Susan Price30 said:That’s what I was thinking too, and it’s been argued here for ages, among other places like the local parish council.
The issue is that tarot, fortune telling, or magic stuff gets its own little sub-sections, or even the almost dead Spiritualist section has its own whole area, yet the American Catholic community doesn't have one on the Religion sub-forum.🙂
Besides, if you look at just the first couple pages of that sub-forum, about 80% or more of the topics are centered on Catholic questions. Without those, what would that sub-forum even be? Maybe that counts as "special treatment" for Catholics too—that most discussions stay focused on that and don't wander off much? And logically, most people here just want to talk about that anyway.
I'll try explaining this one last time.
Even if we were living in Vatican City where the vast majority identify as Catholic, I bet the owner and the admins of Reddit would stick to their guns. It doesn't matter where you are or who makes up the majority around you; the core rule of Reddit is that everyone plays by the same set of rules.
Honestly, I'm not sure how else to break this down so it finally clicks for you.
Susan Price30 said:So, when you say "Catholicism"—referring back to my point above—you're talking about the actual Latin root, *catholicismus*. So, you're saying they aren't going to recognize Nauks as being fundamentally different from other Christian denominations that would actually deserve their own space? Is that what you're getting at with what's being suggested here?
If that's how you feel, just say so—can you walk me through your reasoning?
Man, by denying that there’s even such a thing as a "state religion" in America, you basically just admitted how much you're missing the point.
Nah, there won't be some standalone PDF dedicated solely to Catholicism or whatever you want to call it.
I’ve already laid out my reasons for this more than once, so I’m not going to get into the weeds again. Just because most people here identify as Catholic doesn't mean Reddit needs a dedicated sub ever focused solely on that. This isn't some national American forum owned by the government; it’s a private site owned by an individual who clearly doesn't want it to go in that direction.
We're currently brainstorming how to structure that PDF for what we're calling a more "multi-faith" discussion—moving beyond just Christianity to cover all religions. I can't dive into the specifics just yet since the wheels are still turning, and I don't want to get ahead of ourselves before a final decision is made.
In that sense, Christianity—or Catholicism, or whatever you want to call it—isn't going to get any special treatment compared to any other religion. The whole point of this Reddit is to make sure everyone gets treated exactly the same.
Susan Price30 said:I'm ready to get to work. Send over the content you need me to rewrite. Man, by denying that there’s even such a thing as a "state religion" in America, you’ve basically said everything that needs to be said.
What was I even saying? Look, I’m not denying that most Americans are Catholic, but that doesn't mean the Church and the government should be joined at the hip.
Nicholas King said:OT: I honestly don't get how the admins managed to turn such a relatively simple situation into this massive, drawn-out debate.
If I were in their shoes and couldn't wrap my head around something, I’d be handing in my resignation immediately—it would be the only logical move.
Like I mentioned before, and Brenda Cook4 backed me up on, we're working on some bigger shifts regarding the religion section than just "why doesn't this person have their own thread," so please bear with us. I truly believe that once we nail down the details, everyone's going to be much happier because there will finally be room for topics that go way beyond just "Catholicism."
Susan Price30 said:Are you trolling me? What you wrote makes zero sense...
Anyway, this post is directed at the admin, and looking at the arguments here, I'm hoping we can get some clarification.
He’s not trolling; he’s just pointing out that America is a secular nation. You really ought to know what that implies, especially when you claim something is a "state religion."
Ryan Vaughn7 said:I actually already posed that question to the guys, and they stuck to their decision. Still, it isn't out of the question that they might revisit the whole thing down the road.
If that's the case, then we're looking at partials staying as they are for now.
Jason Campbell70, I’m the admin handling your case. I spent some time over the weekend digging through your threads and posts to get the full picture. After three days of reading, I totally get why you caught a flag for "trolling," even though I’m not usually one for stacking up penalties. Back in the day, as a moderator, I might have docked someone 100 points just for their "overall vibe," but that was pretty rare. I don't follow Formula 1 religiously and I'm not an expert on everything, but I respect that people experience it differently, and that friction can definitely cause tension. In your case, my hand was practically itching to reach for the penalty button while I was reading your stuff, mostly because of how much you tend to spit venom using those (un)selected words. People might call me a Boy Scout for saying this, but honestly, I've been in enough dive bars in the middle of nowhere to know that even there, folks don't talk like this.
