Posts by Arthur Fowler83

Honestly, this entire thread feels like a journalistic marathon during some small-town parade; if they weren't so busy trying to snap a photo of a single letter "U" among 100,000 people, maybe they wouldn't have anything to nitpick about.

On the flip side, these same reporters don't see any issue with the fact that those in power consist of a revolving door of former communist officials masquerading under the banners of the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.

So, it’s pretty obvious that both this topic and whoever started it are stuck at that superficial, tabloid level of journalism.
☕

Brian Edwards78 said:At any rate, I don't think Goebbels' quotes belong as user signatures on a civilized forum.

And if we're being honest, I don't think the German language has any business being on a civilized forum either.
Just imagine—it was that very same filthy language spoken by the Nazis who swore an oath against my grandmother back in '43.
🙂

It’s funny how some people will nitpick every tiny detail when they're discussing Nazism, yet when it comes to communism, they'll let absolutely anything slide.
🙄

When slybison8 isn't around, you can pretty much lock down the entire World and Discussion section without any trouble.
☕

To me, that says everything you need to know about his political insight and overall quality—which is a massive step up from most of the other moderators in Politics.

Since when does having a blood alcohol content of 1.33% make you a drunk during the Storm celebrations?

Personally, I’m betting a huge number of people participating had somewhere between 1.0 and 1.5 percent. Honestly, that’s hardly anything considering how massive these celebrations get.

Besides, since when did any law dictate that people should be hauled in just because they exceeded a certain limit while out in public?

dustyranger64 said:a topic where the debate basically boils down to "90% of Romani people are thieves..."

Why shouldn't we be allowed to talk about this?
Do you honestly think the percentage is any lower?
How much lower?

I can say with absolute certainty that at least 50-60% of the Romani community is involved in criminal activity. I wouldn't push it further than that since I don't have the exact data.

By what standard would this even qualify as hate speech?

When you aren't happy with how things are going, the easiest move is just to toss a key into the lock. 👍

...and then you just let all that dissatisfaction and criticism aimed at the administration drift aimlessly into the void. 😍

...meanwhile, the paycheck still hits the account right on schedule 👍

...and suddenly, all four of them just vanish into thin air. 😍

original post : http://www.reddit.com/r/post/123

slycrane94 said:I wish we wouldn't label people with a common cold as "sick" either. It feels incredibly distasteful to me, and honestly, it just leaves me feeling pretty depressed about how we talk. 😢

So, let me get this straight: it's okay to call religious people sick, it's fine to call people with a cold sick, but we can't call homosexuals sick?

What kind of logic are we using here? 🤷

Just pick a side and be consistent. Either everyone—religious folks, the LGBTQ+ community, and people with a sniffle—can be called "sick."
Or nobody gets that label, and we apply that standard across the board.
☕

William Gonzalez3 😂

Maybe it’s worth giving our dear (so-called) supermoderator a little refresher on the very rules he supposedly swore to uphold when he stepped into this role:

"Anderlon says:
1. Acting condescending, arrogant, cynical, sarcastic, or pulling a 'god complex' admin move while handling appeals on the PŽK is strictly prohibited. (Violators will face card sanctions.)"

👍

rowdyowl said:There are about ten different parties out there—five serious ones, plus two that actually hold seats in Congress.🤷
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic..._Third_Parties

Honestly, bringing up those minor parties is a waste of breath. It's obvious they don't have any actual leverage.

You can see how everything just boils down to two parties that are practically clones of each other. It's a farce, not a democracy.
And this is exactly the kind of model they work so hard to push onto the European Union and, by extension, here at home.

We’ve certainly proven ourselves to be the most eager adopters of Western garbage—those so-called center-left and center-right parties that end up running the entire political show.

You can't reduce democracy down to just personal freedoms—you know, the right to say whatever you want or wave whatever symbols you like, provided you stay on the street and hold zero actual power. That isn't democracy; that's just a subset of it.

A real democracy requires at least three or four major parties with significantly different platforms and areas of influence.

So, what's really the difference between elections back in America, where the Communist Party would just swap out various candidates you could vote for, and today, when "democracies" just cycle through different faces within two nearly identical parties (like the Republicans and Democrats in the USA, or the Republican Party and Democratic Party here)?🤷

I was wondering, what’s actually the point of changing your username? 🤔
Is it some kind of tactic to throw enemies off the scent? 😬

I’m honestly just wondering where all those pro-European enthusiasts have disappeared to—the ones who used to claim leaving the European Union was a simple walk in the park. 😠

It’s becoming pretty obvious now that exiting the European Union is something that only works on paper; in reality, it's never actually going to happen. What does that mean for Americans, or for the Brits, when 90% of them are against the Union but politicians refuse to grant them a referendum??

