rustydrifter10 said:The number of bans you rack up can definitely say a lot about how someone carries themselves online—it's kind of a tell, right? But honestly, that’s no excuse to just hand out a fresh ban without actually explaining what the new rule is.
Is there actually any valid excuse for not moderating posts that people report? Seriously—is it really okay to just let them slide?
Brian Edwards6 said:So, "almost never"? Basically, we’re all agreeing that both sides can just weaponize that argument whenever they want—whether to score points or just screw someone over—and honestly, isn't there plenty of drama coming from both directions?😕
Yeah, almost never. Honestly, those few times they actually did—it was enough of a reason to just stop using them altogether, you know? Never. I’m really trying to keep my cool here—honestly. I just don't get why you’re constantly trying to deflect user insults onto the mods when, let’s be real, those things actually get sanctioned? Meanwhile, mods can talk trash and it goes totally unpunished. Trying to draw parallels between the two is just tacky, honestly kind of stupid, and—if I'm being blunt—a little insulting.
You missed the mark again—modders almost never get slapped with warnings here, and users can't even see them anyway. I'm talking about the mods getting warned, not just the regular users. 👍
It’s all kind of pointless—mostly because things like this get scrubbed immediately whenever some random troll decides to report an unpleasant post or an insult. 👍
I get what you're saying, but let's be real—if you're sliding into some guy's inbox, you aren't showing up with "sweet mama" or "sunflowers and daisies," right? You’re going in with stuff like "Ferrari lifestyle" or "living large"—you know what I mean? 😁
A solid password should be at least 15 characters long—think a mix of uppercase, lowercase, numbers, and symbols. Just make sure it doesn't include your name, username, birthday, your dog's name, or any actual dictionary words. I'd recommend using 1Password to generate and store everything. Once you've updated your passwords, pay extra attention to those "security questions" on your webmail accounts. Avoid the standard stuff like your uncle's name or your mom's maiden name if you can—just make up your own answers instead! If you're stuck with the defaults, go with something totally nonsensical. For example:
1) "What's the name of your first pet?" - The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog. 2) "Where did your parents first meet?" - Jesus Christ, it's a lion! Get in the car! 3) "What's your favorite artist's name?" - All your base are belong to us.
Log all of this into 1Password—which, obviously, you'll protect with its own unique, complex (but memorable!) password. Here’s how to build one: Let's say you have a phrase you really like, something like "wife, mother, queen." You might start with wifemotherqueen. Then, toss in some capital letters: WifeMotherQueen. Next, swap some letters for numbers: W1feM0therQu33n. Finally, throw in some special characters: W1f3$M0th#erQu33n!.
If someone manages to crack all of that, then you've basically swallowed a keylogger. 😁
brisklynx62 said:I’m just a random passerby here... stumbled onto this thread by accident and saw this. I’d say it’s absolutely true—honestly, why would anyone deny it? 😬
Take the moderators, for example. The first name that pops into my head is Stinger—he’s lost count of how many times he’s insulted people, calling them idiots, morons, you name it. It doesn't even matter if someone actually belongs in the discussion or not; he just takes liberties. I mean, seriously, Stinger? With that kind of language and attitude... how many people with big egos have tried to call him out or report him? And yet, nothing. No penalties, no warnings, nothing at all.
And honestly? There are tons of users like that on this forum.
You're twisting definitions. Being a moderator isn't the same thing as being a longtime member. Some old-timers happen to be mods, but that’s where the connection ends.
If the US moderators actually stuck to what’s interesting and relevant—man, I’d be the only one left posting! Honestly, just roll with it and keep the chat moving while we can.
electricharbor30 said:Look, I mean, Brian Edwards6 isn't exactly the only one acting like this. Even Velia told me straight to my face that I was lying, then went ahead and nuked my post. Later on, I actually had to sit there in our private messages trying to defend myself and explain that I wasn't making stuff up just because she wouldn't take my word for it. Honestly, it doesn't even surprise me. At the end of the day, the admins and mods are just regular people, which means they mess up and let their own biases get in the way. Every time I try to lighten the mood or throw a little joke around to keep things from getting too heavy, my posts get wiped and flagged as trolling—even if the person I was joking with totally got the vibe and didn't take it as an insult. You really can't expect any objectivity around here, it's just not happening. And speaking of being one-sided, if I can pivot for a second to talk about Michelle Alvarez8, I swear I haven't heard her say one single nice or positive thing about anyone since the day I joined this forum.
