Posts by Megan Green72

David Parker93,

Why the ban? The whole debate was actually pretty civil—zero profanity or anything. The absolute worst thing said was "you're not being totally honest" and me suggesting someone was getting worked up. If every thread on this site was handled with this level of decorum, this place would be incredibly chill. Plus, the best part is that within that same post, I actually cleared things up with the guy to fix any communication breakdown—I laid my cards on the table.

So there’s zero reason to drag this up.

I wasn't forcing my views on anyone, I wasn't attacking, and I even apologized if needed.
Honestly, the discussion was useful because some info came out that wouldn't have surfaced otherwise.
My last post wasn't "attacking" or pushing an agenda—and you won't find a single instance of me being aggressive in this entire thread, at least not from my end. Bottom line: I made it clear we should check out that specific model, and I plan to look at it myself. It was an open, respectful talk. We don't agree? Fine. Thank God people actually have opinions. That's how it works.

Out of everyone here, I'm the only one who isn't too proud to admit when I've messed up, misread something, or misspoke.

When you gave me this warning

I tried to lay out a decent argument for why I said what I said—showing I actually stand by my points—and asked you to look at the logic, but you weren't interested in digging deeper or actually hearing me out.
Now you're citing something that I think is wrong from the jump, applying it to an even more trivial example. If I don't get a pass next time, you'll probably use this exact same excuse just because I reply to someone.

I'll give the other users this: you're being a bit too heavy-handed with the strictness. Probably justified given everything that's gone down in the past, sure, but things have cooled off enough now. In this specific case, there's no need for partiality or bans. This was just a standard, quiet debate—exactly like the thousands of others happening across the forum right now.

@stormybadger8/">@@stormybadger8

Look, you can try to pin this on me all you want, but here’s the real deal—the actual issue is that my colleagues can't handle anyone popping their little bubble. They've been coming at me with every dirty tactic in the book just because I won't play along. Even with all that crap, I actually managed to stay decent—meanwhile, everyone else was busy acting like total jerks whenever they felt like it. Honestly, that alone tells you everything you need to know. The real problem? These people have massive egos and zero ability to talk to someone who doesn't think exactly like them. That's it. Period.

Both sides think they’re getting a raw deal, but let’s be real—our own feelings are getting in the way here, so objectivity is basically out the window. Personally, I don't think Tim Cook can actually prove he was being any more rude or out of line than the rest of the users on this board. Sure, he was more blunt—he definitely was—but he’s still miles more polite than half the guys here whose insults are barely tolerable even at a local dive bar, yet somehow they aren't permanently banned despite deserving it ages ago.

I think Tim Cook and Dub should give Jerry Robinson56 another shot.

Huge props to Tim Cook for all the effort he put in—he could’ve been way stricter if he wanted to, but he was a human being first and a moderator second, which is why I respect him. I also totally get why he had to step down; honestly, I wouldn't touch that job even if they were paying me 😁
On the flip side, I think the permanent ban on my buddy Route99 is overkill. Unless there's actual proof he was acting differently than everyone else on the forum, I say lift the ban.

Casey Bennett said:The rule against insults applies to everyone on this forum—you included. Whether you like it or not is irrelevant.

Look, I'm just laying out how I think the system works. Beyond that—I’ve got nothing to say. Politics isn't my lane and I don't have any insight into what's been deleted. Period.

I'm not even gonna bother responding—it’s not like the rules say anything about that anyway.
I mean, seriously—what kind of pathetic excuse for a forum even allows people to just go around insulting everyone? It’s garbage.

Casey Bennett said:insulting forum members isn't allowed and gets you sanctioned.
Insulting public political figures is fine (to an extent) and won't get you banned. Besides, it’s debatable if calling someone a "bloated bureaucrat" is even an insult or just a dead-on description of who they are.

But circling back to the same topic right after the last thread was locked? Yeah, that’s definitely getting you sanctioned.

What a pathetic excuse.
And just so you know, insulting anyone is against the rules here. It's honestly sad that you don't even know the basic site rules.

Where does it say that insulting public political figures is allowed?

What you just said is embarrassing.
Fine, call them a bureaucrat—but "bloated"? What does weight have to do with what kind of person they are? That's purely just to be insulting. It's unbelievable how the mods and admins act and then try to justify being jerks.

