Posts by Bradley Sanders4

Let’s stop playing games here.

First off, I’m done engaging with Mume’s constant spinning of things. For those who missed it: there was a thread where I mentioned that people who are easily swayed are basically just mindless sheep, and apparently, that was interpreted as me hating on religious people. I literally included two disclaimers, and even the other people in that thread told him he was overreacting and that my point was perfectly clear.

Secondly, regarding Megan Torres' response. We looked at JPK's post where he takes a subtle jab at A. border, and yeah, it was a low blow. But like I said, we don't ban border posts. If A. border hadn't responded by basically saying "you're an idiot and my dad has a better car than yours," he wouldn't have been cardboarded. Bottom line: we decided the post didn't warrant a ban, and we aren't going to start banning people just to be "even." In a more strictly moderated sub, he would've been gone. Also, Medin's post where he claims pilgrims are uneducated isn't grounds for a ban either. I don't agree with him—I think it's a huge generalization and honestly pretty easy to debunk—but I can't just ban people for having shitty opinions.

If you don't have anything else to add, I think we can call this discussion over. 🤷

1. I didn't insult any believers, whether directly or otherwise.
2. I haven't used my moderator status to win arguments.
3. Because of that, I don't see any reason to apologize.

Are you planning on apologizing for maliciously twisting my words?

Mume, stop spinning this. This whole thread went nuclear the second a few posters started implying that making fun of a glowing statue was some kind of collective atheist middle finger to believers. Before that, people were just having a decent conversation. Now, they’re still having a conversation—they're just talking about everything and anything under the sun.

Megan Torres, I honestly don't get why you're struggling to follow my explanation. You brought up j.a. in your opening post, so that's what I was responding to. Seriously, I have zero clue how Euripides fits into anything we're talking about here, which is exactly why I asked you for an example. I thought you were complaining about specific moderation on the ZK boards, not trying to kick off some massive debate about some vague definition of trolling on the forum in general. 🤷

What exactly would you want to see lead to JPK or Teddy being cardboarded?

I have no clue where you dug up Euripides from. What does she even have to do with this thread, and why does she bother you? That’s on you. I don't even know which post by Mume you're talking about. If you've got a bone to pick, just drop the link.

Megan Torres said:If you want me to look at the context, maybe try looking at it yourself. He didn't just wake up one day and start bashing atheists in general; he was reacting to constant posts and generalizations claiming believers are all morons.

I am looking. That's exactly why his posts aren't being cardboarded for generalizing about atheists. It's the same reason nobody else is getting cardboarded for their posts generalizing about believers.

Since people kept complaining that "trolling" was too vague during previous appeals, we’ve introduced custom explanations for warnings. Now you can see exactly why someone actually got flagged.

From the thread:

Megan Torres said:Personally, I find this post offensive, even if it technically fits within the forum rules. 🤷 😁

I’m also sick of this pile of garbage posts that insult me for being an atheist forum member, yet they don't get banned. 🤷 😁

They're right on the edge. Honestly, my rule is that it's better to let borderline posts slide than to go banning everyone. People end up getting a pass either way too often.

The specific posts you pointed out to me don't deserve a ban. Look at them in the context of the conversation. Someone says something totally illogical, and others reply by telling them their logic sucks. Is it trolling? Sure. Is it legitimate? Yeah. Fine. We'll just debate it.

As for Eurifesa, you're starting to sound like a full-blown defense attorney. We could go down that rabbit hole, but then we'd be doing it for everything. Let's not expand the argument, especially when it targets specific users. Is someone being insulted? Is there a flame war? If her posts bother you, just report them.

Megan Torres said:Ace gets banned because of her strikes, while Jevge, who’s actually picking fights, stays online. 🤷

They both hit 70 points. Ace got banned because she already had a 45-point strike on her record.

Look, we almost never hand out strikes just for light trolling or messing with people. We don't do that. What we *do* consistently crack down on are direct insults, aggressive trolling, and attacking the moderation team.

