Home › wiredangler5 › Posts

Posts by wiredangler5

179 posts shown.

North Korea in Feedback & Suggestions · Mar 12, 2013

Larry Walker24 said:Is anyone actually going to step up and moderate this thread, or are we just waiting for a total site meltdown?

Which thread about Korea are you talking about? The one regarding the conflict between the two Koreas, or the official North Korea thread? If you don't want to report it publicly, just DM me the links to what you find problematic.

Just a heads-up, you're making the same mistake again. You keep doing the same thing despite being asked repeatedly to change. You could have just messaged any of the Politics moderators or the supermods, like Edge or myself. There's no need to start a new thread here for every little thing you see on the Forum. Plus, you didn't even include any links in your opening post so we can actually see what you're talking about. Are we expected to read your mind? Threads opened like this usually aren't even considered for resolution, so please keep that in mind next time.

Now, send me those links.

Resonator in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 6, 2012

Look, let's just get straight to the point. I see you've been busy posting on Politics all night and racking up warnings. There's no sense in dragging this out or waiting for your side of the story. Your conduct in the "Russia" thread was clearly against the rules, and if anyone needs a second opinion, they can check with St. Louis. Honestly, it doesn't matter anyway, because you've already received a permanent ban on the Prokhorov account over on Politics, which means you're banned from this forum too, regardless of which username you're using.

You've accumulated way too many points for us to bother reviewing this ban; even with this current account, you're sitting pretty at 750 points.
There won't be any appeals here, as the rules regarding this are pretty straightforward.

Best,

Resonator in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 6, 2012

rapidtiger7 said:Well, there's your excuse!
Is there anyone I can actually complain to?

Sure, I handle appeals within the Politics subforum. So, I don't really get why you ignored my question while giving long-winded reports on everything else, only to turn around and ask where to file a complaint.
Let me ask again: was your old username Prokhorov?

Resonator in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 6, 2012

Just wanted to ask you quickly so we can wrap this up—is your handle Prokhorov?

Why was the thread about militant feminism closed on "Politics"? in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 6, 2012

silentridge3 said:Not at all, actually quite the opposite. There isn't any "subjective impression" here (or whatever "what others have commented" refers to), because there is a National Strategy written down in black and white, an official government document:

The Feminist National Strategy, also known as the "National Policy for Gender Equality".

1) Promotion of Women's Human Rights and Gender Equality 2 and gender equality
2) Creating equal opportunities within the labor market
3) Improving the implementation of gender-sensitive upbringing and education
4) Balancing the participation of women and men in political and public decision-making processes
5) Eliminating all forms of violence against women
6) Promoting international cooperation and gender equality outside of the US
7) Further strengthening institutional mechanisms and implementation methods

This strategy contains two clearly unconstitutional points (1 and 5), so there really isn't any room for "subjectivity or interpretation" here. Point 1 explicitly focuses on promoting the rights of only one gender (which is, by definition, gender discrimination against the other), and Point 5 basically cements this whole feminist idea that women are exclusively and solely the victims.

It's as clear as day. Over the next five years, the government is implementing a gender-discriminatory strategy under the cynical title of "National Policy for Gender Equality."

By the way: there is no such thing as "women's human rights"; there are only and exclusively "human rights," which exist independently of gender, age, religion, nationality, and so on.

I wouldn't look at it quite as strictly as you are, or call this a state-run feminist campaign. This is different from those cases where feminism goes overboard and people say or do things that just end up hurting themselves.
What you highlighted is something else entirely, and we shouldn't ignore the fact that, whether intentionally or not, women are treated differently in certain parts of society. What the government wants through this law is to align these rights across all levels of society and make sure everyone hears the message. The reality is that many women face various forms of discrimination.

Point 5 is also pretty clear. In this country—and it’s not just happening here—it’s a fact that every second or third woman will encounter this during her life (usually within the family). They deal with it because there are so many people who use their power or status to lash out at women, and often these incidents are reported but met with zero response from society or the state. I've seen examples of this personally among people close to me. It usually ends with someone being taken away for a few hours to cool off, only to go home and start the cycle all over again.
What you're pointing out is actually a message to institutions to step up and do their jobs, which is sadly a major issue in our society. Of course, men experience violence too. But there are countless more instances where the victim is a woman because we have a million wrongdoers exerting that kind of pressure on them.

silentridge3 said:Not at all, actually quite the opposite. There isn't any "subjective impression" here (or whatever "what others have commented" refers to), because there is a National Strategy written down in black and white, an official government document:

The Feminist National Strategy, also known as the "National Policy for Gender Equality".

1) Promotion of Women's Human Rights and Gender Equality 2 and gender equality
2) Creating equal opportunities within the labor market
3) Improving the implementation of gender-sensitive upbringing and education
4) Balancing the participation of women and men in political and public decision-making processes
5) Eliminating all forms of violence against women
6) Promoting international cooperation and gender equality outside of the US
7) Further strengthening institutional mechanisms and implementation methods

This strategy contains two clearly unconstitutional points (1 and 5), so there really isn't any room for "subjectivity or interpretation" here. Point 1 explicitly focuses on promoting the rights of only one gender (which is, by definition, gender discrimination against the other), and Point 5 basically cements this whole feminist idea that women are exclusively and solely the victims.

