Biased moderation in PA - Another example

Re: Biased moderation in PA - Another example

^ fine, here is the sort of attitude that i have problem with.

http://www.paklinks.com/gs/pakistan-affairs/316974-pakistan-will-either-break-up-fall-under-taliban-rule-2015-a-3.html#post6437278

In this thread M2k says about pakhtoons:

*They were against the creation of Pakistan in 1948. They don’t consider themselves Pakistanis. They kill Pakistani Soldiers. They do not follow the Pakistani constitution. What else is a definition of a traitor?

*another one here

*Lets see Swat a former tourist region is now run by the Taliban. FATA is totally outside of Pakistani sovereignty. *

and it has been going on for a long time earlier on it was this way, and its still not edited so appears he never thought there is any ethnic slur here
http://www.paklinks.com/gs/pakistan-affairs/273158-breaking-news-benazir-bhutto-dead-16.html#post5559674

time to make FATA a nuclear wasteland

Re: Biased moderation in PA - Another example

First linked post is debateable, and can be argued.

Second link is a post from 2007. If we were to dig up old threads and filter remarks made that far back, it would consume too much time and gain little or nothing.

Lets focus on now and onwards...

Thanks for the effort of finding them though. Will be at your service, please report posts that you see unfit. And lets work in coordination to make Pakistan Affairs an ideal discussion sub-forum for all the latest.

Obviously, there is a problem and you have many senior posters complaining here, many left in the past, and more will continue to leave. I dont think it has to do with all the mods though, and I have full confidence in teggy, the channel manager.

As for the moderating, its not consistent. You will find one mod very vigilant in NOT taking out any insults aimed at tribals or their leaders, or quite simply the people he/she doesn't like. Yet he overlooks insults on people who are considered enemies by the other lot. There should be a fair degree of consistency.

As for this new policy, needless to say it doesn't suit a discussion forum. We cant all be 'yes men' and endorse wars, no matter whose right or wrong. We are told by some that the operation against the Bengalis was wrong, the operation against the MQM terrorism in KArachi was wrong but THIS one is saintly and MUST be supported. Though I personally support it, but dictating what action users should take on a discussion forum is a bad idea and always backfires. Let people debate it out, stop threatening them with zulmat-e-zia please. I request the babu-jees who masterminded this policy to read a little about Habib Jalib. It took the nation decades to figure him out, and now hes hailed as a hero and his poetry is dubbed the poetry of defiance. Keep in mind he spent most of his life in jail because he spoke the bitter truth, and he didn't spare our Armed Forces either. He passed away but just a few weeks ago (15 years after his demise) he received the hilal-e-imtiaz.

Its simple, when we had the whole mumbai escapade, I was really disappointed to see some senior people just recommend the easiest way to deal with them is to ban them on the site. That is defeat in itself. Some of us prefer to let them stay and make sure to provide them with befitting counter arguments and we did so in the past. Quite frankly, this new forum policy is basically a defeat, atleast in my eyes.

Re: Biased moderation in PA - Another example

^^ Nice argument Spock, but we should draw a line between intellectualism and solidarity. Pakistani Govt is with the locals of Swat and locals of Swat are with Pakistani Govt, or else they would not be running away from Taliban controlled areas towards Pak. Govt controlled area.

If you are with locals of Pak decent, you should be supporting the action of Pak Govt, at least GS thinks so, hence the Policy,

Its easy to be Habib Jalib and Faiz Ahmed Faiz, its hard to see your love one's beheading video on youtube. Those soldiers had mothers and wives also, the one who already got killed by these terrorist. Its cool in this day and age to go against our Govt and curse the army, its difficult to get rid of that lens and look at the picture from unbiased perspective, but its about time we should do that.

Policy is going to stay.

Re: Biased moderation in PA - Another example

Ah, there are those that also said how the operation against MQM actually saved Karachi from becoming Jinnahpur.

p.s. its fine to support soldiers, infact thast what we should all be doing (not sure if you did that back in the karachi operation days or not). But being yes men to govt policies, certainly not.

Re: Biased moderation in PA - Another example

I expressed my take of Karachi Operation in another thread, already.

Re: Biased moderation in PA - Another example

hmm i think you should put a ban on anyone who degrades or cheers the deaths of army. and apply the same logic on the other hand unless we know for sure that 46 people who died were all militants and indeed terrorists. or may be put a ban on cheering death altogether, it appears quite distasteful.

You try to paint picture as if Taliban=Pashtun, that is not correct. Pakistan army action is against Taliban who are fighting the army, there is nothing wrong if army is now retaliating against those militants.