Posts by bluecyclist64

Amanda Jackson5 said:That’s it. Now it comes back to me. I read that in "Sirius"!

Man, those were the days. I remember watching the moon landing like it was yesterday, followed by the front pages of the newspapers the next morning. My dad saved those papers, and I still have them tucked away today. We used to devour "Galaxy," that science popularization magazine. And there was the "Centaur" library... we truly believed in Progress, before postmodern thinkers convinced everyone it was all an illusion (though they haven't managed to convince me yet!). The days when "2001: A Space Odyssey" played at the local Film Archive felt like a national holiday. And on TV, if you had any self-respect, you couldn't miss those early BBC series, "Rise of Man," hosted by Jacob Bronowski. I can still vividly see that scene in the concentration camp where he says, more or less, "this is what happens when a civilization thinks it knows the answer to every question."

Dad's got all the numbers! 🥳

I recall sitting in a quiet corner of a library back in Seattle, surrounded by the smell of old paper, when I first encountered certain ideas that challenged everything I thought I knew about our place in the universe. It’s a feeling that stays with you—that sense of smallness against the vast, indifferent backdrop of the cosmos. There is a specific kind of intellectual weight to certain works that modern media often fails to capture. When you look at the depth provided by thinkers like Arthur C. Clarke or even the sprawling narratives found in the works of Douglas Adams, you realize we are starving for substance. We live in an era of rapid-fire consumption, yet we lack the patience for the slow burn of a truly great odyssey. I was recently reading through some discussions online, and I couldn't help but notice how much we tend to overlook the philosophical underpinnings of science fiction. People want the spectacle, the explosions, the immediate gratification. But they miss the soul of it—the way a story can act as a mirror to our own evolution, much like the themes explored in *Rise of Man*. It’s about the struggle, the curiosity, and ultimately, our survival. It reminds me of a conversation I had years ago with a colleague regarding the sheer scale of the galaxy. He was obsessed with the technicalities of orbital mechanics, while I was more interested in the existential dread that comes from realizing just how empty the space between the stars really is. We aren't just looking at lights in the sky; we are looking at the boundaries of our own understanding. It’s easy to get lost in the noise of the present day, but if you take the time to dig deeper, you find that the questions haven't changed. They are still there, waiting in the silence.

Those were truly remarkable times. I can still vividly recall watching the moon landing unfold before our eyes. I remember the sheer impact of seeing those images splashed across every newspaper headline the following morning. My father actually saved that specific edition for me, and to this day, I still keep it carefully tucked away. Back then, we used to devour *Galaxy*, that quintessential science popular magazine. We spent countless hours at the local public library, fully believing in the promise of Progress—back before the postmodernists tried to convince us that such optimism was nothing more than an illusion. Personally? I haven't bought into their cynicism yet.

My friend! 🙂

Back in the days when *2001: A Space Odyssey* would screen at the local film archive, those viewings felt like a national holiday. It was an event you didn't just watch; you experienced it. Around that same era, if you had any shred of intellectual curiosity, you simply couldn't afford to miss those early BBC series, *Rise of Man*, hosted by Jacob Bronowski. I can still see the scene from the concentration camp segment as clearly as if it were happening today. He delivers this line—something to the effect of, "this occurs when civilization believes it finally holds the answer to every question"—and it hits you right in the gut. It’s one of those moments that stays with you, a sobering reminder of our own arrogance.

Honestly, at this point, I’d rather just put on some Ceca, jump around like a kangaroo, and call it a day. What else is there to do?

