DebatePolitics.com is a white nationalist and white segregationist forum to the extreme, but insidiously so. It is the new Stormfront and exists solely to preserve and protect white American culture.

I was on the forum for over 10 years and the only person of color of a different ethnic background that dared post about other than popular current white cultural values. For this I was constantly harassed and stalked by forum staff and their trolls. Anyone could ignore any and all rules including attacking my children and family because they are mixed race and also because I have LGBT family members.

This was not done by a single staff member, but the entire staff supervised and lead by the forum owner himself, a white man in white-suburban-flight Plano, Texas who is currently using the ID of "Schweddy." However, the forum is more run by an ancient old racist white woman in California using the ID of "DiAnna." She is pure racist, homophobic and xenophobic to her bones - as are nearly all the staff.

When a white racist poster attacked my children and family in private messages, it was learned I have a black wife. The most racist moderator DIAnna went berserk when informed this, demanding I divulge that I am in a mixed race marriage, have mixed race children and there are people in my family of different (including non-white) cultural background and have family members who are LGBT. She demanded I divulge my private message to the full forum staff, supervised by the owner.

The owner, the administrators and moderators made no secret to me - but only in private messages - that the forum is ONLY for people of white cultural origins and only to discuss white cultural values. Forum staff, with the owner overseeing it, stated that my having a black wife and mixed race children, plus LGBT family members is "extremely disturbing" and "just not right."

I was permanently banned because I mixed race children, was married to a black woman, and there are LGBT members of my extended/blended family. The attacking white poster was given full immunity for all rules to attack my children, my wife, my ex wife, and myself, to post my private messages on the forum, and overall more violations than were double what would cause a permanent ban.

This forum is nothing but white supremacist KKKish click bait. Even staff members have quit the forum for how extremely, but covertly, racist and bigoted debatepolitics.com truly is. The staff leads trolls to stalk, ridicule and endlessly attack and bait anyone posting outside of a low-class version of American white cultural values - and then ultimately celebrate running off the next person of color or anyone of any different race, ethnicity or sexual orientation in an area they call the "Basement." To make "undesirable" posters (meaning not white and not of their white values and background) seem like liars and ridiculous, the staff will edit your messages if they don't like you - meaning not acting white enough - with no indication you didn't write the message. There is no level corruption the racist staff and owner of the forum will not employ. The forum rules are irrelevant to anything other than however any staff member wants to use or ignore or make up non-existent rules.

The staff members themselves do post about their lives and they are truly losers in life. A bunch of nobodies who get to be KKKers hiding behind IDs in a sense of finally having some power in their old age after a lifetime of failure. Failed relationships. Failed economically. Failed as parents. Basically, the forum is run by old white losers whose only claim to worth is their whiteness, which is then their superiority.
Statistically, over 90% of people who join the forum quit or are banned.

Be VERY careful of joining or being associated with this white nationalist KKKish Stormfront forum - as doing so is the same as joining a Chapter of the KKK. This could come back to bite you in the $#*! as this forum has come under a spotlight by numerous civil rights organizations and activists. In the past they publicly exposed the real identity of members of white supremacist forums like this one in the past. You may not want a permanent heritage online as a white racist as your legacy.

Do not invest time on this forum. There is a small inner circle of white segregationists and xenophobes that runs the forum and nearly everyone else ultimately is banned or leaves in disgust. In existence for over a decade and a half, less than 300 people every participate on the forum in a month. Rather, it is the same inner circle of loser white people year after years whose real game is to mess with new people and anyone different from their almost bizarre view of even decent white cultural values. They often pretend to be liberal or progressive, but really it is all just a game for their race-click bait game.

The Debate Politics Forum keeps going around in its well known and predictable circles, spinning its wheels interminably, this time busting a notorious and unsuitable Mod, Red Akston who several of we former members have exposed here, but replacing him with yet another sleazy and dishonest DP authority, DiAnna who has already been mentioned here too.

Here's what the DP rightwing owner who goes by the username Schweddy said in trying to make a soft and gentle explosion of this big bomb announcement:

"It's with regret to say *******@RedAkston is stepping down as a mod. To be clear, he will not issue warnings or work in a mod capacity going forward. In the event the mod team needs temp help, he as [sic] agreed to step in and we appreciate his willingness to do so."