Dammit, I’m copy-pasting this thing, I swear I’m checking it, and yet somehow I still manage to screw it up. 🙈

Joshua Williams82 said:So, what, the moderators here don't actually have any influence? I mean, I guess it's possible they just don't care, but it feels like there's zero oversight happening. Maybe I'm overthinking it, but it seems like nobody is actually running the show around here. 🤣
And here I was under the impression that they were actually the ones tasked with weighing their words—you know, the people responsible for deciding what actually constitutes an insult and what doesn't. I guess I was mistaken about how much weight their specific roles carry in that regard.

They’re the ones pulling the strings and setting the whole tone of the room. They're the ones who aren't afraid to give you a sharp sting if you step out of line. I guess you could say they're the ones keeping the kids disciplined, making sure they stay quiet and don't make a scene.🤷

It seems like this has become a pretty common trend lately. I guess you see it happening more often than you used to. 🤷

Honestly, I think we barely interfere at all. Especially when it comes to those "nudges." It’s pretty obvious if you look closely. I might as well put a massive disclaimer over the entrance to Zelenskyy's headquarters: Abandon all hope, ye who enter here. 😁 😁 😁

Look, Jose Williams, my bad. I deleted that because I didn't want things to get weird. Seriously, I have zero interest in making you feel unwelcome here, and I'm definitely not trying to rub salt in the wound. I wasn't taking a shot at you personally; I was just being sarcastic about filing complaints in situations like this. My apologies.

Regarding the specifics of what happened, I already told you—I totally get why Paul Morales's post makes you uncomfortable. I’m not against calling out the possibility that personal biases might lead to subjective moderation, even if I don't know for sure if that's actually happening here. But I don't think that's what we're dealing with right now.

Jose Williams said:It’s not even about the nitpicking. I’m not out here trying to suggest or imply that moderators shouldn't be part of the conversation on equal footing, or that they aren't allowed to weigh in on... thoughts? They’re just terrible, honestly. And look, I’m not exactly out here preaching for some kind of sterile perfection from Zelenskyy, so I won't pretend that wouldn't be a tough sell for me right out of the gate either. 😁.

The real issue here is how Paul Morales handled that report. It wasn't even about what we were actually discussing; she just went off on a tangent and decided to attack my entire reputation as a user instead. That’s the part that bugs me. I didn't start this thread to debate my specific takes—I started it because I wanted to see if the admin team thinks this kind of thing is actually okay. Is it standard procedure to turn a disagreement over a topic into a full-blown judgment on someone's character? Because from where I'm sitting, it feels pretty off.

I don't really see this as some massive deal. If there was a dedicated thread for admin questions, I would've just dropped these queries there instead of starting a whole new topic. It’s not like I’m out for blood or looking to get Paul Morales3 sanctioned or anything. I just wanted to see where everyone stands—is this kind of moderator behavior actually okay, or is it a problem? Specifically, I want to know if it’s going to mess with Paul Morales3's objectivity when it comes to my posts. Basically, I just need an answer to those three questions I asked in my first post.

I honestly don't get what part of that whole situation actually bothered you so much. You know, that one post where Paul Morales went totally white-faced and claimed she could just hit the ignore button on you whenever she felt like it, while you’re stuck being unable to do the same to her. Like, so what? What's the big deal? 🤷 Honestly, I feel like the complaint would carry a bit more weight if you dropped that part, but hey, fair enough. I get why the whole thing rubbed you the wrong way.

I don't want to sound like a broken record here, but Kiss and rustydrifter10 already laid it all out pretty clearly. The real issue isn't even about her tone—though she wasn't exactly typing in "mod colors"—it's the power dynamic. She made it obvious she’s looking down on us from a higher position. It feels like she’s using her moderator privileges as a way to poke at people. Like, she can just hit the ignore button whenever she wants, whereas I'm just a regular guy on this forum with zero extra perks. It’s that little nudge of authority that gets under my skin.

