I posted a six minute video about replacing tarrifs replacing taxes. It was a discussion that went into a lot of the real news surrounding Trumps fiscal policies, which is directly related to his campaign and imo, there's nothing more important than the government's fiscal policy

So we can't post news and discussion? No, I did not give a summary because there was a lot of detail in that 6 minutes, but it's still news worthy and worthy of discussion. People post news links all the time and say little to nothing. That's how you start a conversation when something comes out. Hey everyone, check this out, let's discuss

It was edited out and deleted by staff, and left with this message.



[You need to frame this with your view on the issue. Simply saying 'here's a video; watch it' isn't adequate -- Staff]

There's Rule 1.

It seems like the exact rule was provided to you with that staff message.

YouBet said:

---

It seems like the exact rule was provided to you with that staff message.

---

Not really, considering I see links posted all the time, everywhere, all over TexAgs. It's news, it's discussion. We share it. Some respond and have a discussion. Others say nothing but may read the shared content

If posting a video, you may want to post a summary or your views on it. Simply saying "here's a video, go watch it" isn't adequate.

You will most definitely get the answers you seek.
But you must pass the test….

jamey said:

---

YouBet said:

---

It seems like the exact rule was provided to you with that staff message.

---

Not really, considering I see links posted all the time, everywhere, all over the site. It's news, it's discussion. We share it, and then talk abiut it

---

They haven't been doing that for quite a while. Just repost, give a synopsis, along with what you might agree or disagree with, it's really not that hard to start a topic and have it stay posted if you just follow a simple rule or two.

Staff replied in your OP. ^

Not in bold. But they replied.

The whole "you have to provide your own opinion" thing makes absolutely zero sense and only serves to stifle and limit discussion by preventing posters from bringing up new topics

jamey said:

---

YouBet said:

---

It seems like the exact rule was provided to you with that staff message.

---

Not really, considering I see links posted all the time, everywhere, all over TexAgs. It's news, it's discussion. We share it. Some respond and have a discussion. Others say nothing but may read the shared content

---

I don't know man. I'm kind of drunk.

Lex said:

---

Staff replied in your OP. ^

Not in bold. But they replied.

---

Lex is posting on F16 or is this a sock?

I get bored when my board gets slow. Don't hate.

• The first rule of F16 is you do not talk about F16
• The second rule of F16 is you do NOT talk about F16
• The third rule of F16 is to have fun and try your best

The Marksman said:

---

The whole "you have to provide your own opinion" thing makes absolutely zero sense and only serves to stifle and limit discussion by preventing posters from bringing up new topics

---

My total guess is that it's to discourage people who just use message boards to try to steer traffic to their favorite content generators.

And people who just post links to hour long videos with no summaries get criticized on just about every message board I know of. I don't think the OP always needs to write a full editorial review, but at least give some bullets.

C@LAg said:

---

jamey said:

---

YouBet said:

---

It seems like the exact rule was provided to you with that staff message.

---

Not really, considering I see links posted all the time, everywhere, all over TexAgs. It's news, it's discussion. We share it. Some respond and have a discussion

---

they treat this specific forum differently in that regards.

part of the inconsistent moderation across forums, but it is what it is./

---

Yeah, guess so. The same exact post has a good discussion on another forum, since it's both politics and business

The business forum can discuss it but for some reason it gets the hatchet here

Also, I see that you posted same topic on F57 so they either moved it there for relevancy or were removing dupe threads.

They're trying to cut down thread posts and instead leave up discussion. If you post a simple twitter link, without at least a few sentences that would start a discussion, your thread will be locked.

hope this makes sense.

Jugstore Cowboy said:

---

The Marksman said:

---

The whole "you have to provide your own opinion" thing makes absolutely zero sense and only serves to stifle and limit discussion by preventing posters from bringing up new topics

---

My total guess is that it's to discourage people who just use message boards to try to steer traffic to their favorite content generators.

And people who just post links to hour long videos with no summaries get criticized on just about every message board I know of. I don't think the OP always needs to write a full editorial review, but at least give some bullets.

