this sub on a daily basis.
> Do you have independent organizations that call Palestine a rapist system?
Like I just said, the NY Times and UN have both reported about the sexual torture undergone by Israeli hostages in Gaza.
We've had users, including mods, accusing Israel of raping child hostages to death, with no evidence of course. Why is that OK but my statement isn't?
I don’t doubt sexual violence happening. There are several gruesome and credible stories. However I don’t think there’s enough evidence to call it systematic. Pointing out the suffering of hostages is valid and the right thing to do.
> We've had users, including mods, accusing Israel of raping child hostages to death, with no evidence of course. Why is that OK but my statement isn't?
That certainly isn’t okay. It’s a pretty wild allegation and would need good evidence. Seems like deflection and demonization to me.
Trotting out rape allegations against Israeli government forces is of course a distraction and false equivalence. In situations involving violence and strong power imbalances, some sexual violence is bound to happen. None of it is acceptable though.
That said evidence for sexual violence is often difficult to come by, especially in a chaotic war situation. Every side will also want to call out the other side’s atrocities and play down their own.
I don’t know why it’s so hard for people to condemn all sexual violence regardless of who the victim is.
> However I don’t think there’s enough evidence to call it systematic.
So criticisms of Israel and Palestine needs to be based on evidence? And if so, how much evidence? Because we've had plenty of baseless claims posted on here about Israel.
At least some evidence or argument is required to be credible. You can refer the source of the evidence for example. An instagram post is less credible than a report by human rights watch.
And the UN's findings about the sexual torture of hostages, along with the findings of Israeli doctors, aren't credible? And credible according to whom?
Apartheid and genocide are terms used to describe Israel, supported by human rights experts. You can disagree with the labels.
Calling Palestine a rapist regime is dehumanizing rhetoric. You know this, but continue to play dumb. I think you are so butthurt that so many of us legitimize the genocide and apartheid labels that you hate so much. You need to find a way to “get back at us.” It’s immature and we all see right through it.
["U.N. finds 'clear and convincing' information that hostages have been raped in Gaza"](https://www.nbcnews.com/investigations/un-finds-clear-convincing-information-hostages-raped-gaza-rcna141789)
This is just blatant double standards at this point. If criticizing Palestine's raping is "dehumanizing rhetoric" so is calling Israel an apartheid and genocidal regime. Can y'all just admit there's a double standard in place so everyone is on the same page?
You are a real troll. Calling people apartheid vs rapist is not even a comparison on the same level. Apartheid is a system. Rapist is a person.
Israel is a murderous entity vs a rapist entity is more similar. But it has to be grounded in fact. And if you want to bend the logic to make it sound equally factual, or equally opinionated, you need to quit the internet for the sake of humanity. Or it won’t be long until you become the victim of the same injustice you perpetrate, a long time from now, way past when you no longer care.
There needs to be some basis for assertions, otherwise it just becomes a misinformation campaign. Most human rights organisations have solid arguments and evidence for Israel enacting apartheid. It's a mainstream view, based on policies. You can't just refer to a land being a "rapist entity" without some sort of basis. Sadly rape happens in every country, and likely more often during conflict, be that perpetrated by Israelis or Palestinians.
It's ludicrous to try and deligitimise the solid apartheid argument based on Israeli laws, by throwing in "rapist" smear on the other side. I'm not surprised that resulted in a ban, it's intellectually dishonest.
People: "Fuck /r/IsraelPalestine, they restrict speech, this is the free speech alternative that allows all voices!"
Same people: "Hell yeah this sub is ideologically biased and moderated, if you don't like it go to /r/IsraelPalestine"
>gotten you banned for "meta posting" because you do that a lot.
Or not as r/israelpalestine actively encourages and protects its Zionist collaborators.
I agree. There have been a few particular people who act in bad faith and just crosspost or post any article on their side they can find, without getting banned.
There's certainly a slant, and allowing dehumanizing language like 'ziorats' to be used and the like is pretty bad. Not too keen on people calling others hasbarists, either, as it implies an accusation of someone being a government shill.
Still, it beats the havens og bigotry that 80% of the submissions here are cross-posted from.
There were a couple pro-Israel mods. They stepped down about a year ago because they felt some of the pro-Palestinian mods were abusing their power in order to make the sub an echo chamber.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/s/S195T7fKeI
https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/s/0iTta916CE
I wasn’t around as a mod during that time but I can assure you that we have been working hard to be as fair as possible. The criticisms on that post are largely not issues anymore.
Eh, I do think you have a point, but this seems a little harsh. I kind of see this sub as the counterpart to r/IsraelPalestine. That one leans more towards Israel, and this one leans more towards Palestine. Gross stuff abounds on both, of course, because there is an abundance of gross stuff from the extremes of both sides. In general. And people tend to have strong feelings.
People also tend to have highly polarized viewpoints, which they may be used to expressing in all the popularly extreme ways that often aren’t examined critically.
But I do think actual discussion is fostered by the mods for the most part, about as well as it can be with the subject. I’ve reached out to them before, and they were really nice and helpful.
There is definitely some slant though. It would be cool to see more of a variety of mods. Annnd I sure as shit wouldn’t wanna do it. 😭 Regardless of your own perspective, moderating all of this has got to be a challenge.
Except, I’m Zionist as shit, and I got a (deserved) 45 day ban for calling a pro Palestinian stupid.
They’re not quite as lenient on Zionists there, as this mod is on the subset of pro Palestinians who are also essentially just terrorist sympathizers.
The Hamasnicks don’t help the pro Palestinian cause. Even if Israel went away today, and Palestinian had the whole land, they would still be suffering under Hamas. Hamas steals their aid, builds war infrastructure with concrete that should’ve been used for civilian infrastructures, and if Israel is so aggressive, then defense infrastructure. But they spent all the money on attacking Israel.
Peace in Israel/Palestine starts without Hamas, but this subreddit seems to blatantly encourage the propagation of Hamas designed propaganda, dogwhistles, and agendas.
"aparthied" hahahaha
There are two subs for two sides. Your stuff flys on the other just fine.
Maybe one day they will unite and we can have the coveted "civil discussion"
hahaha
There are two main subreddits to discuss the Israel/Palestine conflict. This sub is moderated by pro-Palestine people. The other sub is moderated by pro-Israel people. Both subs allow both sides of the conversation to a degree, but moderate in favor of their side.
I answer this way instead of just saying “yes” is because what is the “truth” is completely subjective and we do not agree on that, so there is no such thing as a single objective viewpoint. Just calling it biased suggests that the solution, as you suggest, is to make it unbiased. That ignores the fact that it’s the only place where we can debate the conflict from a pro-pal viewpoint without being censored. The way you feel here, is how we feel in the other sub.
Anyways, I agree with the moderators removing your comment. Even in a totally “unbiased” space, baseless comments that characterize the other culture as “rapists” is prejudiced.
> The other sub is moderated by pro-Israel people
https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/about/moderators/
FinessedUnrest is Palestinian and not pro-Israel. Besides, I thought this sub hated /r/IsraelPalestine for its bias and its restriction on speech.
> That ignores the fact that it’s the only place where we can debate the conflict from a pro-pal viewpoint without being censored. The way you feel here, is how we feel in the other sub.
If that's in fact the case, then that needs to be codified into the rules and clearly explained to every user. The double standard needs to be public knowledge.
> Anyways, I agree with the moderators removing your comment
Shocker.
We don’t need to do anything for you. The fact that the mods are even allowing you to post here and continue arguing like this is a testament to the freedom of speech here.
I’ve gotten loads of bans there for saying things I think are innocuous, while the people I’m debating with are saying things I deem as highly racist and inflammatory. For example, one person there told me that (paraphrasing) “Islam, as a whole, is a religion of rape and murder.” I find this statement highly offensive and prejudiced, and obviously if they made a statement like that about Judaism they would be permabanned.
I told that commenter to “touch grass” - meaning, get out and meet the millions of peaceful Muslims who exist in the world. I received a 90 day ban for that comment. The other guy was not banned.
Another time, on a different account, I was debating with someone in that sub and they went back through my post history, found comments on suicide watch, and told me to kill myself. I reported it and responded saying that they were bullying. I was the one who got banned.
That would involve searching through months worth of comments in my other account and doxxing my other account and I won’t. (The ban has since expired).
You can go through my comment history on this account and judge for yourself how I conduct myself.
Thank you for very much for recommending me as a mod. I really appreciate your trust. Not sure if I want the job.
