Posts by Mark Thompson6

Gerald Chavez7 said:Go ahead, feel free to pitch your favorite brokers... Which ones are you actually using, and how much do you actually like them?

I’m looking at shifting my cash allocation—planning to bump my gold holdings from about 20% up to double that. Right now, I’m holding physical bullion, which I'll probably try to offload right before or after the peak (though we'll see if I can actually time that correctly 😬).

So, I'm thinking it's time to move toward more "paper" assets—you know, the digital stuff 🙂...

Are you talking about the peak expected around January 2013 (somewhere near $3,000)?

quiettrucker12 said:Nothing surprising here. Back on August 16th, I wrote this when it was sitting at 1620 Dollars:

Well, those 10 days have passed. If things head south or manage a tiny nudge toward 1700, then everything is playing out exactly as planned. The problem is, seeing this play out in real-time feels way more sudden and aggressive than I expected—it almost looks like a total trend reversal.

What are you basing this month-long outlook on? Are you betting on a continued slide for the Dollar, or is there something else driving this?

ambermason16 said:brightpuma, you hit the nail right on the head. It starts with Australia and Canada, then Germany follows suit—it’s a total reign of terror against newcomers and moderators alike. They are insufferable, acting like they're untouchable. Honestly, it's embarrassing when people carry that kind of ego into their real lives and still claim to represent Americans. The constant noise, the endless drama, and the screaming matches in those three specific threads have been going on for years! The sheer amount of toxicity and bitterness thrown around, the public threats, the secret ones, the absolute horrors... I was honestly stunned when I first took on a moderator role for the diaspora.

The most pathetic part of this whole mess? The very same losers driving this entire trainwreck are the ones opening these threads, swarming like a pack of wolves to attack the moderator just because she’s doing her job. And she did it perfectly: strictly by the book, but with more humanity than was probably even necessary. When she responded, she was peaceful, clear, and polite—she even left room to admit if she were wrong (which she isn't) and offered an apology upfront just in case. But that doesn't matterrr... no, what matters is surrounding her and systematically attacking her on a personal level, over and over again. They drag the topic out as long as possible just so the whole world can see what terrible players they are, acting like Henry Moore2 isn't worth the breath it takes to speak her name.

Who is she exactly, and where did she start making things personal?
It’s perfectly legitimate for any forum member to file a formal complaint against a moderator if they feel their moderation has caused them actual harm.

ambermason16 said:brightpuma, you hit the nail right on the head. It starts with Australia and Canada, then Germany follows suit—it’s a total reign of terror against newcomers and moderators alike. They are insufferable, acting like they're untouchable. Honestly, it's embarrassing when people carry that kind of ego into their real lives and still claim to represent Americans. The constant noise, the endless drama, and the screaming matches in those three specific threads have been going on for years! The sheer amount of toxicity and bitterness thrown around, the public threats, the secret ones, the absolute horrors... I was honestly stunned when I first took on a moderator role for the diaspora.

The most pathetic part of this whole mess? The very same losers driving this entire trainwreck are the ones opening these threads, swarming like a pack of wolves to attack the moderator just because she’s doing her job. And she did it perfectly: strictly by the book, but with more humanity than was probably even necessary. When she responded, she was peaceful, clear, and polite—she even left room to admit if she were wrong (which she isn't) and offered an apology upfront just in case. But that doesn't matterrr... no, what matters is surrounding her and systematically attacking her on a personal level, over and over again. They drag the topic out as long as possible just so the whole world can see what terrible players they are, acting like Henry Moore2 isn't worth the breath it takes to speak her name.

It seems to me like you have a massive problem with the appeals process.
Someone should have handed her a red card for trolling like that. It was completely uncalled for.

ambermason16 said:You’re generalizing and drifting off-topic.

You have zero clue who I get along with or don't, and your claim that supporting two colleagues equals "defending a moderator on every single thread where a complaint is made" is nonsense. In Henry Moore2's case, I’ve had the privilege of working alongside her for over two years. And that's on the specific thread mentioned. Beyond that, having moderated various threads on this Reddit for eight years gives me every right to voice my opinion.

The situation here is so obvious it's almost laughable to even argue about it: You have a troll stirring the pot and aggressively baiting a fight; then you have an advocate stepping in; then a user gets warned, then warned again, then hits a yellow card, and then—with lightning speed—runs straight to FEMA with the exact same tired routine: "What is she even doing there, acting like a moderator (in this case, Henry Moore2)!!! She is the absolute worst thing that ever happened to this Reddit! I'm being harassed here! I demand she be removed, blah blah blah..."

