Lisa Ortiz2 Asks: rowdyhawk10... just being appointed as a moderator isn't enough.🙂 Honestly, we really should have stepped in to prevent this ages ago—it’s reached a point now where it’s incredibly difficult to even begin fixing.👎 Honestly, isn't the current moderator count already more than enough? I mean, seriously—why not just recruit another five or ten people to fill out the ranks... I don't know exactly how many it would take at this point... you might as well just call in the media. At this rate, a news crew could probably handle the whole job by themselves.😍steelskipper5🙂 But honestly, you really have to make an effort to actually read through the threads. 🙂
Look, here’s the reality of the situation—this forum isn't our private property, and we can't just go around appointing whoever we want whenever we feel like it. While I agree that active moderation is absolutely necessary, let's be honest: it isn't always feasible. For instance, when I have a major exam at the university in three days, I’m not going to spend my entire day sitting there scrolling through endless pages of threads—I'll probably just glance over the reports during a quick break and react to what needs attention. Beyond that, the whole idea of an all-seeing, omnipotent moderator is becoming increasingly unrealistic as this community grows. The forum is simply getting too massive for a handful of people to monitor every single detail effectively. What we actually need is a solid foundation of dedicated members—people who truly care about this place—who will work alongside the moderators. Whether it's by filing reports, steering discussions in the right direction, or just ignoring the trolls, we need everyone to cooperate to keep the forum readable and, frankly, a decent place to hang out.
Lisa Ortiz2, are you actually aware that you're backing someone who was slapped with a massive 500-point penalty for serious hate speech and making violent threats against the LGBTQ+ community?! For goodness' sake, please get serious.
Lisa Ortiz2 said:Nicole James....😁 you know exactly how this works. I really hope I don't have to walk you through it step-by-step.🙂 Just imagine... if I went over to an ESPN football thread and posted something like this... It's primitive entertainment.😂 Aimless chasing. You're all wasting your time on a hollow game. A poor investment of precious hours.😲😂 So, people pay admission just to watch a ball get kicked around, only to have everyone just charge blindly at it once they arrive?????????😂 Is there any logic to it? It’s simply an outdated... intolerant form of entertainment, discriminatory because it doesn't allow everyone the chance to chase the ball. And it has its own set of rules.🤷 How terrible.😲 Or... perhaps another example?👍 Tell me, which specific subreddit am I allowed to crash like that?😁
As far as I'm aware, there are two forum members who use that kind of rhetoric, and both of them have quite a nice collection of bans and deleted posts thanks to me. I can't exactly show up at their houses and take their computers away...
Kenneth Peterson5, you keep repeating the same points over and over without actually listening to what people are saying to you. If someone argues that a person should be killed simply because they changed their faith—well, that isn't "practicing free will"—that is straight-up pathological fanaticism and a criminal act. These kinds of primitive, violent fanatics—who, let’s face it, are basically the extremists on this Reddit thread with their specific ideologies—are not welcome here. I'll say it again: it’s a shame that some of the more moderate users have sided with them, but honestly, that’s their problem, not mine. As long as I am at the helm of this platform, any religion or set of ideas that conflicts with the Declaration of Human Rights will not be permitted under the guise of religious freedom.
It’s pretty rare to see someone drop over 5,000 posts without them just being mindless chatter—all while staying completely under the radar with zero serious warnings and never even getting a sniff of an offer to moderate somewhere...
Henry Rodriguez39 said:So, I have a question for the group. About a month ago, I met this girl—we haven't had full intercourse yet, just kissing and things like that—and she mentioned she’s had a few sexual partners in the past but always used protection. She seems healthy, or at least there's no reason to think otherwise. But here is what's weighing on me. During one of our encounters, I was performing manual stimulation on her—if you catch my drift—and I realized I had a small nick on one of my fingers. It wasn't bleeding heavily, but it was a fresh cut—you know how dry your skin gets in the winter, so it just wouldn't heal properly. I am fairly certain my finger didn't actually make contact with any fluids, but the thought keeps itching at the back of my mind. I can't help but wonder: what are the actual odds of HIV transmission through a scenario like this? If she were positive—which, again, is unlikely—could it happen this way? Honestly, it's really eating at me. I'm thinking about just waiting six months to go get tested, but I wanted to see if anyone here could give me some real clarity. Everything I read online is so vague and unhelpful. Thanks. 😢 😢 😢 😢 😕
The chances are roughly the same as being struck by debris from a falling satellite, surviving without a scratch, and then getting hit by a freight train on your way to the hospital.