It's as clear as day. Over the next five years, the government is implementing a gender-discriminatory strategy under the cynical title of "National Policy for Gender Equality."

By the way: there is no such thing as "women's human rights"; there are only and exclusively "human rights," which exist independently of gender, age, religion, nationality, and so on.

Sure, we all have equal rights. But we can't turn a blind eye to the fact that women's rights aren't respected in certain areas (to varying degrees) and that so many women have faced violence. The state isn't talking about general human rights here; it's addressing a specific segment that needs to be fixed so that everyone can eventually enjoy the same human rights, regardless of age or gender.

How to appeal a partial history ban? in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 29, 2012

Larry Walker24 said:Haha, alright!

I'll try to keep my posts shorter from now on.

To be honest, I don't care about military tech or historical wars, so I don't plan on reading up on them. The mods can relax since I won't be hanging out in those sections anyway.

Thanks for the effort in cleaning up the spam.

I'm not going to just copy and paste, and I won't limit myself to one-sentence replies either—though this could have been handled by just sending me a DM instead of making me find out why I was banned while chatting with other users.

You got a DM too, don't worry. You were the one asking for a detailed explanation of what was wrong with your posts during that meetup, so that's when I answered you.

But okay, I see the rules are clear now. I hope they really are; at this point, it's all up to you.

How to appeal a partial history ban? in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 24, 2012

Larry Walker24, I'll make sure you're kept in the loop. All the moderators over in the History sub-forum need to weigh in, and since there are seven of us, it takes a little while—not everyone is online every single day. I've brought the issue up, though, so things are moving. Just hang tight while I gather everyone's thoughts; about half have already weighed in, and I'm just waiting on the rest. You should have an answer in a day or two. Thanks for bearing with me.

History & Historical Debates - Thread locked for no reason in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 18, 2012

Angela Kelly27 said:Thanks for getting back to me.

Does this apply to Off-Topic too? I really hope not...

Are you talking about the Off-Topic subforum? This specific rule is part of the History section's internal PDF guidelines, so it only applies there. I'm not really familiar with how the Off-Topic moderators handle these kinds of threads, so I can't say for sure. You might want to check their own rules regarding starting new topics to see if they have something similar.

History & Historical Debates - Thread locked for no reason in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 18, 2012

The reason we have rules about starting new threads on this PDF is because there have been hundreds of similar topics before that just went nowhere and never sparked a decent discussion. Check out the subforum rules regarding thread creation.

How to appeal a partial history ban? in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 17, 2012

I'm going to loop in the subforum moderators about this topic and ask everyone to weigh in with their thoughts. You'll be updated once we reach a collective decision. Larry Walker24, I hope you understand why you received a partial ban; it was due to the copy/pasting of posts and threads. I really hope you worked on improving that in other areas of the forum before bringing this request here. 🙂

The Resonator injustice in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 14, 2012

amberwalker4 said:Yeah, we're on the same page 😉. I get where you're coming from, and I already apologized to KRIN regarding the complaints. I took the feedback to heart and I'll try my best not to let it happen again.

Glad we cleared that up. 🙂

The Resonator injustice in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 14, 2012

amberwalker4 said:Well, look. My point was just how pointless it is to deny the crimes of communism today. It’s been decades since the fall of the regime, and everything is available online now, not just tucked away in thick history books signed by people like Francisco Franco. I wasn't trying to be offensive, and I didn't write that post specifically to insult KRIN. If I had, I wouldn't be complaining about it.

Okay, but why did you choose that specific way to say it's futile? Isn't there a better way? Look, try not to do the things you'd hate if someone else did them to you. You reported the other side on this thread for labeling people. Those posts weren't even directed at you, yet you reported them. Maybe their words weren't even aimed at anyone specifically, just general statements, which isn't right either. I think you agree with me on that. That's roughly how others are perceiving your posts. If you were arguing with someone in person and they implied you needed a psychiatric evaluation because of your views, you'd probably snap at them. Why? Because the person was just trying to make a point about how outdated those views are in modern times.
Do we at least understand each other regarding what I'm saying about the warning?

Sam Green73 said:I didn't penalize the original trolling, so I didn't penalize this response either.
If this gets penalized, then the quoted parts should be too.

I usually just delete labels that don't name a specific user.
But I like the idea that all labeling leads to warnings.

p.s. I appreciate the move toward moderator transparency with the users.

Okay, but why wasn't the trolling penalized in the post you identified as the catalyst for all this, if you saw it was trolling? Regardless of that "original" post, building on top of it doesn't justify anything if it contains trolling or insults.

Just out of curiosity, is this "original" trolling post you mentioned—the one that deserves a warning—Megan Ruiz13's post that Judolino is responding to?

Regarding labeling, you can just delete it, but feel free to issue a warning if you think it's necessary. Personally, I'd warn for all of it because this label-sticking has become so common here; people are handing them out like Panini stickers. It shouldn't be happening, and for years, people have just been warned or had posts deleted. Feel free to issue warnings for that stuff moving forward.