In the expatriate community, we performed this exact little dance twelve thousand times.

Since you all don't seem to mind mobbing together at FEMA to jump a moderator, I certainly won't let anyone stop me from standing up for a mod when they are clearly in the right. If that irritates you, go find a home over at Gastrol. ☕

I’m not generalizing; I’m citing specific examples.
There have been more than just two instances, so don't nag me for more, because you know perfectly well how often you step in to play the moderator's defender—often for no reason at all, and frequently regarding threads where you haven't even participated as a mod or an active user. And this right here

ambermason16 said:You’re generalizing and drifting off-topic.

You have zero clue who I get along with or don't, and your claim that supporting two colleagues equals "defending a moderator on every single thread where a complaint is made" is nonsense. In Henry Moore2's case, I’ve had the privilege of working alongside her for over two years. And that's on the specific thread mentioned. Beyond that, having moderated various threads on this Reddit for eight years gives me every right to voice my opinion.

The situation here is so obvious it's almost laughable to even argue about it: You have a troll stirring the pot and aggressively baiting a fight; then you have an advocate stepping in; then a user gets warned, then warned again, then hits a yellow card, and then—with lightning speed—runs straight to FEMA with the exact same tired routine: "What is she even doing there, acting like a moderator (in this case, Henry Moore2)!!! She is the absolute worst thing that ever happened to this Reddit! I'm being harassed here! I demand she be removed, blah blah blah..."

In the expatriate community, we performed this exact little dance twelve thousand times.

Since you all don't seem to mind mobbing together at FEMA to jump a moderator, I certainly won't let anyone stop me from standing up for a mod when they are clearly in the right. If that irritates you, go find a home over at Gastrol. ☕

That's exactly what you're admitting to.

ambermason16 said:You’re generalizing and drifting off-topic.

You have zero clue who I get along with or don't, and your claim that supporting two colleagues equals "defending a moderator on every single thread where a complaint is made" is nonsense. In Henry Moore2's case, I’ve had the privilege of working alongside her for over two years. And that's on the specific thread mentioned. Beyond that, having moderated various threads on this Reddit for eight years gives me every right to voice my opinion.

The situation here is so obvious it's almost laughable to even argue about it: You have a troll stirring the pot and aggressively baiting a fight; then you have an advocate stepping in; then a user gets warned, then warned again, then hits a yellow card, and then—with lightning speed—runs straight to FEMA with the exact same tired routine: "What is she even doing there, acting like a moderator (in this case, Henry Moore2)!!! She is the absolute worst thing that ever happened to this Reddit! I'm being harassed here! I demand she be removed, blah blah blah..."

In the expatriate community, we performed this exact little dance twelve thousand times.

Since you all don't seem to mind mobbing together at FEMA to jump a moderator, I certainly won't let anyone stop me from standing up for a mod when they are clearly in the right. If that irritates you, go find a home over at Gastrol. ☕

Which makes your defensive intervention even more unnecessary.

ambermason16 said:You’re generalizing and drifting off-topic.

You have zero clue who I get along with or don't, and your claim that supporting two colleagues equals "defending a moderator on every single thread where a complaint is made" is nonsense. In Henry Moore2's case, I’ve had the privilege of working alongside her for over two years. And that's on the specific thread mentioned. Beyond that, having moderated various threads on this Reddit for eight years gives me every right to voice my opinion.

The situation here is so obvious it's almost laughable to even argue about it: You have a troll stirring the pot and aggressively baiting a fight; then you have an advocate stepping in; then a user gets warned, then warned again, then hits a yellow card, and then—with lightning speed—runs straight to FEMA with the exact same tired routine: "What is she even doing there, acting like a moderator (in this case, Henry Moore2)!!! She is the absolute worst thing that ever happened to this Reddit! I'm being harassed here! I demand she be removed, blah blah blah..."

In the expatriate community, we performed this exact little dance twelve thousand times.

Since you all don't seem to mind mobbing together at FEMA to jump a moderator, I certainly won't let anyone stop me from standing up for a mod when they are clearly in the right. If that irritates you, go find a home over at Gastrol. ☕

I have to ask: what kind of "defense" is this?
You’re out here insulting the person who started this thread while simultaneously accusing them of being the one who's insulting people.
You talk about some "mob" attacking Henry Moore2, yet you were the first one to go full Rottweiler on Drew Martin84 right after his opening post.
On another thread, this joker is citing the Code of Ethics for Federal Employees as the gold standard for moderation in a PDF titled "Your Rights," which you enthusiastically support. You're even claiming that the moderator drot13—who is currently the center of a massive debate on that thread—is top-tier, despite the fact that you've never actually moderated anything or even really participated in that group.