Blah blah in the last sentence of course, not to mention the Debate Politics Forum needing a literate owner who is attentive to his work product.

Red Akston being busted from busting DP members comes two months after Akston banned me as I was in my 7th consecutive year as a regular at DP, to include most prominently my military expertise that also included a smash hit Military Cadet thread I began in 2018 and that, as of Red Akston banning me several months ago, had more than 41,000 views and more than 500 video posts by me that DP readers viewed regularly -- members and visitors alike.

I've already posted about Red Akston banning me under completely false and dishonest pretenses. And I've also posted that the new Mod DiAnna posted several times over the years that she hates my posts, and hates reading them. Indeed, DiAnna is aligned openly and admittedly with a shallow rightwing poster who stalked me from the time I joined DP, with their purpose that I "GTFO" of DP. Failing at that over the years, their guy Red Akston stepped in shamelessly to ban me under dishonest and concocted pretenses.

So Red Akston getting the boot from moderating only to be succeeded by DiAnna is a less than zero improvement for the Debate Politics Forum where Trump fascists spewing their hate and lies rule.

So while Red Akston stays on at DP as Admin and for his woeful technical fakery -- to include his trying unsuccessfully to technically sabotage my Military Cadet thread -- Akston has now been stripped of his authority to suspend or ban members, or to take any action against posters. DiAnna does however get this new authority so the end result is no change at this "dangerous" website that also has accurately been called "creepy" and "hateful" by other reviewers here.

Well, today is the day that I've been banned from Debatepolitics, and the reason was that I stood my ground against a moderation team, that was actively working against me.
I've been on the site for some years now, and I can tell you that what I originally heard of the them was mostly true. Even though I did not want to believe it, and I was particularly starved for this sort of discussion.
The admins are split into two groups. One does their jobs, and the other does not, while also abusing what power that they collectively possess.
They routinely change the rules to suit their own opinon at the moment, and are not above breaking them of their own free will, even going so far as to make personal/racist attacks on anyone who doesn't' agree with them.
You will not be treated fairly, especially if you do not agree with their own form of political opinion, and you will easily see that they allow other posters that they favor, to break the rules. While you will be punished the very moment that they deem you to have stepped out of line.

I will also give you a direct warning about the Administrator RedAkston, is possibly one of the largest offenders in this case. He will play at being your friend in the beginning, but he will fall back into deriding you and punishing you if you so much as question a moderator's actions. Even if you can directly prove that the moderator is lying, or if they've broken the rules. He will simply claim that you're lying to him and threaten you will further punishment, if you attempt to speak up on the issue further.
He continually uplifts those who break the rules, to the position of moderator, and removes those who fall out of favor. It's his actions that I believe have caused the site to fall as far as it has.

There is a part of me which is sad to say goodbye to this site, after helping it to grow for the last two years. But I'm also happy to see that I no longer have to deal with such a group of racist bigots, who actively belittle those around them, for their own selfish reasons. Funny enough, practically none of them are right-wing. They're all either self proclaimed liberals, or communist.
Which was another aspect that other reviews had warned me about as well.

Interestingly enough. The moderator who ended up getting me banned, was a new moderator, and one that RedAkston uplifted himself. He'd cited me for breaking site rules, and directly lied to me on that issue. Which I called him out on, and required moderation on working to have the penalty removed. While also pointing out how he'd directly lied in his ruling.
His name is Jetboogieman, and he's probably one of the largest offenders of the sites rules to have been on the site in a long time. He's actively targeted posters due to their race and repeatedly broke site rules, for days at a time.

This just goes to show you the kind of people that RedAkston is willing to allow into power.

