Posts by Morgan Carter

rapidskipper8 said:The issue is that I am constantly being banned due to this dictatorship. I keep receiving senseless penalties that serve as nothing more than an excuse because I called the dictator what he actually is.
However, the way Nick and Striker are being ignored is truly commendable. Just keep in mind where you are; it is only now becoming clear to me.

Look. You need to watch how you post for a while until your points drop down to about 100. Pay close attention to the technical requirements, such as those rules regarding links.
You cannot compare yourself to the others when you aren't on their level🙂. That is simply the reality. You have to accept it and move on. And specifically, do not lower yourself to the level of certain individuals. Just scroll past them.😉

rapidskipper8 said:While all forum members ought to be treated with equal fairness, unfortunately, that is simply not the case here.

I fail to see why you are letting this get under your skin. It is an exercise in futility; what purpose does it serve to fret? My advice to you is to stop reporting posts just because they contain insults. Simply ignore them. Do not engage, and do not give them your attention. When you file a report, most of the time they merely delete the content without issuing any actual penalties or warnings—and we both know exactly who I am referring to. In fact, the more of these instances occur on the forum, the better.
You surely realize how much more interesting it will be when those types of comments can be found across all 500 sections of the board.

Sam Alvarez4 said:Introduction.
The Banker was banned for his own doing (for the second time in a row).

Analysis.
After everything he wrote, he plays the victim. Can you believe that?

Conclusion.
He isn't the first in a long line of such commentators (Goldenboy, Sabina), nor are we all crazy or unintelligent.

Introduction.
You clearly don't know how to read.
Analysis.
This isn't solely about him. However, the man has demonstrated clear double standards.
Conclusion.
Do not troll the thread if you fail to grasp the point.

I see some people have even been banned following this thread. Progress is being made.

Michael Anderson2 said:You see, this is exactly the modus operandi I am referring to. As soon as someone disagrees with you, they are labeled as having "frustrations toward Muslims," then in the next post, they are an "irrational person who simply doesn't understand Islam," and by the third post, they have become an "Islamophobe"... 🤦

What else can I say when you write a post that lumps all the forum users together as Muslims, just as you—and others—do whenever a Muslim makes a mistake? 🤦
But I will tell you again. This is not a discussion about Muslims; rather, it is a discussion regarding double standards. Or do you truly believe that what was presented in the initial posts as a clear example of discrimination is acceptable? 🤷

Michael Anderson2 said:How does one even respond to a statement like, "Even if I hated Americans, I would have a basis..."?

Is there any point in attempting to maintain a dialogue after such a remark? In my view, there isn't...

🤣
What kind of sentence is that? What am I supposed to conclude from it? Look, let's be clear: stop trolling. If you actually have something to contribute, say it and provide the full context. If someone has violated the rules and hasn't been disciplined, feel free to share that with us. If you want to vent about your frustrations regarding Muslims, then start a dedicated thread and explain what is troubling you. That is how we all handle things here.

Michael Anderson2 said:I can. If you are capable of doing so, then so am I. My argument is complete, as is this discussion with you. ☕

But what exactly are we accomplishing here? 🤣

That is correct; he is secondary. What matters is the trend you are following. I must tell you, most of the Muslims on this forum serve as anti-propaganda for Islam. With very few exceptions, they only reinforce the negative perceptions non-Muslims hold about you. Through your own rhetoric, you are simply deepening those prejudices... ☕

Then please, provide some examples. I am genuinely curious as to what specifically provoked such a reaction from you. Is it perhaps because we refused to side with people like yourself who attempt to define an entire community based on the actions of a few individuals? 🤦

Anthony Perez9 said:That is one reason why I would prefer to see the home countries of users who aren't from the US.

I find myself more sensitive to Americans when they express strange or hostile views about their own country, compared to when people from Canada or Mexico do the same.

Therefore, I believe that displaying user locations would help reduce tensions, because if we knew someone was local, their comments wouldn't carry the same weight.

As it stands, you can't tell if someone is a local here in the States or from some other part of the world where chaos reigns and hate speech isn't sanctioned the way it is here in the West... 😉 🤷

Who am I supposed to report if an American from Canada insults me, a Canadian from the US? 🤣 Isn't that right? It is a complicated question.