I don't know what your goal is here, other than completely undermining the whole concept of filing an appeal with FEMA.

Henry Moore2 said:Actually, no, because even though you signed up a month ago, you clearly didn't take the time to actually read the rules.
If I already gave you a heads-up about staying on topic and not leaning on DMs or FEMA, and you’re still pushing it, then yeah, that’s a warning card situation.

I don't need a lawyer here. ambermason16 just happened to be around before me, but Mimosa also totally called out my work, and it was pretty obvious in that post. Objectively speaking, deleting this and handing out a penalty is the same thing I'd do if someone else did it to you.

The whole thread is supposed to be about Australia, not about me personally. I asked a few times for everyone to stop making it about me, but since people wouldn't drop it, I had to step in.
I delete off-topic posts. This Australia thread is huge as it is, and when people coming from outside are looking for info, they don't need five pages of useless spam cluttering everything up.

The fact that she was there first doesn't matter; that's entirely between you and whoever is complaining about your moderation.
Especially when they handle it the way she did.
She tries to defend you in the initial post, but then the person who complained about your work starts insulting everyone else, only for her to end up throwing an insult back at him about his "nerve."

What kind of credibility does that argument have? It’s a terrible way to defend someone. She's just unnecessarily ramping up the tension and creating a massive backlash against your moderation efforts.

I know you used to moderate on the expatriate community site, but this actually concerns you and the users complaining about your oversight. This involves specific people, and she wasn't even part of the situation.

Surely you can explain your own reasoning for when you've issued a strike or deleted a post in certain instances.

My point is that it’s totally misguided to defend moderators like that—or to call someone an "excellent moderator" while people are actively complaining about them—especially when you weren't even a moderator on the subreddit they manage and never once participated in those discussions.

ambermason16, what is the point? Every single time someone starts a thread on FEMA to complain about how a moderator is doing their job, you immediately spin up some makeshift National Security Council to defend them. And half the time, you're defending mods who manage specific sub-sections where you aren't even a moderator or even a participant.
I don't want to get bogged down in this specific drama since I don't know all the details and I don't follow the expatriate community closely enough, but any moderator handling a specific section should be able to stand by their own decisions. They shouldn't need a personal bodyguard or a tutor. It’s up to the admins to look at the situation and decide if a ban or a deleted post was actually justified, and whether that person actually deserves to hold a moderator position or not.

Not long ago, you and one of your buddies were "defending" a mod on another thread by claiming they have to act like a federal employee following the Code of Ethics for Federal Employees.
Making arguments like that doesn't actually help the moderators people are complaining about; it’s a disservice to them, to yourself, and to the entire site.

Just because you happen to be friends with some of them privately doesn't mean you should automatically go into combat mode every time someone voices a grievance. Doing it in such an absurd way just makes things worse.

loneraven25 said:...go back and read what you wrote...
...there are actual reasons why threads aren't opened with titles like that,
and there's also a reason why you decided to go after certain moderators right here...

If you had an issue with those reasons, you should have taken it up with The Terminator, who's the one who actually started this thread with that title. Like I already said, that’s why I jumped in.

Besides, even Slackoff already weighed in on her moderation, so I didn't realize my own comments were bothering people as much as they seem to be bothering everyone else.

loneraven25 said:...I actually put a direct link to your post right underneath mine...
Even if you wanted to, there's no way you could miss it.

Look, this whole thing is about how one specific moderator handles things. The title targets her personally, but I never once implied that terms like "illiterate" or "retarded" were being directed at her character.

loneraven25 said:...Oh, great, so now we're comparing how any moderator works
with a thread title like: "Are you illiterate or just stupid?"...

Where exactly did I compare the thread title to anyone's moderation style?

Elizabeth Anderson63 said:Honestly, I think you're focusing on the wrong thing, but 🤷
I agree that moderators need certain qualities to hold the position in the first place. However, since this is all volunteer work, the owner can't technically force them to act a certain way; they just have to trust that those people have the right traits (which includes being polite enough to answer when asked something). At the end of the day, she answered you (from what I've seen every time you called her out). 🤷
Now you're acting angry because she responded to your question by saying she wasn't obligated to, even though she answered you every single time (not because the owner forced her, but out of basic courtesy to the users)?!
Is it just me, or is that weird? 🤷

I'm not even going to address what you wrote above the bolded sentence, because I've already said more than enough about that topic.
If you get it, you get it. If you don't agree with me, you don't agree with me.