Also, how do you explain me getting a strike for calling someone's statement stupid, while they call my statements moronic and walk away scot-free?
Oh right—double standards. 😁

Kolega napise ovo:
I can't believe people are still falling for this garbage—it’s honestly pathetic at this point. You guys see what's happening and you just sit there? Seriously? It’s like watching a slow-motion train wreck where everyone thinks they’re safe because they aren't the ones on the tracks. The Department of Homeland Security isn't playing games here, and if you think you can just ignore the reality of the situation, you're dead wrong. It's not about "opinion" anymore—it's about facts. Plain and simple. Stop being so naive. It’s exhausting watching the same tired arguments pop up every single day from people who clearly haven't done a lick of research. Get real.

I can't even deal with this—total slave behavior. said:Look, the Department of Homeland Security—specifically that high-level "John Doe" guy—has been faking it for three months straight. Just one. They’re looking at Zalichina’s godmother’s bloodwork just to claim her BAC wasn't 1.1—it was actually 1.34. And even with that media report, it’s totally unclear if that’s what was in her system at the exact moment they drew the blood, or if they’re just extrapolating back to the time of the crash—especially since the cops didn't even pick up the godmother until two hours later.

So I'm asking—does this mean our buddy John Doe spent three whole months working on just one single case? And get this: my comment gets nuked twice, yet this specific post is still sitting here. It was just a regular, normal question—polite as hell, honestly. Can't get any more civil than that.
So, censorship is officially in full swing—apparently, you’re allowed to smear someone all you want, but the second you actually ask a question about it? Boom. Silenced. Typical.

And let’s not forget how Body Halleck is shamelessly sucking up to the moderator again—zero backbone, just total bootlicking.

I’m asking how it's even possible that posts filled with obvious insults aren't getting hit with a ban—especially after they've been reported. Seriously, from what I can see, none of them are actually being taken down.
Give me an example—and I want a direct link to the insult.

Instead of getting any actual, objective answers—you know, like how decent moderators are supposed to handle things—I just get lectured about what Cuka decided is okay to talk about on this board. It’s ridiculous. I asked why there's such blatant double standards, and that's all I get. Total joke.

So here comes the duty officer, Body Halleck—who clearly doesn't give a damn about actually answering the question. He just leans over as far as he can, tells me that the big boss Cuka already said what he had to say (which has zero to do with my actual inquiry, by the way), and then slams the thread shut. Case closed. Typical.

They’re totally screwing over Cuka and Body Halleck. It’s a textbook example of how to be a pathetic moderator or admin.

EDIT:
LMAO!
I can't believe people actually fall for this garbage—it’s honestly embarrassing. You see these "experts" out here spinning absolute nonsense, acting like they have some deep insight, when really they're just shouting into the void to feel important. It’s pure delusion. And don't even get me started on the legal side of things. People think they know how the Department of Homeland Security operates, but they clearly haven't read a single actual regulation. It doesn't work that way—period. They're just grasping at straws to justify their own incompetence. Anyway, stop falling for the hype. It’s all noise.

I can't even deal with this—just absolute nonsense. Seriously, what are we even doing here? It’s all just noise at this point. kaže:
Here it is. Total fat cat bureaucrat. She basically had to tear those kids apart just to get her thread started on this subforum—honestly, that says everything you need to know about her "professionalism."

You watching some surrealist comedy sketch while looking at these losers? Because that’s what this looks like—watching a live broadcast where you’re actually one of the actors they're scripting lives for. 😁

Let’s see if they try to pull the trigger on deleting this comment or slap me with a ban. Deletion? A ban? Not happening. No way. 😁
Oh man, no way—the post is still up and hasn't been nuked yet, but in the meantime, they went ahead and wiped out my actual question. Typical. 😁

Cuka, don't you have even a shred of shame?

Someone needs to pull up the original so we can see what the exact wording was before I tweaked it.

But let’s be real—that’s not happening, because then everyone would see I didn't even mess with the connections just to flip the meaning.

I'll jump back into the thread later and we'll see if this whole thing starts repeating itself.

Look, I’m asking nicely—don't drag that debate over here.

