Posts by Susan Price30

Quincy:

Viktor Orbán has realized that targeting tycoons isn't a sin. On the contrary, he views it as being in the national interest.

But how does that actually work on the ground? In a country like Canada... and is that part of why they're 'emerging' from the crisis, as you claim?

(What I mean is—it’s highly likely this is done through irregular channels, much like the other forms of repression being carried out)

Richard Wilson4 said:Viktor Orbán is one of those rare statesmen you see in Europe. Honestly, his whole way of running things would be a total game-changer for the US, both economically and politically 👍

😁🤣

Yeah, right.😁 More like a final, suicidal leap off a cliff.

(Especially on the economic side, since Canada is basically a total mess right now.)

casualharbor3 said:It’s perfectly clear from this that you’re equating communism and communist symbols with the cross and Christian imagery.🙄
By the way, you shut down both threads using the exact same excuse.

Exactly. Unless there’s some other explanation—which doesn't seem likely—it looks like that first impression was spot on.

Good grief, why am I even wasting my breath here?
That sub-forum is a complete disaster... any topic that actually gets interesting or heated just turns into a troll fest before it's over.🤦
And then everything gets locked by my favorite local, Charles Fox10.
😁

p.s. Basically, what I’m trying to say is, if those fascist-style evil communists want to redirect the conversation elsewhere or shut it down entirely, isn't there another option? Instead of defaulting to banning—effectively locking out everyone else who just wants to discuss certain topics and punishing the innocent—why not just remove the people who constantly push or glorify this ideology (which has been globally condemned as criminal)? Why punish the group when you could just deal with the persistent trolls who keep doing the same thing wherever they go?

That was my thought, but I suppose the PZK admins will decide whether or not to consider it, since that’s the actual issue here. We aren't in the Politics section.

And who exactly is stopping you from starting a thread like that??

Let me help you brainstorm an idea.

It's just difficult because I already know who’s going to turn a thread like that into a total mess, shouting nonsense and insulting everyone involved.😁 I truly admire your patience and good will toward them, but sometimes it feels like instead of endless warnings and strikes, it’s time to be a bit firmer... a ban or a partial ban and goodbye. Write whenever you can.

Charles Fox10 said:I'm not even joking; I closed two threads that had absolutely nothing to do with Politics because they were just used for insults and trolling, nothing more, nothing less. And as for me equating communism with the Catholic Church—that’s just biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiip.

Really??

Let's try this: The Declaration on condemnation of criminal communist regime regarding crimes committed during the totalitarian communist era in America from 1945–1990, which was adopted back in 2006 by members of the US Parliament along with the Council of Europe—you're telling me that has nothing to do with politics? And a thread where we poll people about regulating the public glorification of such and such a criminal system doesn't belong in Politics either?😁

and as for me equating communism with the Catholic Church—that’s just biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiip

I didn't claim that, but you shut down both topics using the exact same reasoning, effectively putting them in 'the same boat.'

wanderingheron52 said:Once again, we see an attempt to equate communism with the Catholic Church, which seems to be a recurring theme from certain users here. It appears even the moderators and the admin team share this sentiment. Personally, I don't mind; this is a private forum, and we users certainly aren't going to dictate which way the wind blows. However, it is also a fact that this forum wouldn't survive a few days without these specific viewpoints, so I suppose we should be thankful the mods care about freedom of speech. Then again, they are only human, and I can understand why they react this way when their sacred beliefs are being poked at...

Yes, hopefully, a moderator will step in soon to clarify exactly what was meant by those comments above.

p.s. btw, here is the reasoning provided for both threads, which, quite coincidentally, are locked right next to each other regarding Middle East politics.

The bitterness and mutual insults end here. As for those who want to ban things, why not just start a political party, win a supermajority in the next election, and change the Constitution and federal laws to suit your whims?

Thanks for reading.
_________________

Charles Fox10, you aren't joking, are you? You truly don't seem to realize that, unlike the other case or that other thread (which were insulted, lol), all of this has actually been illegal in the country you live in and throughout all of Europe for some time now. Respect to you, man. May you live a hundred years.

Do you just have an itch to argue, or do you actually enjoy reading what’s written? I was simply adding my own perspective to what our colleague Strile said in part of his response.

Let’s be real here—what does communism, WWII, the partisans, the Nationalists, or any other ghosts from 50 or 70 years ago have to do with a politics forum??