---

Like I said, there was a lot of detail in the 6 minutes. I figure any fiscal conservative that's interest can listen to 6 minutes.

It was about Trumps tarrifs and tax breaks, which feeds into hos idea of bringing manufacturing back to the US.


I'm sure that's why he had the teamsters at the convention too though that wasn't mentioned in the video

Quite frankly it's a huge topic, or should be among fiscal conservatives.

jamey said:

---

YouBet said:

---

It seems like the exact rule was provided to you with that staff message.

---

Not really, considering I see links posted all the time, everywhere, all over TexAgs. It's news, it's discussion. We share it. Some respond and have a discussion. Others say nothing but may read the shared content

---

If it was allowed to post a tweet, or a video, or a link with no commentary it opens the doors for this board to be just a copy of twitter posts or youtube videos.

F16 is not meant to be a political news headline aggregator but rather a board for commentary about the political news.

Edit that the rule for adding some commentary to OP is a means of filtering out the attempts to turn this board into a headline aggregator and instead forces conversation right from the start, which is the whole point of F16.

Tea Party said:

---

jamey said:

---

YouBet said:

---

It seems like the exact rule was provided to you with that staff message.

---

Not really, considering I see links posted all the time, everywhere, all over TexAgs. It's news, it's discussion. We share it. Some respond and have a discussion. Others say nothing but may read the shared content

---

If it was allowed to post a tweet, or a video, or a link with no commentary it opens the doors for this board to be just a copy of twitter posts or youtube videos.

F16 is not meant to be a political news headline aggregator but rather a board for commentary about the political news.

Edit that the rule for adding some commentary to OP is a means of filtering out the attempts to turn this board into a headline aggregator and instead forces conversation right from the start, which is the whole point of F16.

---

This entire website is about discussion, and has been since day 1

If F16 doesn't want news, or literal discussion posted in a link to drive discussion here that's fine. Seems like a weird rule but ok.

jamey said:

---

YouBet said:

---

It seems like the exact rule was provided to you with that staff message.

---

Not really, considering I see links posted all the time, everywhere, all over TexAgs. It's news, it's discussion. We share it. Some respond and have a discussion. Others say nothing but may read the shared content

---

Most forums on the internet outlaw video link bombing, especially in the OP (and whether the people who do it get away with it or not, they deserve to die and then burn in hell).

Don't be such a whiny child. If you want a discussion, post your thoughts. Don't just drop in a video with a lazy, brainless "here watch this" comment.

jamey said:

---

Tea Party said:

---

jamey said:

---

YouBet said:

---

It seems like the exact rule was provided to you with that staff message.

---

Not really, considering I see links posted all the time, everywhere, all over TexAgs. It's news, it's discussion. We share it. Some respond and have a discussion. Others say nothing but may read the shared content

---

If it was allowed to post a tweet, or a video, or a link with no commentary it opens the doors for this board to be just a copy of twitter posts or youtube videos.

F16 is not meant to be a political news headline aggregator but rather a board for commentary about the political news.

Edit that the rule for adding some commentary to OP is a means of filtering out the attempts to turn this board into a headline aggregator and instead forces conversation right from the start, which is the whole point of F16.

---

This entire website is about discussion, and has been since day 1

If F16 doesn't want news, or literal discussion posted in a link to drive discussion here that's fine. Seems like a weird rule but ok.

---

You sound like you don't want to contribute to the discussion and instead want to just post links.

If you can't think for yourself and start off a discussion with your own opinion or at least give a summary of your provided link, then I don't care if your posts get deleted. If it's as important as you say then it's worth the rule for commentary if it weeds out 99% of drive by troll posts.

This board is only as good as the effort put in and you are calling for less effort in starting threads...

your qualms have nothing to do with f16 and everything to do with the way moderation is during an election season....

read the mod comment at the end of your OP.

Re-post what you posted in the OP and provide some sort of discussion topic and it wont end up like this one.

good luck

BadMoonRisin said:

---

your qualms have nothing to do with f16 and everything to do with the way moderation is during an election season....

read the mod comment at the end of your OP.