Gary Wilson said:After insults like these, the moderation team typically remains silent. When they are actually asked to intervene, they resort to childish excuses such as, "We don't have enough time" or "We can't catch everything." Yet, if a user were to dare respond to such a primitive individual, they would be banned instantly.

One particular moderator on Politics (mind you, on Politics) claims he cannot distinguish—or simply fails to notice the difference—between a Muslim and a Canadian, or even between a Muslim identity and religious affiliation, even when pointed out.
How can someone so incompetent attempt to moderate the Politics section or the forum discussions regarding Canada? And yet, this same individual is remarkably proficient at distinguishing between Catholics, Canadian Catholics, Americans, and Canadian Americans. It is quite a selective skill set.

It is more than laughable for a site like this; it is truly pathetic.

That is precisely the worst part. This silence and blatant disregard. If only they had the decency to respond. It seems the rules apply exclusively to those who aren't Americans. At least then we would know where we stand. Instead, they tacitly approve of this behavior by staying quiet. Furthermore, they retain incompetent moderators despite their own admissions of ignorance. If you lack the knowledge, why hold the position? What kind of moderator am I expected to respect when I explain that the Constitution of Canada recognizes three constituent peoples, including Canadians, rather than just Muslims? He simply tells me that the laws of the United States apply here. When I point out that even the U.S. legal framework acknowledges Canadians, he simply ignores me. It was the same with my recent ban involving fascists. I am not permitted to identify those singing fascist anthems as fascists. 🤦
Those people are apparently the model citizens of the United States and Canada.

Here is a thread regarding Praljak and his group. Someone actually posted this:
http://www.reddit.com/showpost.php?p=4...postcount=4737
How am I even supposed to respond to someone like that? He would essentially try to silence Canadians from expressing their views simply because they don't align with his own.

rowdytiger13 said:Try to step back for a moment and view the situation objectively.
unknown demonstrated chronic tactlessness, often pushing the envelope with his posts.
With such provocative content, a single word—or even the absence of one—is often enough to earn a ban.
He chose this specific way of writing and interacting with others on this platform.
Even his avatars were provocative, constantly testing the limits (to what end?).
I personally warned him regarding the religious imagery, suggesting he change that avatar; if he truly wanted to show support for Palestinians, he should have simply used the Palestinian flag.
That only sparked defiance and unfounded theories from other users—who saw him as a role model—claiming I was attacking him because he doesn't support homosexuality, despite there being no connection whatsoever.
The responsibility lies largely with him...

He is only responsible for his own actions because he refused to be tactical and instead chose to speak his mind openly. If he made mistakes, he earned his ban. That isn't the issue. The issue is that the rules don't seem to apply equally to everyone. I have provided examples, which he actually cited himself. People on this site write things about Islam and Muslims that are far worse, yet no one cares. Someone will post on a thread about Myanmar claiming they support genocide and stating that Muslims are an inferior race :facepal: and call it freedom of speech. When those two individuals in New York City kill someone in the middle of the street, everyone immediately blames all Muslims and Islam, demanding these terrorists be banned from entering Europe. When Breivik kills 80 people in the name of racial purity, no one thinks to mention Christians; everyone just calls him a disturbed lunatic.
And don't even get me started on politics.

rowdytiger13 said:But he’s laughing about it, though I personally don't see why given it was removed from the list of mental disorders.
He actually took it a step further.
In other words... based on my interpretation of that vague rule...
You are permitted to say, "I believe homosexuality is a disorder,"
but you aren't allowed to say, "Homosexuals are mentally ill."

Yet, apparently, one can simply say Muslims are terrorists and should be banned from entering American countries.🤷

EDIT: I finally located his actual post. He wrote, "For most people, homosexuality is viewed as an eccentricity, and that is how I perceive it."
Therefore, what you suggested isn't quite accurate.

rowdytiger13 said:You are certainly entitled to your own opinion—whether you believe an obsession with full-body tattoos constitutes a disorder or not. However, in my view, such a stance is offensive to that community, especially since there is no scientific evidence to support the claim that it is a disease. Of course, per the rules of this forum, you are free to express your views.
But suggesting that you would seek to "treat" these people goes much too far.

I feel equally offended when someone claims that Muhammad was a pedophile. And what then? If that is simply their opinion, they have the right to state it under the forum's guidelines. If it isn't a crime to publicly state that homosexuality is a disease, then I fail to see how expressing a similar sentiment here should be prohibited.

