Posts by rustydrifter10

Frank Williams7 said:It feels weird here without ex-anais. She was one of the first people I actually noticed on this forum, and honestly, she’s one of the few who actually gets the point of a discussion. She always stuck to the actual exchange of ideas, which is a rare skill to find online. It’s definitely a loss for the community that she stepped away.

I have no idea why she left, but I know I’m personally done fighting windmills and getting caught up in parades of certain egos. You know the type—people using this place to vent their own frustrations, acting like they own some private little kingdom where everyone else is just a target for their baggage. And then there are their followers, too.

On that note, can someone give me a permanent ban? Just in case I ever get the urge to start posting in those ridiculous parades again. I don't want to be back in this internet daycare where grumpy teachers bully the "kids." :p Look, you're a good person, but you constantly get under my skin. After two years and over 3,000 posts, it just doesn't make sense anymore, and frankly, it makes me feel sick.

Enough is enough.

Big shoutout to ex-anais. And hi to SeaPod.

I didn't want to post this request in the Admin Q&A section; I'd much rather leave my final post right here on the main board. Please let it stay here. No more discussions. Thanks for the ban.

Justin Harris12 said:First off, don't go speaking for everyone else. If you personally have an issue, fine, own it, but quit using "we" when you're just one 🙂
single person on this
Reddit. Second, can we get a lock on this? 🤷

silentjackal52 said:I’ve been spending quite a bit of time lately scrolling through Reddit. I read and observe, yet I find myself sensing a distinct void. For some time now, we have been deprived of the insightful, wise, and seasoned commentary provided by our dear Vail. 😢 Furthermore, I no longer see the contributions of the wonderful ex anais. 😢 Then, by sheer coincidence, I stumble upon this specific subreddit—one I rarely visit—only to encounter mindless grievances directed at ex anais. While I haven't had the pleasure of meeting her personally, that doesn't mean I won't one day. However, I can say that many frequent Redditors and I have gained much to hear, read, and learn from the brilliant ex anais. She may be somewhat biting at times, but that is simply because she is an exceptionally honest, sincere, and decent individual. She is someone who insists on bringing the truth to light.

Ex anais, if you happen to read this, please return; your presence is missed. You are the very trademark of Reddit. Without you, Reddit is merely Reddit! 😉

silentjackal52 said:I’ve been spending quite a bit of time lately scrolling through Reddit. I read and observe, yet I find myself sensing a distinct void. For some time now, we have been deprived of the insightful, wise, and seasoned commentary provided by our dear Vail. 😢 Furthermore, I no longer see the contributions of the wonderful ex anais. 😢 Then, by sheer coincidence, I stumble upon this specific subreddit—one I rarely visit—only to encounter mindless grievances directed at ex anais. While I haven't had the pleasure of meeting her personally, that doesn't mean I won't one day. However, I can say that many frequent Redditors and I have gained much to hear, read, and learn from the brilliant ex anais. She may be somewhat biting at times, but that is simply because she is an exceptionally honest, sincere, and decent individual. She is someone who insists on bringing the truth to light.

Ex anais, if you happen to read this, please return; your presence is missed. You are the very trademark of Reddit. Without you, Reddit is merely Reddit! 😉

Rachel Jones8 said:Honestly, I don't even know why I'm bothering to argue with you, since this whole debate feels pretty pointless.
Since you clearly can't see how biased your moderation is, I don't think you're really the right person to be discussing objectivity with... you'd need someone from the outside looking in who actually has no skin in the game. You aren't that person. And honestly, you should probably read the entire thread, though I doubt anyone here has the energy or the time for that.
I figured you’d realize that and just stay out of a conversation that isn't going anywhere... because fighting with a bull is useless, and you've got horns while I don't.
But fine, I'll give an answer—not for your sake, but for everyone else wondering if I have a point.

And that's exactly the issue. You aren't "sorry" because you missed a chance to dig through my posts to find some tiny slip-up to justify a ban. You're "sorry" because you ignored countless posts filled with insults and accusations, letting this whole discussion spiral completely off the rails. People who actually wanted to talk about sleep methods or ask real questions are getting drowned out by people who get a free pass to just vent their outrage and attack other parents.
Is the post you flagged a violation or not? Who knows, maybe it is.
But... the post itself isn't a provocation; it's a response to one.

it might be hard for you or others to wrap your head around, but I put my schedule and my own needs second. Everything revolves around making sure he gets a decent amount of sleep, no matter what we're doing.

In this post, this person assumes it would be unthinkable for me or anyone else to put a baby first, which is insulting in its own way. They're acting like they're on a pedestal, as if their own needs and wants are the only ones that matter. As if nobody else has them. They act like they're just trying to help the kid "catch" a little sleep.
Given how this same person has been trashing other parents in previous posts, this looks hilarious to me—just another provocation in a long line of them. Why? Because the whole reason this thread exists is that parents want their kids to sleep; their child's rest is the priority. We aren't just trying to help them "catch" some sleep; we're trying to build a solid routine so sleeping becomes easy and high-quality without the constant struggle.

or this

Regarding that, okay, maybe it was unnecessary... but I wasn't saying anything that wasn't already said by the other side. I was just repeating things that should have been handled much earlier.

as for the other members you claim haven't been banned despite being provocative or insulting, I...I’ve noticed that with everyone, too. Anyone else? They should write from their own experience, you know? Talk about how the method actually feels to them. They always end up apologizing to people for getting too intense with their communication, but I don't really do that with you.

If you actually noticed that and still didn't call out how everyone's trashing parents, then you clearly weren't reading closely—or even paying attention to what you were writing.
Look, they weren't just sharing their own experiences or talking about how the method felt. They were straight-up attacking and blaming the parents.
You can actually see that pretty clearly if you just put in the effort and read the whole thread. Seriously, why wouldn't you?
The ladies on here have tried asking each other to tone it down—to stop attacking and judging parents. Even some of the people who don't even agree with the method themselves have stepped in to say, "Hey, let's chill." A moderator even jumped in to try and settle things. But did it work? Not really.
Did you seriously miss all that?

I mean, if they’re really getting under your skin, why do you keep replying? Especially when the thread is already dead?

Man, this whole thing about attacking parents is getting out of hand. Should we really just sit here and let people get bullied while the moderators stay silent? Why leave this topic open to the folks who are just looking for a fight against parents using CIO methods?

Regarding that "monstrous accusation" thing—I’ve noticed you have a habit of pinning accusations on people that they didn't actually make. You use such intense language that it sounds way scarier than reality, which just forces everyone to get defensive and spin around your provocations. Isn't that how it works?