We’ll likely be offered a referendum to join the European Union, and we might even have to do it three or four times if necessary, but once America is fully integrated, unfortunately, getting out won't be an option unless there's total chaos.

History always follows this pattern, and sadly, this time will be no different. People are far too susceptible to manipulation, and the entity known as the European Union is such a powerful manipulator that most people wouldn't even know how to stand up to it.

While some people are actually fighting to get out of the European Union, we seem to be shifting into fifth gear with a driverless car, busy constructing this whole EU-religion that everyone is expected to worship. 🙏 🙏

Over here, you can end up behind bars just for tearing down an EU flag. I’m genuinely curious—has anyone in the United Kingdom ever been prosecuted for burning or ripping one of those EU flags?

brightpuma said:The "Greater Canada" ambition makes sense if you consider that the city is actually located in Canada, rather than in America... hmm... ☕ I find myself wondering who exactly here is nursing territorial ambitions... 🙄

Saying that this belongs in Canada instead of Herzegovina is just as ridiculous as claiming San Francisco isn't part of California. It’s a distinction without a difference. 🙄

That’s just not true. The state of Canada doesn't exist. However, there is definitely a state of Canada. HerzegovinaLook, let’s get one thing straight: Pittsburgh is part of Herzegovina, not Canada.

Look, you're making a comparison that doesn't even hold water. There isn't even a state called California or a place like San Francisco in this context, so your whole analogy is completely off base.

brightpuma said:I just want to draw some attention to what I consider to be some pretty sloppy moderation over on the Politics board. Earlier today, I flagged two posts by Kansas in a thread discussing nuclear power plants. Specifically:

This is extreme nationalism involving claims over territory that doesn't belong to them. As such, it should be unacceptable—unless, of course, the admins and moderators happen to share those same views.

I also find it hard to believe that if someone were to claim, for instance, that Indianapolis or San Diego were Mexican or Italian cities, they wouldn't be slapped with an immediate ban.

Since I filed those reports this morning, not a single moderator has reacted to either the flags or the posts themselves, despite being online and presumably seeing the notifications.

So, do you consider St. Louis to be a Mexican city?

hollowtrucker77 said:It's tough. All I've managed to learn so far is that there is an alternative, there are serious people, and then there's pure idiocy—and plenty of people who would happily swallow any product pushed as "alternative." In those cases, you usually hear: "It can't be explained that way; you just wouldn't understand."

🙂

Sure, there are charlatans and scammers out there—people driven solely by greed or a desperate need for validation—but there are also individuals who actually possess genuine insight. That’s exactly why studying the alternative scene is interesting; it gives you the tools to distinguish what's real from what's fake.
Dismissing everything outright and mocking the subject shouldn't be the defining traits of a moderator on an alternative forum (or in any religion, for that matter).

brightpuma said:Look, it would be just as problematic if someone who actually believes in that PDF were the one moderating it... there has to be some level of objectivity... and an objective skeptic is always going to be more reliable than a fanatic.

It’s not about whether they believe it or not; it’s about having enough respect to value people who think differently instead of just mocking them—kind of like that moderator Kyle Roberts5 brought up.

As for objectivity, I never said we needed a zealot. All I'm saying is we need someone who is actually open to different perspectives.

Objectivity doesn't mean being some smug atheist who thinks their job is to "enlighten" everyone else, dismissing religious, spiritual, or alternative beliefs as primitive or stupid simply because they haven't experienced them firsthand.

I’ve noticed the same thing. And it isn’t just limited to the alternative scene; it's happening in religion too. You have several moderators spending their time editing a PDF that details things they personally don't believe in—things they consider nonsense that ought to be wiped out entirely. If that's the case, why on earth are they even moderating that document in the first place?

Karen Alvarez4 said:Linda Walker37@: I totally get what you're saying. You can't really explain it to someone who hasn't felt it—that feeling that actually gives you the strength to keep going, like proof we aren't just a bunch of meat... and I know exactly what I felt. It was my dad... I don't care if some expert tries to tell me it's just my brain doing things, I know what I felt and how I feel now.

The thing is, we struggle to spot those signs because life moves way too fast, you know? We're always rushing, stressed out, never just *being*... it makes it impossible. But when something like this hits you, you realize nothing else matters except you and your family. Work, money, whatever—it's all noise. You gotta live for the moment. I guess I realized that too late, and there's so much I could've done differently... so many missed chances. But hey, at least I have the memories and the knowledge that he's still there watching over me. I felt him reach out, and honestly? No scientist or shrink in the US is gonna talk me out of it.

Well said. 🙂