To me, it just looks like you didn't read my whole post—so you totally missed the point of what I was actually saying. Honestly? It’s nothing I haven't dealt with before, and I'm definitely not used to it.
loneraven25 said:...honestly, looking at the big picture here, this entire discussion shouldn't even be happening because it’s targeting the personal life and actions of a moderator, someone who just happens to volunteer his spare time on a forum, making things simpler for everyone to communicate... ...now, if someone were to actually prove that he's browsing these forum pages during his official working hours, then sure, you might have some grounds for suspicion... but as far as any other possible solutions go, I’m going to lean on his legal protections: The Code of Ethics for Federal Employees,
A federal employee is obligated, within the scope of their authority, to ensure the realization of rights and the respect of the integrity and dignity of citizens and other federal employees without discrimination or favoritism based on age, nationality, ethnic or social affiliation, linguistic or racial origin, political or religious beliefs or inclinations, disability, education, social status, gender, marital or family status, sexual orientation, or on any other basis.
So, I really want to point out that you all seem to be on a bit of a witch hunt here, and by doing so, you're unacceptably interfering with his professional duties and his right to work...
A federal employee has the right to protection from harassment—that is, behavior intended to, or which actually represents, an affront to the dignity of the employee, which creates fear or a hostile, humiliating, or offensive environment.
Moving from the big picture to what's actually happening here—you totally lost the plot, along with your signature. Aside from the fact that this subforum is literally built for comments, Brian Edwards6 himself was the one who told me to start the thread right here.
Looking at your post, I can only assume you either have no idea what you're talking about or you're just here to troll. The first option is pretty sad—though not really surprising—and the second one usually gets you a warning. ☕
One thing is certain—I'm the one who's going to get the strike, just because I told a moderator they were full of it. 🎉
Brian Edwards6 said:Since I've looked at the report you submitted, I don't see any evidence of what you're claiming, nor does it match the reason you gave for the report. If anyone interpreted my posts that way, I followed up with several messages to clear the air (which you are, of course, welcome to report as well). Besides, the rest of this thread addresses the issue directly, and I believe I've been perfectly transparent about my stance.👍
Some of those complaints are legitimate, and some aren't. When a complaint is valid, I adjust my approach to ensure users are satisfied. As for the idea that I should be removed from the moderation team—well, if that's what the community decides, I have no problem with it; that's just how a healthy forum operates.👍
Look, if I make a mistake and someone objective points it out to me, I don't see much point in getting angry, sulking, or throwing a tantrum about it.👍
The vast majority of what I do happens behind the scenes, where it remains invisible to most users while keeping things running smoothly.👍
So, I’m lying again? Really? 😁
Mystery: How did I end up reporting a message all by myself? Wait, before we go any further—did anyone else see that? Wait—didn't you tell me that was actually possible? 🤔
quietdriver3 said:But NSFW isn't really a warning, I guess. Like, what does that even mean? I actually tried to google it for an explanation, and it says: not safe for fucking. So, how does that actually relate to your hotlinking? 🤷
I mean, how is anyone supposed to believe that 80% when you're constantly lying? 🤷
And regarding the quote, I don't really see the issue. We could probably just break my sentence down into simple facts. Did you lie when you said you had a clean record? Yeah. Did you repeat that same lie twice (once in the banned corner and again in the appeal book)? Yeah. So, I guess it’s not just an acute thing, maybe more of a chronic problem.
A colleague already explained this in a previous post, I think.
Right now you’ve got 20 strikes, whereas before this latest incident you had 17. How far is that from those 10 or so strikes you were bragging about in your first post? Are we lying again?
Btw,
This actually just backs me up. If I say you were getting punished for stuff like this, and you're loaded with strikes, how exactly does that disprove my point?
I haven't forgotten. Just like I haven't forgotten the way you used to bully people whenever you felt like a crowd was forming behind you.
This is totally taken out of context, and it feels like a blatant attempt at trolling. Honestly, in the spirit of this new moderation direction, it actually handles a potential troll without needing more strikes or deleting posts.
Anyone can easily check that just by clicking the link.
OMG WTF LOL? I'm using Google to search for nsfw and the very first thing that pops up is a link to a Wikipedia article titled Not safe for work.
Here's the link to the Google results. Either you're lying about searching, or you have no clue how to use a search engine—or maybe you're just acting tough so you can jump down someone else's throat? Honestly, if you're moderating a sub-forum on the biggest forum in America, you really should know the basic internet slang being used on the site itself, FFS.