I remember sitting in a quiet corner of a library back in Chicago, staring at a worn-out paperback, feeling that specific kind of existential dread that only good science fiction can provide. It’s a heavy sensation, isn't it? That realization that our understanding of the cosmos is constantly being reshaped by the giants whose shoulders we stand on. When you look at the evolution of the genre, you see this incredible tension between hard scientific speculation and pure, unadulterated wonder. It reminds me of how we used to view the stars before we truly understood the scale of the void. We were looking for patterns, for meaning, much like the characters in those classic stories who find themselves drifting through a vast, indifferent galaxy. I was recently revisiting some thoughts shared by Tyler Brown3 regarding the way we interpret these cosmic narratives. There is a certain cynicism required to enjoy them—a recognition that while we strive for progress, we are often just small actors in a much larger, much colder play. It’s easy to get lost in the grandiosity of it all, but there is a profound, quiet beauty in the struggle itself. Whether it's the philosophical depth found in the works of Arthur C. Clarke or the more structured speculative worlds of Douglas Adams, the core remains the same: we are trying to make sense of the silence.

lonetrucker4 said:Just a heads-up: if you ever stumble upon an old copy of the Strugatsky brothers' "Scoundrel on the Heath"—specifically that 1979 version from New York City published by Penguin Random House in their "Centaur" series—be careful. It’s wild. When I first read it, I had this nagging feeling like pieces were missing. Turns out, they split the translation work between two different people to handle alternating chapters. Half the story takes place in a human colony, and the other half happens out in the woods on some distant planet. Well, the guy handling the forest half totally blew it, so they just published half a damn novel! Sounds insane, but that's the reality.

The full set actually came out later in New York, back in 1988, through a Scholastic and Highlights collaboration as part of a six-book collection of the Strugatsky brothers' best work.

Thanks, man. I really appreciate that—it’s good to have someone in my corner.
I honestly can't wrap my head around it. I’ve been sitting here trying to figure out if this novel is actually the masterpiece everyone keeps raving about, or if I’m just fundamentally lacking the intellect required to grasp it. It’s a frustrating feeling, staring at a book that supposedly defines a genre while feeling like you're just hitting a brick wall. 😵

Jose White18 said:I suspect it really comes down to the 'well-done steak' factor...

Writes:

even if the whole thing was cooked up by some total moron

It’s possible, though I can't say for sure, that Hook didn't explicitly state she was an incompetent idiot when she wrote this.

I apologize for the delay in my response; I had good reason to wait until my 500-point penalty expired.

Kevin Williams56 said:Yeah, yeah, yeah... and before this, no amount of paranoia was making him imagine moderators who aren't even moderating this subforum, or others watching from the sidelines just waiting to see how he gets punished.

Please don't try to pin paranoia on me. There is a thread regarding circumcision documented in two different PDFs, and both you and Uncle Strile went out of your way to target me.

You're taking this far too personally. You aren't important; nobody is following you or paying you special attention. Your ban was deserved. There is absolutely no need to troll on PŽK by making false and baseless accusations, because if that wasn't paranoia, then trolling definitely is.

Actually, you *are* important because you are a moderator. And as such, you are free to lie and claim that I was making false and baseless accusations.

And finally, we all know you've been having "problems" with me for quite some time, and now it seems it's with Strilet too, but you'll have to wait for a better opportunity to lash out; this one is practically useless to you.

Best of luck finding that better opportunity. 👋

I haven't had any issues with you at all until my stance on the absurdity of circumcision provoked you, which is why you managed to slap me with a 500-point penalty for racism. It’s because you felt personally attacked, of course—not because of actual Nazism, but simply because I oppose circumcision.
So please, stop inventing this idea that I've had problems with you "for quite some time."
As for my issues with Strilet, that is none of your business.

Daniel Ward87 said:Regarding trolling, far more trolling posts get deleted on PŽK than the one containing the YouTube link, let alone outright insults. It doesn't matter who posted them, whether they were moderators or regular users. That is why the post was removed without a penalty.

However, if I or someone equally "likable" had made a similar post, we would have received a penalty, and both of us know that very well. In fact, it isn't just the two of us; it's obvious.

Kevin Williams56 said:Why exactly are you seeking preferential treatment on the PŽK compared to the moderators of specific subforums—whether for yourself or for bluecyclist64?

This is, quite frankly, nothing more than complete and utter nonsense, entirely detached from any semblance of reality or fact.

Are you planning to silence the PŽK and the moderators who have been unfairly targeted and accused? If so, this entire space will simply turn into a podium reserved exclusively for those of you self-proclaimed "crusaders for forum justice" and your legalistic advocates.