My provocations? Hmm...
I still can't shake the feeling that people are accusing parents of just letting their kids cry for no reason just so they can watch Sulejman. It’s like they're reaching out just to rub salt in the wound and make the whole thing feel even more intense. Isn't that just cruel?

Take a look at this post, for example.

So, I'm looking at this. I think I can pull out a few bits from here too:

Everyone’s just looking out for their own little one. Honestly, judging parents who are just trying to step up and make things better for their baby? That's just wrong.
It’s one thing to have an opinion on the method itself. A lot of people aren't buying it and think it's a dud, which is totally fair. You've gotta respect that.

Look, people should say what they want about the method. If some think it sucks... fine, let them criticize it. Why not? There's always a better way to do things, and no single approach is ever perfect. Everyone just needs to find whatever actually works for them.
Honestly, just lecturing people about "those kinds" of parents isn't actually a discussion about parenting methods—it's just judging them. Right?
Let’s face it—no matter how much parents argue over which method to use or what steps to take, at the end of the day, they’re just being protective. They love their kids, and honestly? Everything they do is for them. Isn't that just how it works?

I haven't seen anyone on this thread labeling people as criminals like you're claiming.
🤷

1. In the post you just quoted, I’m not saying anyone is being branded a criminal.
2. Let me clear things up first:
I just get the feeling that because of this specific method and those few days of crying, some parents are basically being cast as villains—labeled as harsh or neglectful—regardless of anything else or how they actually treat their kids for the rest of their lives. That's just not fair.

"I get the feeling" — which means exactly that: it's my impression, not a claim that someone explicitly wrote it somewhere.
"cast as villains" = it seems to me (which I explained above) that people are perceiving them that way.
"labeling them as harsh and neglectful" — they are being labeled that way, and they are.

3. A lot of posts here link this method to child neglect and even mention calling CPS.

If it is, then why didn't you report the post?
And if anyone else insults you or someone else, or says anything you think is out of line? There's a little icon next to every user's name....

I don't know, maybe I'm just not built that way. It doesn't cross my mind (I've honestly never reported anyone). I guess I just hope the mods handle it, punish or warn whoever needs it, or at least notice when others call people out and step in to keep things civil.

More to come

Jack Rodriguez7 said:I’m not entirely sure if my curiosity about why this user got banned stems from his specific views, but honestly, if a high-quality contributor with right-leaning perspectives isn't welcome here, then those of us who lean a little bit in that direction probably won't find much value in this community either.

Nicholas King said:Since (that absolutely terrible, awful, subpar, mediocre, whatever 🤦boldwalker12>>) has stepped down from her moderation duties, I honestly feel it would be only polite to either rename this thread or just shut it down entirely.

Gary Cox2 said:Man, I'm bummed she stepped down from her mod gig.. she was honestly such a killer moderator.

Rachel Jones8 said:So, we're diving into parenting today. The topic is "Every Child Can Learn to Sleep." Just a heads-up for anyone out of the loop—this is all about a specific book. I'm totally down to chat about the method and swap stories if you guys want?
Honestly, this thread is just full of people jumping down the throats of parents who use certain methods. Sure, that approach isn't exactly the trendy way to do things nowadays, but plenty of people still stand by it. Shouldn't they be allowed to have a civil discussion without getting attacked or insulted every five seconds? The mods aren't doing anything about it either... and somehow, I'm the one walking away with a strike.

Here’s a quick rundown of the posts:

unknown: I honestly thought the whole idea was just telling the kid, "Hey, lay down and go to sleep," then walking out of the room. Turns out, it’s way more complicated than that, isn't it?

If my kid has been up all day and we’re dealing with those middle-of-the-night wakeups, isn't it totally fair to just want them to go down without the hour-long rocking sessions?
unknown: And who exactly decided you're the one to call the shots on what a baby actually needs?
Look, I don't get to decide when I'm available or not. That’s entirely up to her—how much access she gets and how she plays it depends on what I think is actually worth my time. Right?
Look, I’m his parent. As his mom, I’m the one deciding what’s actually best for him—but also what keeps my own sanity intact. Is it really worth fighting for hours every single night? Maybe I’d rather just take the win if he finally falls asleep.
If a kid finally learns how to self-soothe after a few days of crying, and then just breezes through their bedtime routine every night? I mean, if they're happy, sleeping well, and Mom isn't losing her mind, why are people making such a big deal out of it?
Look, nobody's saying everyone has to live that way. It's about having the right to choose for yourself, isn't it? And honestly, shouldn't the rest of us just accept people for who they are, even if we don't see eye to eye?

So you get to decide how much of your own baby you're allowed to give? What, like an employer being too demanding or some guy you just started dating that you need to take down a notch? Is this even real, or just someone trolling at this point?

Yeah, if someone decides to go with CIO or whatever, they’re basically choosing to take a hit in the short term because they know it'll pay off later. It's not about shutting a kid down; it's about actually making the method work. Right?
Honestly, I think the constant nitpicking and bashing around here is getting out of hand. Isn't it starting to feel more like straight-up trolling and insults?

Look, if a method isn't working for you or you just don't vibe with it, that’s totally fine. No big deal. But there’s really no reason to go after people who actually see the benefits. If a parent decides to try the CIO approach, they’re making a conscious choice to let their baby cry for those few minutes. It's an intentional move, right?

unknown: At least things are looking up now. You and your crowd really think you know the best way to break a kid just to get them to do what you want, right?From sleeping to whatever comes next... That’s exactly why you train a baby that way—it’s definitely not about just getting them to crash.(This wasn't even directed at me, but it really shows how XY treats people in a conversation... though I guess the whole point of the method is just to get the kid to sleep.)

unknown: I hear you, but I honestly don't think you should push a kid—or especially a baby—to do just anything, right? That's just insane..

Look, I'm his parent. I'm his mom, and at the end of the day, I'm the one deciding what's actually good for him—and honestly, what works for me too. Isn't it better if he just learns how to fall asleep instead of us fighting this battle for hours every single night?
Awesome, keep it going... At least someone's around. She’s definitely cashing in on that! (And we all know Mom is the one pulling the strings.)