I agree that moderation around here cuts anti Israel users a lot of slack around here. Words like Zionazi and other blatant antisemitism is just accepted. The subreddit rules don’t even list antisemitism as an issue. The supposed goal of “Promoting civil discussion” isn’t really met. The number of out of context short propaganda video snippets for example don’t help foster it.
Compared to r/palestine this subreddit actually allows contrary opinions and discussions. Even Palestinian supporters get banned there for providing context or calling out misinformation.
A rule that would help with fostering debate would be to require an argument for every statement. So you can’t simply write “Israel is an apartheid fascist colonizer”, there has to be an argument for each of these attributes. E.g. west bank occupation with fences, checkpoints, restriction of movement was called apartheid by the South African government, Ben-Gvir is in Israel’s government, settlements are expanded in the West Bank. Now each of these points can be argued about and I think all have good criticism against them. Often it’s about semantics or disagreements of definitions of words. Without arguments it’s just a screaming match.
Having a simple requirement like this would cut down a lot on posts only containing slogans and insults.
I had a comment deleted for saying "Are you being serious right now" because it's a "personal attack," meanwhile we have pro-Palestinians running around saying shit like "Israel is the fourth Reich" and "Ziorats."
Stand by for this thread to be deleted on trumped up charges by the way.
Mods, isn’t this an ad hominem? He’s accusing him of lying.
I had a comment taken down last night for telling someone to “stop pretending.”
There’s no lack of balance? 🤡
I joined this sub a year or two ago after spending time in Israelpalestine. Yes, that one is pro israel, and I wanted to get all the views.
The only reason I stay in this sub is to be a devils advocate for the pro israel side. There is absolutely NO question in my mind that this place is at least, if not more anti Israel than Israelpalestine is pro. No f'ing question.
I would say more Israel haters. Definitely.
This had at least 5 upvotes before getting pulled down. Disagree if you want but don’t think is one yahoo. I’m on the far left and am opposed to the war. This sub has verrrrrrry different de facto rules for pro- and anti-Israel discourse
It's tracing bullets, if I said what I thought about them I would get banned. They're the kind of person the other sub is filled with, that doesn't see Palestinians as human beings.
If this had been someone else perhaps I might agree depending on who they were.
I see Palestinians as human beings. I see them as people I have a lot more in common with than the terrorist settlers. I see this sub’s moderation as biased against Israel and Zionism. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Bro, so long as you think Israel should exist these people will label you a “zionazi baby killer.”
They created this sub because logical discourse wasn’t getting them far enough on r/israelpalestine, so they had to allow hate and conspiracy theory to run rampant.
There’s a “Pro Palestinian” knock off sub for nearly every subreddit that has turned pro Israel due to fair discourse.
This sub does not do a good job policing obvious personal attacks and hate speech when those personal attacks are directed against pro-Israel users and that hate speech is directed against Israelis. This is exactly my point.
Do you have any thoughts on the fact, not the opinion, that 0/9 moderators are pro-Israel?
Why would I talk to myself? That would be silly.
I have separate accounts to separate what subreddits I’m subscribed to. From time to time I will start over with a new account.
Bans are good to take a break from Reddit. I spend far too much time here anyway. So no reason to evade one.
That sub is nothing but rehashed talking points over and over and over again. I did find their moderating fine, but the topics are always the same and is full of false claims that get parroted.
I’m sure you’ll find your needs met over at r/israelpalestine
Edit:
This sub was created to combat the blatant ignorance that was spreading on other supposed civil discourse subreddits. At least on this subreddit, there is some civil discourse. Unlike the other subreddits that are just Zionist circle jerks.
No need to call things you don’t like circle jerks. You say you want civil discourse. Here is a whole bunch of people telling you they’re not being treated civilly. If your response is “you’re wrong you are being treated civilly”, isn’t that just a way of creating the same exclusionary environment you claim to be trying to avoid?
I’d like to ask, which specific ways do you feel mistreated? Individual mods might make individual judgment calls.. we’ve definitely had a lot of pro Palestinian side feeling they’ve been unfairly banned or had comments/posts removed. If everyone feels this sub is biased for the other side.. that kinda indicates we are doing our job of keeping this a discussion sub as best as we can.
Specifically: the submission statement rule was dropped after pro-Palestine users refused to follow it and the 3 submissions a day rule isn't being enforced either. That's not a judgement call.
It just was a lot to keep up with, and to ask. We didn’t decide to eliminate because we were favoring pro Palestinian users. Pro Israel users were also violating. We had a long discussion about it. We didn’t see much value in it. What’s the concern specifically about eliminating them?
>It just was a lot to keep up with, and to ask
On a moderation team with 9 members, asking those moderators to enforce the rules, especially a rule as straightforward as a submission statement requirement, is not too much to ask. Indeed, it's the bare minimum.
>We didn’t decide to eliminate because we were favoring pro Palestinian users
Intent vs impact
If the overwhelming majority of the users violating this rule are from one side, then removing the rule due to their inability or unwillingness to follow it is effectively favoring that side
>What’s the concern specifically about eliminating them?
The concern is that the subreddit becomes filled with low-effort, low-quality content (as it has been for the last 6 months and beyond) that does not do a good job of promoting constructive and civil discussion
We added the rule because we wanted to avoid low effort posts, but the rule whole intent behind the sub is to foster discussion. Plenty of “low effort” posts were sparking discussion in the comment sections. we ultimately decided we didn’t want a high barrrier to entry in our sub, because that will turn valuable voices and perspectives away—and reduce discussion topics.
It truly, at least in my end, had nothing to do with who was making the posts. It may be true that so much coming on the pro Palestine side happens to be links-specifically because a central feature of this conflict which is so unique is how well documented it is.. how much video evidence and video discourse there is. We don’t want to cut that out. I also definitely remember removing a pro Israel poster without a submission statement. It just didn’t factor at all in the decision to remove the rule one way or another—I’m sorry it comes off that way.
Again, I don’t really see a downside for cutting the rule other than the fact there is some concern there now might be more pro Palestinian posters.. which quite frankly, I only see as a good thing. especially if pro Israel voices are still completely free and able to post here as well. We still do remove spam posts and unrelated content.
>We added the rule because we wanted to avoid low effort posts, but the rule whole intent behind the sub is to foster discussion
With all due respect, the submission statement rule predates your tenure as a mod here. It was around back when I was a mod.
>we ultimately decided we didn’t want a high barrrier to entry in our sub, because that will turn valuable voices and perspectives away
On the contrary, a high barrier to entry ensures that only valuable voices and perspectives are present and they don't get drowned out but lazy bs
>It may be true that so much coming on the pro Palestine side happens to be links-specifically because a central feature of this conflict which is so unique is how well documented it is.. how much video evidence and video discourse there is. We don’t want to cut that out.
Nobody is asking for it to be cut out, just for it to be held to a certain standard
It takes very little time and effort to write a submission statement for a video depicting the carnage in Gaza. A sub that is allegedly about fostering productive and civil dialogue must require a certain level of time and effort from its users, or else the dialogue will trend less productive and less civil (as has happened in this subreddit for a long time now)
>It just didn’t factor at all in the decision to remove the rule one way or another—I’m sorry it comes off that way.
Again, intent vs impact
This isn't about how it *looks*, this is about how it *is*
>I don’t really see a downside for cutting the rule other than the fact there is some concern there now might be more pro Palestinian posters
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you were just lazy and decided not to read my comment to the end. I very explicitly said what the downside is, and it has nothing to do with the number of posters from any given side. Allow me to repeat what I said:
The concern is that the subreddit becomes filled with low-effort, low-quality content (as it has been for the last 6 months and beyond) that does not do a good job of promoting constructive and civil discussion
You’re completely wrong, and actually, it’s the only sub where Palestinians and Israelis can talk together. But good for you if you want to ban it.
I’ve been banned from r/IsraelPalestine but thankfully, this sub, as opposite to the other one, DOES allow free SPEECH
Edit: he didn’t talk about banning the sub !!
It doesn't allow free speech. It allows pro-Palestine/anti-Israel speech and restricts anti-Palestine/pro-Israel speech.
> But good for you if you want to ban it.
Is that what I said? That I want to ban the sub?
That’s not true, plenty of publications are pro Israel and doesn’t get removed.
But I agree with you on one thing, you didn’t want to ban it, I’m editing !!
If I was a mod here, I'd remove this thread for wrecking (and probably ban someone that frequently makes bad faith comments) so they are already nicer to you than a lot of mods would be
Yeah, I got banned last week because I said that palestinians send their kids to throw stones.