Re-post what you posted in the OP and provide some sort of discussion topic and it wont end up like this one.

good luck

---

I think I'll pass, considering I did not even get 10 posts deep before finding 3 posts that were simply links to whatever and no commentary by the OP whatsoever

Doesn't seem like F16 is very interested in this fiscal policy discussion I was attempting to start

If you're interested it's on the other forum

Even if it were the dullest day in the history of the Earth, if you cannot be bothered to post at least a little about what to expect at the link, why should anyone expect there to be any value in clicking on the link?

And if it is an actual link, how does anyone know that the link is safe?

I am not, no sweat off my sack. Good bye.

And again, it's not a f16 problem. It's a problem with what you posted...and not for the reasons you think. I attempted to explain it to you. ....annnnyway.

eric76 said:

---

Even if it were the dullest day in the history of the Earth, if you cannot be bothered to post at least a little about what to expect at the link, why should anyone think it is worth reading?

---

This is a politics forum loaded with Rs. If the title alone doesn't clue everyone into what the details are concerning, then fiscal conservatism truly is dead

And I said, it's a lot of detail. I'm not rehashing all that. I figured thered be plenty of interst on a politics forum


When we go off the financial cliff it won't be just because of democrats

"And I said, it's a lot of detail. I'm not rehashing all that. I figured thered be plenty of interst on a politics forum"

You don't need to rehash it, you just need to post the video's key points. If you're not smart enough to identify and summarize those, then your thread will be worthless anyway.

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

"And I said, it's a lot of detail. I'm not rehashing all that. I figured thered be plenty of interst on a politics forum"

You don't need to rehash it, you just need to post the video's key points. If you're not smart enough to identify and summarize those, then your thread will be worthless anyway.

---

I have no doubt it would be a bad thread, probably no responses at all, even if spoon fed it and retyped every single word

The Marksman said:

---

The whole "you have to provide your own opinion" thing makes absolutely zero sense and only serves to stifle and limit discussion by preventing posters from bringing up new topics

---

Na I disagree. It is lazy to just post random twitter posts or whatever. users bring discussion. Otherwise it jsut becomes an extension of twitter or realclear or whatever


It is the best rule on any of the Texags forums and is a step in the right direction

jamey said:

---

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

"And I said, it's a lot of detail. I'm not rehashing all that. I figured thered be plenty of interst on a politics forum"

You don't need to rehash it, you just need to post the video's key points. If you're not smart enough to identify and summarize those, then your thread will be worthless anyway.

---

I have no doubt it would be a bad thread, probably no responses at all, even if spoon fed it and retyped every single word

---

You are being childish and your attempts at moral superiority over F16 claiming we are not interested in fiscal conservativism is the worst kind of strawman I've seen in a while.

We want fiscal conservativism.

But on F16, per TexAgs moderation rules, you cannot post just a link and assume the thread title is sufficient to start a conversation. Imagine if everyone did that, then the first page would be filled with posts with nothing but links, tweets, or youtube videos and the well thought out threads would be drowned out.

Your topic is great, and likely the video, but your effort in starting the conversation is nonexistent.

jamey said:

---

Deputy Travis Junior said:

---

"And I said, it's a lot of detail. I'm not rehashing all that. I figured thered be plenty of interst on a politics forum"

You don't need to rehash it, you just need to post the video's key points. If you're not smart enough to identify and summarize those, then your thread will be worthless anyway.

---

I have no doubt it would be a bad thread, probably no responses at all, even if spoon fed it and retyped every single word

---

Do you have to pay more to get this type of condescension unlocked with your monthly subscription or does it just come as a bonus because you have zero-self-awareness?

Im starting to notice a pattern.

I remember OP.

Respect.

[Another rule you seem to be unfamiliar with is grandstanding about moderation. If you see an objectionable post, flag it. We do not read every post on the board, and depend on the users to help us identify objectionable threads --Staff]