Maybe some kid just wants to be carried around for an hour every single night until they drift off... whether they're a week old or a year old. They probably want you to carry them all through the night, too. But let’s be real, that's just not happening. There's just no way Mom can pull that off. And that’s exactly why she’s worried about getting her to sleep right away, isn't it? She doesn't want to deal with the fallout later.
unknown: Maybe she just doesn't know any better, you know? Mom won't even try it because that's when Sulejman or some other newbie is usually around, and they just end up nodding off... She'll be back at it tomorrow, hopefully she finally gets the hint!

unknown: Look, let’s be real—hearing that crying while I’m right there in the car with them sounds way different than just hearing a kid cry in another room. It feels like Mom just doesn't want to deal with the struggle of putting them down, so she’d rather "teach the baby to sleep on its own" just so she can get something else done!
ME: You see... you aren't actually talking about the method here. You're attacking the parents directly and implying that Mom is being selfish... like she's some villain who doesn't care about her baby and only cares about herself.
You aren't even trying to grasp that moms do this because they truly believe it's what's best for the baby—so they can have a peaceful bedtime every single night without the constant fighting, stalling, or crying (and yeah, for some, that's exactly the goal).

unknown:I guess I just can't help it. It looks to me like moms are doing this for their own convenience rather than the baby's benefit, because I just don't see how this helps the child.
ME: There you go... you just proved my point. You only see the mom's comfort.
After using the method, the baby goes to sleep peacefully every night. That’s what parents see as the baby's benefit. You don't have to agree with where the benefit lies; you just need to realize that you—and other parents—see the value in it and feel satisfied that the method worked.

ME: Hey, it's fine to have an opinion on the method. If people think it's bad, let them criticize it. Why not? There are always better ways, and no single method is perfect for everyone. Everyone should find what works for them.
But... lecturing "those kinds" of parents isn't a discussion about the method; it's just judging the parents themselves.
We should accept the fact that regardless of the specific steps or methods chosen... these people love their kids. They are caring parents, and everything they do is for their children.
I get the feeling that because of this method and a few days of crying, some parents are being branded as villains or labeled as cruel and neglectful... and honestly, that's just not fair.

unknown:Maybe I’d read everything and give you a detailed reply, but I don't have the time. I've got my hands full with my little one. I tried letting him try to sew his own costume for Halloween, but that didn't work, so now I'm just letting him cry over a needle and thread, maybe he'll get an idea for how to fix things through his sighs... (Is this trolling?...she claims you can't teach a baby to sleep, then provokes by saying she'll let hers "sew" on her own.
)
unknown:...and you and people like you think they'll just turn over and fall asleep once Mom stops bothering them...
Oh, sure! For Mommy! For dear old Mommy! And I couldn't care less what anyone thinks. I don't have any respect for those moms; to me, they're just thinking about themselves. Boohoo, what am I gonna do about it!

unknown:I told my husband the other day, no matter how hard it gets, anything is possible since I'm a realist... But I would never dream of doing something so awful. He could throw a bucket of ice water at me or lock me away from the baby, but he'd never let me mistreat the child if it meant doing something I don't believe is right in that moment.
It's crazy how reasonable a little kid can be when you actually try to reach them instead of breaking them down.
I can't help you if you can't empathize with that feeling. Maybe it doesn't matter to you when a baby cries, but it matters to me... (of course, it doesn't matter to any mother... they don't let a baby cry because they don't care.)

unknown: Believe it or not, there are moms out there who let their kids cry just so they can check in and show them they aren't alone! Like, seriously! Just adding salt to the wound to make the agony worse! Rock'n roll all the way!

In one previous post, she said moms let babies cry just so they can watch Sulejman, and in this last one, she says they check in just to rub salt in the wound and make the misery even worse.
I'm jumping on that thread to say:

ME: Yeah, it's not even just about letting them air commercials so people can catch Sulejman; they’re straight-up using ad breaks to rub salt in the wound. It's like they're actually enjoying watching everyone suffer...
I think you've gone a bit overboard.
And yeah, you totally missed the mark on being off-topic.

And for this last post, I am definitely getting 35 troll points. 😁

Who's the crazy one here?

Sure, the moderator isn't a fan of my approach. But regardless, a little objectivity wouldn't hurt.

Rachel Jones8 said:So, we're diving into parenting today. The topic is "Every Child Can Learn to Sleep." Just a heads-up for anyone out of the loop—this is all about a specific book. I'm totally down to chat about the method and swap stories if you guys want?
Honestly, this thread is just full of people jumping down the throats of parents who use certain methods. Sure, that approach isn't exactly the trendy way to do things nowadays, but plenty of people still stand by it. Shouldn't they be allowed to have a civil discussion without getting attacked or insulted every five seconds? The mods aren't doing anything about it either... and somehow, I'm the one walking away with a strike.

Here’s a quick rundown of the posts:

unknown: I honestly thought the whole idea was just telling the kid, "Hey, lay down and go to sleep," then walking out of the room. Turns out, it’s way more complicated than that, isn't it?

If my kid has been up all day and we’re dealing with those middle-of-the-night wakeups, isn't it totally fair to just want them to go down without the hour-long rocking sessions?
unknown: And who exactly decided you're the one to call the shots on what a baby actually needs?
Look, I don't get to decide when I'm available or not. That’s entirely up to her—how much access she gets and how she plays it depends on what I think is actually worth my time. Right?
Look, I’m his parent. As his mom, I’m the one deciding what’s actually best for him—but also what keeps my own sanity intact. Is it really worth fighting for hours every single night? Maybe I’d rather just take the win if he finally falls asleep.
If a kid finally learns how to self-soothe after a few days of crying, and then just breezes through their bedtime routine every night? I mean, if they're happy, sleeping well, and Mom isn't losing her mind, why are people making such a big deal out of it?
Look, nobody's saying everyone has to live that way. It's about having the right to choose for yourself, isn't it? And honestly, shouldn't the rest of us just accept people for who they are, even if we don't see eye to eye?

So you get to decide how much of your own baby you're allowed to give? What, like an employer being too demanding or some guy you just started dating that you need to take down a notch? Is this even real, or just someone trolling at this point?

Yeah, if someone decides to go with CIO or whatever, they’re basically choosing to take a hit in the short term because they know it'll pay off later. It's not about shutting a kid down; it's about actually making the method work. Right?
Honestly, I think the constant nitpicking and bashing around here is getting out of hand. Isn't it starting to feel more like straight-up trolling and insults?