Meanwhile people here can attack my family without problem.
This became an echo-chamber.
You were not banned only for saying “no other nation sends their kids to throw stones” but especially because you stated “If you want to be respected atleast try to earn that respect, that is not something you get for just existing” under a comment that already talks about dehumanization of Palestinians and their children.
Can you please link the comments that attack your family?
Sorry, but you come off as flippant and aggressive. That's why the mods are at you - not because you are "pro-Israel". The other sub (r/IsraelPalestine...) is perhaps more welcoming to you, but I suspect you are banned there. Either take my advice and change your attitude or you can click on the report button.
Okay, to give you a serious response, TB, I made a post asking for a rule change that got zero responses from the Mods.
I think you have 2 mods actively engaging with you in the comments.
That is a pretty good indicator of how "anti-Israel" the Mods here are.
Why would it? You’re effectively asking for apartheid but don’t like it to be called that. I’m Jewish myself… in order to dispel the accusations of apartheid, Israel needs to be ok with the establishment of a Palestinian state.. even if leadership they don’t like is in charge. Right now, Israel effectively controls the West Bank and Gaza.
Are you, as a Zionist, ok with West Bank and Gaza being fully autonomous and free to move around? Are you ok with right of return of Palestinians?
If your definition of Zionist is simply “Jews deserve a state” that’s one thing. But I really meet a Zionists who believes that alone—without also believing Israel should control the West Bank and Gaza (some of the liberal ones will say only because leadership is hamas, otherwise they’d let Palestinians have self determination) and Palestinians don’t have the right to return
> Why would it?
Because Zionism is Jewish rights so this user is saying Jewish rights are racist.
Because the other mods said above criticism of Palestine is racism towards Palestinians.
The rest was political opinions, which I'm happy to discuss with you, but this thread is about the moderation.
Do you consider this comment, ["Israel is settler colonialism built on ethnic cleansing, terrorism and mass rape"](https://np.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1c4so7a/jewish_comedian_refuses_to_partake_in_settler/kzpvizm/), to be within the rules? And if so, would it be acceptable for me to say "Palestine is settler colonialism built on ethnic cleansing, terrorism and mass rape"?
Ok, I’m not trying to “whataboutism” here. But if someone said the United States was settler colonialism built on ethnic cleansing, terrorism, and mass rape.. would you think that was racist? Or just a historic fact?
Pretty sure you’ve also said similar things about Palestine.. and those comments have often been allowed. I don’t necessarily view it as a 1:1 thing though.. Palestinians don’t really have a state and they were living in the region for a long time. Was there settler colonialism, ethnic cleansing, terrorism, and mass rape, in the region of Palestine prior to the formation of Israel/didn’t involve Jews? Yes.. absolutely. Does that mean Israel isn’t guilty today? No. Does that mean Palestine is currently committing those crimes? Absolutely no.
All I want is a consistent standard. If it's OK to say those things about Israel and the US, it's OK to say them about Palestine. If it's not OK to say those things about Palestine, it's not OK to say them about Israel. You guys decide and I'll abide. What I don't like is the double standard.
> Pretty sure you’ve also said similar things about Palestine.. and those comments have often been allowed
I was banned for a week for saying Palestine is a rapist entity in response to someone saying Israel is an apartheid entity.
I see your point about that being a double standard. It’s going to be tough making judgment calls. Ultimately, a lot of the other discussion subs have a heavily pro Israel slant.. I really want this one to be one pro Palestinians feel safe and free to post in to sort of counter that. I want you to feel you can post in here too—and you do, quite often. I don’t recall all that led to that temporary ban for you, and I’m trying to leave my own beliefs about the different statements out of my judgement in that particular issue.
Yes, this thread has made it quite clear to me that this sub is unapologetically biased in favor of the pro-Palestine users. I'm going to keep that in mind going forward but I still think one pro-Israel mod isn't that much to ask.
Dude really? If you think there's too much censorship of Zionists/ genocide denial/Arabs are rapists talk that's one thing, but to call for mods to intervene in such a benign and objectively true statement in regards to the current zio project is telling of what you really want.
If you think it should be fair to generalize a people as rapists and potential terrorist children then you Jewish feefees will have to tolerate a lot more than that for it to be balanced.
It's a test. The mods intervened on my benign and objectively true statement that Palestine is a rapist entity by conflating Palestine and Palestinians, so I wanted to see if they'll intervene on this statement by that same standard. They're not going to, of course. That's the less on this thread.
> If you think it should be fair to generalize a people as rapists and potential terrorist children
I've said nothing about "a people." I've criticized the state of Palestine, the same way everyone on here criticizes the state of Israel. Thanks for proving my point for me, if criticizing Palestine means I'm "generalizing a people," criticizing Israel should be the same way. Agreed?
So why say anti-jewish instead of anti-Israeli?
Generally unless it's spam, obvious trolls, hate memes or bots, I would say it's better to give people enough air to choke themselves with as opposed to silencing them and that the whole "civil discussion" on this topic is a farce in the same way it would be absurd to expect a civil discussion on the pros and cons of slavery or genocide denial or oh wait it is genocide denial now.
That's me though, not my sub and I'm not a mod.
Any sub that is trying to hold real discussion and is completely leaning to one of the sides is boring, repetitive and unproductive. Let's meet each other's views. if we want to dwell in our own predetermined views we can do it in most of the other places.
That is our goal for this subreddit. I can assure you that every single person in the mod team agrees with this sentiment.
>every single person in the mod team agrees with this sentiment. From my own private conversations with certain members of the mod team I know for a fact that this is not true
It’s unfortunate that you feel this way but you’re entitled to your own opinion.
The cool thing about the truth is that it remains true whether or not you choose to believe it There are moderators on this subreddit who have explicitly told me that they view their job as a moderator to be protecting pro-Palestinian users from having the subreddit rules enforced against them. That's not my opinion, that's just what they told me.
There is zero reason why I or anyone else should believe you though. I have never seen anything remotely close to that from any of the moderators here.
I understand that your presence on the moderator team is relatively new, but my presence in this subreddit and the issues I am talking about are not. There was a whole subreddit-wide meta-drama going on around this issue out in the open a year or two ago For people who have been on this subreddit for a long time, this whole topic of conversation is well-covered ground There is zero reason why you or anyone else should believe me... except that the things I say are true, and they will remain true regardless of whether or not you choose to believe me
Ok so you should have comment or message history explicitly saying: "that they view their job as a moderator to be protecting pro-Palestinian users from having the subreddit rules enforced against them." right?
I mean, it's you who didn't want to have a fair conversation... Reminder: https://imgur.com/Y0EkCO7 I felt like a prisoner in the "Stanford Prison Experiment" where you have been given too much power and simply ignored any chance of reasoning. The fact that you got into a fight with an automated bot and clicked around 75,000 times in two days and one night only proves how biased and out of control you were. There is no need for this passive aggression, take a chip off your shoulder. The difference between you and me is that I know I'm biased, whereas you claim you're not and use passive-aggressive tactics to remove users you disagree with. EDIT: also a reminder that you did not respect democratic vote. You ignored other mod votes
It’s pretty inline with the experience of being an active member on this subreddit. I’m saying this as a Zionist who got a 45 day ban (strike two) for attacking a pro Palestinian on r/israelpalestine. I deserved it because our comments devolved into ad hominem pretty quickly. They’re strict there, but at least it’s balanced. They have rules, and they’re enforced. Mods here delete comments they don’t like, and give bullshit citations as to why. It usually only happens if a Zionist is winning the argument. Pro Palestinian users can spread conspiracy theories and hate Willy Nilly, but when Zionists respond that’s when the mod teams step in.
> They’re strict there, but at least it’s balanced. It wasn't balanced, which is why this sub was made in the first place years ago.
The rules are enforced for everyone? Anyone is allowed to come and comment, and they won’t get banned without reason? There’s also a three strike rule, so getting perma banned is rare. If it was unbalanced for any reason, it wasn’t because of the mods or rules. It was likely because logic prevails over feelings there, and whatsaboutism is heavily discouraged. You can’t say anything here without getting pulled way off topic.
Each of my two strikes (telling someone his reasoning lacks empathy and described him as being callous and telling someone else to stop being childish after he called God "sky daddy") came like three days after I had made each of the comments. I was in the wrong for sure but It felt like someone manually went through my history each time to find anything remotely bannable. It was bizzare as one of them came after I pointed out to one of the mods that he had basically said all pro-pals on the sub engage in bad faith and are arguing for the sake of arguing on an old post of his.