The arguments and links are right there in the post above. If someone can't wrap their head around the fact that I only commented on one of the two cases—and clearly cited which one I was talking about—then they're just clueless. Especially after I already told them this isn't the place to bicker over whether the Department of Justice is doing its job or not, and that I'm not going to engage further. It just goes to show who the real problem is here, and frankly, it highlights exactly what kind of "work" the moderator is doing (read: censorship).

Adam Collins4 said:Look, Condor, you're totally taking things out of context...

You grab one sentence from one post, then another sentence from a different post...

And then you act like you've proven me wrong without actually making a single damn argument—so basically, you just decide your own claims are facts and call them axioms...

Your only move is constantly leaning on the Department of Justice, even though it's been FACTUALLY shown multiple times that the DOJ doesn't do its job by the book... so yeah, there's plenty of reason to doubt their impartiality...

Plus, you call others out for saying Thorn is guilty, yet you're happy to throw a kid under the bus without a second thought... if that's your logic, you don't need any proof at all...😉

Who's the liar here? You're the one spinning tales...

Since you were lost from the jump, I quoted the actual part of the post where this whole mess started. So NO, I didn't twist anything or change the meaning of what I originally commented on—you just don't get it, so I had to REPEAT what you wrote because you kept veering off on your own tangents even after I told you exactly what I was responding to and why I disagreed.

This isn't some debate club for differing viewpoints—this is where I'm officially lodging a complaint about my posts being unfairly flagged and deleted just because someone misread them, not because I actually broke any rules. I'm gonna skip addressing your long list of claims above since they clearly show you're just lying and making stuff up.

Let the big man show his proof of how I changed the meaning of anything, considering I just repeated the original quote that kicked this whole thing off—which you clearly failed to grasp in the first place.

And let the big man explain why one "insult" gets a strike while another goes totally untouched, even when it's three times worse.

The criteria this mod uses for handing out strikes are biased and nowhere near fair—honestly, he's a pathetic excuse for a moderator.

Maybe one of the more objective mods can explain how calling someone "stupid" gets you flagged, but calling them an "idiot" doesn't. I'd love to see a rational explanation for that kind of nonsense.🙂

Look, I already laid this out on the thread—you can quote someone, fine, but you better make it crystal clear exactly which part you’re responding to. Otherwise, it looks like you're just twisting their words to suit your own agenda, and I won't have it. I told everyone upfront that I'd be scrubbing posts like that, and I have—I've already deleted a few without handing out any warnings or strikes. Case closed.

The moderator is straight-up lying here—just because I called him out on his nonsense.
Look, if you’re actually engaging in a debate, you don't just harp on the first point—you follow the flow of the argument. The moderator didn't hide that initial part because they knew damn well there was zero ambiguity in what I was saying. And yeah, here comes the caps lock again: I DID NOT TAKE ANYTHING OUT OF CONTEXT. Suggesting otherwise is a straight-up, shameless lie.

A colleague's got a comment like this:
Statement A
Statement B
Conclusion C

I’m quoting Statement B—saying I don't agree. Then the commenter gets all worked up, starts picking a fight, and tries to spin it like I'm just taking things out of context. Like, hello? Throughout the whole argument, I kept pointing out multiple times that I am strictly talking about Statement B and that I think it's wrong. Period.
Let the mod show me the exact post where I supposedly broke the rules or took something out of context. Go ahead.

Two posts I quoted and commented on—that’s where this whole mess kicked off.

I can't believe some people still fall for this garbage—it’s honestly embarrassing. You see these "experts" coming out of nowhere with their half-baked theories, acting like they actually know how the legal system works. Newsflash: they don't. They just love the sound of their own voices. The DOJ isn't going to just roll over because some amateur with a keyboard thinks they found a loophole. It doesn't work like that. It’s all much more complicated, and frankly, most of you wouldn't understand the nuance even if it hit you in the face. Stop looking for conspiracies where there aren't any. It's pathetic. Just stick to the facts and stop wasting everyone's time with this nonsense.

My take? It’s clear—I cited the exact part I disagree with. Nothing was taken out of context here.

