Posts by Richard James2

mau123 said:So, what exactly is the issue here?

The issue is pretty simple: discussing specific forum members by name is against the rules, even if this thread is officially allowed on the board. Honestly, if you’ve spent any real time on this forum, you should have enough experience to realize that people's political convictions aren't always predictable—you might even be surprised. Or maybe not. By the way, some of the non-religious folks over here identify as right-wingers, so... psssssssst. What now? Is the neat little box we use to categorize people suddenly broken just because they don't fit the stereotype of what they are thought to represent? Personally, I find that kind of skepticism a bit ridiculous and totally disconnected from reality, but hey, whatever.

Kate James11 said:For instance?

Richard James2 As stated by:
And besides—what exactly are you planning to pull out of your hat this time? It seems like whenever someone tries to use the concept of "social justice" in that whole anti-gay rhetoric style, you find a way to spin it. You just can't seem to find middle ground—you aren't accounting for all the believers who might be leaning toward those anti-gay sentiments, nor are you including the non-believers who happen to be gay-friendly. It’s all a bit one-sided, don't you think?

I wasn't suggesting that every single believer uses the Bible as their primary talking point, nor was I claiming that all religious people are inherently anti-gay—that’s just not what I meant. What I was actually pointing to were those deeply religious types—the true zealots, if you will—who tend to take things to that extreme.

Being deeply religious isn't the same thing as being a fanatic. And sure, you didn't explicitly state that, but you did frame the National Socialist Party's stance on gay rights as the ultimate summary of religious thinking. Why didn't you mention Luka Tomašević's media appearances on the subject? You know, to give the religious crowd some credit for once? Is it because the American Christian Democratic Party is more controversial and leans closer to those old-school, imported agendas?

Besides, what was the actual point of this thread you started in the first place?

Kate James11 said:I mean, even the HČSP members were pulling from the Old Testament when they were talking trash about gay people.

Look, it’s not just religious types being against gay rights; there's a whole spectrum of people pushing back, including a decent number of secular folks—the "whatever" crowd—which was pretty obvious if you actually bothered to read this forum during that absolute circus last June. And honestly, it happens all the time. So what? Even if someone reaches for the Old Testament to fuel their anti-gay rhetoric, that doesn't mean every believer shares those views, nor does it mean every non-believer is suddenly pro-gay.

At the end of the day, we're talking about blatant cherry-picking, and there's really no way around that reality.

Amanda Brooks7 said:So basically, when it's time to collect tax money from the government, 95% of Americans are suddenly believers, but when it comes to taking responsibility for the war, suddenly only 7-8% are Christians.🙂

Right? It's just like how 70% of high schoolers claim they’d never marry a Mexican, or how people lose their minds over Pride parades—they all swear it’s due to deep religious conviction, when in reality, you’re just listening to those incredibly, incredibly, incredibly exaggerated polls about how truly pious everyone is.

Terry Palmer said:Now, even though Jezerinac falls on the more conservative side of the clergy, he didn't actually utter the exact sentence that the trashy tabloid used for their headline.

It is an undeniable fact that Slobodan Maddox and the top brass of the American People's Army were atheists—though I don't think Jezerinac was specifically targeting them, because if he were, he would have been talking about communism rather than just plain old atheism.

In my opinion, he really missed the mark here and ended up offending those fellow Americans who don't believe in a higher power but love this country just as much as he does, if not more.

Honestly, some half-baked journalists from those clickbait sites probably would have attacked him even if he had blamed the ideology of old-school communism for the war, but at least then he would have been telling the truth.

Yep.

Some half-educated journalists from those clickbait news sites would probably tear him apart...

Most likely. Though, maybe this time the editor, who is clearly neven biti vjernik Barković, might actually find some solidarity with people whose worldview he doesn't share—despite the fact that his social media feeds constantly and generously attack and insult them like he’s completely lost his mind: "Catholic high schools? What a joke," or "Religion? Pfft, mental slavery," stuff like that. A good voice carries far, but a bad one carries even further.

Tasting your own medicine sucks.