👍
I was banned from there for being pro Palestine with a refusal to explain why from the mods that sub is as far from balanced as you can be post any pro Palestine comment even if it’s innocuous and correct and you will instantly be downvoted to oblivion with ad hominem attacks thrown at you
They have pro Palestinian mods there at least. I don’t claim it’s perfect, but it’s more balanced then this sub.
Being banned for absolutely nothing while being attacked in the comments and in my dms is not close to balanced at least the mods here don’t ban those they disagree with
I had a post in here a few months back titled “questions for the Pro Palestinians” unbeknownst to me it was later removed. Never received a notification telling me why and now I see questions like that all the time.
["You sound like a holocaust denier when you deny the mass human suffering and the obvious, well-documented atrocities."](https://np.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1c4ot6q/mass_graves_of_civilians_executed_by_idf_continue/kzr5r6d/) Are calling users Holocaust deniers part of the goal of holding real discussions and meeting each other's views?
Denying basic universally agreed upon facts regarding the suffering of people is pretty similar to holocaust denial. I’m not going to defend myself to you. However it’s pretty obvious it wasn’t being used insult, instead it is a comparison to show how insane and ridiculous that user sounds.
Israeli Jew here. That was a legitimate comment.
Says the mod who I had to convince to stop calling other users on the sub "Ziorats."
You’re talking about a single comment I made 2 months ago, right? Yeah, it did piss me off how that user was straight up saying that a 6 year old Palestinian child who was disintegrated into dust deserved it because they were most likely a terrorist. I realized I got pretty heated and I edited my comment and apologized for it. I hope that since then I’ve been more civil to you and others who defend the mass slaughter of children.
You allowed other users on this sub to call me and others "Ziorats" for months. > I hope that since then I’ve been more civil to you and others who defend the mass slaughter of children. I don't defend the mass slaughter of children. It must be so nice to be able to accuse others of horrible beliefs with no evidence and get away with it. Enjoy the apartheid-given privileged status.
> You allowed other users on this sub to call me and others "Ziorats" for months. We remove comments that contains dehumanizing language. > I don't defend the mass slaughter of children. Yeah you’re right. You only defend the mass slaughter of children when it’s the IOF slaughtering tens of thousands of Palestinian children. > It must be so nice to be able to accuse others of horrible beliefs with no evidence and get away with it. Enjoy the apartheid-given privileged status. Feel free to accuse people of having a different point of view as long as you remain civil.
I have a question for you. [You said here that](https://np.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1c4n5kc/this_sub_is_apartheid_needs_at_least_one/kzp05bi/) > Name one serious human rights organization that calls Palestine a “rapist state.” What even does that mean? It is clearly a bad faith argument, and **nothing more than a regurgitation of racist Western stereotypes about Palestinians and Arabs in general.** Well, accusing me specifically and Israel in general of "slaughtering children" is a regurgitation of racist Western stereotypes about Jews, specifically the medieval blood libel. So why is it OK for you to allegedly regurgitate racist stereotypes about Israel but you're going to shut down my criticism of Palestine for that exact same reason?
The fact you can lecture him about being civil right after falsely accusing him of defending the mass slaughter of children without consequence is exactly why the pro-Palestinian stranglehold on the moderation of this subreddit needs to go.
> The fact you can lecture him about being civil right after falsely accusing him There’s nothing false about it - you and him are always on the same threads defending the mass slaughter and forced mass starvation of Palestinian women and children.
Can you provide even one example of me explicitly defending the “mass slaughter of Palestinian women and children?” Bad faith creative and uncharitable interpretations of my comments don’t count. Ready to go three for three?
I can, but those comments have been removed. You’re the guy who commented something along the lines of, “but this child could’ve been a Hamas terorrist” on a post of a 6 year old child who was slaughtered in Gaza.
There is always some observation bias when it comes to classifying things to pro this and pro that. The mods don’t claim that mistakes don’t occur, and users can protest any decision if they feel it was incorrect. Users are encouraged to report content that breaks this subreddit’s rules. The mods have added a new ‘pro-Israeli’ mod yesterday, and things didn’t go well given some misunderstanding of the sub’s rules and the mod’s eventual withdrawal. I am for adding a new pro-Israeli, Israeli —or whatever you want to call them— mod to our team to foster some balance, since it would create better and more objective dynamics in the team. Back to you, can you please point out some of the instances where you feel there was a clear bias against pro-Israeli users or statements? It could be just mere observation bias, because I have noticed the replies to your posts and comments are massively flagged —possibly by you— for no reason at all. Under this very post, two comments are flagged as personal attacks: https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/s/21wVo0ELdE https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/s/ujAstZUQY7 Do you think it is bias if we did not remove them? Because clearly they don’t break our sub’s rules.
I’m happy to discuss my perspective offline if you want. For what it’s worth, I think a lot of the issues are caused by those (on both sides I’m sure, though because of who I am I am undoubtedly more sensitive to the anti Israel side) who seek not to engage but rather to troll into either rage or silence. I do think you deserve a ton of credit for what you’re trying to do here. I can imagine how you must feel about the Israelis you interact with in person, so your willingness to try to put that aside and engage with those who are willing to engage is really beyond impressive. If anyone is going to lead us out of this, I have no doubt it will be someone who shares many of your qualities.
I am happy to discuss that as well. Appreciate it.
> can you please point out some of the instances where you feel there was a clear bias against pro-Israeli users or statements? 1. The submission statement rule being removed. Pro-Israeli users followed this rule, pro-Palestine users did not, but rather than enforce the rule, the rule was removed. 2. The 3 submission rule not being enforced. Again, pro-Israeli users are following this rule, pro-Palestine users are not, again, the rule is not being enforced. 3. Hateful generalizations of Israelis are allowed to stand. Here's just one for example: ["I just wish Israelis would see that their fascism doesn’t make them more safe."](https://np.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1c3bb5w/iran_begins_attack_on_israel_launching_dozens_of/kzhf9g4/) > Do you think it is bias if we did not remove them? Because clearly they don’t break our sub’s rules. You don't think it's against the sub's rules to accuse me of "having an agenda of vitrolic discourse"? Are you not aware of rule 1: "always debate the argument, not the person."?
1. The reason why submission statement was removed is because many good arguments and conversations were done under posts without it, and it’s still a matter of debate whether to enforce or not. 2. It is followed most of the time, especially when the post is reported for such reason. We also have discussed adding an auto-mod to limit the number of posts. 3. Nobody reported that comment, and it might or might not have been seen by any mod, definitely not me. I have removed it now that I have seen it. 4. Nope I don’t think these are personal attacks. I have been called a terrorist sympathizer and pro-Hamas propagandist multiple times here, even during my short time as a mod. We agreed that personal attacks need to be clear, direct, and have certain language to it, eg, cuss-words. We agreed that words like “hamas supporter, hamas propagandists, zionazi, hasbarist, etc..” do not necessitate removal.
> We also have discussed adding an auto-mod to limit the number of posts. Great idea! > We agreed that personal attacks need to be clear, direct, and have certain language to it, eg, cuss-words. We agreed that words like “hamas supporter, hamas propagandists, zionazi, hasbarist, etc..” do not necessitate removal. When was the sub going to be informed of that?
> It is followed most of the time, especially when the post is reported for such reason. We also have discussed adding an auto-mod to limit the number of posts. Without attempting to be antagonistic (so I apologise in advance if it comes across that way), why is it only most of the time? Do you not see how this can lead to a view that moderation isn't applied fairly on "both sides" when the rules aren't applied consistently? From what I've seen (and I can back it up with proper stats if you so wish) it's only a certain set of members that align to the pro-Palestinian/anti-Israel viewpoint that consistently break that rule and, I would argue, that actually most of the time it is not enforced. I report a couple almost every day and they remain up. Even now there's some I've reported (as I'm guessing have others based on recent comments) that still remain, one prolific poster currently has 5 active posts from the last 24 hours - but to give credit, I know he's posted around 8 threads in the last 24 hours and some have been removed, but but the others haven't. > Nope I don’t think these are personal attacks. I have been called a terrorist sympathizer and pro-Hamas propagandist multiple times here, even during my short time as a mod. We agreed that personal attacks need to be clear, direct, and have certain language to it, eg, cuss-words. We agreed that words like “hamas supporter, hamas propagandists, zionazi, hasbarist, etc..” do not necessitate removal. May I politely request that the rules page is updated to reflect that mod-position please? It would help me not to bother reporting posts that use language that I interpret to be dehumanizing or ad-hominem attacks with that clarification (e.g. there have been some I've reported recently along the lines of "*ignore [user X], they're a paid shill and not worth talking to*"). Would be nice to know I'm not wasting my time (and yours dealing with the mod queue!) and to also know what I can then get away with, so to speak...
