lonehawk172 said:Take this post, for example—this kind of thing is only allowed for a select few users on the entire Forum. It wouldn't even fly with most Moderators, who would have handed out a warning card immediately in this situation.
I fail to see what makes this specific post problematic, nor can I fathom who would issue a warning or why such an action would even be warranted here. 🤷
lonehawk172 said:Conservatives are being persecuted. If you can't see that, then it's definitely not my problem, and I have no intention of spinning my wheels here because it's a waste of breath. Plenty of people smarter, more constructive, and more articulate than me have tried and achieved absolutely nothing. Personally, I have enough common sense to not waste my time on something that is essentially the equivalent of tilting at windmills.
Sean Cooper65 is just one more victim in a long line of selective enforcement by the moderator clique over at Politics.
I wouldn't exactly call myself a right-winger, yet somehow I find myself caught in the crosshairs just the same. It seems to be a recurring theme in my life; I end up facing a ban at least once every month. Most recently, it was because I dared to voice an opinion regarding Politics.
Jerry Rogers6 said:That's just classic behavior. Honestly, if you look closely, you can see how history repeats itself, especially if you check out my second post
Just ignore the crowd that's clearly here on a specific assignment again 😁
What kind of Task are we even talking about here? Or perhaps, is it you all who are actually facing the Task?
Michelle Alvarez8 said:I can't help but notice that the posts Steven King74 linked actually have some serious grounds for sanctions—meanwhile, I’m out here getting flagged for posts that are way more benevolent than those.
It certainly isn't coming from slybison8 or Robert Hall7, is it?
Steven King74 said:That sex offender's statement to the media claims his bar was closed over a mere $2 change. The IRS hasn't confirmed that. The media only reports one side of the story. It's entirely possible the owner is lying. While bringing up his past doesn't have a direct connection to the case, it does say something about his character and why his word shouldn't be taken at face value. Alexis's post is actually one of the more reasonable ones regarding Politics, even on this topic since the merger. At least she found some links and made an effort to write something argumentative. The real question regarding where we should detect slybison8's bias is: why did he choose to attack *this* specific post and accuse a female Forum user of having a totalitarian mindset, yet he doesn't do the same to much worse posts by Branko and Ferrari? Why didn't Ferrari go Googling whether Linić has children? Isn't that also a totalitarian mindset? And this isn't the first time he attacks Alexis the moment she finds any reason to justify herself to the administration. Look, I know one single post can't prove anything. But the issue is the continuity of this behavior, which has been going on for years. I could provide examples here, but I'm not going to dig through the entire archive from several years ago. I've already wasted too much time on this. And we have to consider that a good portion of the Politics threads have been deleted and are only accessible to the administration.
Fine, but while I'm being called a communist and told to move to China or North Korea, what am I supposed to do? I live here. The consequences of political decisions will hit me in the face, not those people in Canada or Vanguard. It bothers me when outsiders tell me I live in a dictatorship. Why don't you come back here and deal with this mess with us? I bet they'd sing a different tune once they saw how high the taxes are here compared to what they don't have to pay. It's easy to talk trash on a Forum, but once they log off, their entire connection to this country vanishes.
Sam Wright21 Furthermore, your claims about being on a "blacklist" and therefore too afraid to post, along with the assertion that Alexis hasn't written anything because she's "scared of getting banned," are pure paranoia. Just look at this thread—is it turning red from all those bans?
slybison8 is calculating. There are no bans because nobody gave him a direct reason. But since that can't be proven, I’ll drop that part of my complaint.
It’s a matter of taste. To me, the aforementioned users are among the most obnoxious Forum users (excluding drota13), and I’ve definitely noticed them acting condescendingly. Here is an example:
And what exactly was it that I "saw"?
I wanted to point out that you’re essentially thinking like a totalitarian if you believe a Prime Minister’s speech—or any great leader's address—is so sacred that it shouldn't be interrupted by boos.