This time, I'll just point you toward reading the questions in my previous posts again, because there are plenty of unanswered questions in there.
They shouldn't be hard to spot, but if they are, that's your problem. I'm not going to list them out here any more than I'm going to list my specific reasons for complaining about the warning, since I've already laid everything out clearly.

shadowpilot8 said:About 4 months ago, I handed you a warning, and you didn't say a word. Now you're complaining because you didn't get that same warning the day Klapalo got his, simply because you didn't like what he wrote.

The whole endless back-and-forth is just full of illogical nonsense because of that. Don't you think it's time to drop it?

Well, I stepped up here specifically because I was fascinated by yet another display of your moderation style.
I already gave my full, detailed explanation when the issue actually happened, and I see no reason to repeat myself—especially since you were dodging any real discussion back then.
I have no idea what "illogical nonsense" you're talking about, but I firmly believe there's plenty of sense in discussing how you moderate this board.
Especially if we're sticking to actual arguments and stances rather than trying to be "witty" with cheap little jabs.

Elizabeth Anderson63 said:Look, I was curious enough to go back and read a few posts before and after what you linked.

That’s nice of you, but it would’ve been better if you’d done that before deciding to jump into this thread.

Elizabeth Anderson63 said:First, you ask if the Moderators are required to respond or if they can just ignore you (on the Moderator thread). shadowpilot8 tells you they aren't obligated, but that it's polite to reply, and then she actually did 🤷

Yeah, except I don't care about her perception of politeness; I care about actual obligations. So her comment about volunteering is completely irrelevant.

Elizabeth Anderson63 said:And now you're claiming she's being rude just because she answered that they aren't obligated and mentioned they are volunteers—which is a plain fact 🤷. I honestly don't see how you're linking the mention of volunteering to job performance, since all mods are volunteers 🤷. And frankly, I don't get why anyone would act arrogant by pointing out they're volunteering 🤷

Maybe we're reading different threads, but I really don't get the vibe that shadowpilot8 was rubbing anything in anyone's face, nor does it depend on her mood. On the contrary, she said it's the polite thing to do, and that's how she's acting 🤷. Ultimately, from what I gather, you're looking for the admins to weigh in (just like on the Moderator thread), so shadowpilot8's mood shouldn't matter to you since the admins aren't volunteers 😍. As much as I wish mods were required to reply, you technically can't force a volunteer to do anything. You can only rely on their decency to answer when asked. And clearly, those who aren't decent aren't cut out for this, so you end up in the same spot anyway 😉

I wasn't linking volunteering to quality of work; I was just pointing out her argument that a moderator's response on the FBI thread depends entirely on whether they feel like being polite.
In my view, if you decide to take on a responsibility—and let's assume you actually intend to do the job right—volunteering shouldn't be used as some convenient excuse for why things aren't getting done, regardless of whether there's a paycheck involved.
It’s entirely possible that both you and she see this platform and the expectations for its moderators differently than I do.
Maybe whoever gave her the moderator role said, "Look, you're volunteering here, you aren't getting paid, so don't sweat the small stuff. For example, if someone asks a question on the FBI thread under a specific topic, you can step in or you can skip it. It's your call. Decide for yourself if it's worth your time:"

Elizabeth Anderson63 said:And that's true; you can't just barge into a thread and claim someone is a bad moderator without explaining why. If they're complaining, they need to provide actual reasons. If all they want to do is yell that someone isn't doing their job properly, then they shouldn't be surprised when the admins stop taking them seriously.😉

Well, we can all agree on that.
My point remains: that logic goes both ways, and using "I'm a volunteer" as an argument to dodge obligations doesn't exactly raise the standard of this community.

Elizabeth Anderson63 said:🤣 🤣
shadowpilot8, sorry for jumping in, but I just can't sit here and watch 😍
Mark Thompson6, look, I’m reading what shadowpilot8 replied to you. The woman was asking what kind of "obligation" could possibly exist in something that is purely voluntary, and she also pointed out that it's basic courtesy to reply (just like she did when addressing your question/complaint). And no, I'm not defending shadowpilot8 (she has her own way of speaking and knows how to clarify her point), it's just that such a blatant misinterpretation of what was actually said caught me off guard 🤷

Look, there can't be any obligation. That's not even up for debate. What *is* debatable is bringing up the fact that it's volunteer work as a way to justify the quality of the job being done.
Maybe that attitude works for you, but to me, it comes off as arrogant because I honestly don't see any reason to emphasize that point other than to act superior.

Especially since I think it's a terrible approach regarding complaints or comments, which aligns perfectly with what ambermason16 and rustydrifter10 were saying—that you need to provide specific, concrete reasons when expressing dissatisfaction with a certain Moderator.
The points they made make total sense to me, but this kind of insistence loses all credibility when you have a Moderator who acts like their personal whim determines whether they'll bother to respond to you or not.
It’s hard to take seriously if that logic only applies one way.