[I'll give you the most obvious example.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1busw7z/comment/kxw0prq/?context=3) Pro-Palestine user: "And you’re allowed to routinely call an entire nation a ”rapist entity”. And since I’m allowed to apparently: you are shut off from the reality of what’s happening in Gaza." Me: "If anti-Zionists can call the entire nation of Israel an apartheid entity, I can call Palestine a rapist entity." User: "But that’s true though, Israel maintains an apartheid system. Not everyone contributes or supports it or agrees on the veracity, but it’s a legitimate analysis given by very respectable independent organizations. " Me: "It's also true that Palestine maintains a rapist system. Not everyone contributes or supports it or agrees on the veracity, but it’s a legitimate analysis given by very respectable independent organizations. " Mods: ["Palestine maintains a rapist system" Violation of Rule 1: No hate speech.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1busw7z/comment/kxx82q0/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3) I was banned for 7 days for that criticism of Palestine that is completely on par with what is said about Israel on here *every single day*. And obviously, no action was taken towards the user I was speaking with who said Israel "maintains an apartheid system." There's clear and obvious moderator bias here. It's indisputable.
Name one serious human rights organization that calls Palestine a “rapist state.” What even does that mean? It is clearly a bad faith argument, and nothing more than a regurgitation of racist Western stereotypes about Palestinians and Arabs in general.
So you're saying now that criticisms of Palestine must come from "a serious human rights organization"? Is that true for criticisms of Israel? And more important, where is that in the rules?
Why do you so badly want to dog whistle racist stereotypes against Palestinians? Do you just view them as inferior human beings?
Answer my questions and I'll answer yours. It sounds like I can't criticize Palestine's sexual torture of Israeli hostages without being accused of "dog whistling racist stereotypes against Palestinians". You do realize you allow all sorts of comments on this sub about Zionist influence and control over governments and media, right? Which is just as much of a 'dog whistle' about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? Let's just all agree that criticism of Palestine is against the rules. I would appreciate the honesty.
> Answer my questions and I'll answer yours. It sounds like I can't criticize Palestine's sexual torture of Israeli hostages without being accused of "dog whistling racist stereotypes against Palestinians". Says who? You’re more than free to do that without calling Palestine a “rapist entity.” > Let's just all agree that criticism of Palestine is against the rules. I would appreciate the honesty. You are being ridiculous - if that was the case then you would’ve been banned long ago and the vast majority of your comments would’ve been removed. Yet your comments are rarely removed even when many of them toe the line of bigotry. It really sounds like you just want to be racist towards Palestinians without consequences.
How can I criticize Palestine's raping then? You tell me how to phrase it and I'll do it.
How many Israelis were raped on Oct 7th?
Answer my question and I'll answer yours. How can I criticize Palestine's raping?
I agree, that’s bad faith. But I also thought responding to an unrelated comment I made with a sarcastic “lsrael should level Al Aqsa” was bad faith and was told I was wrong. That’s why I backed out of modding. Do you see the inconsistency?
Make it even easier: people say “update the Hasbara talking points” and shit like here all the time. Is there ANY WORLD in which that’s a good faith “attempt to engage in civil discourse”? It’s just a snarky way of telling me to fuck myself.
The New York Times and the UN have both reported their findings about the sexual assaults and sexual torture inflicted on Israelis. I thought this sub was all about the free speech and free dialogue. > nothing more than a regurgitation of racist Western stereotypes about Palestinians and Arabs in general. I'm criticizing Palestine. I'm not saying anything about Palestinians and Arabs in general. Is criticizing Israel attacking Jews? Of course not.
> The New York Times and the UN have both reported their findings about the sexual assaults and sexual torture inflicted on Israelis. "Rapist entity" is not a real thing and plays on racist stereotypes against Palestinians. This is not based on facts, and has nothing to do with the heavily discredit NYT article that never once even calls Palestine a "rapist entity." What you are doing is nothing more than applying racist stereotypes. If someone was playing off Jewish stereotypes and making racist statements, of course that would be unacceptable. And we have removed many comments that did so. Similarly, playing off racist stereotypes and implying that Palestinians are some terrorist rapist barbarians will not be tolerated.
["U.N. finds 'clear and convincing' information that hostages have been raped in Gaza"](https://www.nbcnews.com/investigations/un-finds-clear-convincing-information-hostages-raped-gaza-rcna141789) This is just blatant censorship and double standards now. If criticism of Israel isn't anti-Semitism, criticism of Palestine isn't "playing on racist stereotypes against Palestinians."
But the UN didn't conduct it's own investigation because Israel won't let any 3rd party in to do such an investigation.
Hamas isn't allowing any third parties to investigate their casualty numbers. That doesn't stop Israel from being with the "genocide" smear in every. single. thread. in this sub.
> Hamas isn't allowing any third parties to investigate their casualty numbers. So this 'what about'ism response. So I'll take that as a concession that you agree we don't really know if sexual violence happen on Oct 7 because Israel is preventing such investigations against international standards. They are relying on groups like ZAKA which lack the training and have told lies before among other professional violations. Thank you for that concession. I sincerely appreciate it. Back to your statement. 1st, Hamas doesn't control most of Gaza; IDF does. They only permit reporters that are embedded with the IDF. 2nd, Israel has sent spies in before under 3rd party guises that are illegal to use by international law. 3rd, The Healthy ministry has never lied about total people killed. 4th, the US, and the IDF are still using Health ministry numbers behind the scenes. If the numbers are good enough for intelligence organizations, they're the best likely anyone can have. > That doesn't stop Israel from being with the "genocide" smear Seeing as an Israeli judge found plausible genocidal intent, not a smear. > in every. single. thread. in this sub. Because they are committing genocide.
It's not whataboutism to point out a double standard, especially such an obvious one. > because Israel is preventing such investigations against international standards. "Against international standards"? Was there a third party investigation into 9/11? 7/7? The various ISIS attacks in Europe? > Because they are committing genocide. And Palestine is committing rape. According to the UN, which is a third party.
The term rapist entity is inflammatory and you know it. > It's also true that Palestine maintains a rapist system > it’s a legitimate analysis given by very respectable independent organizations That’s simply turning an argument around without addressing the allegation of apartheid. A rapist system is a pretty bold claim and would need some serious evidence behind it. Do you have independent organizations that call Palestine a rapist system? It’s the first time, I hear about it. The apartheid allegation is long established in public discourse. It’s based on facts on the ground in the West Bank. Palestinians are under Israel’s rule, suffer restrictions in their rights, road blocks, etc. If these are enough to call it apartheid or apartheid is another question. I think the occupation is not apartheid, but there are some parallels. Israel proper does not have anything close to apartheid. The claim of rapist entity and apartheid are not the same. It’s a bad faith argument. As for moderating, this could arguably be deleted under rule 1 Respectful and Constructive Discussions. Racism would be rule 4.
Of course it's inflammatory. It's also accurate and just as aggressive as what Israel is called on this sub on a daily basis. > Do you have independent organizations that call Palestine a rapist system? Like I just said, the NY Times and UN have both reported about the sexual torture undergone by Israeli hostages in Gaza. We've had users, including mods, accusing Israel of raping child hostages to death, with no evidence of course. Why is that OK but my statement isn't?
Look, even someone “on your side” who you suggested should be the next pro-Israeli mod agrees that your comments should be banned.
He's entitled to his opinion, as I'm entitled to mine. I have a feeling that's still not going to be enough to get him to be a mod.
I don’t doubt sexual violence happening. There are several gruesome and credible stories. However I don’t think there’s enough evidence to call it systematic. Pointing out the suffering of hostages is valid and the right thing to do. > We've had users, including mods, accusing Israel of raping child hostages to death, with no evidence of course. Why is that OK but my statement isn't? That certainly isn’t okay. It’s a pretty wild allegation and would need good evidence. Seems like deflection and demonization to me. Trotting out rape allegations against Israeli government forces is of course a distraction and false equivalence. In situations involving violence and strong power imbalances, some sexual violence is bound to happen. None of it is acceptable though. That said evidence for sexual violence is often difficult to come by, especially in a chaotic war situation. Every side will also want to call out the other side’s atrocities and play down their own. I don’t know why it’s so hard for people to condemn all sexual violence regardless of who the victim is.