And what’s the alternative here? Are you just bitter because someone had enough sense to leave America before things went south? It’s honestly staggering to me that slybison8 sees the reality of this situation more clearly than those of you attempting to shield Linić. ☕
Steven King74 said:That sex offender's statement to the media claims his bar was closed over a mere $2 change. The IRS hasn't confirmed that. The media only reports one side of the story. It's entirely possible the owner is lying. While bringing up his past doesn't have a direct connection to the case, it does say something about his character and why his word shouldn't be taken at face value. Alexis's post is actually one of the more reasonable ones regarding Politics, even on this topic since the merger. At least she found some links and made an effort to write something argumentative. The real question regarding where we should detect slybison8's bias is: why did he choose to attack *this* specific post and accuse a female Forum user of having a totalitarian mindset, yet he doesn't do the same to much worse posts by Branko and Ferrari? Why didn't Ferrari go Googling whether Linić has children? Isn't that also a totalitarian mindset? And this isn't the first time he attacks Alexis the moment she finds any reason to justify herself to the administration. Look, I know one single post can't prove anything. But the issue is the continuity of this behavior, which has been going on for years. I could provide examples here, but I'm not going to dig through the entire archive from several years ago. I've already wasted too much time on this. And we have to consider that a good portion of the Politics threads have been deleted and are only accessible to the administration.
Fine, but while I'm being called a communist and told to move to China or North Korea, what am I supposed to do? I live here. The consequences of political decisions will hit me in the face, not those people in Canada or Vanguard. It bothers me when outsiders tell me I live in a dictatorship. Why don't you come back here and deal with this mess with us? I bet they'd sing a different tune once they saw how high the taxes are here compared to what they don't have to pay. It's easy to talk trash on a Forum, but once they log off, their entire connection to this country vanishes.
Sam Wright21 Furthermore, your claims about being on a "blacklist" and therefore too afraid to post, along with the assertion that Alexis hasn't written anything because she's "scared of getting banned," are pure paranoia. Just look at this thread—is it turning red from all those bans?
slybison8 is calculating. There are no bans because nobody gave him a direct reason. But since that can't be proven, I’ll drop that part of my complaint.
It’s a matter of taste. To me, the aforementioned users are among the most obnoxious Forum users (excluding drota13), and I’ve definitely noticed them acting condescendingly. Here is an example:
And what exactly was it that I "saw"?
slybison8 certainly has some sense, but as bluecyclist64 mentioned, it isn't about holding a grudge; it's all about fairness.
Steven King74 said:That sex offender's statement to the media claims his bar was closed over a mere $2 change. The IRS hasn't confirmed that. The media only reports one side of the story. It's entirely possible the owner is lying. While bringing up his past doesn't have a direct connection to the case, it does say something about his character and why his word shouldn't be taken at face value. Alexis's post is actually one of the more reasonable ones regarding Politics, even on this topic since the merger. At least she found some links and made an effort to write something argumentative. The real question regarding where we should detect slybison8's bias is: why did he choose to attack *this* specific post and accuse a female Forum user of having a totalitarian mindset, yet he doesn't do the same to much worse posts by Branko and Ferrari? Why didn't Ferrari go Googling whether Linić has children? Isn't that also a totalitarian mindset? And this isn't the first time he attacks Alexis the moment she finds any reason to justify herself to the administration. Look, I know one single post can't prove anything. But the issue is the continuity of this behavior, which has been going on for years. I could provide examples here, but I'm not going to dig through the entire archive from several years ago. I've already wasted too much time on this. And we have to consider that a good portion of the Politics threads have been deleted and are only accessible to the administration.
Fine, but while I'm being called a communist and told to move to China or North Korea, what am I supposed to do? I live here. The consequences of political decisions will hit me in the face, not those people in Canada or Vanguard. It bothers me when outsiders tell me I live in a dictatorship. Why don't you come back here and deal with this mess with us? I bet they'd sing a different tune once they saw how high the taxes are here compared to what they don't have to pay. It's easy to talk trash on a Forum, but once they log off, their entire connection to this country vanishes.
Sam Wright21 Furthermore, your claims about being on a "blacklist" and therefore too afraid to post, along with the assertion that Alexis hasn't written anything because she's "scared of getting banned," are pure paranoia. Just look at this thread—is it turning red from all those bans?
slybison8 is calculating. There are no bans because nobody gave him a direct reason. But since that can't be proven, I’ll drop that part of my complaint.
It’s a matter of taste. To me, the aforementioned users are among the most obnoxious Forum users (excluding drota13), and I’ve definitely noticed them acting condescendingly. Here is an example:
And what exactly was it that I "saw"?
Well, of course they seem loathsome to you; they don't go stomping through threads looking for a fight, whereas you seem eager to criminalize mere words—that's simply your personal preference. On top of that, it's obvious you can't stand the fact that they have opinions and express them without sugarcoating, and you'd love nothing more than to see them punished for it.
You haven't the slightest clue what true condescension looks like, much like a dim-witted child; you certainly didn't provide a helpful example.
Steven King74, I’ve gone ahead and clicked almost every single one of those links you posted above, and frankly, it leads me to the conclusion that you wouldn't be able to handle even an ounce of open discourse; if you actually had any real power in your hands, you’d likely stifle any dissenting opinion immediately.