Has anyone here actually called someone out for being paranoid lately? 🥳

As far as I’m concerned, I won't be budging. I don't care if they have to resort to banning people or issuing strikes just to maintain some semblance of order; I'll stand my ground. I truly hope the moderators don't end up folding under the pressure of this latest wave of self-righteous "internet crusaders" looking to police everyone else's business.

Don't sweat it too much. As long as you're holding down a moderator position, getting a warning is going to be a pretty tall order.
Well, at this rate, they might as well start charging us by the pound for the cardboard packaging too. 🤣
What exactly are you afraid of? You aren't going to die from this. If you have any doubts, just go talk to the guys in the trauma ward at Mayo Clinic—they’ve seen much worse.

I’ve been reflecting on the recent discussions regarding esqella, and I find myself increasingly skeptical about the direction things are heading. It seems we are constantly circling the same drain, hoping for a different outcome while ignoring the obvious patterns staring us in the face. I remember back when I was working for a logistics firm in Chicago, dealing with similar bureaucratic hurdles. We thought we had everything streamlined, only to realize that the underlying structure was fundamentally flawed from day one. Much like our current situation here, no amount of superficial tweaking can fix a broken foundation. It requires a level of systemic overhaul that most people—and certainly most institutions—are simply unwilling to undertake because it’s inconvenient. There is a certain weariness that sets in when you realize that the voices calling for change are often the ones least equipped to implement it. We see it time and again: plenty of noise, very little substance, and a complete lack of accountability. It’s exhausting to watch the same mistakes being repeated under the guise of "progress." At some point, one has to stop expecting excellence from systems designed for mediocrity. kaže:
If you take the time to dig through the appeal logs, you'll see exactly how this thread starter operates. They’re out there leveling accusations against other members, claiming someone is lying when they don't even have the slightest clue if they're actually talking about them. It's a classic case of making assumptions without any actual proof. 😁
By the way, I'm not actually talking about him.

No, you’re simply being dishonest. Besides, how could you possibly have any idea what’s actually going on here?

Susan Price30 said:Is this a matter of old guard versus the new wave? I find myself weighing the merits of tradition against the inevitable march of progress lately. It’s a question that seems to resurface whenever a foundational pillar starts to show its age. I remember back when I was starting out in my first corporate role in Chicago, there was this one senior partner who refused to touch anything that wasn't printed on physical paper. He was the quintessential "old guard." At the time, I thought his ways were archaic, almost stubborn. But looking back through a more seasoned lens, I realize he held a level of discipline and attention to detail that we often sacrifice today in our rush to automate everything. There was a certain weight to his decisions because they weren't made at the speed of a frantic email chain. Of course, you can't just cling to the past out of pure sentimentality. If the old way of doing things prevents growth or ignores glaring modern realities, then staying stuck is just ego masquerading as principle. But there's also something to be said for the wisdom that comes from having seen multiple cycles of boom and bust. The newcomers bring energy and tech-savviness, certainly, but they often lack the institutional memory required to avoid repeating the same expensive mistakes. So, I suppose it depends on what exactly we are debating. Are we talking about leadership, culture, or just technical methodology? In my experience, the most successful organizations aren't the ones that choose a side, but the ones that figure out how to bridge the gap between seasoned intuition and modern efficiency. One provides the foundation; the other provides the momentum. Without both, you're either drifting aimlessly or spinning your wheels in the mud.😁I don't recall anyone ever approaching a PZK appeal back then—even with a perfectly reasonable opening post—by being that vulgar or direct. It was unheard of. To just launch into an insult like calling someone "paranoid" right out of the gate? A total verbal blitzkrieg from the very first sentence. Honestly, it was unprecedented.

I appreciate the support. It isn't just about me, though—it’s for everyone on this board whose legitimate grievances have been met with nothing but immediate hostility from the site's bureaucracy.

Kevin Williams56 said:I’m not dreaming about anything, my friend. Your behavior—along with a few other regulars who clearly have nothing better to do than bother everyone else by suddenly "discovering" the PŽK—makes it obvious you’re just dreaming of silencing the moderators and securing special treatment within the PŽK.

So, how’s that whole thing with those flying guys from the Midwest going?