Look, if a method isn't working for you or you just don't vibe with it, that’s totally fine. No big deal. But there’s really no reason to go after people who actually see the benefits. If a parent decides to try the CIO approach, they’re making a conscious choice to let their baby cry for those few minutes. It's an intentional move, right?

unknown: At least things are looking up now. You and your crowd really think you know the best way to break a kid just to get them to do what you want, right?From sleeping to whatever comes next... That’s exactly why you train a baby that way—it’s definitely not about just getting them to crash.(This wasn't even directed at me, but it really shows how XY treats people in a conversation... though I guess the whole point of the method is just to get the kid to sleep.)

unknown: I hear you, but I honestly don't think you should push a kid—or especially a baby—to do just anything, right? That's just insane..

Look, I'm his parent. I'm his mom, and at the end of the day, I'm the one deciding what's actually good for him—and honestly, what works for me too. Isn't it better if he just learns how to fall asleep instead of us fighting this battle for hours every single night?
Awesome, keep it going... At least someone's around. She’s definitely cashing in on that! (And we all know Mom is the one pulling the strings.)

Maybe some kid just wants to be carried around for an hour every single night until they drift off... whether they're a week old or a year old. They probably want you to carry them all through the night, too. But let’s be real, that's just not happening. There's just no way Mom can pull that off. And that’s exactly why she’s worried about getting her to sleep right away, isn't it? She doesn't want to deal with the fallout later.
unknown: Maybe she just doesn't know any better, you know? Mom won't even try it because that's when Sulejman or some other newbie is usually around, and they just end up nodding off... She'll be back at it tomorrow, hopefully she finally gets the hint!

unknown: Look, let’s be real—hearing that crying while I’m right there in the car with them sounds way different than just hearing a kid cry in another room. It feels like Mom just doesn't want to deal with the struggle of putting them down, so she’d rather "teach the baby to sleep on its own" just so she can get something else done!
ME: You see... you aren't actually talking about the method here. You're attacking the parents directly and implying that Mom is being selfish... like she's some villain who doesn't care about her baby and only cares about herself.
You aren't even trying to grasp that moms do this because they truly believe it's what's best for the baby—so they can have a peaceful bedtime every single night without the constant fighting, stalling, or crying (and yeah, for some, that's exactly the goal).

unknown:I guess I just can't help it. It looks to me like moms are doing this for their own convenience rather than the baby's benefit, because I just don't see how this helps the child.
ME: There you go... you just proved my point. You only see the mom's comfort.
After using the method, the baby goes to sleep peacefully every night. That’s what parents see as the baby's benefit. You don't have to agree with where the benefit lies; you just need to realize that you—and other parents—see the value in it and feel satisfied that the method worked.

ME: Hey, it's fine to have an opinion on the method. If people think it's bad, let them criticize it. Why not? There are always better ways, and no single method is perfect for everyone. Everyone should find what works for them.
But... lecturing "those kinds" of parents isn't a discussion about the method; it's just judging the parents themselves.
We should accept the fact that regardless of the specific steps or methods chosen... these people love their kids. They are caring parents, and everything they do is for their children.
I get the feeling that because of this method and a few days of crying, some parents are being branded as villains or labeled as cruel and neglectful... and honestly, that's just not fair.

unknown:Maybe I’d read everything and give you a detailed reply, but I don't have the time. I've got my hands full with my little one. I tried letting him try to sew his own costume for Halloween, but that didn't work, so now I'm just letting him cry over a needle and thread, maybe he'll get an idea for how to fix things through his sighs... (Is this trolling?...she claims you can't teach a baby to sleep, then provokes by saying she'll let hers "sew" on her own.
)
unknown:...and you and people like you think they'll just turn over and fall asleep once Mom stops bothering them...
Oh, sure! For Mommy! For dear old Mommy! And I couldn't care less what anyone thinks. I don't have any respect for those moms; to me, they're just thinking about themselves. Boohoo, what am I gonna do about it!

unknown:I told my husband the other day, no matter how hard it gets, anything is possible since I'm a realist... But I would never dream of doing something so awful. He could throw a bucket of ice water at me or lock me away from the baby, but he'd never let me mistreat the child if it meant doing something I don't believe is right in that moment.
It's crazy how reasonable a little kid can be when you actually try to reach them instead of breaking them down.
I can't help you if you can't empathize with that feeling. Maybe it doesn't matter to you when a baby cries, but it matters to me... (of course, it doesn't matter to any mother... they don't let a baby cry because they don't care.)

unknown: Believe it or not, there are moms out there who let their kids cry just so they can check in and show them they aren't alone! Like, seriously! Just adding salt to the wound to make the agony worse! Rock'n roll all the way!

In one previous post, she said moms let babies cry just so they can watch Sulejman, and in this last one, she says they check in just to rub salt in the wound and make the misery even worse.
I'm jumping on that thread to say:

ME: Yeah, it's not even just about letting them air commercials so people can catch Sulejman; they’re straight-up using ad breaks to rub salt in the wound. It's like they're actually enjoying watching everyone suffer...
I think you've gone a bit overboard.
And yeah, you totally missed the mark on being off-topic.

And for this last post, I am definitely getting 35 troll points. 😁

Who's the crazy one here?

Sure, the moderator isn't a fan of my approach. But regardless, a little objectivity wouldn't hurt.

Rachel Jones8 said:So, we're diving into parenting today. The topic is "Every Child Can Learn to Sleep." Just a heads-up for anyone out of the loop—this is all about a specific book. I'm totally down to chat about the method and swap stories if you guys want?
Honestly, this thread is just full of people jumping down the throats of parents who use certain methods. Sure, that approach isn't exactly the trendy way to do things nowadays, but plenty of people still stand by it. Shouldn't they be allowed to have a civil discussion without getting attacked or insulted every five seconds? The mods aren't doing anything about it either... and somehow, I'm the one walking away with a strike.

Here’s a quick rundown of the posts:

unknown: I honestly thought the whole idea was just telling the kid, "Hey, lay down and go to sleep," then walking out of the room. Turns out, it’s way more complicated than that, isn't it?

If my kid has been up all day and we’re dealing with those middle-of-the-night wakeups, isn't it totally fair to just want them to go down without the hour-long rocking sessions?
unknown: And who exactly decided you're the one to call the shots on what a baby actually needs?
Look, I don't get to decide when I'm available or not. That’s entirely up to her—how much access she gets and how she plays it depends on what I think is actually worth my time. Right?
Look, I’m his parent. As his mom, I’m the one deciding what’s actually best for him—but also what keeps my own sanity intact. Is it really worth fighting for hours every single night? Maybe I’d rather just take the win if he finally falls asleep.
If a kid finally learns how to self-soothe after a few days of crying, and then just breezes through their bedtime routine every night? I mean, if they're happy, sleeping well, and Mom isn't losing her mind, why are people making such a big deal out of it?
Look, nobody's saying everyone has to live that way. It's about having the right to choose for yourself, isn't it? And honestly, shouldn't the rest of us just accept people for who they are, even if we don't see eye to eye?

