This was proven to be false, though. He would update it on a daily basis regardless of who did or didn't post and even stated that he would be doing such. The only way to prevent such would be, naturally, to report it, which I'm going to guess your definition of "whiner" is, unless you wish to correct me on this.
They did, actually. However, many people stopped after seeing it was futile since he'd never engage, only post more links, ignore whatever was said, and move on. At this point, people figured it wasn't worth it to bother and just flung mud at him.
Now, do I agree with the mudflinging or think it was justified? No. However, I can also understand why nobody bothered engaging him after a certain point.


The only remaining option for an unresponsive, unreceptive individual who continually bumps the thread with links and lack of discussion is to either forever ignore the thread or report it. The latter was deemed the best option, considering the toxicity that had formed over it, the general lack of credibility of the sources cited, and what could be argued as continued advertisement/promotion of a show.

It wasn't on a daily basis, but so what?

And why can't the people who don't like the thread simply ignore it?

Nope, there are other ways, like simply ignoring it.

Had that been done, the thread would have died on its own.

Still can't fathom why that is so hard for some people.

Again, this argument is simply not true. RT stated that he would keep the thread alive regardless of who posted in it, and demonstrated such on numerous occasions. Ignoring the thread would not have let it die.

There's also the additional point that ignoring such a thread after the closure of the #GamerGate thread would look particularly hypocritical. Both had escalated into similar circumstances.

I don't remember what thread it was in, but there was a fantastic post about why explaining decisions can be a terrible idea. The short version was basically that if you try to justify your decisions to people who disagree with them, they're likely to just argue with you more because of it. In that thread it was more about GOG rejecting certain games while allowing others, but I think it can apply well to pretty much any situation.

deleted

Censorship is always bad. But i understand GOG's position.
If GOG's customer watches CNN, then comes to GOG forums and sees Infowars thread he gets a cognitive dissonance. Everything he believes in is being stated as false.

"Propaganda! Lies!", - CNN watcher rages in agony, reports to Fables.
Fables's duty is to make GOG customer happy and keep a friendly atmosphere on forum (Happy CNN watcher = More money for GOG! $_$).
So she closes the source of unhappiness of CNN watcher, who is also a GOG customer.


PS: things could've been more simple, if it was officially stated in forum rules, that all political themes are forbidden.
But now political themes are "kinda" allowed, but if "someone" (let's call them "CNN watchers" again) will not like them, they'll report it in PM to mod. So it's allowed, but censored. And that sucks. :/

Show me one active left wing political thread.

This one :P

So it's ok to harass someone, call them names, downvote and spam-delete posts and threads they don't agree with?

Because you seem to excuse other people's behaviour and selectively target people like RT?

The whiners would still find something or someone to whine about.

There's a saying that you shouldn't feed trolls, but you also shouldn't feed whiners as it empowers them and makes them whine more.

When my dog whines I ignore him and he stops.

If I pat him he whines more; he also licks his balls a lot.

What Fairfox said

Ironically enough this is one of the very few times I can actually tell what she said :D

Should I make one?

(Note that I don't count the science vs. common sense thread as being political.)

NO!!!!
NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!!

I'll report it myself.

Are you an American? Because you completely understand what freedom of speech is all about and not doing any of those things.

Them there is fighting words,puddy.