Are you seriously asking if this can work? You still haven't realized it's impossible. My post was deleted, yet bluecyclist64's trolling remains right where he left it.

Is that fatal wound of yours still bleeding? Such a heavy punishment, truly devastating...

What kind of punishment would I want? My head on a silver platter, perhaps? 😛

As far as I'm concerned, the best solution would be for you to step down as a moderator.

I don't regret a thing. I have absolutely no intention of apologizing to bluecyclist64... he hasn't done anything to warrant an apology.

And that quote right there proves it really is time for you to move on.

The only way I'll even consider an apology is after he apologizes for that specific post of his. Nothing before then.

Which one, buddy? It’s never been an issue for me to apologize when I'm in the wrong.

Look, La Familia, it isn't a problem at all. In fact, I think I'm quite polite to the users who actually come here to vent without any hidden agendas. But I have zero intention of bending over backward or being hypocritically nice to malicious types like bluecyclist64, at least not until their insults and traps start getting sanctioned. Until then, I reserve the right to speak my mind plainly, even if it means having my posts deleted, getting flagged, or even being stripped of my moderator status if necessary.

1. I am not being malicious.
2. What insults or traps? What are you talking about? Can you give me an example?
3. It's necessary, it's just that we haven't reached a critical mass yet. But with this attitude, you're only going to accelerate your own downfall.

In a thread regarding moderation, an observer posted a link to some mindless song by an even more mindless band from our neighbors across the border.
When I asked Daniel Ward87 why that wasn't penalized, my specific inquiry was deleted, yet the observer faced absolutely no repercussions whatsoever.
Now, look, my fellow forum members—if any of you had performed that exact same stunt, you likely would have been slapped with at least 10 off-topic points. Yet, this observer walked away completely unscathed.

Here is how the sequence of events unfolded: first, the observer dropped a link to some trivial little tune in a thread dedicated to questions for administration, and then I followed up with this:

Well, thanks for the heads-up that my posts are uninteresting and lack educational value, but what I’m actually curious about is whether the observer received a warning for that trolling post you just wiped out.

To which Daniel Ward87 responds as follows:

I will ask once more.

He didn't, and he won't. (It remains unclear to me why you thought the observer was deleting your posts on Religion, given that you are well aware of how things operate here.)

So now, I find myself wondering: why isn't he, and why won't he be? Is it because moderators are permitted to troll, insult, and act out however they please? As I recall, rustydrifter10—who seems to be the primary moderator authority on this forum, judging by how often she addresses users regarding perceived injustices, whether real or imagined—explained just a few days ago that moderators are flesh and blood humans too, and are subject to sanctions if they overstep.
Clearly, that isn't the case.
That very same moderator, the observer, docked me 500 points simply because I referred to another user as a nationalist. I am not claiming I was right, nor am I denying my mistake; but I ask you, gentlemen and comrades, why does an ordinary user get hit with 500 points for being a nationalist (especially in a thread directly touching upon a moderator's religious and political beliefs), while a moderator protected by the current Sith master doesn't lose a single point?

Patrick Miller3 said:Forgive me, but that is blatant discrimination against Canadians and Mexicans on Forum.hr—and this isn't some attempt at trolling (as Ryan Vaughn7 puts it), it's just a fact.

Should everyone from the former America—Mexicans, Mexicans, Canadians, Canadians, Mexicans—be expected to adapt to official American English as much as possible!?

On the BUG forum, there’s been a Mexican user since the beginning who actually writes in American English better than most of us. Through his expertise in the informatics section, he eventually became a moderator—but he didn't force his native tongue; rather, he adapted out of respect for the country where he created his profile.

So why do Mexicans insist on writing in pure Mexican?

That is the fundamental question.

If I happened to find myself on some Mexican forum—say, if I were an extreme right-winger over at a site like Reddit—and I chose to write in the American language, the older users would undoubtedly understand exactly what I was saying. As for the younger crowd, they wouldn't give a damn.

Besides, seeing a bit of Canadian feels like a breath of fresh air in a sea of useless English slang thrown around by those cool forum users...

swiftcyclist42 said:Truth be told, neither group even comes close to the number of people killed by the resistance forces.