So you get to decide how much of your own baby you're allowed to give? What, like an employer being too demanding or some guy you just started dating that you need to take down a notch? Is this even real, or just someone trolling at this point?

Yeah, if someone decides to go with CIO or whatever, they’re basically choosing to take a hit in the short term because they know it'll pay off later. It's not about shutting a kid down; it's about actually making the method work. Right?
Honestly, I think the constant nitpicking and bashing around here is getting out of hand. Isn't it starting to feel more like straight-up trolling and insults?

Look, if a method isn't working for you or you just don't vibe with it, that’s totally fine. No big deal. But there’s really no reason to go after people who actually see the benefits. If a parent decides to try the CIO approach, they’re making a conscious choice to let their baby cry for those few minutes. It's an intentional move, right?

unknown: At least things are looking up now. You and your crowd really think you know the best way to break a kid just to get them to do what you want, right?From sleeping to whatever comes next... That’s exactly why you train a baby that way—it’s definitely not about just getting them to crash.(This wasn't even directed at me, but it really shows how XY treats people in a conversation... though I guess the whole point of the method is just to get the kid to sleep.)

unknown: I hear you, but I honestly don't think you should push a kid—or especially a baby—to do just anything, right? That's just insane..

Look, I'm his parent. I'm his mom, and at the end of the day, I'm the one deciding what's actually good for him—and honestly, what works for me too. Isn't it better if he just learns how to fall asleep instead of us fighting this battle for hours every single night?
Awesome, keep it going... At least someone's around. She’s definitely cashing in on that! (And we all know Mom is the one pulling the strings.)

Maybe some kid just wants to be carried around for an hour every single night until they drift off... whether they're a week old or a year old. They probably want you to carry them all through the night, too. But let’s be real, that's just not happening. There's just no way Mom can pull that off. And that’s exactly why she’s worried about getting her to sleep right away, isn't it? She doesn't want to deal with the fallout later.
unknown: Maybe she just doesn't know any better, you know? Mom won't even try it because that's when Sulejman or some other newbie is usually around, and they just end up nodding off... She'll be back at it tomorrow, hopefully she finally gets the hint!

unknown: Look, let’s be real—hearing that crying while I’m right there in the car with them sounds way different than just hearing a kid cry in another room. It feels like Mom just doesn't want to deal with the struggle of putting them down, so she’d rather "teach the baby to sleep on its own" just so she can get something else done!
ME: You see... you aren't actually talking about the method here. You're attacking the parents directly and implying that Mom is being selfish... like she's some villain who doesn't care about her baby and only cares about herself.
You aren't even trying to grasp that moms do this because they truly believe it's what's best for the baby—so they can have a peaceful bedtime every single night without the constant fighting, stalling, or crying (and yeah, for some, that's exactly the goal).

unknown:I guess I just can't help it. It looks to me like moms are doing this for their own convenience rather than the baby's benefit, because I just don't see how this helps the child.
ME: There you go... you just proved my point. You only see the mom's comfort.
After using the method, the baby goes to sleep peacefully every night. That’s what parents see as the baby's benefit. You don't have to agree with where the benefit lies; you just need to realize that you—and other parents—see the value in it and feel satisfied that the method worked.

ME: Hey, it's fine to have an opinion on the method. If people think it's bad, let them criticize it. Why not? There are always better ways, and no single method is perfect for everyone. Everyone should find what works for them.
But... lecturing "those kinds" of parents isn't a discussion about the method; it's just judging the parents themselves.
We should accept the fact that regardless of the specific steps or methods chosen... these people love their kids. They are caring parents, and everything they do is for their children.
I get the feeling that because of this method and a few days of crying, some parents are being branded as villains or labeled as cruel and neglectful... and honestly, that's just not fair.

unknown:Maybe I’d read everything and give you a detailed reply, but I don't have the time. I've got my hands full with my little one. I tried letting him try to sew his own costume for Halloween, but that didn't work, so now I'm just letting him cry over a needle and thread, maybe he'll get an idea for how to fix things through his sighs... (Is this trolling?...she claims you can't teach a baby to sleep, then provokes by saying she'll let hers "sew" on her own.
)
unknown:...and you and people like you think they'll just turn over and fall asleep once Mom stops bothering them...
Oh, sure! For Mommy! For dear old Mommy! And I couldn't care less what anyone thinks. I don't have any respect for those moms; to me, they're just thinking about themselves. Boohoo, what am I gonna do about it!

unknown:I told my husband the other day, no matter how hard it gets, anything is possible since I'm a realist... But I would never dream of doing something so awful. He could throw a bucket of ice water at me or lock me away from the baby, but he'd never let me mistreat the child if it meant doing something I don't believe is right in that moment.
It's crazy how reasonable a little kid can be when you actually try to reach them instead of breaking them down.
I can't help you if you can't empathize with that feeling. Maybe it doesn't matter to you when a baby cries, but it matters to me... (of course, it doesn't matter to any mother... they don't let a baby cry because they don't care.)

unknown: Believe it or not, there are moms out there who let their kids cry just so they can check in and show them they aren't alone! Like, seriously! Just adding salt to the wound to make the agony worse! Rock'n roll all the way!

In one previous post, she said moms let babies cry just so they can watch Sulejman, and in this last one, she says they check in just to rub salt in the wound and make the misery even worse.
I'm jumping on that thread to say:

ME: Yeah, it's not even just about letting them air commercials so people can catch Sulejman; they’re straight-up using ad breaks to rub salt in the wound. It's like they're actually enjoying watching everyone suffer...
I think you've gone a bit overboard.
And yeah, you totally missed the mark on being off-topic.

And for this last post, I am definitely getting 35 troll points. 😁

Who's the crazy one here?

Sure, the moderator isn't a fan of my approach. But regardless, a little objectivity wouldn't hurt.

amberskipper3 said:Wrong.
That kind of stuff isn't even penalized on Reddit.

Steven Chavez2 said:Well, my post wasn't trying to provoke anyone. Especially since it was a direct response to someone who had already set themselves up with this incredibly rigid, "us vs. them" attitude toward non-smokers.