Champion, I’m at a bit of a loss here—who exactly is being persecuted so terribly? Could you perhaps provide some specifics? Who is targeting whom? Are we talking about the persecution of "conservatives," or is it the "liberals" who are under fire?
Steven King74 said:I am filing a formal complaint against the moderator slybison8 regarding the Politics sub-forum. I believe this moderator is abusing his authority to manipulate the forum rather than actually moderating it. Specifically, he uses his privilege to hand out warnings only to those who disagree with him in threads where he participates, while posts from Forum users who share his views remain untouched, even when reported. I will explain why.
The final straw was the decision to issue a warning for an ad hominem attack in the following post:
First, I should mention that the Forum user I was arguing with called *me* Scum first, so it wasn't an insult. I was a bit surprised by the warning given the type of posts usually seen in this thread, but upon reflection, I suppose it passes. I used an argument about origin to refute someone's view; if we're being pedantic, sure, call it an ad hominem. Fine. However, my reaction to that was simply reporting the post made by that Scum, which is what I was responding to in the first place.
And yet, that post received no warning. I must point out that I used the exact same rhetoric as the Forum user Scum. If refuting an opinion based on where someone is from in Canada is an ad hominem, then it is also an ad hominem to claim that my way of thinking only exists in North Korea or China.
Incidentally, this post is the opinion that started all of this.
I received a symbolic one-point penalty for the post. Normally, I wouldn't waste my time with an appeal, but I believe the issue goes much deeper. First, I see this warning as slybison8 flexing his muscles—a signal that I should watch what I say whenever he's around. Second, I believe I have ended up on slybison8's blacklist because of this post from another thread. It isn't a coincidence that slybison8 warned a post where I mentioned Canada and the diaspora interfering in our domestic affairs; he feels personally targeted by the same criteria since he lives in the US, and Forum users frequently call him out on it. To understand the full context of this problem, one would need to examine the thread currently titled Fiscalization and Tax Discipline - The Political Mission of Minister Linić. and slybison8's behavior in this same thread. It’s vital to point out that while these two threads were merged, the original one functioned with surprising quality for a US politics subforum. Users were responding to one another in an orderly, well-argued manner without trolling; arguments were backed by evidence. In reality, slybison8 was the biggest troll in that discussion. Here are a few examples.
Forum user Alexis, offering a counterargument regarding a cafe closing due to a mere $0.35 difference, writes this post where she reveals the actual owners of the establishment, suggesting that information provided by only one side should be taken with a grain of salt. slybison8's reaction is extremely heated, accusing her of having a "secret police" mentality just for daring to present that information. If we want to be blunt, the argument stands—it’s a classic ad hominem attack, even if it does highlight the questionable nature of the source claiming a business closed over pennies. But why doesn't slybison8 react as aggressively to posts like this first one and this second one, where he accuses Linić and the users defending him of being losers because they don't have children? Isn't that also, in every sense, an ad hominem argument? It’s also worth noting that Alexis hasn't posted once since slybison8's outburst, likely because she expects a disciplinary warning or a ban. slybison8 achieved his goal: he drove her away from the thread. Finally, here are two of slybison8's posts from that thread, where he attempted to derail what was otherwise a civil debate through sheer trolling ( first and second ).
What kind of Moderator calls other users' posts "pathetic, miserable, cheap, and shameless demagoguery"? Who describes America as a totalitarian, despotic dictatorship? Who can't write a single post without mentioning communism, neo-communism, or secret police tactics? Who uses their authority to settle scores with those who disagree?
I’ve tried to illustrate the problem with these examples, and I hope you see what I mean. These aren't the only instances of such behavior; it happens across many threads, but I simply don't have the time or the energy to go through them all in detail. That should be the administration's job. In closing, I am directing this complaint to the administration. I have no intention of getting into a back-and-forth with slybison8 here or anywhere else. Handle that in your own corner. Honestly, I’m not holding my breath that this complaint will yield results, but I might as well try. The US politics section should be a serious space, but I have to admit, it's functioning poorly. It is a massive mistake to appoint Moderators where some pull left and others pull right, then expect balance. Proper moderation means defining clear, unambiguous rules and enforcing them regardless of who is involved. After opening this thread, I feel like there's nothing left for me to ask of the US politics section, because I know I'd have to weigh every word just to avoid giving slybison8 a reason for revenge. Perhaps one day, if the administration decides to get things in order, they will appoint well-meaning Moderators who take the job seriously—rather than having a Moderator who is the very first person I want to put on my ignore list.
