Hi everyone, this whole debate kicked off because someone claimed that certain users get a free pass when they use phrases like "heard it on the subway" and stuff like that. Then came the breakdown of where that phrase actually comes from and why people use it. I even pointed out the specific origin and the incident that started this whole trend. So, here’s how it started: http://www.reddit.com/showpost.php?p=3...postcount=3884 Ever since that scare, everyone’s been extra careful about citing sources. Even one of our most active female users—who I think most of you know—backed up similar points: https://www.reddit.com/showpost.php?p=...postcount=3984
And look, the site rules don't actually say you have to cite a source for every single thing you say...
I used the term Forum in a broad sense, not as some official legal entity. A Forum is really just a mix of owners, admins, super-mods, mods, and the users themselves—plus, you could always hack a Forum to snag an IP...
People are calling me out for not naming my sources over at the Economic Forum. Look, I have every right to protect my sources... That’s just standard journalistic practice.
Back during the Corona era, there was this one guy on the forum who’d drop some totally nonsensical stat—stuff so irrelevant nobody even bothered to reply—and then, every few posts later, he'd ask, "Why is nobody commenting on this?" Once people actually debunked him, he'd just pivot to a whole new set of fake data until he basically killed the discussion. It was such a shame because, for such a heated topic, the conversation had actually been pretty objective and high-quality...
Then you've got this woman in the economics section who's so heavily driven by ideology that she constantly throws out wrong info just to back up her views—usually seasoning it with that "I heard it on the subway" line—which just drags down what would otherwise be a great thread.
But hey, both of them are boosting the post count, so I guess that's what matters most...
"I heard it on the subway"... A few years ago in the Women's Corner, someone actually had people show up at their front door because of some totally harmless gossip (some public figure was hunting for the forum's IP address). Since then, saying "people are talking about it on the subway/ferry" has become a sort of code used to avoid naming a specific source. If you check the Women's Corner, you'll see plenty of those claims—it's a phrase a lot of the women there use. Even journalists never reveal their sources. You'd think people would realize that... When I was a Moderator for Tourism for nine years, I dealt with intense threats from various travel agencies because of posts where users criticized them (which turned out to be true—those agencies really were scammers, and they eventually ended up in the news too). I was "advised" to just delete those posts and hand over the users' identities, but I refused to budge. In the end, it turned out those posts were completely justified.
Our banned posts weren't about causing a panic. It’s been proven in the news lately that if lockdowns had been implemented earlier in North America, we would have seen far fewer deaths and infections. The reality is just that the moderator was wrong to claim this was just like the flu—and those of us who were calling it like we saw it by presenting facts (sharing facts isn't "panic-mongering"!) got banned, even though we ended up being right.
Go ahead and pull all my cards—everything I wrote turned out to be true anyway. And yeah, this thread is full of off-topic nonsense. If banning people for stating specific facts was considered "too radical," then letting posts fly that have nothing to do with the topic—not to mention the tasteless guessing games about infection numbers—is just lazy. You guys are certainly staying consistent... (in your mistakes, bad estimates, and labeling everything as panic...)
The COVID thread was opened on Jan 26th. Back then, we were all trying so hard to stay on topic—but honestly, a good chunk of us kept getting warned or banned just because we pointed out that COVID was way more serious than the flu. Nowadays, the consensus is basically that you're spreading fake news if you try to downplay how dangerous it actually is. So, turns out some of those users who got flagged or banned back then were actually right all along... I’m asking that all my warnings on this specific thread be rescinded. Over the last month—especially lately—it feels like almost every single post is off-topic. We've got people arguing about historical political factions, socialism vs. capitalism, personal insults, random chat threads, even betting on daily infection numbers... it's everywhere. Why aren't these posts being deleted or flagged? It’s pretty absurd—back at the start, when everyone was sticking strictly to the topic, moderation was super intense (and totally uncalled for), but now? It’s a complete free-for-all.