Brian Edwards6 said:If you find a private message that crosses the line, just click the little checkbox icon to file a report. That will flag the message and make it visible to the site administrators.👍
It wasn't even a question. The administration has full visibility into every single deleted comment within the Law subforum, so they can easily review the exact contributions I was describing.👍
Michelle Alvarez8 As specified by: There is really no need to drag this story out any further. This isn't a forum dedicated to documenting your shift changes, nor is anyone actually demanding an apology from you.
I am not attempting to make excuses here; rather, I am simply presenting my position. It is standard practice for a moderator to respond to public call-outs so that the administration can take a more objective view when rendering a final decision. And just so we are clear: whatever the outcome may be, I will respect it, as I always have.👍
Seriously? I had no clue. Must be some new feature—kind of like that Facebook button, right? 🙄
Brian Edwards6 said:I believe my private message was quite explicit, but I will reiterate for the sake of clarity. Law enforcement officers make mistakes—they are human, they perform their duties, and occasionally, ugly or unlawful things happen. However, we are talking about isolated individuals (even if even one is far too many) and rare circumstances (though even one is one too many). It is simply unfair to engage in constant sweeping generalizations. I am not suggesting that the situation you experienced didn't happen; I am saying it isn't the rule. In my experience doing this job every single day, I have personally never done anything like that, nor have I ever witnessed a colleague do so.👍
Regarding the recent deletion of comments on the controversial thread, those posts were removed because they were direct responses to a sanctioned comment—one which repeatedly insisted that filling the federal treasury is the sole purpose of police work. We have covered this ground several times already, citing various federal budget reports that clearly demonstrate what the actual contribution looks like. That was merely one part of the discussion; the other part involved the user being asked to restate their comment, which they did, leading us to continue the debate.👍
Your comment was nothing more than pure generalization, and since that was your entire contribution to that specific discussion, it was removed accordingly. You are welcome to participate in the Legal subforum just like anyone else, provided you follow the same rules as everyone else. And let me be clear: criticism is not unwelcome—there is plenty of it on that controversial thread and across other topics here—but barging into discussions the way you do is problematic. Dropping a single sentence followed by a smiley face and calling it a day doesn't cut it. In my view, that usually amounts to disrupting the flow of conversation, and if I'm wrong, I'll leave it to the administration to correct me.👍
Finally, while I admit I am subjective, I do not allow that subjectivity to interfere with my moderation. We are all subjective; everyone holds personal opinions on most topics and questions. However, there is a time and a place for every subjective opinion.👍
The only thing saving you here is the rule against posting private messages.
Brian Edwards6 said:I believe my private message was quite explicit, but I will reiterate for the sake of clarity. Law enforcement officers make mistakes—they are human, they perform their duties, and occasionally, ugly or unlawful things happen. However, we are talking about isolated individuals (even if even one is far too many) and rare circumstances (though even one is one too many). It is simply unfair to engage in constant sweeping generalizations. I am not suggesting that the situation you experienced didn't happen; I am saying it isn't the rule. In my experience doing this job every single day, I have personally never done anything like that, nor have I ever witnessed a colleague do so.👍
Regarding the recent deletion of comments on the controversial thread, those posts were removed because they were direct responses to a sanctioned comment—one which repeatedly insisted that filling the federal treasury is the sole purpose of police work. We have covered this ground several times already, citing various federal budget reports that clearly demonstrate what the actual contribution looks like. That was merely one part of the discussion; the other part involved the user being asked to restate their comment, which they did, leading us to continue the debate.👍
Your comment was nothing more than pure generalization, and since that was your entire contribution to that specific discussion, it was removed accordingly. You are welcome to participate in the Legal subforum just like anyone else, provided you follow the same rules as everyone else. And let me be clear: criticism is not unwelcome—there is plenty of it on that controversial thread and across other topics here—but barging into discussions the way you do is problematic. Dropping a single sentence followed by a smiley face and calling it a day doesn't cut it. In my view, that usually amounts to disrupting the flow of conversation, and if I'm wrong, I'll leave it to the administration to correct me.👍
Finally, while I admit I am subjective, I do not allow that subjectivity to interfere with my moderation. We are all subjective; everyone holds personal opinions on most topics and questions. However, there is a time and a place for every subjective opinion.👍
And once again—you're lying.
But hey, it's fine—we're used to the spin, the plants, the deletions, and the blatant lies whenever moderators who shouldn't be doing it start defending their own destructive behavior.
No need to keep this going because this isn't a thread about your resignation, nor is anyone asking you to justify yourself. It's just another shot in the dark. Take care. 👍