Casey Bennett said:If it gets deleted, it wasn't wanted. Can you honestly come up with a better definition than that? We're all just here to kill time anyway, and I'm certain the mods are so preoccupied with COVID that they have nothing better to do than scrub away any memes they deem uninspired or foolish. Note: I didn't actually see what was removed; I'm just assuming. 😬
This is exactly the issue with Reddit... The mods here clearly know my thoughts, they know exactly what I was trying to say, and who knows what else they've gathered about me. 😲 I'm out.
lonebadger6 said:...An internet handle isn't a person you can cite when talking about human rights...
Let’s say someone threatens this wannabe moderator on this forum—say they threaten to "straighten his teeth" or issue some other vague, low-life threat. Could that person actually turn to the proper legal institutions and seek protection? And who would be held responsible and face the consequences? Is it the internet handle, or the actual human being behind that handle...
Scott Long71 said:Why did Twitter and Facebook ban Trump? Because they decided his claims were socially dangerous and harmful. It turns out social media platforms actually judge content and take an editorial stance.
If Trump were on Reddit, he would've been banned ages ago.
Hypocritical, low, and just plain dirty. Then why don't Twitter and Facebook just ban half of America that supports Trump? It’s the same deal with this site—why don't the mods (Zoran Oštrić and his crew) just ban everyone who doesn't share their political views? The owner could honestly just add a rule stating that the moderators sometimes act "editorially and judgmentally" (that part actually made me laugh). But sure, let's pretend they aren't just doing it for the paycheck...
Alright, I get it... I think you’re off base regarding the report. If someone used that kind of tone on any other platform, there would be an absolute firestorm. But if this forum allows that kind of stuff—or if I have to follow some rigid set of rules just to stay civil—then I'm out. I'll just pack my bags and head for the exit; there's no point in wasting my energy getting worked up over nothing. 😁
If you guys actually had an editorial team, I would’ve sent this over for a review before posting it 😁 The main thing is that you understood my point and saw exactly what I was trying to get across...
I reported a post on this forum over a day ago—probably closer to two, actually—so I’m starting to wonder if these reports even go anywhere. Looking at the post I flagged, nothing has been done to it (not that I care about the specific outcome), which tells me the answer to my question is likely "no." In my book, it’s just basic courtesy to send a quick two-letter acknowledgment so people aren't left guessing. Thanks for listening.
So far, I’ve only run into a snake once (I think it made it past 😁) and I’m praying that’s the extent of it. Honestly, I can only imagine what it would be like to stumble upon a cat, a dog, or God forbid, something much "bigger." 🙂
Here’s my two cents on the matter... I don’t get why everyone is making such a huge deal out of political moderation. Personally, I totally get why people are complaining about the mods. I’ve been there myself—dealing with that infamous PDF situation where they basically shut down one side of the argument while letting the other side run wild. In my opinion, that’s just how the "business model" of this forum operates. I actually requested to be blocked from accessing that PDF, and honestly? It saved me a massive amount of stress and wasted typing.
No, you've got it wrong. You're taking things out of context and dragging them into this thread. Go back to the cycling subforum. I honestly don't see why you're even weighing in on a debate that has zero to do with your area of interest.
...
I didn't take anything out of context. Like I already said, that was your very first sentence in the post you linked... Where am I supposed to "go back" to? Where I choose to participate and what I choose to talk about isn't your business—clearly, you don't get it, and frankly, it's not your concern anyway.
A whole lot of nothing here... I read your opening line: "What violation? The driver can't hear a thing through the glass because he's listening to Brahms's sonata in F-minor on NPR. His eyes are closed." If I'm following you correctly, we're talking about a police stop involving traffic enforcement and a driver who has his eyes shut, the radio cranked up, and won't roll down the window to actually listen to the officer. 🙂
Jerry Rogers6 said:Nah, I’ve got plenty—where exactly would you want me to put it? 😁
--The crew stepped in during the fourth quarter and started trying to prove how much fairer, more transparent, and just plain better things were back in your day. 🙂 Double standards or some kind of untouchable absolutism? Please, those were basically non-existent back then. 🙂
Bring back the good old days—do whatever you have to do to make it happen. 🙂
Give me a break. Either you're trolling or you're a clone of someone who already got banned. There's no way you could have felt hollowtrucker77's dictatorship under this handle.
So, when exactly are these indoor pools supposed to get renovated? I’m just asking, before people start getting offended...
Look, you don't just decide on a renovation overnight or first thing Monday morning. You set a budget and a plan at the start of the year. Back then, none of the folks in charge had a crystal ball telling them we'd be hitting 100 degrees during the maintenance window. (Not that I'm defending ZGH—they've got enough on their plate as it is😁).
Kevin Williams56 said:Look, hiddenmoose16, if we’re talking about "artistic" vibes or just my own gut feeling, you’re obviously entitled to yours. Saying "I don't like how the site is being moderated" is a perfectly fine stance to take. Whether it's me or someone else on the Forum disagrees with you, everyone has the right to voice their opinion.
If we’re going to start throwing around accusations about "selective censorship," then I’m going to insist on seeing hard evidence. We can't just let these claims sit there based on hearsay and expect everyone to take them at face value. If you're going to make an accusation, back it up with facts.
The only reason I’m even reaching out is because of that "artistic" way you address the ladies on this Forum—especially that bit about "honoring the reading experience." I just can't bring myself to care about this "artistic" masterpiece, especially when you consider the platform it’s being used to influence—politics. It's just not for me.
Since I’m already here... If you’ve got a specific grievance, put it right here. postuIt feels like you completely ignored my point just to pivot into some petty back-and-forth. Let me be crystal clear: I’m not here to bicker with anyone, and I certainly have no interest in getting into a mudslinging match with you.