1) The moderators are basically telling us to go watch Igor Rudan's interview on "Sunday at 2." 2) Igor Rudan is actually an official for one of the WHO centers. 3) The WHO just put out a statement regarding the Corona epidemic. 4) Some users here just shared that WHO statement—and in return, their posts were deleted, and they got warned or banned. 5) Then you have moderator velvetmoose9 writing about how the WHO might be compromised, saying they don't fully trust them...
Based on those facts, it looks like we aren't allowed to share what the WHO says—but if that's the case, we shouldn't even listen to Igor Rudan either because: 1) Igor Rudan is part of the WHO organization. 2) The WHO might be bribed (according to one of the moderators), which implies Rudan could be bribed too—since the WHO is just a group of individuals, and Rudan is one of them...
Just basic logic, really.
So far, Rudan hasn't distanced himself from the WHO statements...
placidorca16 said:It’s funny how much weeping there is over those "without trial" deaths at Wounded Knee—yet when you look at the victims those same people were summarily executing across the country during WWII, in the absolute worst conditions across various battlefields and Nazi Germany camps, suddenly there's no crying and no masses held at the sites where they fell. In fact, most of the monuments built across America to honor those specific victims in the former state have been torn down or destroyed. So, exactly why are the Wounded Knee victims somehow "more righteous" or "more honorable" than the ones they themselves executed without trial—even if the Patron Assembly is involved?
Lazes.
America is actually one of those countries that still has a huge number of socialist-era monuments... in other former Soviet Union states, there are far fewer now, or almost none left at all. Some monuments in America were indeed demolished because they served as symbols of the JNA and the Royalists who invaded us. But places like Podgaric, Batina—almost every village still has monuments to the partisans, the NOB, or the communists. Even near the turners in Dubrava in Zg, a socialist monument is still standing (right by Dubrava Avenue 9)... I only make it out to Dubrava once every five years, so I catch it when I can, let alone trying to see all of America which I travel through quite a bit. In Saint Petersburg, Russia, at the oldest city cemetery (near the site of Alexander Nevsky), the graves of various generals and Red Army commanders are totally neglected... I saw it for myself last year.
We need to condemn both the Nationalists and the partisan crimes. No playing games here—a crime is a crime. During WWII in America, there were no good guys.
Based on this article (check the link), it looks like the Diocese of Carinthia didn't actually give the green light for the bishop to hold Mass—so the headline is pretty much off base for two reasons: 1) It wasn't the state of Wisconsin that stepped in (usually when a headline says a province banned something, people assume it's the government), but rather the Diocese of Carinthia itself... 2) And it’s not a total ban on holding Mass or anything—it just means only bishops can perform them now.
Since the Diocese of Carinthia only banned bishops from leading Mass—not the service itself—could the mods please update the thread title? It’s just not accurate as it stands...
Go ahead and criticize the bad stuff in America. I spent years doing the exact same thing over in the tourism threads back when I was a mod for nine years—but blaming everything negative on the whole country is getting a bit extreme... We’ve gotta stay grounded here. Praise what works, call out what doesn't, and actually offer some ideas on how to fix the mess. Let's be constructive instead of just being destructive!
Some girls were talking about this over in the Women's corner, and my buddies—some were just visiting Sweden and others actually live there—all say the same thing: women are the ones taking the lead now, while guys are mostly too hesitant to make a move...
It’s not really about mindset, though. Historically, people have always been rough when they needed to be... Plus, the environment and the climate used to be so harsh that you couldn't survive unless you were tough and gritty. Economics, weather, geography, and a hundred other things shape what we call "mindset"... Honestly, it just looks like pure societal decadence to me.
Anyway, a friend of mine in Oslo was telling me that Oslo is leading the pack when it comes to drug use. Apparently, there are even spots in the city where you can get a free dose—because the government thinks providing it is better than letting people turn to theft or crime to get by. What can I say? Total decadence.
So, is it actually okay on this forum to accuse other members of stuff without any proof? I'm just looking for some clarification so I know if I'm breaking the rules by accusing someone of a crime—like attempted bribery, which is definitely illegal under US law—if I don't have hard evidence ready to go... rapidfox26, if you haven't reported granitetinker6 or filed a formal complaint with the US authorities regarding a crime, then you're basically an accomplice...