Kenneth Peterson5 said:It isn't about shadows. Adura and Dervish (from Musliman.hr) haven't just rejected certain social norms because they happen to dislike them—that’s not quite right. Rather, they have refused to adopt the specific set of behavioral standards that you and rowdyhawk10 are pushing. These standards seem to directly conflict with the level of tolerance required for users who hold worldviews fundamentally different from yours two.
If we are talking about those extremist ideologies claiming that a woman is unfaithful simply because she marries outside of her faith—or the twisted logic suggesting it’s permissible to kill someone who converts from Islam—then there is absolutely zero room for tolerance. I am truly sorry for what happened.
Aganor is, much like Phoenix—a total gem. Aganor is, much like Phoenix, a highly educated individual—someone whose body of work is so advanced that it’s hardly surprising both have been sidelined by a mediocre environment. It isn't really about how they react to certain situations in a vacuum; rather, people tend to focus on the specific, highly articulate way they choose to express those reactions. Their works are quite extensive—in any case, they are pieces that I find myself reading with genuine pleasure.
Ultimately, since you aren't showing any actual tolerance for intelligence anymore—instead choosing to judge everyone solely based on those occasional emotional outbursts, which are clearly the minority—you really should have consulted with the Philosophy moderators first. They would have almost certainly sided against it, preferring to only consider banning someone from the Religion section instead. Because, in case you weren't aware, Aganor is a constant, welcome fixture over in the Philosophy section.
Why should they be any different? There are fundamental rules of cultural dialogue that apply to everyone—period. If the vast majority of people on this Reddit can manage to follow them, then there’s absolutely no reason why they shouldn't have to do the same. When an average user gets caught up in a moment of emotional turbulence and lashes out at someone else, they get a warning, and that's that. But when that kind of instability happens repeatedly—to the point where someone hits a thousand points—then we can safely conclude that either the individual isn't mentally sound, or they simply don't give a damn.
Finally, regarding this supposed lack of culture, self-control, or basic empathy for others—I’d just like to point out how one of your fellow moderators recently "branded" a group of users on Reddit as terrorists. In my opinion, that is a far more egregious offense than anything Aganor ever did, which is exactly why he was permanently banned.
Hey, so, after he went ahead and claimed that it’s actually okay to kill someone just because they decide to change their religion...
Kenneth Peterson5, you're honestly the best—I mean, how do you even do it? 🤣 though I have to say, I partially agree with you regarding Religion; there's just no Brezovka, no little bird, not even any Labelline left...:šmrc:
Says the guy who became the moderator for Religion and then just... vanished. 🙂
Kenneth Peterson5 said:Hey there, hiddenhound3, I’ll happily throw in a few more details just for you, because I want to make sure we're totally on the same page here.
Look, if you look back about six months—back when the Religion section had maybe 60 active members, while Psychology was sitting at around 30, and Philosophy and Spirituality combined were hovering around 27.
So, what’s the takeaway?
It tells me that certain moderators—you know, the ones who love "editing the threads whenever they feel like it"—are basically driving away anyone who doesn't fit into that boring, mediocre middle ground. And that middle ground? They absolutely love to follow them blindly, whether they're worshipping them or just spitting on any content that isn't strictly "standard." It's a joke, because those outsiders are usually the ones serving up the best stuff.
Since I'm not sure if my little math lesson above made sense, I'll take the liberty of giving you some real-world examples. Let's talk about the actual users who aren't with us anymore—people without whom "things just aren't the same"—like alim, ja_sanja, mislim..., Musliman.hr, sjena., Adura, Zeev Zion, hija del zion, crno&bijelo, Aganor, and plenty more.
That's just a tiny list of names, really. Some got banned just for being "different," others were chased off by constant belittling from the mods and their little cliques, and some just lost the drive to participate in such a sterile environment where creativity and actual intelligence aren't exactly welcomed with open arms.
On top of that—and I don't know how much you know about this—there are tons of users constantly venting about how these specific sections are managed, which you can clearly see over in the "complaint and grievance" section, and sometimes even in the "ban corner." If my memory serves me right, hiddenhound3, you actually filed a completely valid complaint against one of the mods a while back, and—surprise, surprise—you never got a single shred of feedback from the admin team.
If my "numbers game" still hasn't clicked for you, well, maybe it's just me being unable to connect the dots clearly—so bear with me, okay?
Best, and happy scrolling!