The way you interact with other users here just cranks up the heat and baits people into reacting to you. Because of that, I completely see why you were hit with the partial ban. If I were in your shoes, I'd be asking for the same thing. What makes me feel solid about the moderator's decision is when you said, "If they aren't capable, or if it's too hard for them to deal with my forum style (or anyone else's, doesn't matter), then it's obvious what they need to do." You're right—they know exactly what to do. They give you the partial ban. And look, even if you're an expert in your field, I don't think the others lack the ability to handle different personalities online. Even if they are part of the issue, you're the other half of it. You claim the last six months have been your "cleanest" stretch? Honestly, it scares me to think what you write when you're actually being messy.
Taking everything into account, the only thing I’d consider adjusting is docking 350 points for the trolling. As for the partial ban, looking at your history on the Formula 1 board, I stand by the decision and the explanation you've already received. Regardless of what you think of the mods over there, that kind of behavior wouldn't last long anywhere else, whether you have specialized knowledge or not. That’s not an excuse to let you off the hook.
That said, there's a new crew running the Formula 1 board now, and they have every right to reconsider the ban. Whatever they decide, I'll back them up. For now, your partial ban stays in place.
Brenda Cook4 said:You really need to stop relying on these cheap, flashy little tactics. Calling your own illness a "phobia" just so you can claim you're participating in a debate in good faith is exhausting. It feels like you’re terrified the thread will just "vanish" if you stop making noise and hurling accusations—as if the world somehow couldn't handle seeing your data, almost like some desperate "stop the Reuters" stunt. The post wasn't off-topic, this post was actually a direct response to your post, specifically pointing out the hypocrisy involved.
And honestly, your objection to the terms of service (which was part of that whole "make the post disappear" routine) was loaded with unnecessary descriptions. They were way too explicit—the kind of thing Google wouldn't even allow near their ad placements because this site is treated like a mainstream platform. We'll probably see those parts scrubbed from here soon, too. Plus, an answer to whether Unknown's post was off-topic had already been written right before you jumped in.
The moderator already cleared everything up, so I'm not going to waste my breath repeating it.
I run ABP, Ghostery, and Norton ESS v5 plus, and I’ll throw in Malwarebytes Anti-Malware every now and then... honestly, I've never had a single issue. 🤷
What would we actually call this new subforum, and what’s the point of it? I’ve got nothing against starting a Catholicism thread, but if we do that, then every other denomination is going to want their own space too. Honestly, that would pretty much max out the Religion section. It’s worth considering a dedicated subforum to house all of it, but we still need a clear name and a solid purpose for it. At the end of the day, it’s Anderlon who makes the final call on stuff like this, not just the admins.
Mark Foster said:Not really, because I still think you're just trolling the thread... and honestly, based on what you said, you actually make a decent point about starting a dedicated Catholicism mega-thread. Of course I reported your post... but obviously, there isn't a rule that lets you tell someone they're trolling.
If we’re being real, I think rowdyhawk10 is the one trolling here. On the flip side, there's some merit to the idea of opening a specific Catholicism thread, but that opens the floodgates for every other denomination too. If we move toward a new sub-section within the Religion forum, what would we even call it and what would be the actual goal?
The mods actually sat down to talk about this, and the answer is a no. It’s not even really about whether clones exist or not; it’s more about how people are handling discussions within the Religion section, which is why the moderators landed on a negative decision.
The answer is already a hard no—your proposal isn't going anywhere. It looks like you're just doing this because you barely scraped by on that Politics PDF.
NO, you aren't getting a pass, and YES, you could actually fail PŽK because what you’re doing is nothing more than straight-up spam. A revolution? 🤦đ