Michael Anderson2 said:I find crimsoncrane24 surprising. He was always a decent person to talk to, but it seems he has also been swept up in this "righteous struggle for Islam." I'll refrain from using certain terms to avoid being accused—again—of being "Islamophobic," or whatever label people prefer to use these days... ☕

But you can keep slapping labels and peddling clichés here all you want.

At the end of the day, Velid isn't the main issue. He isn't an isolated incident. If it were just him, it would be easy to address.

rowdytiger13 said:I constantly come across this falsehood.
That wasn't the reason he received a card. He was carded because he attempted to treat it.
Homosexuality is not classified as an illness; it isn't considered one, nor is it treated.

Well, that is simply his perspective. Does that mean one can hold the opinion that Muhammad was a pedophile, yet cannot hold the opinion that homosexuality is a disease? (Personally, I don't believe it is a disease). This forum is full of varying viewpoints. It isn't as if Velid is the only one making these claims; even certain churches hold similar stances.

Michael Anderson2 said:I haven't commented on the PDF policy because I wasn't part of those discussions, nor do I intend to. My comments are based solely on my involvement in the religion PDF...

As far as I can tell, he hasn't done anything particularly out of the ordinary. The core issue is simply this: rules should be applied equally to everyone. If they aren't meant to apply to everyone, then that needs to be clearly stated.

brightotter13 said:Regarding the user HbVelid, I believe the 500-point penalty for "hate speech" was unjust. Many users have made similar comments regarding how Muslims historically slaughtered and persecuted Christians, yet they face no consequences. Some receive warnings while others are ignored. Even when looking at the moderators on the Politics sub, I must admit HbVelid was penalized quite unnecessarily. For instance, he received a strike simply for stating his personal distaste for homosexuality. He wasn't calling for persecution or violence; he was merely expressing a personal opinion, yet he was sanctioned. It is difficult to know what to make of it.

Reddit is a good platform... but it could be significantly better. As I have previously noted, the primary issue lies with the moderators in the Politics section. Quite simply, they protect those who share their views, while scrutinizing "the opposition" with extreme prejudice, handing out strikes or bans for the smallest infractions.

There it is. That is my take on the matter. Honestly, I doubt the situation will change, as this isn't viewed as an issue by the administration.

You are correct. Velid was penalized for nothing. The man simply stated his opinion. Others write the exact same things without facing any punishment.
I experienced the same thing with my last strike, which eventually led to a ban, all because I mentioned that fascists gather at soccer matches. This is a fact proven countless times. There are shouts of "kill the Mexicans" or "kill the Turks" in the stands. Just yesterday, FIFA issued a sanction to the USSF. Yet, the moment I pointed that out, I was hit with a 45-point strike and a ban.

Michael Anderson2 said:The facts are clear; it is simply that some individuals lack the capacity for civilized discourse. They lash out when moderators rightfully enforce the rules. In fact, through their own ignorance, they exert undue pressure on the community, driving decent users away from the platform... ☕

Don't give me that. Do you honestly believe Velid wrote that all Americans are scum? If he had, he wouldn't have lasted long. But apparently, when you say those things about Canadians, it is perfectly acceptable. It is considered "cool." It is deemed "civilized."

Bradley Scott2, would you care to explain what we are looking at here:

or perhaps this:

or maybe this:

Michael Anderson2 said:And yes, I see you've decided to follow in the footsteps of HbVelid... ☕

He hasn't followed anyone's footsteps. Velid simply pointed out how the forum rules are being violated without any consequences being applied. It seems the rules don't apply when Americans are involved, so why should anyone care? As far as I am concerned, if insults are going to be permitted, then the forum rules should be clearly defined so everyone knows where they stand.

I concur. You are absolutely correct. I have encountered this situation countless times myself. A colleague here has merely provided a few select examples.
http://www.reddit.com/showthread.php?t=782558

I have pointed this out numerous times, yet it seems no one cares. The core issue lies with the leadership, as they actively support these actions. I haven't heard Nica say a single word about it. Furthermore, what Velid wrote is just the tip of the iceberg. I won't even begin to mention the fabrications regarding Canadian identities. Now, the trend is to label us all as Taliban, and it seems not even a fraction of the authorities care to hold anyone accountable.