If you're stressing about one moderator potentially playing favorites down the road, don't sweat it too much. We’ve got other moderators on the team who can step in if things ever get out of hand. Honestly, if anyone—regardless of their role—starts acting biased or losing their objectivity, there are plenty of ways to handle it. It's not like one person holds all the cards.

Alright, that works for me.

Look, even if you don't agree with my complaint, you were polite enough when we talked, but this? This was unnecessary. It’s pretty low. That’s not what I’m claiming at all. I even went out of my way to mention that both you and velvettrucker52 have been perfectly fine to me, yet here you are, spinning it to make it look like I'm playing the victim.

Anyway, I'm actually pretty satisfied with how Blissin and nicin handled things. I really hope Paul Morales3 takes a look at their response and uses it to adjust her tone—not just with me, but with the other users she isn't quite as fond of.

Thanks to everyone who chimed in with their thoughts on the situation.

As far as I'm concerned, we can lock this thread.

It won't.

Gregory Harris2, if you actually have a legitimate grievance, you know exactly how to file an appeal. ☕

Oh, please. Mocking someone just because you can't add them to your ignore list? That sounds more like a moderator losing their grip on the tools to me. I guess I’ll just go cry about it since Blissin and Daniel Ward87 decided to keep me on their ignore lists. 🙂

Ethan Lee33 said:Look, this is a completely different ballgame. Neither of those two are moderators, and their beef started because they just didn't see eye to eye on a topic—specifically that one, but generally too. It wasn't some unprovoked intrusion like what we're looking at here.

I’m not out here saying Paul Morales3 needs to be punished, slapped with a warning, heaven forbid banned, or stripped of her mod status. Not at all. It's just common sense—people are naturally going to feel uneasy when someone holding a position of authority (even if it's just being a moderator on some online forum) acts incredibly condescending toward them for zero reason. You have to take that into account, because that kind of behavior does absolutely nothing to help the laid-back vibe of this site—if anything, it kills it.

Yeah, obviously, but people just snap sometimes. From what I can see, this isn't some ongoing pattern; it's just an isolated clash. There's really no point in me making a huge scene over it. Honestly, stuff like this just makes our jobs harder because getting dragged into these arguments on the PŽK is a total waste of time and energy.😁

Ethan Lee33 said:But they didn't even "spat"—that’s actually the crux of the issue right there. Personally, I’m totally fine with mods and users clashing occasionally when they hit a wall on certain topics—it's part of life—but it feels ridiculous for moderators to act like emotionless robots without any actual opinions just to avoid getting dragged over at the PŽK.
The thing is, this wasn't some deep debate; it was just straight-up jumping on someone for no reason out of nowhere. In that moment, I honestly thought there was some underlying beef or bad blood between them. If regular users can't do that kind of baseless sniping, I don't think it's asking too much to expect the mods to hold themselves to the same standard.

For what it's worth, I don't have a bone to pick with Paul Morales3. Both she and Ace are cool in my book, even if they bring totally different vibes to the table. 😁

I agree, it's pretty pathetic. This whole situation sucks too, but I really don't think it's enough reason to give Paul Morales3 a warning or a strike. If that were my standard, I wouldn't even bother showing up to ZK where people jump down each other's throats for no damn reason every single day.

Yeah, she could have apologized, but she didn't. So what am I supposed to do here as her co-moderator? Should I tell her to watch her mouth? I could, sure, but if I'm not handing out warnings to regular users, I'm not going to start policing my colleagues either. I'm not their nanny; they're grown women and they own whatever they post. Our job is to issue strikes when things cross a line, and in my book, this hasn't crossed it. A complaint from me would actually carry weight if we were talking about unfair moderator conduct—like if she actually threatened someone, handed out an illegal strike, or tried to force us to back her up. I get why Ace feels awkward since we're talking about a fellow moderator, but as long as she isn't abusing her power or getting special treatment compared to everyone else, I'm staying out of it. To be honest, watching them bicker like two teenagers fighting over who gets to jump on a trampoline is beneath me; I don't care who started it or why. The only reason I'm even addressing this appeal is because I was asked to. I know my take won't please everyone and people will probably claim I'm being biased, but if I'm called on to give my input, I'm going to give it. I'm not taking sides here. Paul Morales3's insult was annoying, but Ace's complaint is even more annoying. Sorry, Ace. 😁

Look, we use the forum to troll, chat, and argue, and we can all catch a strike just like anyone else. And if we abuse our power? We can be kicked off the mod team. Period. End of story. Honestly, none of this is worth my energy.

