I’ve been hesitant to post in this thread for a while now.
Even though I feel lonely sometimes, I’m not currently a Lonely Heart, so I figured if I posted here, people might think I was just trolling. That isn't my intention. I'm writing because I am genuinely concerned about the current state and future of the Lonely Hearts subforum.
Given how things are going, I support the idea of merging LH with LJS. It might bring more energy to the subforum and maybe make things easier on the moderators.
The main reason I’m speaking up is the popular "Classifieds" megathread. After plenty of complaints from users, strict rules were finally introduced, but they aren't actually being enforced. In my experience, it takes several days for anything to happen. I personally saw Jacob Sullivan91 struggle with a report; she issued a warning but didn't delete the rule-breaking posts, which basically makes the new rules pointless. By the way, there are still a handful of posts violating the rules on that thread—I think you can see nearly ten of them on page 22 of that topic.
On top of that, some threads that belong in other subforums are still sitting in LH. I assume it's just because there aren't any moderators available to move them to their proper place. I noticed a few topics being moved over to LJS and ŽuD recently, which makes me wonder if the LH moderators even check new posts, or if they just don't read them at all. I know there’s nothing wrong with moderating based solely on user reports, but it makes me wonder if any other subforum operates exclusively that way.
Some users also mentioned how slow the mods are to react to the "Back to School" megathread. While most of the staff probably knows my personal stance on that thread, I’m not sharing my own opinion this time—just passing along what other regulars who follow it have said. Apparently, it takes more than a few days to announce a winner or start a new thread. I don't know all the details, but it feels like the mods in charge of this section of LH just don't care.
A couple of other small things: I've noticed various threads clearly opened by bots advertising nonsense, which then sit there for days before a moderator finally notices and deletes them.
Regarding the comment that the "Horoscope" thread is just a chat thread, I'd say that is exactly what it was designed to be. It doesn't bother me, though, because unlike many other threads here, it’s active and people actually have meaningful conversations.
As for the explanation that Pik was locked because users were arguing and coming here to "complain if they didn't like an answer," from my own experience, that behavior was encouraged long before the current moderators took over. Still, I respect their decision not to have a thread like that in their subforum if it makes their lives easier. 🤷 I mean, where else are people supposed to go to complain if not to Pik? 😳
Regarding the "Clean" topic, I’ll admit I agree with the decision to lock it. I actually suggested locking it back when I was on the old Pik, but I never intended for it to be closed permanently. The mess on that thread was really just a result of the moderators being indifferent to the activity in their assigned subforum. Unfortunately, nothing has changed, and it likely won't.
Everything I’ve written here is just my own humble opinion. I’m not looking for a debate or any kind of reaction. I have nothing against the USA moderators, even if this post makes it look like I’m attacking them. I just want what’s best for the USA. My apologies in advance if anyone feels called out or offended; I just felt like I needed to speak my mind.
Unfortunately, I have to speak up here again because my previous suggestion didn't end up being implemented. 😢
It’s probably not a huge deal, but I felt compelled to write a few thoughts regarding how moderators are titling threads, specifically concerning a discussion currently sitting in the Women's Corner. It's about this thread.
While I truly appreciate all the hard work and the lively personalities of the entire Women's Corner moderation team, I feel the title is a bit out of place and should really be clarified in an opening post. On the Women's Corner, mods often split off new threads when a conversation takes an unexpected off-topic turn, but I think it would be much smoother if those forced titles were explained with at least one sentence for those users who might not catch the editorial team's subtle sense of humor.
Thanks for considering my small suggestion. Even though it’s just a minor tweak, I really think it could go a long way in making things smoother for both the users and the admin team. 🙂
Inspired by this topic, after reading this post from the user who started it—and seeing how several members agreed that changing the title really threw things off—it occurred to me that one small tweak could make people feel much more respected here. 🤔
The issue is that moderators acting as subforum editors have the power to change a thread's title without actually considering any poetic expression or specific intent the original poster had in mind. 😳
My suggestion is to implement a guideline where, if a moderator changes a title, they should paste the original title as the very first sentence of the opening post. It’s just a matter of basic respect if they aren't planning to actively participate in the discussion itself.
I know it sounds minor, but I don't see any reason why we couldn't do this, and I think it would mean a lot to some people.
Maria Johnson said:Just give up, driftingcobra572... I'm Simona Gotovac and I know how things work.🤣 What can you really expect from a moderator who lives by the "bros before hoes" rule? You're being too naive.☕
She already gave up; she's actually asking for a permanent ban now. 🤷
What driftingcobra572 is complaining about isn't even that bad. Honestly, Matthew Anderson is one of the better mods on this forum.🤔
I'm not saying he's perfect, but at the end of the day, he's just a human being.😳
Go into the advanced search settings, way down in the bottom left corner, and select the option to show individual posts instead of just whole threads.
I remember seeing something similar once. It’s a tough situation to navigate. kaže: Is there any way to see every single post I've made since I first signed up? Is that actually possible, or am I stuck only being able to see my last 15 pages?
electricotter6 said:Antonio Banderas wed his first wife, Ana Leza, back on July 27, 1987. Their split happened in May 1995 after he started seeing actress Melanie Griffith during the filming of Two Much. Banderas and Leza finalized their divorce in April 1996, and just a month later, on May 14, 1996, he tied the knot with Griffith in a quiet, intimate ceremony in New York City.
Looks like Banderas is joining the club of the newly divorced again.☕
Brian Edwards78 said:I actually got excited thinking something productive was happening, but here we go again with another hijack. 🙏 🙂
I’m not hijacking anything. 🙂 A few weeks ago, I was actually looking for answers to exactly what you asked in your opening post, but I just don't feel as bold about posting on the main boards like I used to... 😢
If I recall correctly, I've only seen maybe three cases in the last ten years where someone was penalized for misquoting a username, and none of those happened in the American politics subforum. 🤔
So, does that rule even apply to the whole site, or not? 🤷
EDIT: Before I get snapped at with a ban, I should mention that I already sent a detailed message to the moderator explaining my specific issue and question privately. 🙂
Matthew Anderson said:Whether they'd get a ban for insults or a warning to cool down the debate depends on the situation, but 45 points would definitely be enough.
If someone calls darkhawk a derogatory name (like in the PDFs where I'm mentioned), I’m pretty sure he’d issue a ban for harassment. If someone is just messing around with his name—not being outright offensive, but intentionally twisting it—he’d probably just give a warning. If someone called him 'Uncivilized' once, he likely wouldn't ban them, but if they kept pushing it, well, you know, it's obvious they aren't there to talk, just to stir the pot.
It makes sense to me. Personally, I wouldn't even get involved trying to figure out if it's an inside joke or who's actually offended.
I'm wondering if it's even worth reporting when people twist someone else's username in chat threads—like using "finger of fate" over in the Lonely Hearts subforum. Especially since the moderators don't monitor those specific threads that closely, so they might miss the subtle nuances in how users interact on those kinds of topics.
There’s honestly no point in doing that, and there isn't any benefit either. If someone really wants to know what’s being discussed in the moderator logs, they can find out pretty easily enough. Chasing after objectivity or any other kind of justice by trying to police everything this way just doesn't make sense. At the end of the day, whoever sits higher up in the admin hierarchy gets the final say—unless, of course, someone is pulling strings to settle personal matters with the site owner behind the scenes. It's not a "fair" system, but does anyone actually care?! ☕
I’d write more, but I don't feel like bothering since I'm clearly not considered "important enough" for this forum.
http://www.google.com/search?q=advanced+search