I click on this supposedly "exceptionally heated reaction," and frankly, I don't see anything particularly intense about it at all. 🤷
Regarding Alexis's post, she merely swapped the arguments—since the individual in question is a convicted sexual predator, it seems perfectly reasonable to shut down his business due to $8.00 excess. However, dredging up past sins that have nothing to do with the specific case is just a way to justify an unjustifiable action. If that reminds anyone of old-school surveillance tactics, so what? She has every right to voice her opinion.
Besides, if you can't see that attacking someone based solely on where they live—especially when you lack actual arguments—is incredibly low, then I truly don't know what to tell you.
Furthermore, your claims about being on some "blacklist" and therefore too afraid to post anymore, along with the assertion that Alexis stopped writing "because she's scared of getting banned," are pure paranoia. One only needs to look at the thread—is it practically bleeding red from constant bans?
To be honest, neither slybison8 nor Robert Hall7 are breathing down anyone's neck; in fact, they are generally pleasant company, unlike many of the other blowhards here.
I felt compelled to step in because those two are my favorites, along with drota13. And it's precisely because they aren't blowhards in the slightest.They never lecture others like a teacher addressing a wicked or dim-witted child, which is the standard style of most other Moderators, and quite frankly, it drives me up the wall.
Look, I’m fairly certain this specific user's writing style isn't being stifled by any moderator oversight; rather, it's simply that slybison8 lacks a true law-enforcement mindset.
Take the thread author, for instance—he posts absolute nonsense that even a stray dog wouldn't touch, yet he provides evidence through his own two posts, only to be slapped with a one-point penalty for one of them. 😍 It really speaks volumes about the supposedly "noble" soul of PL.
It’s honestly laughable that they're using him as a "case study." Besides, you can clearly see that a mob of disgruntled users hasn't descended upon this topic, because there aren't any—which is quite telling in its own way.
Aside from him, we have Robert Hall7 on the thread, and she certainly doesn't carry herself like some heavy-handed authority figure either.
Personally, I find this arrangement quite refreshing; it seems to me that the two of them, along with Vojky, are unique personalities among the moderators—they aren't constantly breathing down your neck or manufacturing unnecessary tension.
Steven King74, since I participated in the thread regarding Minister Linić before it was merged with this one, I can tell you that you’ve simply laid out a series of sweeping generalizations here, attempting to bolster them with links that ultimately fail to hold water. I clicked through every single one of them, and not a solitary bit of evidence supports the claims you're making.
slybison8 writes with a certain level of intrigue; he doesn't harass those who disagree with him and isn't a nuisance at all—all things considered, he's easily one of the best Moderators we've ever had.
I honestly find it hard to believe that you chose to go after him like this, especially with such an interminable, rambling post filled with nothing but baseless accusations. 😲
It seems some of you are just bothered by the fact that he expresses his views without sugarcoating them; frankly, it feels like you'd actually prefer if he were charged with a verbal offense. That is where the real issue lies, rather than some trivial little reputation score for a post that most people would have gladly given thirty points to.
To be perfectly honest, I don't see why people shouldn't use the harshest language possible to describe what is happening here in America, particularly regarding the actions of that traitor Linić, while the rest of the political scum remains unresponsive to these absurdities as if they were in a trance—and a good portion of the mindless masses is actually cheering him on.
It isn’t merely about the endless debates and flame wars that I personally find quite entertaining (🤣); it’s the simple fact that whenever I go hunting for any scrap of information, Reddit is always the first thing to pop up in my search results.
There is an incredible density of specialized knowledge concentrated here. Honestly, I don't think there's any corner of the internet that can rival this place for sheer depth of insight. If I can't find an answer anywhere else, I find it here—like that time I figured out how to strip the trim off a Chevy Spark in under half an hour thanks to a single thread.
So, despite all the chaos, I believe this community holds immense value. It would be a genuine tragedy if a place like this were to simply vanish one day because the servers are running on such prehistoric hardware.
At this point, just send over your routing number; if we manage to scrape together enough $67, we'll know the end is near and we can finally call it quits.
Or, for what it's worth, you could look into offering a way for users to become shareholders. If the capital isn't there, perhaps rights could be exercised through a system of direct democracy, allowing us to elect the administration ourselves.
Well, I just got back from a three-day ban, and honestly, I was feeling quite energized and ready to tear into some gender-skeptics on one of those endless flame wars.
But alas, the entire damn site has been down all day. 🙂
I’d suggest you people set up a PayPal account or something so we can toss a few bucks toward fixing this pathetic excuse for a server. Personally, I’d be more than happy to chip in, and I suspect I’m not the only one feeling this way.