I realize the supermods and admins might see this differently, so you'll have to wait for their final call.

Oh, I just realized we’re waiting on a statement from the sub-moderators too, I guess.

Jose Williams, look, regardless of whether I personally dig the drama or not, I don't see an actual complaint against the RAD moderator. To put it bluntly, if this wasn't about a moderator, this little spat would have slid right under the radar like it has for years in that corner of the forum. If the complaint was about constant targeting, unequal treatment, abuse of power, or some actual misconduct, I'd take it seriously. But as it stands, this is just a matter of personal likes and dislikes, and we don't step in for that. I'm not interested in playing referee for either of you. I get that you might be feeling uneasy after this, but trust me, nobody is out to get you or kick you off the PDF. ZK is crawling with users who love each other so much they spend every opportunity tripping each other up; the only difference here is that this scrap happened with a user with a black username.

slywolf45 said:Yeah, it’s classic ZK and Comparison Policy. (well, except for that one 🤣 instance)

The moderation criteria over at ZK are so incredibly vague that I honestly tip my hat to anyone who can actually stomach their mods. It’s all very "trolling is fine, just don't go overboard" or "insults are okay, but stay within reason." Where exactly is the line? Is it a nudge, a shove, or a punch to the gut? Nobody knows. 😕

As for this specific situation, both parties were being equally shady, which is pretty much par for the course at ZK—regardless of the fact that one of them holds a moderator title. I don't get why everyone is making such a massive fuss over this, acting like we're dealing with some high-stakes drama over at Reddit. 🙄

Exactly. ^^

I’m asking the rest of the ZK residents to please leave the fanboy/fangirl energy out of the Complaints section. You can have your little brawls over at our place. 😬

Haha, honestly, it just depends on which subreddits you spend your time lurking in. If someone’s obsessed with their pets, they aren't going to give a damn about deep dives into Detroit, LJS, or Politics, and the feed would just become an unreadable mess. On top of that, the folks hanging out over in LJS, KLJ, Detroit, or the politics boards mostly show up here to complain about moderation issues or drop some half-baked suggestions; they aren't exactly itching to read recommendations posted here instead of over there.

So, am I supposed to just click the like button? 🍿

Brian Edwards78 said:Yeah, right, because it's clearly a browser issue and totally not because some incompetent admins are messing around with the forum settings. 😂

Sour grapes. ☕

Anyway, let's be real—you only started this thread so you could brag about being number 609. 🙄

What a thread. This is a legendary fail by the Microsoft Edge fanboys. 🤣 🤣 🤣 🙂 🤣

bluecanyon643 said:Look, if you think posting stuff like "she's trash, gross, and stinks" counts as high-quality content, then fine, whatever.

I don't think that, but for God's sake, we're talking about Coconut here, not some specialized sub-forum for nuclear physics. Every corner of this site has its own vibe and its own set of rules.

Sure, I get that being educational is part of what we do, but it's just one aspect, not the whole damn thing. This forum is also a place to hang out, have fun, swap stories, vent opinions, get expert advice, troll people, and a hundred other things.
Honestly, I find the whole "educator" role moderators take on a bit suspicious. Even when it looks necessary sometimes, we aren't kindergarten teachers, and we shouldn't be trying to raise these users. We're mostly adults here who should be able to stand by what we write. People post nasty stuff? So what? Like I said, it's not hurting anyone... except maybe the person who wrote it.