I would argue that, given the recent Council of Europe resolution and the fact that the US has only recently become a full EU member, the topic someone raised is actually relevant and significant. In the context of how it was framed, it isn't just some ancient history from 50 or 70 years ago.🙄

And I honestly don't get why you'd dare compare religious symbols to this (or bring up some trollish topic about it)—comparing them to something that is legally prohibited. Just to clear up any "confusion": there is constant discussion regarding the strictly punishable use of certain symbols or the glorification of such imagery. I really don't see why these should even be lumped together.

Could you please explain yourself? How are these topics—or any potential future ones—even remotely related? On one hand, we have the relevance of Council decisions regarding the recent past and the US, and on the other, we have trolling nonsense that has nothing to do with actual politics.

casualharbor3 said:I completely agree. 👍 bluecyclist64 would essentially be introducing thought crimes to this forum. He'd want to punish anyone holding a different opinion.
@bluecyclist64/">@@bluecyclist64 those days are long gone. It hasn't happened here.

No offense intended, but what someone wants or doesn't want is secondary 😁 — perhaps it's more important to look at what the law actually dictates regarding this. Where are the boundaries, or when does one cross the line into political incorrectness?😉

casualharbor3 said:The Council of Europe and the US Parliament have made it crystal clear through their declaration: they condemn the totalitarian communist regimes that once ruled several nations.

If even the most serious forums and sub-forums hand out instant bans to anyone who mentions criminal regimes or their symbols in any capacity, then you surely know that yourself if you're from the USA.

Justin Harris12 said:That isn't accurate. The Council of Europe resolution condemned the crimes committed by the regime, not communism itself.
Communism as a system is built upon the premise of a classless society. It seeks to abolish private property, placing everything under collective ownership for the benefit of the people.

We shouldn't conflate the specific crimes committed under communism with the ideology itself. Communism isn't the same thing as fascism; after all, fascism isn't built on the foundation of equality.

Even within democracies and capitalist systems, we see crimes being committed. These actions will eventually face judgment, but justice requires time.

Without getting too deep into it—this just looks a bit foolish as written, because the emphasis is placed entirely on the crimes. totalitarian Friends, what exactly is being implied here? Are we claiming these aren't truly free societies when compared to the ones you've mentioned? It brings us right back to the same question: does anyone actually care? velica Whether it belongs in the Political section or not, what is already prohibited by both the Council of Europe and the laws of the Republic of America remains forbidden.

On top of all that, they keep grinding away at the PZK by constantly snitching on anyone with a different opinion—and everyone else who, naturally, isn't doing the same (since they aren't breaking the law with their arguments and legitimate stances). In the grand scheme of things, maybe that’s also a valid question.

Let’s not confuse the specific crimes committed under communism with the ideology itself; communism isn't the same thing as fascism.

Setting fascism aside for a moment, if there is proven evidence of restrictions on free speech and movement—where defying the state leads to imprisonment, extermination, or execution—isn't that simply the definition of a criminal regime? When a system's very foundations are built on such cruelty rather than the freedoms we cherish in a democracy, don't you see the fundamental difference?

Kate Harris50 said:Strile, there's a full-blown propaganda war happening online right now. )

🤣

Do you have any specific posts or links we can actually look at? Lol. Did some kind of alien invasion happen while the rest of us were sleeping or what?

bluecyclist64 said:Here’s what Strile is saying:

The same old Strile uses tabloid trash as evidence, yet expects me to hunt down counterarguments somewhere in the media void.
Specifically, we're talking about that neo-Nazi claim regarding how many millions of people Marshall was responsible for—a narrative pushed relentlessly by CionistUSA. To Strile, it’s all fine because this supposed "thesis" finds its footing in yellow journalism.
And then this same Strile actually has the nerve to suggest that I PROVE THAT MARSHALL DID NOT KILL A MILLION PEOPLE.
.

Honestly, that criticism about missing links doesn't hold water when you were the one who posted a link for the appalachia Force support group 🙏 here or whatever you call your "argument" in that other thread. Hello?😁

Besides, the admins took away your perma out of pure goodwill. You don't just lose your status for no reason, right? And what’s changed? You’re still harassing people in debates and bothering the administration by opening threads with the exact same questions over and over again.

All good. Cheers, loneraven25.