It wasn't entirely off-topic, though I suppose you could argue that in certain pockets 🤷
I mean, eight straight pages of pure noise? That just isn't right 😢
Yet, amidst the chaos, there were some genuinely insightful comments that shed light on why certain people are digging in their heels against Zillow, and conversely, why implementing it in this specific format is actually necessary.
It’s honestly baffling to me why at least eight pages of this thread were wiped clean without a single word of explanation, just a blanket, indiscriminate deletion.
Larry Wilson25 said:Wait, why does it feel uncomfortable for you? Is it just that feeling of losing control over everything?
---- tapatalk
It’s more about the inability to focus—which was already a struggle for me—and this general sense of restlessness. Plus, there's the shift in headspace. Fortunately, it rarely happens. 😬
Charles Peterson3 said:Falling in love is mostly a virtual illusion... much like how most people mistake a pile of nothing for actual love.
I think living a promiscuous lifestyle works fine for certain people... after all, sex can be a tool for plenty of things, even if for most people it’s just a pleasant way to satisfy basic instincts—much like their version of "love."😍 The only real catch is trying not to hurt anyone in the process. It's a tough balance to maintain a solid moral compass without stepping on others along the way.
One should ideally find enough people who share the exact same intentions; then everything stays smooth, provided there’s no deception involved. I view sex as a sort of energetic exchange. To me, living a promiscuous life seems incredibly draining, as you end up cycling your energy through far too many people too frequently.
It’s entirely possible for that initial rush of infatuation to mature into genuine love. In fact, that transition is really the whole point, isn't it? To me, infatuation always feels somewhat inferior—it’s an unsettled, restless sensation that I find quite uncomfortable, actually.
Justin Garcia7 said:What’s the spiritual side to this "issue"? Is this just a common thing for people who are more spiritually inclined? 😁 Or is it simply true that once someone reaches a certain level of psychological maturity, they stop falling in love? Is it because they realize infatuation isn't real—just a mental projection where you see perfection in someone else, even when reality tells a different story? I’m not talking about mental health issues or asexuality here. I mean that feeling where someone is physically attractive and incredibly sweet, yet something is just missing, leaving you thinking you might actually be better off on your own. 😁 Some people argue you can only find the person you truly need once you've reached full self-actualization. Then there's the whole twin flame theory, which suggests that two flames have to go through their own individual journeys before they can finally reunite, whether that happens in this life or the next.
It could be any of those things, or perhaps it's just a fragmentation of emotion. It’s as if one's feelings are so scattered that they lack the necessary "density" required to coalesce into actual love.
I am experiencing this myself, and I don't identify as asexual (which shouldn't be viewed as a psychological disorder). In my view, I haven't reached self-actualization yet, or perhaps it's some sort of karmic design at play.😁
Let’s look at a specific detail, something almost trivial in the grand scheme of things. I have no desire to share a bed with anyone, yet by the time morning rolls around, I find myself possessing absolutely zero patience for another soul. So, how exactly am I supposed to navigate that? 😕
Amanda Allen4 said:The vast majority of these self-proclaimed "cultural elites" are nothing more than leftists—and there’s a very simple reason for that: they can't actually make a living from their "art," so they rely entirely on government subsidies. It’s a racket! They need a specific kind of administration that is willing to foot the bill for their lifestyle. The leftist political class and these "culture vultures" exist in a perfect, parasitic symbiosis—at least until the productive members of society finally decide they can't carry the weight anymore.
Oh, please. As if a highly developed capitalist society or a modern social democracy functions without state subsidies, established social safety nets, or any institutional support for the arts. Is that how you think culture works? 🙂
It’s all just "bread and circuses" rhetoric, which is exactly what certain people here seem to champion, so I suppose we shouldn't be surprised by the current state of affairs. Of course, the working man is the one doing the heavy lifting for $833! He’s the one paying the taxes. By that logic, he should probably just be grateful for the existence of NBC and PBS.
Eric Jones8 said:Haha, so now I'm being cast as some kind of alcoholic? 😁 No... I mean, it's perfectly normal for me to have a drink here and there... I suppose I might have misunderstood the question that was asked of me.. (now I'm coming across as a drunkard 😲 🙄 )
Unless you're drinking enough to drown a horse, alcohol shouldn't be the thing wrecking your sleep. It occurs to me, though—smoking is a much more likely culprit for insomnia, since a nicotine addict is essentially going through withdrawal cycles while they try to drift off.