Posts by wiredangler5

Is this really your thread for History? First off, where’s the actual history here? Second, this is just a "what if" scenario meant for politics and pdf or maybe even close to politics—if it even belongs there at all. You should probably focus on the quality of your posts first and figure out which sub fits before you start calling people out. 🙂 As far as I'm concerned, closing this thread was totally justified. Besides, the rules for politics and pdf clearly state that threads like this get shut down. Even the Legion would have closed this one, and they usually have much more relaxed moderation than you're acting like right now. 🙂

Best,

Larry Walker24 said:It’ll be four years this September since I got a partial ban on the history forum. Does anyone know if there's a chance it gets lifted?

It's hard to say. I already explained why you received a partial ban on the PDF section, and since then, two other threads have popped up showing you're doing the exact same thing in different sub-forums.

Based on how you've responded in those threads, it looks like you might finally get where you went wrong. We'll see by September if you've actually learned from it, and then you'll have your answer. It's too early to give you a definitive yes or no right now. Ultimately, it's all up to you.

Henry Hernandez7 said:Why did you delete my thread where I was sharing avatars with everyone? And why am I getting hit with a 30-point penalty??

Because there's already a thread for that, and you know it. We don't allow new threads just to share avatars. Threads in the politics section need to have a real purpose. You can post this in "various" instead, since I don't see why sharing avatars deserves its own spot in politics.

From what I can tell, there isn't any censorship happening here. People are talking freely; it’s just that a few individual posts get taken down. For instance, yours was removed because you were asking who specifically voted for the AFL-CIO. Honestly, those names don't really matter for this discussion. Posts like that—and things similar to them—get pulled because they don't add anything to the conversation. Other debates and exchanges of ideas are definitely allowed and clearly ongoing, as far as I can see.

neongull99, you both got flagged. If someone actually wanted to get rid of you, they’d hit you with something heavier than a ten-point off-topic penalty. Anyway, what was the actual discussion thread you were in when you got flagged for being off-topic? And what exactly did your post say—and Riobossov's—that triggered the penalty? 🙂

you disgust me said:Wait, what if an inactive Nicole decides to start posting again using her old nickname? For instance, I was gone for two years before deciding to come back, and I didn't feel like making a new profile. And then there's Spectre, who is now basically an ex-Spectre. What happens if someone tries to log in with their old handle without realizing it’s been changed?

They’ll just fail to log in. From there, they might search for their old handle and find the "new" version since it looks similar, recognizing the change by the avatar, post count, or join date. They might also just make a new account and reach out. These are exactly the kinds of complications that make implementation difficult. That's why this was just a trial run. It wasn't done for fun; the idea was to benefit the active users who are actually here, posting and hanging out. At first glance, it seems harsh toward those whose names were changed, but those people aren't around. Maybe they'll never show up, maybe they don't even remember their old handle, maybe they made a new one they like better, or maybe they're busy at Trkeljanjing, you name it. 😁

Someone might show up, or nobody will, since this test was only applied to accounts the forum hasn't seen in years (we haven't touched or even thought about touching anyone inactive for two or three years). Since they're inactive, they're effectively gone, so the idea was to let active users claim unused handles if they wanted them. There's some logic to it, and besides, Anderlon is the owner and can decide if these changes actually help current members.
I don't really want to dwell on it. Like I said, it was just Anderlon's experiment, and it feels a bit silly for me to talk about it when I can't give an official answer. I just wanted to point out that there's no need to attack the moderators; this wasn't some special treatment for favorites like it seemed. That's all.

Edit: I see Nica provided an answer I wasn't aware of—there's a notification sent immediately regarding any changes.

Frank Reed4 said:It’s clear you don't get it. My question is whether James Bond villain became an ex villain because that was his choice—considering he hasn't even logged in since 2006—or if it happened because you wanted it to, and you were allowed to make it happen because you're a moderator. 🍿

I'm waiting for someone to tell me the rules apply to everyone equally, regardless of whether they're blue, black, red, purple, or green. By the way, it would be helpful if Tyndall actually wrote something, just so we can see where he stands on all this. He changes nicknames, doesn't he? 🙂

Nica made a good point that this was just an experiment from Anderlon, rather than moderators just doing whatever they want. I'll share a bit more, assuming Anderlon won't mind. Just trying to clear the air here.

