A couple questions regarding /pol/First, is there a more lax level of moderation by design as opposed to other boards considered non-worksafe? Second, is /pol/ essentially the same as /b/ in regards to what global rules apply to it? I ask this because I regularly see violations of global rule #1 (which I thought applied to ALL boards, including /b/), and global rule #3.There was a discussion to this effect over on /pol/ a couple of nights ago, and people there stated flat-out that they thought that the global rules did not apply to them.Also, is /pol/ going to implement a display ID system? I get the feeling that a lot of the posts arguing with each other is a distinct case of samefaggotry, and it would help to be able to identify those individuals.
wat? Hurting someones feewings isn't illegal in the US, yuropoor.Which boards actually follow #3? (at least the No "Trolls, flames, racism, off-topic replies, uncalled for catchphrases, macro image replies" part)
Pretty curious about this too.What is the official opinion on all of the interracial porn that gets spammed on /pol/ from time to time?
Question, if /pol/ is supposed to act like a black hole for all the stormfag trolls that ruined /new/... why isn't their a moderated /new/ board? It isn't exactly fair for people wanting actual discussion on current affairs to be stuck with /pol/ retards.
>>1999I'm not as concerned about the #3 rule, even though some of the stuff violates speech laws in much of Europe- Holocaust denial is a BIG no-no in Germany, for example- as I am about people openly making death threats against elected officials and other calls for violent acts. Those kind of things are not free-speech protected anywhere that I'm aware of. (BTW, I'm an Amerifat, not a yoropoor),
>>2484>some of the stuff violates speech laws in much of EuropeLike I said, no hurt feewings police in the US, so not a #1 violation.>as I am about people openly making death threats against elected officials I frequent /pol/ and have never "regularly see[n]" death threats being made. I'd find it difficult to believe there's anymore lax moderation for death threats on /pol/ then on any other board.>and other calls for violent acts.Brandenburg v. Ohio>[Our] decisions have fashioned the principle that the constitutional guarantees of free speech and free press do not allow a State to forbid or proscribe advocacy of the use of force or law violation except where such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or cause such action.The "kill the rich/poor/blacks/whites/fags/cis" etc etc posts that populate /pol/ would certainly be protected speech, so again not a violation of #1.