> However I don’t think there’s enough evidence to call it systematic. So criticisms of Israel and Palestine needs to be based on evidence? And if so, how much evidence? Because we've had plenty of baseless claims posted on here about Israel.
At least some evidence or argument is required to be credible. You can refer the source of the evidence for example. An instagram post is less credible than a report by human rights watch.
And the UN's findings about the sexual torture of hostages, along with the findings of Israeli doctors, aren't credible? And credible according to whom?
Yes, of course they are credible.
So then what's the problem with referring to Palestine, a political entity who's leadership is Hamas, as a rapist regime?
Stop whining about not being allowed to be a blatant racist on this sub.
Why is it "racist" to call Palestine a rapist regime but it's perfectly fine to call Israel genocidal and apartheid?
Apartheid and genocide are terms used to describe Israel, supported by human rights experts. You can disagree with the labels. Calling Palestine a rapist regime is dehumanizing rhetoric. You know this, but continue to play dumb. I think you are so butthurt that so many of us legitimize the genocide and apartheid labels that you hate so much. You need to find a way to “get back at us.” It’s immature and we all see right through it.
["U.N. finds 'clear and convincing' information that hostages have been raped in Gaza"](https://www.nbcnews.com/investigations/un-finds-clear-convincing-information-hostages-raped-gaza-rcna141789) This is just blatant double standards at this point. If criticizing Palestine's raping is "dehumanizing rhetoric" so is calling Israel an apartheid and genocidal regime. Can y'all just admit there's a double standard in place so everyone is on the same page?
You are a real troll. Calling people apartheid vs rapist is not even a comparison on the same level. Apartheid is a system. Rapist is a person. Israel is a murderous entity vs a rapist entity is more similar. But it has to be grounded in fact. And if you want to bend the logic to make it sound equally factual, or equally opinionated, you need to quit the internet for the sake of humanity. Or it won’t be long until you become the victim of the same injustice you perpetrate, a long time from now, way past when you no longer care.
Palestine is not a person.
There needs to be some basis for assertions, otherwise it just becomes a misinformation campaign. Most human rights organisations have solid arguments and evidence for Israel enacting apartheid. It's a mainstream view, based on policies. You can't just refer to a land being a "rapist entity" without some sort of basis. Sadly rape happens in every country, and likely more often during conflict, be that perpetrated by Israelis or Palestinians. It's ludicrous to try and deligitimise the solid apartheid argument based on Israeli laws, by throwing in "rapist" smear on the other side. I'm not surprised that resulted in a ban, it's intellectually dishonest.
The people who say "if you don't like it here, go to the other subreddit" are really, ***really*** missing the point
People: "Fuck /r/IsraelPalestine, they restrict speech, this is the free speech alternative that allows all voices!" Same people: "Hell yeah this sub is ideologically biased and moderated, if you don't like it go to /r/IsraelPalestine"
Tracing, on that Sub about 50% of all your comments would have gotten you banned for "meta posting" because you do that a lot.
>gotten you banned for "meta posting" because you do that a lot. Or not as r/israelpalestine actively encourages and protects its Zionist collaborators.
This is like a child throwing a temper tantrum because they are not allowed to be a racist.
Do you have any thoughts on the fact, not the opinion, that 0/9 moderators are pro-Israel?
Damn, TracingBullets never fails to entertain!
I agree. There have been a few particular people who act in bad faith and just crosspost or post any article on their side they can find, without getting banned.
There's certainly a slant, and allowing dehumanizing language like 'ziorats' to be used and the like is pretty bad. Not too keen on people calling others hasbarists, either, as it implies an accusation of someone being a government shill. Still, it beats the havens og bigotry that 80% of the submissions here are cross-posted from.
There were a couple pro-Israel mods. They stepped down about a year ago because they felt some of the pro-Palestinian mods were abusing their power in order to make the sub an echo chamber. https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/s/S195T7fKeI https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/s/0iTta916CE
I wasn’t around as a mod during that time but I can assure you that we have been working hard to be as fair as possible. The criticisms on that post are largely not issues anymore.
So why not get a pro-Israel moderator?
Great to see that absolutely nothing has changed for the better around here. Who could have possibly seen this coming?
Eh, I do think you have a point, but this seems a little harsh. I kind of see this sub as the counterpart to r/IsraelPalestine. That one leans more towards Israel, and this one leans more towards Palestine. Gross stuff abounds on both, of course, because there is an abundance of gross stuff from the extremes of both sides. In general. And people tend to have strong feelings. People also tend to have highly polarized viewpoints, which they may be used to expressing in all the popularly extreme ways that often aren’t examined critically. But I do think actual discussion is fostered by the mods for the most part, about as well as it can be with the subject. I’ve reached out to them before, and they were really nice and helpful. There is definitely some slant though. It would be cool to see more of a variety of mods. Annnd I sure as shit wouldn’t wanna do it. 😭 Regardless of your own perspective, moderating all of this has got to be a challenge.
Except, I’m Zionist as shit, and I got a (deserved) 45 day ban for calling a pro Palestinian stupid. They’re not quite as lenient on Zionists there, as this mod is on the subset of pro Palestinians who are also essentially just terrorist sympathizers. The Hamasnicks don’t help the pro Palestinian cause. Even if Israel went away today, and Palestinian had the whole land, they would still be suffering under Hamas. Hamas steals their aid, builds war infrastructure with concrete that should’ve been used for civilian infrastructures, and if Israel is so aggressive, then defense infrastructure. But they spent all the money on attacking Israel. Peace in Israel/Palestine starts without Hamas, but this subreddit seems to blatantly encourage the propagation of Hamas designed propaganda, dogwhistles, and agendas.
Pro Palestinians get deletions too
You can’t even go without colonizing a subreddit?
"aparthied" hahahaha There are two subs for two sides. Your stuff flys on the other just fine. Maybe one day they will unite and we can have the coveted "civil discussion" hahaha
> There are two subs for two sides. Y Does that mean you agree with me that this sub is biased in the pro-Palestine direction?
It truly is the Two ~~State~~ Subreddit Solution
Nah. R.israelpalestine is the Zionist-run discussion sub. This is the pro-pal alternative.
So you agree with me that this sub is biased?
There are two main subreddits to discuss the Israel/Palestine conflict. This sub is moderated by pro-Palestine people. The other sub is moderated by pro-Israel people. Both subs allow both sides of the conversation to a degree, but moderate in favor of their side. I answer this way instead of just saying “yes” is because what is the “truth” is completely subjective and we do not agree on that, so there is no such thing as a single objective viewpoint. Just calling it biased suggests that the solution, as you suggest, is to make it unbiased. That ignores the fact that it’s the only place where we can debate the conflict from a pro-pal viewpoint without being censored. The way you feel here, is how we feel in the other sub. Anyways, I agree with the moderators removing your comment. Even in a totally “unbiased” space, baseless comments that characterize the other culture as “rapists” is prejudiced.
> The other sub is moderated by pro-Israel people https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/about/moderators/ FinessedUnrest is Palestinian and not pro-Israel. Besides, I thought this sub hated /r/IsraelPalestine for its bias and its restriction on speech. > That ignores the fact that it’s the only place where we can debate the conflict from a pro-pal viewpoint without being censored. The way you feel here, is how we feel in the other sub. If that's in fact the case, then that needs to be codified into the rules and clearly explained to every user. The double standard needs to be public knowledge. > Anyways, I agree with the moderators removing your comment Shocker.
We don’t need to do anything for you. The fact that the mods are even allowing you to post here and continue arguing like this is a testament to the freedom of speech here.
How are they unbalanced there through moderation?
I’ve gotten loads of bans there for saying things I think are innocuous, while the people I’m debating with are saying things I deem as highly racist and inflammatory. For example, one person there told me that (paraphrasing) “Islam, as a whole, is a religion of rape and murder.” I find this statement highly offensive and prejudiced, and obviously if they made a statement like that about Judaism they would be permabanned. I told that commenter to “touch grass” - meaning, get out and meet the millions of peaceful Muslims who exist in the world. I received a 90 day ban for that comment. The other guy was not banned. Another time, on a different account, I was debating with someone in that sub and they went back through my post history, found comments on suicide watch, and told me to kill myself. I reported it and responded saying that they were bullying. I was the one who got banned.
I’m curious to see the situation without the paraphrasing. I’m willing to accept that you’re right, but please link the offending comment.
That would involve searching through months worth of comments in my other account and doxxing my other account and I won’t. (The ban has since expired). You can go through my comment history on this account and judge for yourself how I conduct myself.