As weird as it sounds, this wasn't done out of some whim by Spectre, nor is it about special treatment. Spectre was basically the guinea pig for Anderlon's experiment, just like Nica mentioned.

If you look at the threads where people request name changes, there's a huge group of users who might actually benefit from this. It happens all the time where someone wants a name like Nicole, but it's been sitting idle since 2006 with maybe zero or five posts. People end up registering as Nicole_1011 or Nicole_1903 because the simple version is taken. We've seen those requests before. And honestly, nobody would bother changing a name with a high post count. Let's say, 20 posts or more. This is really just about inactive accounts with almost no history.

That was the whole idea behind the experiment: to see if this change was even possible or useful in practice for everyone. Not just for mods, but for any user. I don't want anyone thinking I'm pushing to make this permanent; I'm not. As far as I know, that's not happening. Whether it becomes a thing or not is entirely up to Anderlon.

So, you can stop ganging up on Spectre now. He’s innocent. 😁

Anyway, let's wait for Tyndall to say something more. ☕

Tyndall?

😁

Thanks for the links. That last post was already banned before. The first one is a bit vague; you can basically guess what he meant, though he’s likely aiming at what you're saying. But there's no question about the second link—it was banned for clear hate speech.

Thanks for the report.

Look, you’ve got to be more direct with me. I don't have the time or energy to dig through every single thread just to find what you're talking about.

Link to the thread or the specific post?

I went ahead and cleared out all the replies following that unnecessary post that caused the whole mess. It’s not that your entire thread was based on it—it's just that I don't edit other people's posts since that isn't how we do things here. I just wipe everything related to the issue when needed.

Benjamin Reyes52, there’s actually a bit of a difference between what you said and what Goldietrickz wrote. What you posted felt like a direct shot at the users here, whereas Goldietrickz was just speaking in general terms. There's a distinction there, even if I'm not exactly a fan of his writing style either. I'll see if I can get him to work on that.

you're annoying me said:Whether you look at the current mod team and admins, or the former mods and the duo whose short stint on this subforum was unfortunately cut short (Apophis and Velia), as well as the supermod in charge of the subforum...

Fine, if the subforum mods are handling this topic, then sure. Go ahead and open it if they're going to be using the space. 🙂 It might actually be better to just start a fresh thread.

Thanks for the input, jadetiger962. 🙂 Tyler Ross86, I'll leave the rest up to you. 🙂 Hopefully, the relevant agencies can just finish their part and wrap this deal up. 😁

amberwalker4 said:Just let me call my Masonic relatives ☕. And yeah, it's settled. wiredangler5 posted his thing at 10 AM—I didn't even log on until about 7:30 PM. I honestly don't know what I did wrong.

You’re looking at this the wrong way, amberwalker4. If we had decided everything beforehand, you wouldn't have gotten access back. We wouldn't have given you a second chance, period. It would have been much easier for us to just cut ties, right?
And for the record, DF was also on board with giving you a shot, along with the rest of the Reddit moderators. When I asked if we should give you another chance, everyone said yes. I could have easily skipped asking you and just kept hunting for clones, which wouldn't have been an issue since you haven't really been active lately—you remember that yourself.

You asked about reviewing your status. You got an answer because I don't see anything in the posts I quoted that warrants a formal review. All we're asking is that you stop arguing with other users in that same tone. That's it. If you can't stick to that, then I'll have to issue a partial ban. This isn't about playing favorites; it's simply about making sure people aren't constantly being attacked on this site.
If anyone actually wanted you off the site, you'd be gone already. I think you remember our agreement: one more slip-up with that attitude and you lose access. You accepted that with a huge promise to be on your best behavior. Well, look at now. Based on our actual agreement, I could have kicked you out already. But nobody did.