Introduction:
I joined DebatePolitics.com (DP) about a year ago. My user ID there was Xelor, and I welcome you to review threads I created (https://www.debatepolitics.com/search.php?searchid=*******) and posts I made so you can get a sense of the types of content and arguments I presented. Here are a few of the ~10K posts I made on the site:
-- Post 82 in "Today... These are the kind of fake news headlines the public is subject to reading..." (https://www.debatepolitics.com/bias-in-the-media/*******-today-these-kind-fake-news-headlines-public-subject-reading-post*******358.html#post*******358)
-- Post 10 in "I trusted you!' Trump voters seethe after realizing they're getting screwed by the GOP's tax plan" (https://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news-non-msm/*******-trusted-you-trump-voters-seethe-after-realizing-they-re-getting-screwed-gop-s-tax-plan-post*******197.html#post*******197)
-- Posts 56 & 57 in "Richard Dawkins' Compound Ignorant Mistakes" (https://www.debatepolitics.com/academia/*******-richard-dawkins-compound-ignorant-mistakes-post*******534.html#post*******534)
-- Post 1 in ""FBI chief Wray refutes Barr, says no 'spying' on Trump campaign" (https://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news-mainstream-media/*******-w-171-fbi-chief-wray-refutes-barr-says-no-spying-trump-campaign.html)
-- Posts 394,395 & 396 in "FBI chief Wray refutes Barr, says no 'spying' on Trump campaign" (Post 394: https://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news-mainstream-media/*******-w-171-fbi-chief-wray-refutes-barr-says-no-spying-trump-campaign-40.html#post*******879)
-- Post 1 of "Reconcile this..." (https://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/*******-reconcile.html#post*******120)
-- Post 1 of "Social Welfare" (https://www.debatepolitics.com/economics/*******-social-welfare.html)
-- Post 1 of "Should public schools teach Father Georges Lemaitre's creation theory in science classes?" (https://www.debatepolitics.com/education/*******-should-schools-teach-father-georges-lemaitres-creation-theory-part-their-science-curriculum.html)
-- Post 1 of "An examination of the NRA's argument against registering guns" (https://www.debatepolitics.com/gun-control/*******-examination-nras-argument-against-registering-guns.html)
-- Post 1 of "A legislation proposal on accountability" (https://www.debatepolitics.com/gun-control/*******-legislation-proposal-accountability.html)
-- Post 1 of "Is it logical to believe in God solely on the basis of the major arguments for His existence?" (https://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/*******-logical-believe-god-solely-basis-major-arguments-his-existence.html)
-- Post 1 of "An age of character draws depressingly yet conspicuously closer to a close" (https://www.debatepolitics.com/off-topic-discussion/*******-age-character-draws-depressingly-yet-conspicuously-closer-close.html)
-- Post 1 of "Regulation of Software Platform Firms" (https://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/*******-regulation-software-platform-firms.html)
-- "Do you think people should be held accountable for their blacked out behavior? (see the rubric)" (https://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/*******-do-you-think-people-should-held-accountable-their-blacked-out-behavior-see-rubric.html)

Jejune Discourse:
The vast majority of opening posts (OPs) on DP consist of a member excerpting a passage or two from a news article whereof the opening poster (OP-er) writes a banal sentence or two about it. Basically OP-ers' OPs do little more than inform readers that "so and so" wrote an story about "such and such." Once in a blue moon, an OP-er cites a news or other essay as the inspiration for an editorial/argumentative essay OP-er presents.

Don't mistake me, however. I started threads of that sort (https://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/*******-we-find-no-convincing-evidence.html). The disappointment derives not from the mere existence of such threads. Rather it's a function of threads commenced with a member's own editorial essay wherein s/he takes a clear and unequivocal stance being too rare.

Like most OPs on the site, most subsequent responses in the thread are little purport to discuss among the most complex issues of our time with only a sentence or two more prose than a tweet allows.

So, if you're looking for a place wherein people present strong, complete and coherent arguments for/against a given policy or "whatever," I suggest you look elsewhere. You can certainly present your own "proper" argument (note there's a 5000 character limit to each post, so you'll to break such commentary into multiple posts -- see posts 6-9 in "Is Quality of Life Actually Increasing?": https://www.debatepolitics.com/general-political-discussion/*******-quality-life-actually-increasing-post*******698.html#post*******698); however, if you do, expect to receive either no response or a barrage of trivial ones or one after another response that fails to consider material parts or all of the themes, factors and the relationships among them that you addressed.