On another note, there's one thing that strikes me as... well... a bit ridiculous. On one hand, you guys are busy deleting benign little comments just because they might be perceived as a provocation. But then, on the other hand, when someone starts a thread about a personal struggle, you often let these absolutely brutal comments fly at the author. Look, I'm fine with the latter—honestly, I hate it when people are treated like they're made of glass, and let's be clear, this forum isn't some therapy support group—but then it makes no sense why there's such intense fear regarding the first part. Let's emphasize those words: "perceived" and "potential." I'm telling you, people aren't made of paper.

A troll—now that's a provocation, clearly. That's a different story altogether.

Steven Chavez2 said:Well, my post wasn't trying to provoke anyone. Especially since it was a direct response to someone who had already set themselves up with this incredibly rigid, "us vs. them" attitude toward non-smokers.

On another note, there's one thing that strikes me as... well... a bit ridiculous. On one hand, you guys are busy deleting benign little comments just because they might be perceived as a provocation. But then, on the other hand, when someone starts a thread about a personal struggle, you often let these absolutely brutal comments fly at the author. Look, I'm fine with the latter—honestly, I hate it when people are treated like they're made of glass, and let's be clear, this forum isn't some therapy support group—but then it makes no sense why there's such intense fear regarding the first part. Let's emphasize those words: "perceived" and "potential." I'm telling you, people aren't made of paper.

A troll—now that's a provocation, clearly. That's a different story altogether.

Steven Chavez2 said:Well, my post wasn't trying to provoke anyone. Especially since it was a direct response to someone who had already set themselves up with this incredibly rigid, "us vs. them" attitude toward non-smokers.

On another note, there's one thing that strikes me as... well... a bit ridiculous. On one hand, you guys are busy deleting benign little comments just because they might be perceived as a provocation. But then, on the other hand, when someone starts a thread about a personal struggle, you often let these absolutely brutal comments fly at the author. Look, I'm fine with the latter—honestly, I hate it when people are treated like they're made of glass, and let's be clear, this forum isn't some therapy support group—but then it makes no sense why there's such intense fear regarding the first part. Let's emphasize those words: "perceived" and "potential." I'm telling you, people aren't made of paper.

A troll—now that's a provocation, clearly. That's a different story altogether.

Steven Chavez2 said:Hmm... with all due respect, I have to disagree. I had one of my posts wiped clean once. No heads-up, no warning, nothing. Just gone.

Steven Chavez2 said:I’m not talking about starting threads that just spiral out of control until everyone forgets what the hell the topic was even about in the first place. I don't support that at all. No way. What I am talking about—in my opinion—is a reasonable degree of flexibility. Like I said before, I think the strictness here is just overkill. For instance, punishing someone because they’re in a thread discussing Person A, who smokes, and Person B, who doesn't, and they make a comment about smokers in general? Come on. If someone made a comment about Formula 1 drivers, sure, I'd get it—that's just being off-topic or maybe trolling... but this is just taking a specific subject and putting it into a broader context, which actually helps people understand the original poster's point. I'm just using that as an example because it's fresh in my mind.

It feels like we're wasting so much energy on this long list of rigid rules that makes this whole place feel stiff and way too unspontaneous for a typical forum vibe. At the end of the day, people spend more time worrying about accidentally "slipping up" than actually enjoying a good conversation with others...

Adam Parker2 said:Regarding the unknown, looking at the big picture, I find myself agreeing. Most topics are delicate, though certainly not all of them.
One really needs to recognize those nuances, along with the natural flow of a discussion.

Roughly speaking, cutting off a massive thread of posts—where the debate is actually flowing, well-argued, and stays on track despite strong opposing views—is just unnecessary, especially when people keep their tensions within civilized bounds.

Demanding such rigid adherence to a topic, without allowing any tangential connections (that infamous off-topic behavior), basically turns a conversation into a series of monologues.
It becomes: "this is my view," "well, here is mine," "it’s like this for me..."—and by the time everyone on the forum has had their say, we might as well just hand over the keys.
At that point, you aren't having a forum discussion anymore; you're just reading comments.

If a discussion crosses the line of politeness, a moderator should be able to evaluate the specific problematic posts and remove only those—rather than nuking the last 50 messages.
It's particularly odd, given the current practice here, to leave the insulting posts visible while punishing and deleting the response.
That essentially sends the message that you shouldn't respond to someone who insults you; instead, you should just hit that "report" button.
It's a bit of a silly way to handle things.

If they have to pluck ten pages out of a single thread just to "bring it back on track," then what is the point of moderation? A simple automated script could probably do that job just fine, and nobody would complain.
--------------------------------------

As for emojis, I haven't seen rows of icons on the unknown, as boldwalker12 mentioned. I don't go overboard myself, though I do use them occasionally to set the tone.

Using them in moderation helps the atmosphere—since they act as a tonal guide for the person you are actually addressing, rather than just every reader. A dry sentence can be misinterpreted in a dozen different ways, which can send a conversation off the rails.
There isn't any form of social communication via text where emojis aren't a valid option.
I assume no one expects you to type out "grrr" or "hahahhaa" to modulate your tone, nor do they expect everything to be written like a legal deposition.

Adam Parker2 said:Regarding the unknown, looking at the big picture, I find myself agreeing. Most topics are delicate, though certainly not all of them.
One really needs to recognize those nuances, along with the natural flow of a discussion.

Roughly speaking, cutting off a massive thread of posts—where the debate is actually flowing, well-argued, and stays on track despite strong opposing views—is just unnecessary, especially when people keep their tensions within civilized bounds.

Demanding such rigid adherence to a topic, without allowing any tangential connections (that infamous off-topic behavior), basically turns a conversation into a series of monologues.
It becomes: "this is my view," "well, here is mine," "it’s like this for me..."—and by the time everyone on the forum has had their say, we might as well just hand over the keys.
At that point, you aren't having a forum discussion anymore; you're just reading comments.

If a discussion crosses the line of politeness, a moderator should be able to evaluate the specific problematic posts and remove only those—rather than nuking the last 50 messages.
It's particularly odd, given the current practice here, to leave the insulting posts visible while punishing and deleting the response.
That essentially sends the message that you shouldn't respond to someone who insults you; instead, you should just hit that "report" button.
It's a bit of a silly way to handle things.

If they have to pluck ten pages out of a single thread just to "bring it back on track," then what is the point of moderation? A simple automated script could probably do that job just fine, and nobody would complain.
--------------------------------------

As for emojis, I haven't seen rows of icons on the unknown, as boldwalker12 mentioned. I don't go overboard myself, though I do use them occasionally to set the tone.