Daniel Ward87 said:Alright, please feel free to archive or delete posts if you need to.

Done. I'll circle back and take a closer look at this thread later on.

The Resonator injustice in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 14, 2012

Gary Anderson38 said:At the end of the day, the admins and mods get the final say. That’s just how it works, and I think that's fine.

If we just mess with them, they won't listen to a word we say.
I'm sure one of the admins will eventually read through all this—our criticisms, our complaints, and our suggestions—and make an official statement here.

I'll take a look later today once I have a moment to breathe. I just need to wrap up some work first, then I'll dig in to see exactly what went down. Just bear with me for a bit—hopefully things aren't actually blowing up this badly. 🙂

amberwalker4 said:Alright, Daniel Ward87 already told me that, and I went along with it (not like I really had much of a choice). 😁If you don't mind me asking, what happened to that first box from a few days ago?

Of course you can ask. In my opinion, you've gotten a little too caught up in the insults.

When it comes to criminal systems, anyone who thinks communism wasn't one of them... A doctor really ought to take a serious look at this. No offense intended. Stalin was stealing millions long before Hitler even knew he’d eventually go to war with Poland this.

All that extra padding wasn't really necessary. Personally, I think the horrors and millions of lives lost under the old communist regime in the USSR are more than enough reason to view that entire system as criminal. That’s just my take, and I could be wrong. But I wouldn't have brought it up if I didn't feel that way. That part was honestly overkill.

The Resonator injustice in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 14, 2012

Sam Green73 said:I watched it.
There’s a difference between answering a troll and actually engaging with someone’s "what if" alternative history theories.
I'll clear out the excess.

Sam Green73, responding to trolling doesn't take away the responsibility for the insults or the behavior in the initial post. An inappropriate comeback isn't any less problematic just because it was a reaction to someone being a jerk. Not by a long shot.
I think you're missing the point of Zenodor's post. He was just pointing out how pointless some of these observations can be in the context of the discussion. You missed what he was actually getting at because you jumped straight to labeling him in that first sentence. We really should avoid labeling people just because we disagree with their views. In my opinion, that kind of behavior deserves a warning—or even a ban, depending on which moderator is looking at it. This stuff shouldn't be allowed, no matter who it's aimed at.

Daniel Ward87 said:Your post feels like pure trolling, especially with that "was your grandpa here" comment. We banned those kinds of conversations—including all that nonsense about where people were during the war—on this forum a long time ago. Regarding the other posts, I think they should be flagged, but since I don't have the full context, we’ll have to wait for Sam Green73 and wiredangler5 to weigh in. Personally, I think posts like yours deserve a ban for trolling and getting deleted.

The posts from Judolin and Zenodor definitely deserve a ban; there’s no debate there. It’s not just about trolling, either—that kind of insulting labeling is straight-up harassment. Not to mention the deletion.

amberwalker4, I think you definitely earned that ban. The post by Sam Green73 you were quoting didn't warrant an attack like that. The way you framed your point was clearly just trolling. The ban stands. Please try to keep things civil moving forward.

Appeal to Admin Primal - Locked Thread in Politics in Feedback & Suggestions · Aug 31, 2012

Just a quick heads-up that I've opened the thread where we can talk about the role of the Roman community in society.

Appeal to Admin Primal - Locked Thread in Politics in Feedback & Suggestions · Aug 31, 2012

Paul Peterson4 said:That's why I think my complaint against the moderator is justified.

It isn't justified. Since you started a separate thread for this, it doesn't fall under political topics. Discussions regarding Rom communities or government inefficiency on those issues might be political, but not this. This was just a standard fight that could have involved anyone. That's why the thread was closed; it’s not a political matter. There's no reason to blame Jose White23.

Regarding the old thread about the Rom community that was previously closed, I'll check in with the moderators. We'll see if we reopen the original one or start a new discussion focused on social issues involving the Rom community. Once we decide, I'll let you all know.

I'm closing this thread for now.

Why was Illyrian banned? in Feedback & Suggestions · Aug 30, 2012

Yeah, we don't allow inquiries about other people's bans here. I'm locking this thread.

Appeal to Admin Primal - Locked Thread in Politics in Feedback & Suggestions · Aug 30, 2012

I honestly don't see how a brawl at a police station becomes a political issue for the Politics section. This thread is rightfully locked.

Where's the line drawn? in Feedback & Suggestions · Aug 1, 2012

The thread has been deleted, and the author is currently out of office.

Is this hate speech? in Feedback & Suggestions · Jul 29, 2012

Hmm, this is a bit of a slippery slope. We could probably find a hundred other examples where someone might feel offended, even if the comments aren't particularly extreme enough to warrant punishment. Take the term "quasi-state," for instance. For the U.S. government, it’s vital not to use that kind of terminology in official capacities.

But as a private citizen, you can have whatever opinion you want about any country. That's your business. Just like anyone else can privately hold any view they want about the United States, it shouldn't offend me personally. If we start sanctioning speech like that, we're heading toward extremes; people would be reporting everything, and it would be impossible to draw a line. Besides, how would you even penalize a term like the one I used? What do you think a fair punishment would even look like for something like that?