First post where I’m making it clear—I’m only addressing one specific case here (out of the two mentioned in the original comment). So, let me be crystal clear right out of the gate: I am not taking anything out of context.
I can't believe people are still arguing about this—it’s honestly embarrassing at this point. You look at the data and it's right there in plain sight, yet half the crowd wants to ignore reality just to stay comfortable. It’s not rocket science. The DOJ isn't going to step in and save you if you keep making these kinds of calls. You have to be smart about how you handle this stuff. If you don't follow the logic, you're basically just shouting into the void. Anyway, enough of that. I'm done repeating myself to people who clearly aren't listening. Conclusion C

Second post where I'm AGAIN explaining—to the second commenter here—that I’m only addressing one of the two cases mentioned in the original post.

And then they go ahead and wipe my posts—where I’m literally just saying I'm commenting on ONLY one of those two cases. ABSOLUTE JOKE.
I’m calling out the mod here—show me the damn post where I supposedly mashed different threads together just to twist my words.

It’s honestly pathetic that I have to manually reconstruct this entire timeline myself—the moderator clearly doesn't have a clue what they're doing.

The mods are totally ignoring why they let posts fly where people are straight-up insulting me—calling me a troll and all that—and labeling my actual statements as "idiotic" without any consequences at all. But the second I call someone's take stupid—which is a way more polite way of putting it, by the way—I get hit with a ban. Make it make sense.
I bet our "objective" moderator is just gonna conveniently skip over that part of the argument.
The mod can cry about my caps lock all they want—I only used them because this guy is out here straight-up lying just so he can skim through things. He barely even read 10% of my comment anyway, so it’s not like I’m dumping a whole essay in all caps just to be annoying. He just needs some excuse to act high and mighty. The bottom line? His moderation here is garbage. He’s clearly biased, which he proved by jumping into the thread not as a mod, but as just another guy throwing baseless attacks at the Secretary.
It’s a joke—honestly, it’s pathetic how they just lock the whole thread after posting their own comment, just so nobody can swoop in with a counter-argument. Total coward move.
Moderator—keep it fair and apply the same damn rules to everyone here. No favorites.

If the moderators actually did their jobs objectively and stayed neutral, I wouldn't even have to deal with this whole moderation mess or all the damn caps lock.

restlessdrifter12 said:Basically, I got curious and tried messing around with a USB drive following the guide on this site.
Now, after doing everything by the book, the thing won't let me write anything to it or even format it.
Every time I try to open it, it tells me I need to format it—but when I actually click "format," Windows just gives me an error saying it’s unable to do it.
Anyone know what's going on or how to fix this mess?

Open up Disk Management. See if the USB shows up there and try initializing it manually.

Mark Allen6 said:Hey, I'm trying to set up a Medium blog and I could really use some help??? Anyone... 😢

Just follow the instructions—it’s seriously not that hard. There are plenty of video tutorials out there that walk you through everything step-by-step. It's not rocket science...

Brenda Cruz23 said:Aha, I see—so that’s mostly intended for desktop setups, then.
I was actually wondering if I could potentially use it with a laptop? I tend to head out to my sister's place on the coast quite often, and the Wi-Fi signal in her bedroom is pretty much non-existent—just one measly little bar.
Do you think using an adapter like that would give me even a slightly better signal?

Give it a shot, but honestly? It probably won't do jack for you.

You can grab external enclosures that hold two drives at once.

I’d honestly just ditch it overnight—these damn updates take freaking hours.

Alright, thanks for the tips. It didn't cross my mind that these newer Celerons and Pentiums for standard sockets could pull such low idle power—though honestly, you really should've known that 🙂

Nah, this machine is a home server, not a Home Theater PC. I care about virtualization, raw CPU muscle, and idle power draw. I checked out that Intel Pentium G3930 too, but it lacks Hyper-Threading—and honestly, I need that just for my own peace of mind, even if it’s more about performance than anything else. 🙂
As for an HTPC, I’ve already got an i5-2500k paired with an Nvidia GTX 1050 ready to handle UHD via HDMI 2.0.

I'll either sell the DDR3 or toss it into my HTPC, which I also use for gaming. Right now it's running 4x2GB DDR3, so I could probably swap to a 2x4GB + 2x2GB setup.

I was totally planning on just buying everything brand new, but honestly—maybe I'll take a look at some used gear instead.