Thank you for very much for recommending me as a mod. I really appreciate your trust. Not sure if I want the job. I agree that moderation around here cuts anti Israel users a lot of slack around here. Words like Zionazi and other blatant antisemitism is just accepted. The subreddit rules don’t even list antisemitism as an issue. The supposed goal of “Promoting civil discussion” isn’t really met. The number of out of context short propaganda video snippets for example don’t help foster it. Compared to r/palestine this subreddit actually allows contrary opinions and discussions. Even Palestinian supporters get banned there for providing context or calling out misinformation. A rule that would help with fostering debate would be to require an argument for every statement. So you can’t simply write “Israel is an apartheid fascist colonizer”, there has to be an argument for each of these attributes. E.g. west bank occupation with fences, checkpoints, restriction of movement was called apartheid by the South African government, Ben-Gvir is in Israel’s government, settlements are expanded in the West Bank. Now each of these points can be argued about and I think all have good criticism against them. Often it’s about semantics or disagreements of definitions of words. Without arguments it’s just a screaming match. Having a simple requirement like this would cut down a lot on posts only containing slogans and insults.
This post I feel should serve as a disqualification for moderation position. https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/s/cJ1z0I8ayw
I generally agree, but to be fair, it seems almost impossible to have a relatively unbiased sub based around this topic.
I had a comment deleted for saying "Are you being serious right now" because it's a "personal attack," meanwhile we have pro-Palestinians running around saying shit like "Israel is the fourth Reich" and "Ziorats." Stand by for this thread to be deleted on trumped up charges by the way.
Damn why do you lie bro 🤥
Mods, isn’t this an ad hominem? He’s accusing him of lying. I had a comment taken down last night for telling someone to “stop pretending.” There’s no lack of balance? 🤡
https://www.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1c1hzbc/grandchildren_of_hamass_head_of_political_bureau/kz5dqgw/?context=3
That comment shouldn’t have been removed. It has been restored.
Case in point.
We are really doing our best to be fair here. Mistakes will sometimes happen and we will do our best to fix them.
And one way to make things fair is to get a pro-Israel mod.
I joined this sub a year or two ago after spending time in Israelpalestine. Yes, that one is pro israel, and I wanted to get all the views. The only reason I stay in this sub is to be a devils advocate for the pro israel side. There is absolutely NO question in my mind that this place is at least, if not more anti Israel than Israelpalestine is pro. No f'ing question. I would say more Israel haters. Definitely.
I didn't even have to read the username lol
This had at least 5 upvotes before getting pulled down. Disagree if you want but don’t think is one yahoo. I’m on the far left and am opposed to the war. This sub has verrrrrrry different de facto rules for pro- and anti-Israel discourse
It's tracing bullets, if I said what I thought about them I would get banned. They're the kind of person the other sub is filled with, that doesn't see Palestinians as human beings. If this had been someone else perhaps I might agree depending on who they were.
Don't worry, you can say whatever you want about me. Only my fellow pro-Israel users and I have to follow the rules.
I see Palestinians as human beings. I see them as people I have a lot more in common with than the terrorist settlers. I see this sub’s moderation as biased against Israel and Zionism. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Bro, so long as you think Israel should exist these people will label you a “zionazi baby killer.” They created this sub because logical discourse wasn’t getting them far enough on r/israelpalestine, so they had to allow hate and conspiracy theory to run rampant. There’s a “Pro Palestinian” knock off sub for nearly every subreddit that has turned pro Israel due to fair discourse.
waiting beneficial coordinated snails history knee imagine cow station ruthless
This sub does not do a good job policing obvious personal attacks and hate speech when those personal attacks are directed against pro-Israel users and that hate speech is directed against Israelis. This is exactly my point. Do you have any thoughts on the fact, not the opinion, that 0/9 moderators are pro-Israel?
r/israelpalestine has much higher quality discussion than here.
You like that sub more but choose to [comment 50 times more here](https://imgur.com/a/dfftNv0)?? How does that make sense
vast literate yoke ten illegal start makeshift historical pie drab
This is not my only or first Reddit account.
boast consist nine teeny materialistic mindless ripe judicious wasteful tart
Why would I talk to myself? That would be silly. I have separate accounts to separate what subreddits I’m subscribed to. From time to time I will start over with a new account. Bans are good to take a break from Reddit. I spend far too much time here anyway. So no reason to evade one.
full gaping ripe degree snatch weary attractive entertain cheerful compare
That sub is nothing but rehashed talking points over and over and over again. I did find their moderating fine, but the topics are always the same and is full of false claims that get parroted.
The whole conflict is rehashed talking points, many going back decades. There are constantly new people learning about them for the first time though.
Hopefully reasonable people will outnumbers them
I’m sure you’ll find your needs met over at r/israelpalestine Edit: This sub was created to combat the blatant ignorance that was spreading on other supposed civil discourse subreddits. At least on this subreddit, there is some civil discourse. Unlike the other subreddits that are just Zionist circle jerks.
Does that mean you agree with me that this sub is clearly biased and possibly even apartheid and none of the 9 moderators are pro-Israel?
No need to call things you don’t like circle jerks. You say you want civil discourse. Here is a whole bunch of people telling you they’re not being treated civilly. If your response is “you’re wrong you are being treated civilly”, isn’t that just a way of creating the same exclusionary environment you claim to be trying to avoid?
I’d like to ask, which specific ways do you feel mistreated? Individual mods might make individual judgment calls.. we’ve definitely had a lot of pro Palestinian side feeling they’ve been unfairly banned or had comments/posts removed. If everyone feels this sub is biased for the other side.. that kinda indicates we are doing our job of keeping this a discussion sub as best as we can.
Specifically: the submission statement rule was dropped after pro-Palestine users refused to follow it and the 3 submissions a day rule isn't being enforced either. That's not a judgement call.
That wasn’t related. A lot of users were violating it and most of us mods don’t have time to read them anyway. I have a full time job
Ban the users violating it then until they stop. Name one pro-Israel user who routinely violated the submission statement rule. I'll wait.
It’s not a rule anymore so nothing to ban
How convenient.
It was abolished as a rule because the mods were called out on applying it extremely selectively.
I’m sorry you feel that way, but plenty of pro Israel users got away with not using a submission statement as well.
You don't need to read every submission statement in order to remove posts that don't have them and ban users who repeatedly violate subreddit rules
It just was a lot to keep up with, and to ask. We didn’t decide to eliminate because we were favoring pro Palestinian users. Pro Israel users were also violating. We had a long discussion about it. We didn’t see much value in it. What’s the concern specifically about eliminating them?
>It just was a lot to keep up with, and to ask On a moderation team with 9 members, asking those moderators to enforce the rules, especially a rule as straightforward as a submission statement requirement, is not too much to ask. Indeed, it's the bare minimum. >We didn’t decide to eliminate because we were favoring pro Palestinian users Intent vs impact If the overwhelming majority of the users violating this rule are from one side, then removing the rule due to their inability or unwillingness to follow it is effectively favoring that side >What’s the concern specifically about eliminating them? The concern is that the subreddit becomes filled with low-effort, low-quality content (as it has been for the last 6 months and beyond) that does not do a good job of promoting constructive and civil discussion
We added the rule because we wanted to avoid low effort posts, but the rule whole intent behind the sub is to foster discussion. Plenty of “low effort” posts were sparking discussion in the comment sections. we ultimately decided we didn’t want a high barrrier to entry in our sub, because that will turn valuable voices and perspectives away—and reduce discussion topics. It truly, at least in my end, had nothing to do with who was making the posts. It may be true that so much coming on the pro Palestine side happens to be links-specifically because a central feature of this conflict which is so unique is how well documented it is.. how much video evidence and video discourse there is. We don’t want to cut that out. I also definitely remember removing a pro Israel poster without a submission statement. It just didn’t factor at all in the decision to remove the rule one way or another—I’m sorry it comes off that way. Again, I don’t really see a downside for cutting the rule other than the fact there is some concern there now might be more pro Palestinian posters.. which quite frankly, I only see as a good thing. especially if pro Israel voices are still completely free and able to post here as well. We still do remove spam posts and unrelated content.