OMFG 😲
Alright, look—I get it when someone brings up Adura, sunlight, or Dervish. I actually feel bad that they left, but there isn't much I can do when people choose to reject basic social norms just because they don't like them. However, once you bring up Aganor into the conversation, all I can say is WHAT THE FUCK? Seriously, just look at his body of work! Anyone who dares to disagree with him gets hit with some variation of "you're stupid, uneducated, clueless, why are you even talking to me, you jerk." People like that will never find a home on the Religion forum—not because they lack originality or intellect, but because they lack basic culture, self-control, or any shred of consideration for others.
Kenneth Peterson5 said:We're throwing open the floor for some deep-dive philosophical and religious debates—both the open kind and the structured variety. It’s basically like those formal debate formats you see on TV, but without all the annoying timers or being told we can only post a certain number of times.
We actually tried running some debates... but so far, nobody has stepped up to the plate.
Lisa Ortiz2 said:You make a fair point, rowdyhawk10... you've got me there this time.🙂 The post isn't an insult. One needs to read the whole thing instead of just picking out selective parts. But doing that requires time and slowing down a bit.🙂 That doesn't mean I won't complain about the current state of the religion.😁 It is absolutely catastrophic.👎
Instead of just complaining, why not offer some actual suggestions on how we can make this forum better?
Hey, everyone—just so you all realize how incredibly difficult it is to find decent moderator candidates on most forums nowadays; honestly, people wouldn't even dream of suggesting any changes to the current staff... if anything, they’d probably be demanding that we make it a mandatory full-time job 🙂
I don't have the bandwidth to get back to everyone right this second—I might be able to catch up early next week (sorry, college stuff has to take priority over Reddit, unfortunately).
Just wanted to clear up one little inaccuracy floating around... the whole atheism thing was already hanging around before my time.
BTW, steelskipper5, we really should have had those new moderators appointed ages ago, but things have been... a bit stalled at the higher levels of management...
I already explained to Angie why that wasn't just some minor oversight—and I’ll say it again. The individual in question churned out several posts in a row that were, to put it mildly... absolutely horrific. On his very last post, I handed him 500 points for "overall impression." It’s not like I missed the sheer lack of backbone in his arguments, or that I was simply choosing to look the other way.
I honestly regret not just locking this thread the moment it devolved into this endless back-and-forth regarding gay rights versus opposition to them.
Regarding the bans—if I recall correctly—I was actually quite lenient with the more extreme stances taken by the anti-gay side; what I actually stepped in to ban were the threats of violence, the truly horrific insults, and similar behavior. I think the core issue here is that Tyler Scott3 and Lisa Ortiz2 accused me of taking sides, and they both ended up getting flagged for trolling because of it. Both of them have been around this Reddit community for a long time, and frankly, they should have learned by now that if you have an issue with how a moderator handles things, you don't vent about it within the threads—you use the official grievance process.
If anyone thinks the state of this forum is ideal, they couldn't be further from the truth. The Religion sub is massive and incredibly volatile; Danaye and Blaise haven't been active for quite a while, and Scat has so much on his plate that he can't always get to everything. I try to step in whenever my personal life allows, but I simply don't have the bandwidth or the energy to meticulously comb through every single post. Most of the moderation happens reactively as reports come in, which is far from an ideal system. To be honest, I don't know how to fix all of this right now, but I do know that putting this kind of pressure on those of us still trying to keep this place alive isn't helping anyone.
Amy Long9 said:Well, there you go—take a look for yourselves! Every single thread I start gets shut down immediately! If you actually bother to read them, you’ll see I’m not just some troll—the posts are actually coherent and make sense! I am honestly looking for a female moderator to step in and review this! And frankly, I feel like there's a real bias going on here!
Sorry, Ljubicice, but those threads are just way too intense. They were all closed for good reason.
goldengull3 said:Beyond the standard regulation, we also have the noise control act to consider:
Section 17.
It is prohibited to conduct any work, business, or other activities in a manner that disrupts the peace and quiet of individuals in both indoor and outdoor living spaces.
In residential areas, the use of bells or electroacoustic devices for public announcements is permitted between the hours of 7:00 AM and 7:00 PM.
An exception to the second paragraph of this section is made for bells or electroacoustic devices used for religious services on religious holidays.
http://www.govinfo.gov/example-link
That said, what we are dealing with here doesn't actually fall under "public announcements." That type of equipment should really only be utilized when there is a large congregation gathered at or around the church, specifically when the parishioners can't all fit inside the building. And, naturally, even then, everything must remain in strict compliance with the law.
Hmm... looking at this, I'm left wondering if I've completely misread the situation—is someone actually allowed to just stand outside a window at 4:00 AM on a religious holiday and ring the doorbell, or am I missing something here?