.

hollowtrucker77 said:For those of you actually paying attention here, the real issue we need to be discussing is whether asylum seekers should just be allowed to wander around wherever they please without any oversight at all.

According to him, when you deal with someone claiming to be a "fighter for all minority rights in America," you often get the impression that you aren't even allowed to utter a single word of criticism—or even engage in a decent debate—regarding certain specific groups here in the States.
It would all be wonderful if he applied that same level of passion and clarity to "seeking justice" for every group, rather than just focusing on one or two.

That’s why some people find his moderation in the Politics section a bit tragicomic; his bias is just too obvious. Unlike the other moderators over there who actually maintain some objectivity and don't act as arrogant as he does.

Olivia King62 said:What about Judylin's avatar? Aren't dictators and mass criminals allowed to use those kinds of images? What about European Union resolutions and all those policies?

I believe the rule is that you can't glorify criminal organizations or illegal political factions—basically anything that openly incites things like international or ethnic hatred, which falls under the umbrella of "hate speech."

But does an avatar count as glorifying someone? If you put their face up, aren't you technically honoring them? So, theoretically, maybe yes... 😁The catch might be that the person he's honoring hasn't actually been officially labeled a criminal yet.

Honestly... seeing that image probably makes a lot of people on the Politics board feel sick to their stomachs—but who knows if that was the goal or what his actual intention even was.

hollowtrucker77 said:It’s pretty funny to me—since when did it become standard practice for the administration to just nuking a thread and then decide to handle all the replies via private message instead?

Apparently, it's against the rules to write, hold a debate, or start threads regarding who belongs to which clone on PKZ 🤣—that’s clearly why.

Take former moderator VeronikaV, for instance; she used to make things up and throw out false accusations. It seems the new administration is strictly forbidding that behavior now. And frankly, I’d say they're right to do so, given how easily those powers could be abused.🤷

Michelle Alvarez8 said:Honestly, if you don't know what Pizvo is about—just ignore them. Seriously, why even bother?

Or you could just debunk them with actual arguments, if anyone even has the time or the will.

Is it better to just feed someone 500 points at a time because they’ve already decided you're a "troll"? If you truly believe someone is just trolling, why even bother wasting your energy on the debate? Or are you just looking for moderator protection to shield your own bizarre reactions to them? I'm not saying the user is actually a troll—I'm saying the thread starter claims they are, and they seem pretty convinced of it.

Please. I haven't seen this one before, but...

Look, I’m not looking to go after anyone, but I am asking for protection when I'm being targeted. If you guys step up to protect me, I won't have to take matters into my own hands—and I won't keep getting slapped with 500-point penalties for the exact same things others get away with without any consequences.

But... if what you're saying is true and you're constantly losing 500 points while others face zero consequences for "the same things" (??), then there are really only two conclusions: either the moderators are catastrophically incompetent and incredibly biased, or you're being overly subjective about how much weight your posts actually carry.

Since the first option doesn't really hold water logically, we're left with the second.

Besides, in your opening post, you suggest not even appealing that 500-point penalty (is that because you think you earned it?). That just leads right back to the same conclusion, lol.

Sam Alvarez4 said:As for PL, the commentator and moderator, I only know him from the World and Discussion PDFs...
A perfectly decent moderator.
An interesting commentator with deep knowledge, always worth a read. Quite unlike some of his colleagues over on the World and Discussion forums...

Whether I agree or disagree with his takes, I can say one thing about his moderation: chapeau!

Calling this the "PL case" is just being dramatic—it’s an exaggeration...

I think the difference is that most people posting on the World PDFs either understand or actually live in democratic, free nations—so any discussion on those topics there would be completely different. It would likely be broader, higher quality, and much calmer.

The only obvious downside is how narrow the topics get on the World PDFs, obviously, because the "profile" of the users participating there is, I believe, far above those on the main subforum or BP—just like the moderation is, thanks to PL, as you mentioned.

The best proof is when he wasn't around on World, or during that period when he wasn't moderating World; you could see what a nightmare that subforum turned into. It was honestly terrible, 😁 but thankfully only temporary.

Jesse Ortiz71 said:Let them drag them through the mud. They knew exactly what they were signing up for when they agreed to be the "proof" that this Forum isn't an ideological echo chamber when it comes to picking Moderators.

So, I guess we're supposed to just drag someone through the Criminal Code and hurl insults at them—even when they haven't done anything to deserve it? 😁

wow