Morgan Rodriguez57 said:Why? Well, that’s just how the forum rules work... honestly, this whole PDF religion thing feels like a direct reflection of a mindset where regular believers are constantly being labeled as fanatics... I wonder if it's actually possible to teach the owner to be a little more compassionate toward faith? I mean, I really doubt it...

No, the real question is whether it’s necessary. Anderlon can easily view believers as borderline psychopaths if he wants, but as the owner of this Forum, I assume it’s in his best interest to make every corner of this place a pleasant, well-moderated space for people who just came here to spend a bit of their free time. If that's the goal, then yes, there is a clear interest in setting those standards from the jump. Looking at the state of things here, it’s obvious that managing and civilizing discussions isn't exactly smooth sailing when people instead choose to ramp up tensions while simultaneously breaking the forum rules (!) on the most banal, everyday holiday threads.

And since we’re already tearing into things, let's be real: one particular user once got flagged and turned bright red on the very PDF they were supposed to be moderating, simply because they couldn't keep their own antagonisms under control. But even keeping that in mind, all this ranting is pointless. Some old lady complaining about cookies—nobody gains anything now by retroactively handing out a yellow card because someone wrote their post in English or engaged in obvious trolling meant to provoke hyper-pathetic reactions, which was clearly the intent. We could argue endlessly about how petty someone can be by refusing to even type "Merry Christmas" in the designated thread, or staying silent because the Christian Messiah gives them heartburn—but yeah, it’s all redundant. It’s proven that changing the discourse on this Forum doesn't happen without the head honcho getting a serious earful. Good luck with that. Honestly, it surprises me that anyone still has the willpower to read the Religion section; you people are absolute folk heroes.

Merry Christmas (I mean the season, not the day). 🙂

Honestly, you’re much better off putting your money into Adblock Plus. 😍

It’s entirely possible that absolutely none of them will work out, and even then, things have a nasty habit of shifting anyway. Maybe Germany, though honestly, that feels like a massive stretch.

Susan Price said:Are we seriously going to keep reading and putting up with these posts about the goddess Minerva and "Satanists"?

Thanks for the laugh.

The politics and pdf world has its flaws—your run-of-the-mill boring trolls, spammers, and all that jazz—but once a more serious scenario rolls in, whether it’s the assassination of some backwater dictators, royal weddings, Wall Street protests, or the mass migration of those happy folks who technically belong to the Alternative, it becomes completely unbearable. Haven't you noticed? Start actually reading.

That quoted forum user is just one example, though when he's involved, he's so loud and present that even a dedicated ignore filter doesn't help. Generally speaking, the amount of Icke-style trash being recycled across this board is ridiculous—ranging from pseudo-prophetic messianic announcements delivered in the tone of gods from Olympus imparting "Truth" to the ignorant masses, to posts stuffed with ten different links to crackpot websites that offer zero actual substance, no opinion, and no argument. They just take up space.

I still maintain that the World is the highest quality part of Politics, but it won't stay that way for long if you don't keep the Alternative on the Alternative. I'm not advocating for sterile, mindless debates, but I certainly won't stand for the constant turning of a blind eye to the stuff I just mentioned. This is an appeal to all moderators: look, I'm telling you now, I am going to climb up your backsides with reports for off-topic spam regarding Minerva. It's for your own good, and ours. 😍

At least, while I still care.

Drop the plural. 😁

I was talking about a strictly informational thread that would focus solely on breaking news from the world—basically, it would live in the World subforum. I’m not just talking about standard news reports, either; I mean reactions, op-eds, and things of that nature. In my biased opinion, the World section is where you find the highest world quality on politics, but it constantly gets cluttered with threads where people have absolutely no clue what to say, like African tribe recognizes gay marriage or Angela Merkel's plane breaks down, Turks deny landing rights. I’m not even exaggerating; people actually start threads like that. What happens is they end up hogging two whole pages of mediocre debate while taking up valuable space. Look, if people feel that certain global events are interesting enough to warrant a spot on the forum board, but they don't actually offer much meat for discussion, it's just easier to toss them into that general thread.