Using them in moderation helps the atmosphere—since they act as a tonal guide for the person you are actually addressing, rather than just every reader. A dry sentence can be misinterpreted in a dozen different ways, which can send a conversation off the rails.
There isn't any form of social communication via text where emojis aren't a valid option.
I assume no one expects you to type out "grrr" or "hahahhaa" to modulate your tone, nor do they expect everything to be written like a legal deposition.

Adam Parker2 said:GENERAL OBSERVATION:
While this forum has a duty to protect personal data, the issue arises when certain moderators prioritize protecting the "feelings" of posters and their supporters—being overly sensitive toward anyone sharing a "difficult situation"...

Good grief—is this a medical clinic or a public forum?

Something that might hurt an emotional poster during a tough time isn't necessarily universally offensive.
Plus, there are ultra-sensitive individuals facing hardships who aren't being aggressive jerks about it.

There are far better ways to redact private info than just dumping a bunch of vague, incoherent facts that leave you scratching your head.
It’s honestly ridiculous to expect people not to react to that.
By penalizing or deleting sensible posts, isn't the message essentially: "smart people should leave, while the fools should rush in"? Correct me if I'm misreading the situation.
Such a practice is unacceptable. Where does that leave the overall quality of this forum?

ps:
The post above is meant to be general.
I won't be commenting on my own lack of specifics, nor will I mention those women, the nonsense, or Nicholas King.
I wasn't addressing the banned user, nor am I seeking a comment or a reply,
but her praise for the moderator only reinforced my opinion of her.

Steven Chavez2 said:I'm with you on that.

Generally speaking, one of the reasons (aside from the fact that I have way too much going on in my actual life to get sucked into endless internet debates) that I don't enjoy posting here is this overly rigid approach to moderation. Look, I get it. You have to penalize blatant insults, doxxing, advertising, spam, or bot garbage. That makes sense.

But when someone starts hovering over you like a hawk, throwing warnings and threatening bans like they're wielding a stick, just because you thought a post was funny and responded with a laughing emoji? That is, quite frankly, nothing more than mindless authoritarianism. What’s the big deal? Someone says something, you find it funny, you drop an emoji. It’s not rocket science. Online discussions are supposed to mirror real life, where someone says something and the other person just laughs. Or am I supposed to write out, "Haha, yes, I find your comment incredibly witty, I also ________ (insert whatever the author said here)." Give me a break. It's ridiculous.

On the flip side, I actually agree with the mods that off-topic clutter should be cleared out. If the thread is about a favorite craft beer, there’s no reason to pivot into a debate about fuel efficiency in a Ford F-150. But, if the topic is about a conflict between a non-smoker and her boyfriend who smokes, and the conversation drifts toward the broader dynamic between smokers and non-smokers, then you really ought to show some flexibility. Looking at the bigger picture can actually help the original poster navigate her specific issue. It’s the same logic as how a broad discussion about the pros and cons of Japanese versus German engineering might actually help someone deciding between a Mazda or a BMW.

Bottom line: whenever I come here to type something, I feel like I'm walking on eggshells. Don't get me wrong—I'm not advocating for chaos or lack of etiquette. In fact, I value discipline and order immensely; even digital spaces shouldn't be a free-for-all. But you mods could really benefit from a little more nuance.

I don't have any illusions that this post will change anything, but since this section was created for complaints and feedback regarding moderation, I believe I have a democratic right to voice my opinion—and I think I've done so politely enough. I just hope no one hits me with another infraction because I went off-topic by having boldwalker12 veer into a critique of the entire moderation team instead of sticking to the original point. Yes, there's a bit of irony in that. Life happens everywhere, including on internet forums.

Best regards. 🙂

Elizabeth Davis said:thread

Henry Kim3 said:Look, my way of communicating is pretty straightforward: I have zero patience for people who back that kind of nonsense. You know the type—people who say stuff like, "Oh, it’s totally fine to reinterpret religious icons to fit a modern agenda," or "Yeah, everyone should just cheat on their spouse, why not?" That sort of thing is just wrong. Honestly, if anyone wants to take issue with me for saying that, they can go ahead and deal with the consequences.

Let’s be realistic here. I ended up getting those blocks from both the IRS and the FTC because...
I just couldn't stand the way certain users on these forums were being insulted.
Look, I’ll admit it—I probably went overboard two or three times. It’s just that our moderators here tend to overreact to absolutely everything.
I feel like my every word is being scrutinized under a microscope, and they're just letting it happen.
In my opinion, he’s just spitting venom. It really got under my skin back then. Now, I guess it doesn't bother me quite as much.
Honestly, I couldn't care less. People can talk all they want; it doesn't change anything for me.
They’re really just tarnishing their own reputation at this point.

I had that clone account running for maybe two months or so. I probably dropped about 50 comments on it, but honestly, I was mostly just lurking and reading everything being said. I didn't really feel any particular urge to actually get involved in most of the discussions.
I guess I’m just not really in the mood for that right now. I mostly just want to read and observe.
I suppose I’ve been watching how people write, how they carry themselves, and how they react to things lately. It's all quite something.

I haven't really been communicating in this particular manner throughout those fifty or so posts. Actually,
I haven't even bothered getting involved in any of those arguments or pointless flame wars.
I really don't have the energy for all this. I’d just state my piece and leave it at that.
Whatever. I guess it doesn't really matter. I'll probably just say it again anyway: everyone deserves a second chance, and honestly, everyone is...
I suppose we’d receive them, except for those who committed truly CARDINAL offenses.
Mistakes happen. But seriously, man, blocking me for good just because I...
Maybe he was just trying to stand his ground after the mods had already pretty much written him off.
Defending it? Honestly, that’s just a waste of time...

I’ll say it again: just give me one more shot. If I end up talking out of turn or being a nuisance, then fine.
Just leave me out of it. That's fine by me. At least then I'll know for sure that I don't deserve third place.
Maybe there's a chance... I guess. 😉

Henry Kim3 said:Look, my conclusion is that immoral behavior was being permitted, since I've been warned a billion times for "moralizing," and I'm always told to stop this or that. I mean, honestly, it makes you wonder. Every single time I pointed out that it isn't right for someone to cheat, or lie, or mess around with marriage and family, there was a wave of forum users attacking me, followed immediately by your warnings telling me to stop lecturing everyone...

Fine, it's true, maybe I went overboard sometimes, but man, just think about it yourself—how many times have I been insulted by everyone just because I made a STATEMENT that cheating isn't okay, or things like that, while nobody else faced any consequences, yet all the heat gets directed at me... 😢

In that response of mine, I admit I went too far in the SECOND sentence, but honestly, I was already incredibly frustrated by everything that had been happening.