The posting style of liberal and conservative members is fairly similar; however, conservatives are more likely to post remarks that have absolutely nothing to do with the actual thread topic. Conservative members tend, slightly more than liberals, also to make inferences that aren't supported by the content to which their inference pertains.

Lastly, notwithstanding member's political lean, there're a lot of posts made by folks who really aren't well versed on the subject being discussed, yet they express strong opinions about it. For example, see the above referenced thread: "Should public schools teach Father Georges Lemaitre's creation theory in science classes?", the poll responses, a number of the posts in it and my own post 27 in it. Indeed, post 62 in that thread reflects a profound lack of understanding about the scientific method and the Theory of Evolution.

A lot of the exchanges on DP consists of members taking cheap pot shots at the political party, ideology and/or politicians they oppose or dislike. For instance, conservatives are quick to defend gun rights and assail gun control advocates, but they are completely quiescent when bid to proffer ways to attenuate the incidence of involuntary gun-related deaths and injuries. Liberals are quick to decry income inequality, but their doing so is ideologically driven rather than founded on any particular economic theory.

And, yes, there are certain members who seem to lurk in wait for threads they can derail, generally any thread that presents a strong argument against the lurker's stance or political or medial "darling," there are certain members (liberals and conservatives) who routinely post insightful and on-topic comments. The latter genre of member's are the bright lights on DP, but they comprise a very small minority of the regularly participating membership.

Capricious Moderators:
I was given an infraction for the content I posted in the above referenced post 396 (https://www.debatepolitics.com/breaking-news-mainstream-media/*******-w-171-fbi-chief-wray-refutes-barr-says-no-spying-trump-campaign-40.html#post*******061), A moderator declared defamatory my response to the other member. I attempted to dispute the infraction, but on the same day I was told my dispute argument -- my refutation of the infraction was based on the fact that the truth is not defamatory -- was being considered, I was banned.

So that's another problem: if you are well versed on a given topic -- natural sciences, jurisprudence, social science, business management, etc. -- you'll need a lot of patience if you're of a mind to defend your own remarks. (It's just as well that I got banned, for my patience had run out and I'd about a month ago satisfied the social-media research goals that moved me to join it in the first place.)

On the same day I received the aforementioned notification, I also created a thread a moderator summarily deleted. That thread asked the DP moderators about the copyright message, "Debate Politics.com Copyright ©2004-2019," that appears in the footer of every DP page. I asked who, per public records, is the copyright claimant and for what exactly was copyright claimed. I asked because after using the Library of Congress' copyright search tool, I could find no copyright that had ever been registered in association with Debate Politics.com (or anything resembling it).

I initially posted the above question in the "Feedback/Suggestions" subforum, and that is wherefrom it was summarily removed from view (presumably deleted).

DP has a section called the "Basement." (Non-members cannot access that part of the forum.) Among the subforums in the Basement is one called "Where's My Binky?" The "Binky" part of the Basement is where members may air criticisms and complaints about various actions the moderators take... Or, in DP's own words in the DP rules, the Binky section is "made specifically for members wishing to rant about Moderator action."

On the same date that I was told my dispute was being considered, I created a "Binky" thread to complain about my the moderators' having deleted my copyright question thread. In my Binky post, I noted exactly what I'd asked about, and then I complained about the deletion.

About an hour or two after I created my Binky "rant," I was banned for "harassment." Whom I harassed I don't know.

In addition to the specific example of moderator caprice described above, moderators do not appear to exercise any measure of consistency in terms of who or what comments for which they assign infractions. Indeed, they exercise little-to-no discursive oversight; consequently, it's rare that a thread actually stays on-topic. The moderation team's insouciance in that regard is evident by how infrequently one sees in-thread moderator instructions/warnings to stay on-topic as compared with how many posts in any given thread are off-topic.

Other thoughts:
The non-political sections of DP are pleasant enough, but it can be like pulling teeth to get people to share things. For instance, the Food section is fairly lively, yet on the several occasions I bid folks to share recipes, very few folks did.

A fair number of DP's members will readily attest to "this or that" personal experience -- sometimes related to careers, sometimes merely anecdotal -- in support of a political or policy stance they're advancing, don't expect much in the way of reflective exposition that connects those experiences with something going on in the world today.

