Posts by Charles Fox10

Regarding the opening post here

To keep things simple: if it's an image, just say "image." If it's a video, write "video." If there's text, provide a summary or a key quote along with a necessary translation.

So now you're trying to convince us this is impossible and that the cartoons are unjustified? Really?

I already told you our approach is to moderate with minimal interference to allow for high-quality debate. That’s my only answer. Whether or not someone gets banned is on us, not you.

Do you honestly believe any US official is going to go on record and admit that the events in Ukraine were funded by the USA to the tune of billions?

And then, anyone who tries to interpret those leaked phone calls or recorded conversations will just be branded a liar and accused of spreading misinformation. No one will actually engage with the substance of the information, because that would defeat the purpose of the debate.

Take it as friendly advice: don't bother.

If the administration has something legitimate to say, fine. Otherwise, I'm done with this.

You didn't even sign up, and there's plenty to talk about here.

To have the nerve to drop a comment like that alongside all these one-sentence trolls on this thread...
It’s honestly embarrassing that you’re even allowed to clutter this forum with such garbage.

And don't think I forgot your trolling from last night. You’re out here claiming people are lying and spreading falsehoods, demanding we "prove" things to you... as if everyone posting in the Ukraine thread is somehow an elite intelligence officer with a front-row seat to every global conspiracy.

Once again, you're pushing the lie that Victoria Nuland said $5 billion was spent on a coup.

The Ukraine thread is being moderated fairly. We’re trying to keep the discussion moving with minimal intervention, because over-policing a topic this heated usually just backfires.

silentridge3 said:...........To is, if I may use a more colorful expression, simply untrue.
................

🤣Great. 🤣Though it probably won't matter much since we missed your point on this topic entirely, but there it is.

So you waited three days, you say? Then you open a thread here. Fine by me. But if we've already waited three days, what's one more day to actually coordinate these topics?

This is just the explanation from page 36 back when these threads merged. I don't really have anything more substantial to add to what was already written then.

Charles Fox10 said:I know what’s bothering you—it’s been bothering me too—but it’s simply impossible to split discussions this way. Once you hit about ten posts, one thread starts mimicking the other. We tried deleting posts, but that feels unfair to the participants; whether they want to or not, they've earned their place in the conversation.

We also have the thread on family law, which is perfectly suited for debating gender discrimination within proposed legal frameworks.

I'll just ask that we avoid ad hominem attacks. After a few of those, the discussion loses its point and we just end up circling the drain.

This is at least the fifth thread regarding gender discrimination, and without fail, these topics eventually bleed into one another during the debate. The moderators are open to suggestions on how to manage two separate threads without them overlapping after ten posts or so.

So far, despite our best efforts, we haven't quite figured it out.

The title isn't the issue. As I mentioned in the thread itself, the title was put together quickly; I'm happy to change it if anyone has a better idea. No one has offered any.

Donald Trump said:Look, just DM me the link. Otherwise, I’m deleting this thread and you're getting a strike.

Is there really something about his explanation that isn't clicking for you?

I didn't say it happened in your own posts, but rather in the ones you quoted—the ones that ended up getting deleted.

The deletions aren't going to stop. Your posts—just those two—were wiped because the thread was being cleared of spam and trolls, and they were removed as direct replies to posts that had already been erased.

granitefalcon26 said:What’s the problem with my signature:
UN Security Council Resolution 1481(2006)
In this resolution, the Council of Europe strongly condemns the criminal communist-totalitarian regimes that committed unprecedented atrocities against their own people.
Veritas vos liberabit

Nika, please restore my signature. It was wiped yesterday. The resolution exists. Everything is laid out there. I have no idea why it was removed.

I deleted it because it was too long and you were using all caps. Just fix the formatting. If you want to know how it should look, here it is.

Sam Alvarez4 said:Charles Fox10,
your warning about the Syria thread has nothing to do with what I said in my last two posts.

It isn’t about English, or any other foreign language. It’s about cluttering up the thread (links, bolding, underlining, three lines of space, more links, more bolding, more spacing, etc.).

As for foreign languages, it's completely irrelevant here.
Just thought I'd remind you.

Why do you think my point was related to your comment regarding the PM??

Posting a raw link without any context—or if it's in a foreign language without a translation—is just bad form, for you and everyone else. Pretty straightforward.

original post : http://www.reddit.com/quote

Some moderators here are just running a circus, hiding their aggressive ideological biases behind a thin veil.

Once you properly appeal the warning, you'll get a response. ☕

Susan Price30 said:Why? 🤷

Did someone start an argument in the thread?

Was there some insulting behavior, or did a bunch of posts get nuked because things were getting too heated?

Probably not. Based on what the other moderator—whoever that was—did, it looks like the thread was moved from the main subforum to Political Advisor just so they could shut it down a day later without saying why.

Maybe they're just trying to clear out those "duty to lock" threads in Politics since it seems to be their favorite hobby. For whatever reason...

Just pure nonsense...

Users from Memphis asked me to lock it because the discussion had become pointless.

That’s enough for you, but not for me?

Calling it "pure nonsense"... bravo. I always love these kinds of inquiries. It's quite something.

I was convinced I’d pinned him down—someone who turned Pilatus into cartoon characters in compromising poses with their right hands outstretched, specifically Donald Duck, Thomas, and SpongeBob, before you appropriately sent him to hell. But fine, I stand corrected.

So, if there aren't even fascists in cartoons, does that mean there's no such thing as anti-fascists either?

Look, I'm not messing with you or treating you like an idiot; it just feels like you're trying to get one over on me because you can't be bothered to come up with a better headline, right?

Come on, just give me a title without all the labeling and we can run this Annual Awards thing again. You couldn't ask for a fairer deal than that.

My moderator note explaining why I closed this thread remains unchanged.

Try approaching this differently, without the labeling.

My apologies for missing this question... Opening a thread on a topic right before a national referendum feels a bit too much like trolling, which is why it was locked.

Elizabeth Price2 said:I imagine they'll argue we've already debated "Blood and Soil" a million times over.

Still, this topic is currently dominating the national news cycle. Banning it on a site like Reddit would be a massive self-inflicted wound—think about the traffic, the clicks, the ad revenue... the list goes on. I truly wonder how a platform owner views these moderator calls when they essentially hand money right out of their own pockets. 😕

And if you look over at it’s pretty obvious. There's a PDF from the New York Times right on the front page.

And what would your suggestion be?

You asked, you got your answer, and as far as I'm concerned, I have nothing left to add.

crimsonjackal63 said:A new thread has popped up, which overlaps quite a bit with the existing one regarding the "In the name of the family" referendum costing $8 million.

Since there's already a poll on this thread, I suggest merging them. Let's rename the new one:
The "In the name of the family" referendum—democracy wins, at an $8 million price tag.

You just narrowly avoided a strike for violating the pdf rule, specifically article 4, which would have landed you a three-day ban via point accumulation.

Duplicating threads (starting new topics about subjects that already have an active topic).

Your thread is locked, and tomorrow, it's headed for the trash.

Moving this over to a fresh thread http://www.forum.us/showthread.php?t=803200