On the other hand, just think about it and tell me if I wasn't right. You go out with someone for New Year's, everyone is drunk, things are casual, and you have no idea if you're hooking up with someone who is sick or not... Honestly, as bad as it sounds, I really didn't mean anything by it... Because I see plenty of people around me who have suffered from that, and I don't want that for ANYONE...

I suppose I should say that I’m sorry if I ever went too far... maybe. 😢

Well, look, back when I first joined this forum, I was pretty much a complete novice. It had only been a few months, and I honestly didn't have a clue about the rules or how things worked here. But, I guess things change. I’ve been around for a year or two now, and I’ve gone through almost all the rule PDFs, so I intend to follow them strictly, God willing. I’m not some kind of unreliable person you can't reach an agreement with. As for those times when I was acting out and giving you guys a hard time... well, my apologies for that.

dustyranger64 Asks:
It doesn't seem like you actually care about this. Bringing up two failed marriages within a family just feels like a hollow point that doesn't mean anything at all. As for ŽuD, I suppose it carries some weight, but for LJES, it really means nothing.

Whatever. Honestly, I'd like to come back, and I can give you my word that whatever bullshit happened at the start won't be happening anymore.

Look, you can't just pin all the blame on me. Not when none of you actually bothered to sit down and have a conversation with me to point out where I went wrong, what I messed up, or even just try to find some common ground. I mean, I’ve been a moderator on forums before, so I know how this whole thing works. I'll admit it—I overstepped. I went too far. But honestly, you guys didn't give me, or even yourselves, a fair shot at fixing things, especially since I know I've crossed the line more than once. We're only human; we make mistakes and we regret them. I have zero intention of causing more trouble or being a nuisance here. If that means I don't write a single comment at all, then fine. All I really want is to be able to read the discussions, and that's it.

Well, Bliss gave her take, sure... But seriously, guys, maybe just think about this for a second and lift this
partial ban, because it feels completely pointless to me. I spend a lot of time here with
you all, yet I'm being restricted like some guy getting kicked out of a Starbucks for smoking.

Henry Kim3 said:Look, my conclusion is that immoral behavior was being permitted, since I've been warned a billion times for "moralizing," and I'm always told to stop this or that. I mean, honestly, it makes you wonder. Every single time I pointed out that it isn't right for someone to cheat, or lie, or mess around with marriage and family, there was a wave of forum users attacking me, followed immediately by your warnings telling me to stop lecturing everyone...

Fine, it's true, maybe I went overboard sometimes, but man, just think about it yourself—how many times have I been insulted by everyone just because I made a STATEMENT that cheating isn't okay, or things like that, while nobody else faced any consequences, yet all the heat gets directed at me... 😢

In that response of mine, I admit I went too far in the SECOND sentence, but honestly, I was already incredibly frustrated by everything that had been happening.

On the other hand, just think about it and tell me if I wasn't right. You go out with someone for New Year's, everyone is drunk, things are casual, and you have no idea if you're hooking up with someone who is sick or not... Honestly, as bad as it sounds, I really didn't mean anything by it... Because I see plenty of people around me who have suffered from that, and I don't want that for ANYONE...

I suppose I should say that I’m sorry if I ever went too far... maybe. 😢

Well, look, back when I first joined this forum, I was pretty much a complete novice. It had only been a few months, and I honestly didn't have a clue about the rules or how things worked here. But, I guess things change. I’ve been around for a year or two now, and I’ve gone through almost all the rule PDFs, so I intend to follow them strictly, God willing. I’m not some kind of unreliable person you can't reach an agreement with. As for those times when I was acting out and giving you guys a hard time... well, my apologies for that.

dustyranger64 Asks:
It doesn't seem like you actually care about this. Bringing up two failed marriages within a family just feels like a hollow point that doesn't mean anything at all. As for ŽuD, I suppose it carries some weight, but for LJES, it really means nothing.

Whatever. Honestly, I'd like to come back, and I can give you my word that whatever bullshit happened at the start won't be happening anymore.

Look, you can't just pin all the blame on me. Not when none of you actually bothered to sit down and have a conversation with me to point out where I went wrong, what I messed up, or even just try to find some common ground. I mean, I’ve been a moderator on forums before, so I know how this whole thing works. I'll admit it—I overstepped. I went too far. But honestly, you guys didn't give me, or even yourselves, a fair shot at fixing things, especially since I know I've crossed the line more than once. We're only human; we make mistakes and we regret them. I have zero intention of causing more trouble or being a nuisance here. If that means I don't write a single comment at all, then fine. All I really want is to be able to read the discussions, and that's it.

Well, Bliss gave her take, sure... But seriously, guys, maybe just think about this for a second and lift this
partial ban, because it feels completely pointless to me. I spend a lot of time here with
you all, yet I'm being restricted like some guy getting kicked out of a Starbucks for smoking.

Drew Lee7 said:Instead of actually penalizing Sea Princes for being a total troll, I’m the one getting hit with penalty points just for reporting her.

And of course, the moderator in charge is Apophis.

So, this user is playing dumb, acting like she didn't clearly write what she wrote.

Her little argument is basically:

It's perfectly fine to comment on this lady. What isn't okay is continuing to bother her with rude comments after she's already asked to be "left alone."

But look at the actual text:

when a middle-aged man approaches me and stares and/or makes a comment.

When we're talking about harassment, she's implying that just staring counts as harassment. The sentence says "stares and/or makes a comment." That means the comment is optional.

But instead of holding her accountable for trolling, they punish me for calling her out.

I have never seen such absolute nonsense in my life.

Megan Hernandez2 said:Look, I wasn't planning on weighing in here, but since the debate is already heating up, I might as well.

@Phiber, could you clarify what actually constitutes an insult under the "gloves" rule and what the penalty is? If insults are against the rules, they should be penalized. Using this vague "gloves" terminology just leaves too much room for interpretation and nonsense.

Laura Mendoza2 said:They wouldn't have even been able to see it because I hadn't officially submitted the post yet!

Laura Mendoza2 said:What really gets under my skin about this whole situation is that the source isn't just some random person on Reddit blowing off steam; it’s coming from someone who claims to be "vetted," "trusted," and all that other nonsense. It's even worse because this individual actually has access to certain bits of my private data—information that a regular user wouldn't have any business seeing.
....
I honestly think someone out there will get where I'm coming from when I say this, but it just feels fundamentally wrong—it makes me so incredibly uneasy—to see people tossing my private information around so recklessly and carelessly just because they have the opportunity to do it.