Posts by briskjackal5

wow, that is just absolutely wild.

I really hope this manages to grab everyone's attention.

-Steve

Emily Smith6 said:The FBI has officially filed an indictment against the unnamed counterpart

Speed traps everywhere!

Just being honest, I guess

-briskjackal5

So, I’m looking at this doctor standing right outside the cancer center, and he’s saying there aren't even any radiologists available. You've got a woman with cancer who needs radiological imaging, but it’s just not there, so he can't even start her treatment. Period.

That’s basically the reality of things over there right now.

He’s even saying the whole crew—surgeons, gynecologists, the entire medical staff—might just start handing in their resignations.

Then you have this other doctor saying she's being accused of "refusing to do her job," and apparently, those kinds of attacks are really getting to her.
https://hr.n1info.com/n1-tv-live-stream/
She’s insisting she handles all the emergency MRIs and the preoperative scans, claiming she's never denied anyone that service and nobody has been left hanging without it, or whatever.

It honestly feels like a huge group of doctors is rallying behind the exact same sentiment.

It’s a total disaster.

-briskjackal5

George Robinson43 said:I'm not sure which specific news outlets are reporting this, but there is a video floating around online of this clown openly bragging about his arsonist tendencies.
It isn't just tragic for the film production company, which should absolutely sue this pyromaniac for damages; it’s also a disgrace because people like this belong behind bars, yet here we have one serving as a county executive.

Yeah, truly unbelievable stuff.
I mean, you really can't expect much from that crew, right? We’re all pretty used to the usual suspects—the corruption, the crime, the sheer incompetence, and the total lack of class—but somehow they still manage to (uncomfortably) catch us off guard.

-briskjackal5

I’ve gotta say, these bans are honestly such a massive issue overall.
If we’re talking about 5, 10, or even 25 points, I don't really care if someone misses the mark once in a while.
But when you're looking at 300 or 500? There absolutely has to be an explanation—something clear, well-founded, and visible at every level so that any reasonable person could actually agree with it.

It’s a pretty big red flag that with this kind of scoring and general approach, things have gone totally off the rails. Honestly, it’s gone so far that we’re seeing situations where people would get hit just for having an actual, reasoned debate about scientific topics like the coronavirus.

I mean, imagine someone acting like the Mayo Clinic expert—basically the top scientist and the most reliable straight-talker on epidemiology in the Western world—providing the most constructive and logical arguments possible, only to get slapped with bans (!) and lose 100 or 200 points for nothing (!!). In a normal conversation, under normal circumstances, nobody should be getting axed like that.
I’ve seen one ban, then another, then a third, then a fifth... before you know it, you're looking at ten or twenty of them... :D

They really shouldn't be running things this way. It's super obvious that there's a huge amount of tilt happening here and a total departure from all standard modes of sensible conversation. I really think this needs to be fixed.

-Joe

Giving 500 points on Politics because I actually agreed with what another user said—it wasn't even controversial, just a really straightforward point.

That other comment was actually posted by a moderator, by the way.

Plus, they threw in some criticism about the culture of violence—which is honestly such a standard talking point you hear in basically every public debate out there, no matter who's talking.

I mean, if we aren't allowed to critique people's actions, habits, or the culture itself anymore, then I don't see how any real conversation can happen; and if that's the case, then maybe Bubba should get a few hundred points too.

In my opinion, this whole thing where people overreact and then try to hand out punishments—the way mod KLCCLK keeps pushing things—is just totally crazy.

I know nobody wants to deal with this.
Believe me, I don't want to either! :D But, yeah, I didn't really intend to jump in here, I just felt like I had to.

And honestly, it would be great if we could just have a normal conversation without SJWs breathing down our necks with their uninvited mental gymnastics coming out of nowhere.
You’ve got a moderator who acts so out of line and behaves so irrationally—and since the other guy was right in the middle of the discussion—that this is eventually going to have to be addressed.

The sooner the better, but in the meantime, you might as well take a look at these little escapades.

-briskjackal5

I guess you skipped over the reply because there aren't any official final numbers tallied up somewhere, and since you don't have a running total either, I’ll just estimate and round it up to 100. Honestly, even a rough scale is enough to get the point across.

So, there are, let's say, about a hundred moderators. Everyone has the power to delete, close threads, issue warnings, hand out bans, and all that stuff.

Out of those hundred mods, about 50% of all complaints regarding bans for half of the posts—and actually, basically ALL the bans on the entire Reddit—are tied back to the actions of just ONE single moderator.
It’s really hard for me to wrap my head around a scenario where one guy, in just one subreddit, carries as much weight as the other 99 combined. It feels... I don't know, maybe a little (okay, a lot) excessive, right?

I totally get that different subreddits operate differently, and that mods vary too, but I really feel like an imbalance this huge points to a specific underlying problem.
In my opinion, having things tilted that heavily feels unjustifiable under any kind of reasonable scrutiny.

When it comes to how moderation actually works in practice, the criteria used for these actions often seem more than just questionable—they're downright sketchy. I know this firsthand because I read and participate in those discussions, and I've seen unpopular opinions getting punished simply because they are unpopular, and for no other reason at all. Plus, the principles you were asking about in the post quoted above are often impossible to even explain or define. This leads to a kind of "self-censorship" where you basically have to guess how much truth or how many "normal" perspectives you can actually share. And we can see what a "normal perspective" means—like with the whole COVID topic—if someone didn't want to believe certain things earlier but explained themselves politely, they still got hit.