Conclusion:
On what basis, if any, would I recommend DP?

Well, the ratio of conservatives to liberals is relatively even, though it seemed to me there were slightly more conservatives among the regular posters.

If you're seeking a web forum that encourages, welcomes and is structured to support rigorously coherent (sound/cogent) debate on public policies, look elsewhere.

If you're seeking trivial jabs based on whataboutism, tu quoque, guilt by association, well poisoning, and whatever other rational failing there is, DP may be a good fit for you.

Debatepolitics seems pleasant enough at first. Most of the people are nice, and the community is undeniably quite a bit more mature and intellectual, on average, than most. Beneath the surface, however, the board is actually something of an Orwellian nightmare in terms of moderation, administration, and the culture behind it.

Have you ever had the misfortune to work in a truly toxic environment? One where management always makes sure to be on their soft-spoken "Ps and Qs," but are backbiting and manipulative authoritarian low-lives underneath it all, making decisions based off of petty personal biases, rather than any sort of real professional interest? Yeah... That's DP's moderation team in a nut shell. They'll swear up and down that they're all just as professional and impartial as can be, and that they are absolutely bound by the board's rules in laying down judgement (and God help the poor fool who suggests otherwise on the open board).

In reality, however, they clearly show favoritism towards some posters, and negative bias towards others. What gets one person a slap on the wrist, or is allowed to pass entirely, will get another punished to the fullest extent possible. And if, for that matter, the mods decide that a certain poster needs to go, they will not hesitate to bend, twist, and distort the rules in basically any way necessary to make it happen as quickly as possible. They will usually do it all with a smile... At least where other posters can see the interactions in question.

That's before we even get to the "good ole' boy" circle jerk that is "the Basement." In theory, this "special" area of the board is a place, mostly free of moderation, meant for blowing off steam, and the settling of grudges. The reality of the place, however, is a veritable no man's land of clichish and caustic board vets, psychopathic trolls, and bullies. These supremely unplesasant people operate with near total impunity, and viciously rip into any new-comer unfortunate enough to cross their paths.

Which... Finally... Brings us to the board's last and most serious problem. It's - really rather bizarre - "troll culture." One fact serves to illustrate this point above all others: that among the number of those "Basement-dwellers" mentioned above one can even find a Senior Moderator - having served in his position for several years. This individual claims to be a psychologist in real life. However, he not only openly boasts about using his skills in that profession to manipulate the rest of the moderating team, but he also claims to use his advantaged position on the board to drive posters he dislikes into nervous break-downs for his own amusement.

Most shocking of all, however, is that - while this mod's antics draw numerous complaints from board members - no one with any power or influence seems to care in the slightest. Some even congratulate the probable psychopath on his "smack skills," and will gladly toast along with him to his many victims.

Likely due to the Basement's influence, this seems to be a sentiment shared by many - if not even most - of the board's longtime members towards trolls and trollish behavior of all measure; both in the Basement, and on the greater board. They feel that it's perfectly acceptable to be an actively malicious troll; deliberately lying, baiting, or otherwise trying to cause harm to other posters. It's just not alright for the intended victim to draw attention to it, or try to fight back. They feel that deserves to be punished. Hell! The moderators even count accusations of "trolling" as being an infractable offense, regardless of if the poster accused openly admits to being a "troll" in other contexts, or is well known by that reputation across the entire board!

Yes, I'm almost certain that this plays into the favoritism and biased moderation I mentioned above. Some people seem to be able to insult, bait, and abuse other posters with near impunity even when operating outside of areas in which the board supposedly deems this as being appropriate behavior. It is likely more than just coincidence that these favored posters also happen to be board vets, and usually the Basement's most well known agitators as well, more often than not.

In any case, DP can be a lot fun. Most of the rank and file membership is nice, and the atmosphere is generally fairly relaxed in most areas. It might behoove one, however, to keep their head down, and avoid some of the more corrosive subforums likely to draw attention to one's self from the board's more malicious and corrupt "elite" members. Simply speaking, no good ever seems to come from it.