And for the record, she wasn't answering my question; she was responding to my complaint, which is a huge distinction.

shadowpilot8 said:Mark Thompson6, did it ever occur to you that the mods and admins didn't give a final ruling because they actually agree with me and had nothing left to say? That's their prerogative. Just like it's your prerogative to think I'm the worst Moderator to ever walk the earth.

No, it didn't. But it did occur to me that if they're siding with you, someone else could have easily typed out the exact same thing.

shadowpilot8 said:Stryker, Mark Thompson6 recently filed a complaint about my moderation; if you're interested, feel free to check out the threads he linked. Regardless, I'll just add here that I have never in my life said anything as arrogant as what he's accusing me of (specifically, "Why should I have to chime in when I'm doing this job as a volunteer anyway?").

Yeah, right,
just a figment of my twisted imagination..

Look, if we’re going to move past the abstract stuff, you can find my actual arguments over on the "Complaints about bans" thread on page 138 and under the "Moderator" topic on pages 77 through 79.

@rustydrifter10/">@@rustydrifter10, it’s pretty interesting how not a single admin or mod bothered to give a final word on that whole situation.

ambermason16 said:It’s your right to complain if you feel wronged by a moderator or another user... I just took issue with how you handled it regarding shadowpilot8. I won't bother mentioning why I think she's a great moderator because that's irrelevant here. I'm just pointing out that calling someone out publicly like that without providing specific examples or arguments is unfair and uncomfortable for them. If you think she messed up, call her out on the actual mistake... but using insults like "facepalms" or saying "I don't know who picked you to be chosen" is just cheap and unjust.

Fine, then tell me: do you find it fair when I ask the FBI admins why a certain moderator isn't responding to a thread? I directed that question to the admins and mods, not her—I wasn't demanding she jump in immediately with an answer. To paraphrase what happened: "Why should I have to respond? I'm doing this job as a volunteer anyway." (And in that case, it wasn't a facepalm, it felt more like a slap in the face).
So, she ignores the questions actually directed at her, yet she jumps in to address things she wasn't even asked, adopting a tone that completely contradicts the version of moderation you just described.
Look, I called her out too, but she just ignored my inquiries, mostly by playing a game of telephone—talking about things I never even mentioned or asked—only to eventually shut down all communication entirely without any real argument or explanation for her actions.

ambermason16 said:I don't see how this qualifies as criticism. It’s just another post attacking shadowpilot8 without any actual arguments or examples provided...

The issue here is that I dealt with something very similar involving this same Moderator not too long ago (I can go into more detail if you're really interested). The reason this whole thread was even started—including the fact that she's actually asking one user if they insist on getting another user banned—is because of the sheer absurdity of it all, which isn't exactly surprising given her track record.

ambermason16 said:Honestly, I’m interested in this too. Especially since this specific complaint has been popping up repeatedly over the last few weeks. I know quite a few of the moderators here, and none of them just ignore reports or use invalid email addresses. Reporting posts is how we get help—and a massive amount of it at that. I don't see any reason to ignore those flags, and I don't know any mod who would think it's okay to just brush things off. To me, this whole situation feels potentially toxic for the moderation teams on all these subreddits. If people lose faith that their feedback actually matters, they won't bother reporting anything anymore. We'll end up losing invaluable help, and on high-traffic forums like this, we can't be everywhere at once. By the time we notice, dozens of threads will already be trashed or derailed, which could have been avoided if we had just acted immediately.

Look, I’m saying this again: after nearly eight years of moderating, I haven't met a single person who actually ignores reports. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but if people are dead set on claiming that we ignore posts, they need to step up and provide actual proof—a specific report, a username, a timestamp, or a link. Anything else is just hearsay. Even if what they're saying were true, none of the admins could do anything about it because the whole thing sounds like nothing more than gossip, paranoia, or just a bad vibe. There's always that nagging suspicion that it's all just made up.

It wouldn't hurt to actually read this entire thread from start to finish so you'd know exactly who we're talking about and what the actual issue is.

ambermason16 said:So, what exactly is your point? 🙄

Short lines, three beats. Not much to say here today. That is all I have.

What exactly is your problem?
How is it even possible that there are moderators out there whose management style is borderline tragicomic?

Seriously, shadowpilot8...

I’d love to know what kind of criteria they used to pick that woman as a Moderator.
Or better yet, what on earth keeps her in that position.

"If you really insist, I'll penalize him..." 🤦