Honestly, a thread like this might not even be necessary. It might not even solve the flood of nonsense examples I mentioned above, but still. Feel free to ignore me; no hard feelings, and like I said, it's probably debatable whether it would actually streamline the subforum the way I'm imagining it.

I don't have a PDF for you, but honestly, I’ve been itching to start a thread dedicated to real-time global news updates. If a major story breaks, we could just spin up a specific topic for it on the fly. We really shouldn't be clogging up the politics section with more PDFs; there are already way too many potentially great discussions dying a slow death in places like the close political aide subforum and its various other rabbit holes. Keeping things concise makes them much easier to moderate and keeps the conversation focused, rather than letting it get drowned out by pure stupidity... though, let's be real, that's never an easy feat.

Alright, thanks.

Henry Cox78, the ball is in your court now. 😁

Charles Fox10 said:Jonathan Reed4-no Mad Corner here for quite some time now

Sean Cook2's title isn't doing much for the topic or the discussion 🤷 perhaps there's a better way to frame this.

Henry Cox78, your thread was locked by a colleague with an explanation, and the moderators don't have the authority to move or edit polls.

Is that a technical limitation or a matter of principle? Because if we're talking principles, Henry Cox78 already conceded that you'd be violating his copyright if you messed with it—even if you did it for the good of the thread, which is clearly what's needed here.

James Diaz8 said:That's all there is to know about Richard James2.

Linguistics is my bread and butter, by the way... I've always just written here totally free, keeping it casual and raw, the way things should be.
Do some reading.
Find some actual quality literature.

You're just losing all your street cred on this nonsense.
Give a thanks to Powerlock 🤣

So, because you're whining and can't actually make a coherent point—just regurgitating scripted garbage—*I'm* the one losing credibility? Yeah, right. That’s a hard pass. Honestly, it’s impossible. Besides, I don't see any point in arguing with someone who clearly knows deep down that their constant obsessing over these pathetic little fashion dictatorships is nothing but pure hypocrisy. I might even forgive you if you were just being annoying, but this is something else.

Oh, wait, I see what's happening here: :Listen, I'm not interested in dealing with you; I'm busy critiquing this whole ridiculous moderation circus, even though my arguments are strictly based on the fact that I simply cannot get over how that 😳 disgraced MOD rightfully got the boot a while back.

And typical—you wrote way too many lines just to say absolutely nothing at all. Blah.

James Diaz8 said:I sure am. It's ugly and frankly embarrassing.

The nicknames have already been flagged to the mods and the admin.

Both the first and second times. Don't even worry about it.

PS... strictly speaking, I actually thought you were above this kind of cheap, low-life manipulation.😢

Look, I haven't exactly witnessed flawless moderation here either, but I haven't seen anything this ugly or disgraceful. From where I'm sitting, I just report what I actually see—pulling serious discussions out of the spammer sludge. And we're talking about perfectly normal, balanced threads. All because of the Democratic Party.

As for those nicknames, I assume that's just some nonsense story about octopus tentacles. Honestly, people whining about "unfaithful moderation" don't have anything better to do with their time. It's laughable. Even the "loyalists" (god, the horror of dissent!) can see right through it.

That's all.

James Diaz8 said:Man... you really need to read more.

Do some homework... you'll get it eventually.🙂

I am reading, despite what you claim. Look, I noticed your very first post—back before you started terrorizing everyone with those annoying little marks—where you had that classic, burning desire to crush an opponent with undeniable logic, only to end up stumbling over phrases like just get a clue and stuff like that. Honestly, you're right about one thing. It’s pathetic when moderation is so bad that it lets a bunch of people hiding behind ten different fake accounts mock anyone who actually knows what they're talking about. Namaste.

James Diaz8 said:So, I’m gonna take this chance—even though I’ve already dropped hints about it—to point out that my beef was also directed at the Pedef world

That’s where I first caught onto his, to put it mildly, blatant cluelessness and bias, and honestly, it's pretty dangerous stuff 🙂

Maybe. I don't. Even though he definitely knew how to get under my skin. But what I *did* notice was the constant stream of cloned accounts, people using multiple handles just to parrot the exact same talking points. It's dangerous letting people like that in to probe into the decline of any forum or community. 🙂

Walter Jones4 said:I honestly feel like that's exactly what's happening most of the time.