I really don't think that's right. That specific example isn't even the main point; it's more about the general situation, because similar things are happening in other threads, which is pretty obvious if you look at the ratios I mentioned.

-Stipe

That’s spot on.
It feels like we've just had a massive influx of oceans worth of anti-vaxxers, conspiracy theorists, and honestly, just straight-up spammers flooding this thread; I mean, it's definitely reached that point where actual, normal conversation is becoming impossible.
No matter how much stuff gets deleted, I guess it’s still not being cleared out nearly enough. 😁

-Joe

I mean, you can't really take a firm stand for or against something if you don't even have a clue what's actually going on, right? 😁

-briskjackal5

Gerald Chavez7👍

-Stipe

Nicholas King said:Well, if they hadn't been in power, he wouldn't have become a minister at all—partly thanks to those little hands raised by the Moesta faction.

Honestly, if you’re trying to figure out how the Republican Party actually operates, you don't need an analyst... you basically just need a crystal ball. 😁

All those folks like Marić, Tolušić, Žalac, and the rest of the Republican Party 6.0 squad—I mean, who could have possibly seen that coming?

-briskjackal5

He’s basically saying he’s paying for everything with loan money that hasn't even hit his bank account yet.
And who knows if he even applied for the thing in the first place?
So, yeah, he's counting on money he's just... expecting to show up.
Plus, there's this whole plan involving the proceeds from selling an apartment he hasn't even put on the market yet.

I mean, that's certainly one way to explain things, I guess! A real masterclass in logic right there.😁

-briskjackal5

Ehej, oh man, I think we totally missed another big name here!

She’s actually right there in the party leadership. Used to be a Cabinet Secretary, too.
It just wouldn't feel right to leave her out of the conversation, I guess.

Gabrijela žalac!

-Stipe

Edward Cooper2 said:The Republican Party's "ethics committee" is an oxymoron. It's basically pig iron—for those of you who don't speak English properly.

Man, I just remembered another one.
Šuica. 😁

And then you've got Maletićka right there with her, too. I think those headlines where she promises 180,000 new jobs just popped up again recently.

Well, where are they?!

-Stipe

silentnomad7 said:Are there actually any women in the Republican Party?

PHOTO: Check out the expressions on the faces of these Republicans while Andrej Plenković rolls out the party platform.

Well, practically speaking, they do!

I mean, I can think of at least three women who are pretty much part of the Republican Party.

One of them didn't bother re-registering with the party, which I guess is kind of expected lately now that she's lost a few elections. But hey, she could jump back in any second!

Then there was one who used to lead the whole thing, but I think they ended up kicking her out through some ethics committee or something like that.

And the third one? Well, she's currently dealing with some legal trouble regarding power plants.

So, yeah, you really can't say they don't have any...

-briskjackal5

Maria Barnes said:Can you give me some actual examples? There’s no need to name specific moderators right now. We’re talking about moderation principles and how they're applied in practice.

I don't want to sit here and count them all by hand, but do you have any idea roughly how many moderators are running this Reddit?

-Stipe

driftingtinker said:After watching tonight's Open Forum, there's really no question about how the investigation eventually landed on Ćorić.

I only caught a few short clips of it.
How so?

-briskjackal5

Hey, can you actually show me the source(s) for that?

-briskjackal5

Maria Barnes said:I've heard this sentiment in several places, so let's address it.

What exactly do you think won't fly? To what extent does this actually stop you from writing freely?

If you aren't breaking the basic rules we all agreed to during registration—like no insults, no harassment, no malice—then you shouldn't feel restricted at all.

If there is an issue, we will work to fix it.

In the meantime, please keep political topics aside. Politics is a breeding ground for endless conflict. It's true: we do lean in a bit harder there because of past experiences. Things spiral into extremes and chaos too fast, and the decent users end up leaving. So, just don't bring politics here. There will be other times. Reddit isn't a political forum; it's a general interest site, and politics is just one tiny segment.

Personally, I think a little bit of "self-censorship" is totally normal whenever you're socializing.
Some of our impulses just don't really fit with how society works, and the reactions from people (or certain groups) show us that. So, we adapt.

That in itself isn't really "good" or "bad" until you look at the specific situation.
Generally speaking, it's often just a normal, even desirable, process.

I don't think that should apply to holding back your ideas from others, though. But honestly, I don't think anyone should be getting worked up over someone thinking an Audi is better than a Passat or an Octavia, or that Hajduk is better than Dinamo, or that Kant is overrated. And I don't think self-censorship is even that common in those cases.
If it is happening somewhere, maybe the mods are tripping? I haven't noticed anything like that myself. Even the anti-vaxxers have been sharing their "opinions" for years. 😁

On the flip side, though, it's super hard to just push political stuff aside.

Lately, you've had situations where people write stuff starting with "the fact is," and they state things that are flat-out wrong or just badly interpreted, and that gets allowed to slide. Meanwhile, having a cultured, rational conversation to correct them actually gets penalized. Discussions about material stuff—things where you can actually reach a consensus—get shut down and punished.
It seems to me that acting like that is exactly how you drift into extremism; that *is* the extreme. It moves away from constructive, sensible talk and just scatters the "normal crew."

Sure, that can technically "work" that way, but I really don't think it's a great foundation or a good direction to go in.

-Steve

Is this the same unknown from the post above?

Man, it’s like he completely lost his mind. I mean, seriously. 😁

-briskjackal5