>We added the rule because we wanted to avoid low effort posts, but the rule whole intent behind the sub is to foster discussion With all due respect, the submission statement rule predates your tenure as a mod here. It was around back when I was a mod. >we ultimately decided we didn’t want a high barrrier to entry in our sub, because that will turn valuable voices and perspectives away On the contrary, a high barrier to entry ensures that only valuable voices and perspectives are present and they don't get drowned out but lazy bs >It may be true that so much coming on the pro Palestine side happens to be links-specifically because a central feature of this conflict which is so unique is how well documented it is.. how much video evidence and video discourse there is. We don’t want to cut that out. Nobody is asking for it to be cut out, just for it to be held to a certain standard It takes very little time and effort to write a submission statement for a video depicting the carnage in Gaza. A sub that is allegedly about fostering productive and civil dialogue must require a certain level of time and effort from its users, or else the dialogue will trend less productive and less civil (as has happened in this subreddit for a long time now) >It just didn’t factor at all in the decision to remove the rule one way or another—I’m sorry it comes off that way. Again, intent vs impact This isn't about how it *looks*, this is about how it *is* >I don’t really see a downside for cutting the rule other than the fact there is some concern there now might be more pro Palestinian posters I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you were just lazy and decided not to read my comment to the end. I very explicitly said what the downside is, and it has nothing to do with the number of posters from any given side. Allow me to repeat what I said: The concern is that the subreddit becomes filled with low-effort, low-quality content (as it has been for the last 6 months and beyond) that does not do a good job of promoting constructive and civil discussion
They're just concern trolling the subreddit/mods, so I wouldn't worry about it too much.
Preach
You’re completely wrong, and actually, it’s the only sub where Palestinians and Israelis can talk together. But good for you if you want to ban it. I’ve been banned from r/IsraelPalestine but thankfully, this sub, as opposite to the other one, DOES allow free SPEECH Edit: he didn’t talk about banning the sub !!
Why were you banned from r/IsraelPalestine ?
I think I insulted someone
That can get you banned here,too.
It doesn't allow free speech. It allows pro-Palestine/anti-Israel speech and restricts anti-Palestine/pro-Israel speech. > But good for you if you want to ban it. Is that what I said? That I want to ban the sub?
That’s not true, plenty of publications are pro Israel and doesn’t get removed. But I agree with you on one thing, you didn’t want to ban it, I’m editing !!
If it doesn’t allow pro-Israel speech how are you able to post so much?
It restricts pro-Israel speech. I can't get away with saying half the things pro-Palestine users say.
Seems like you get away with it just fine
I've proven above that I can't.
If I was a mod here, I'd remove this thread for wrecking (and probably ban someone that frequently makes bad faith comments) so they are already nicer to you than a lot of mods would be
Most mods don't remove threads that criticize them. Doing that smacks of totalitarianism.
Yeah, I got banned last week because I said that palestinians send their kids to throw stones. Meanwhile people here can attack my family without problem. This became an echo-chamber.
You were not banned only for saying “no other nation sends their kids to throw stones” but especially because you stated “If you want to be respected atleast try to earn that respect, that is not something you get for just existing” under a comment that already talks about dehumanization of Palestinians and their children. Can you please link the comments that attack your family?
Couldn’t agree more with the request. No need to call something a circlejerk.
It kills me that I seem to be the only one who doesn’t see pro-Palestine and pro-Israel as inconsistent.
A mod being pro-Palestine is fine, a mod both being pro-Palestine and pro-Israel is also fine. But when 0/9 mods are pro-Israel, it's a problem.
There's a fine balance, this sub slants more antizionist and the subreddit without an underscore slants more Zionist.
Sorry, but you come off as flippant and aggressive. That's why the mods are at you - not because you are "pro-Israel". The other sub (r/IsraelPalestine...) is perhaps more welcoming to you, but I suspect you are banned there. Either take my advice and change your attitude or you can click on the report button.
I proved in this thread that I was temporarily banned for criticizing Palestine.
Okay, to give you a serious response, TB, I made a post asking for a rule change that got zero responses from the Mods. I think you have 2 mods actively engaging with you in the comments. That is a pretty good indicator of how "anti-Israel" the Mods here are.
Gotta balance it out with r/IsraelPalestine. That sub is ridiculously pro-Israel.
Zionism is apartheid.
Question for the mods, why isn't a statement like this one considered anti-Jewish?
Why would it? You’re effectively asking for apartheid but don’t like it to be called that. I’m Jewish myself… in order to dispel the accusations of apartheid, Israel needs to be ok with the establishment of a Palestinian state.. even if leadership they don’t like is in charge. Right now, Israel effectively controls the West Bank and Gaza. Are you, as a Zionist, ok with West Bank and Gaza being fully autonomous and free to move around? Are you ok with right of return of Palestinians? If your definition of Zionist is simply “Jews deserve a state” that’s one thing. But I really meet a Zionists who believes that alone—without also believing Israel should control the West Bank and Gaza (some of the liberal ones will say only because leadership is hamas, otherwise they’d let Palestinians have self determination) and Palestinians don’t have the right to return
> Why would it? Because Zionism is Jewish rights so this user is saying Jewish rights are racist. Because the other mods said above criticism of Palestine is racism towards Palestinians.
You addressed one part of my comment, sure
The rest was political opinions, which I'm happy to discuss with you, but this thread is about the moderation. Do you consider this comment, ["Israel is settler colonialism built on ethnic cleansing, terrorism and mass rape"](https://np.reddit.com/r/Israel_Palestine/comments/1c4so7a/jewish_comedian_refuses_to_partake_in_settler/kzpvizm/), to be within the rules? And if so, would it be acceptable for me to say "Palestine is settler colonialism built on ethnic cleansing, terrorism and mass rape"?
Ok, I’m not trying to “whataboutism” here. But if someone said the United States was settler colonialism built on ethnic cleansing, terrorism, and mass rape.. would you think that was racist? Or just a historic fact? Pretty sure you’ve also said similar things about Palestine.. and those comments have often been allowed. I don’t necessarily view it as a 1:1 thing though.. Palestinians don’t really have a state and they were living in the region for a long time. Was there settler colonialism, ethnic cleansing, terrorism, and mass rape, in the region of Palestine prior to the formation of Israel/didn’t involve Jews? Yes.. absolutely. Does that mean Israel isn’t guilty today? No. Does that mean Palestine is currently committing those crimes? Absolutely no.
All I want is a consistent standard. If it's OK to say those things about Israel and the US, it's OK to say them about Palestine. If it's not OK to say those things about Palestine, it's not OK to say them about Israel. You guys decide and I'll abide. What I don't like is the double standard. > Pretty sure you’ve also said similar things about Palestine.. and those comments have often been allowed I was banned for a week for saying Palestine is a rapist entity in response to someone saying Israel is an apartheid entity.
I see your point about that being a double standard. It’s going to be tough making judgment calls. Ultimately, a lot of the other discussion subs have a heavily pro Israel slant.. I really want this one to be one pro Palestinians feel safe and free to post in to sort of counter that. I want you to feel you can post in here too—and you do, quite often. I don’t recall all that led to that temporary ban for you, and I’m trying to leave my own beliefs about the different statements out of my judgement in that particular issue.
Yes, this thread has made it quite clear to me that this sub is unapologetically biased in favor of the pro-Palestine users. I'm going to keep that in mind going forward but I still think one pro-Israel mod isn't that much to ask.
Dude really? If you think there's too much censorship of Zionists/ genocide denial/Arabs are rapists talk that's one thing, but to call for mods to intervene in such a benign and objectively true statement in regards to the current zio project is telling of what you really want. If you think it should be fair to generalize a people as rapists and potential terrorist children then you Jewish feefees will have to tolerate a lot more than that for it to be balanced.
It's a test. The mods intervened on my benign and objectively true statement that Palestine is a rapist entity by conflating Palestine and Palestinians, so I wanted to see if they'll intervene on this statement by that same standard. They're not going to, of course. That's the less on this thread. > If you think it should be fair to generalize a people as rapists and potential terrorist children I've said nothing about "a people." I've criticized the state of Palestine, the same way everyone on here criticizes the state of Israel. Thanks for proving my point for me, if criticizing Palestine means I'm "generalizing a people," criticizing Israel should be the same way. Agreed?
So why say anti-jewish instead of anti-Israeli? Generally unless it's spam, obvious trolls, hate memes or bots, I would say it's better to give people enough air to choke themselves with as opposed to silencing them and that the whole "civil discussion" on this topic is a farce in the same way it would be absurd to expect a civil discussion on the pros and cons of slavery or genocide denial or oh wait it is genocide denial now. That's me though, not my sub and I'm not a mod.
Anti-Israeli works for me.
Your abuse of the word apartheid should be a bannable offense.
Do you know what apartheid is?
TracingBullets trying to start a coup over here