All you need to do is be respectful to others. Everything else is up to you.

Larry Walker24 said:amberwalker4 is just comforting himself because he wasn't the only one who got a partial ban in History! No wonder that subforum is one of the least visited!

If the History sub is losing visitors, it's because of those pointless one-liners you kept dropping all over threads. Looking at your posts in World Politics, I don't see any change there either; I can't remember seeing a single constructive post from you where you actually explained or argued a point clearly. Both History and World Politics rely on good reasoning to stay relevant. They don't need one-liners that often have nothing to do with the topic at hand.

And judging by how hard you try to keep posting one-liners in History, it's hard to believe that sub is unpopular or lacks an audience that keeps it going. 😉 There are usually about 60-100 people online in that sub at any given moment. That's more than many other subforums, so don't twist things just to suit your narrative.

Take care, Larry Walker24. 🙂

Quote : Jolly Roger

rustydrifter10 said:Who knows, maybe we'll score a free sample out of it. 😳 Honestly, there's a good reason I don't hang out in those chaotic internet comment sections. 😁

Looks like I'm calling it quits too. 😁

rustydrifter10 said:Man, I’m seriously considering picking up a phone like this one. The Scotsman was actually telling me that the forum runs way smoother when you're browsing from a mobile device—not that he's better at using it or anything, just that the experience is much more seamless! 😢

🤣

Just so you know, we're both going to be in deep trouble if they catch us running ads like this. 😁

I'm not sure why ZK can't see this subforum, but I'll ask the admins to fix it if this is just a partial ban.

ZK, regarding the moderation, your warnings are staying.

amberwalker4 said:It's weird how The Infallible, the self-proclaimed "archaeology expert" on Reddit, missed commenting on stuff like this. Even weirder that he didn't get flagged for showing a Katana in a battle at Iron. Oh well, I guess someone actually needs to know ☕.

amberwalker4 said:Don't overthink it; you can see it's bad for you.

I thought we agreed that your partial ban—and the permanent one you picked up elsewhere on the site—would be lifted if you stopped arguing the way that got you in trouble in the first place. You said yourself there was no problem and that you’d change your ways and be on your best behavior. I also told you that you'd lose access again if you kept this up, and I really mean it.
What kind of review are you actually asking for? Based on these posts (the snippets I quoted here), the warnings for trolling are justified. On what basis are you talking to people like this? I'm being serious. If everyone else is having a normal conversation and trying to share opinions or participate respectfully, then these attacks on others won't be tolerated from you. They aren't tolerated from anyone else either. I don't see any reason to overturn these warnings.

Look, this really is your last chance. If you keep this up, I'll issue a partial ban on the History section. You've been given a genuine opportunity, and now it's up to you. The next time you get flagged, you'll lose access to History entirely. If others can talk normally, so can you. It's all on you now..

Taylor Gonzalez79 said:Chuck Norris has tracked down every single thread ever started by Richard Wilson4. 🙏

🤣 🙏

rustydrifter10 said:I don't know, maybe it isn't permanent. 🙂

I'm sharing that hope with you while things feel a bit uncertain. 😢

wiredfalcon2 Jesse Sullivan2:
Gabriel Batistuta? To you, Richard Wilson4 is the Pelé of our era.

That’s intense. 🙏

Frank Williams7 Jesse Sullivan2:
I don't want to be openly confrontational—you could call it a survival instinct—but some of these comments are just hitting way too close to home. See you later, guys. I honestly don't get why you're being so abstract right now, especially during such a difficult time.

Michael, wherever you are or whatever you're going through, it’s going to be okay.

Anyway, take care.

There’s no real conflict here; we’re actually on the exact same page. I’m struggling to balance the heavy weight of that headline—which hits hard—with what Ryan Vaughn7 wrote. As much as that title weighs on me, maybe Ryan found something that goes beyond just the sadness of it, offering a sense of truth that helps us process the permanent loss of Richard Wilson4.