It depends. Topics that draw massive crowds—like anything involving bin Laden's legacy or the fallout from the former America era—are much harder to moderate. Those subjects are absolute minefields of historical revisionism and constant provocations. You have to walk a fine line to ensure the discussion doesn't become sterile, while still allowing for a diverse range of opinions without spiraling into total trash. But looking at the big picture, the quality of this PDF section stays above the rest of the forum, at least for now. So, if I ever get that impression, I’m just glad it hasn't happened often. As for the Democratic Party, I'll just say that a solid selection of high-quality threads has saved me from the usual endless flame wars, spam, and clone accounts. I'm honestly really grateful for that; instead of just packing up my things and walking out, I actually get the chance to participate in a balanced debate. That said, there's always room for improvement, right?

Kevin Gonzalez79 said:PL has abandoned all standards and is handing out warnings based on nothing but personal vendettvas... It is glaringly obvious that PL cannot handle even the slightest hint of criticism regarding his conduct. Specifically, he opened this thread under the guise of asking what we would do if we were handed $185 million...

And... Dear Kevin Gonzalez79,

You have received an infraction at Forum.hr.

Reason: Violation of forum rules
-------
Commenting on moderation outside of official channels
-------

This infraction is worth 30 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires. Serious infractions will never expire.

Original Post:

Quote:
I would call Anderlon, buy Forum.hr, and resolve some issues with the political moderators. The rest would be invested in developing renewable energy sources.
All the best,

The politics section has gone completely to hell alongside Powerlock. If you haven't noticed, all the veteran users—from Revke to MC Ozzy and Adler—have migrated to a different forum...

So, is this the definitive list of names whose absence leaves a massive void in the discussions? Look, I could rattle off dozens of other people who stopped posting in Politics, and it’s not because they were wiped out by the Democratic Party's hand, so how am I supposed to draw any conclusions from that? Honestly, I don't even agree that Politics has gone to hell. In fact, there are certain threads I wouldn't even touch if I didn't know a few specific people would show up to say something actually intelligent. PL is one of them. Though, I have to admit, he's the only mod I've ever managed to rack up that many warnings from in a single day. 😬 Fair enough, though.

As someone who's constantly lurking in the World PDF, I can say with total certainty that the whole thing would have been a massive pile of garbage for months if PL wasn't moderating it. Worse than that, it would have turned into some monstrous hybrid of a close politician and an alternative site. Word.

redeagle42 said:The paranoia surrounding joining the EU has just gone totally off the rails. I mean, people are getting so desperate they're actually labeling the Vatican and the Pope as communists. 🙂
To me, this stuff belongs in the Conspiracy Theories subforum.

Fine, let me agree with you just this once.

mistybison10 said:When these sentiments are voiced by a man who sleeps in a gilded bed, walks with a gold-topped staff, drinks from gold vessels, and likely carries more gold than a top-tier American rapper, his words carry a certain undeniable weight.😁

Oh, look at you, knowing all the spicy little details. 🙂 In reality, what he was saying is just sticking to the social doctrine of the Catholic Church (which is exactly how the Church operates). As for those questionable technicalities, I’ve noticed there's actually far less pomp surrounding them—take the glassware, for instance—compared to that insane amount of jewelry that's mostly just crosses and the Peterson ring (honestly, it's embarrassing). And do you know if he poops gold? It doesn't have to be true; when you're dealing with pure demagoguery, colorful poetic imagery works much better than actual arguments.

And yes, it carries plenty of weight.

Well, that’s just shocking. Almost as much as those rumors coming out of Peševar.

Who actually cares, and what is there even worth discussing here? Either shut this crap down or just go talk about it over at BP.

Look, those commissioned polls are always up for debate—nothing new there, nothing surprising. You have to keep in mind that The Government has been working overtime lately, basically doing all the heavy lifting just to polish their image for the European Union. And let’s be real, they aren't exactly allergic to pulling strings at The New York Times or messing with the polling data; we all know how that game is played.