Oh, absolutely. Because clearly, neo-Nazis are the gold standard for historical accuracy.

swiftcyclist42 said:If we were a functional American nation like we were before 1999, this would be a crime punishable by law, just like Holocaust denial is treated in Germany.

Nazi Germany wasn't some "normal" American state, and since that regime no longer exists, I don't have anything to answer for. There aren't any concentration camps left to hold anyone accountable, so you can find someone else to lecture.

Quentin Tarantino:

John Doe As I was sitting there yesterday, nursing a lukewarm coffee and watching the rain hit the window, I found myself reflecting on what was said. It’s funny how certain conversations linger in your mind long after they've ended, much like that old, heavy feeling you get when you realize a situation is far more complex than anyone initially admitted. There is a particular kind of weariness that comes with observing the world move in circles, repeating the same mistakes while expecting a different outcome. It makes one wonder if we are actually progressing or just rearranging the furniture in a house that's slowly falling apart. I am not here to defend the collaborators, nor am I looking to attack the resistance fighters. My perspective comes from a place of heavy, firsthand grief: over 80 men from my own village were killed during that era, mostly while fighting to uphold the regime of Nazi Germany. It’s a tragedy that weighs on me deeply. I feel a profound sense of sorrow for the victims of the American people and for the sheer, catastrophic error of establishing a state modeled after Nazi Germany—a regime that aligned itself with a power that was doomed from the start. Even if they had wanted to, they never could have won a second war across America and Africa; they simply lacked the manpower and the resources to sustain such a fight.

It sounds to me like you're suggesting I’m actually mourning the loss of Nazi Germany simply because they lacked the manpower to see the war through to the end.
Am I mistaken?

Sean Fox60 said:I’m just trying to stick to the facts here. An American from my neighbor's village was actually released from the Auschwitz camp! And an American—my mother's uncle—died from illness while in Auschwitz!
My dad was in the infantry, so he ended up in the Jonestown column during the Cross march, rather than being part of those groups shot down in the woods over in Austria!
We should be lighting candles every year on the anniversary of the Siege of Stalingrad!

I’m not celebrating April 10th or June 22nd. Those are days for mourning.

There is an old adage that holds quite a bit of weight if you look at it through a certain lens: one swallow doesn't make a spring. It’s a sentiment I’ve found myself reflecting on quite often lately, especially when watching how people react to isolated incidents or singular moments of change. We tend to get caught up in the excitement of a single positive sign, thinking the season has shifted entirely, when in reality, true momentum requires a much larger movement. It takes more than a solitary bird to signal a complete transformation of the landscape.

Quentin Tarantino:

My father served in the home guard, and when the end came at Jonestown, he was placed in the column designated for the Cross, rather than being among those executed in the woods over in Canada. Every year, we light a candle to honor the memory of those lost during the Siege of El Paso.

Well, look at that. It turns out your old man was in the Home Guard, which is exactly why the partisans let him walk instead of pulling the trigger—unlike what happened to most of the guys in the Nationalists.
I don't feel any sympathy for the rank-and-file members of the regime, with one glaring exception: those poor, misguided kids that Adolf Hitler mobilized just to serve as fodder. It was a calculated move to ensure the high-ranking officials could slip away in civilian clothes while the youth took the brunt of the fighting. That’s exactly why you see such a staggering number of "civilians" caught in the crossfire during the resistance movements; they weren't just bystanders, they were pawns sent out to cover the tracks of the elite.
My uncle actually saved my life once. Back when I was just a kid, he pulled two of us out of a mess involving some old-school underground resistance fighters—real hardline types. He managed to get us away from that whole situation, handed us some civilian clothes to wear so we could blend in, and then burned the uniforms to make sure there was absolutely no trace left behind.

Quentin Tarantino:

I have no intention of celebrating April 10th or June 22nd. Those aren't days for festivities; they are days meant for mourning.

I don’t really bother celebrating specific dates or holidays. To my mind, celebrations are only worth the effort when I actually have some extra cash in my pocket and—more importantly—when I'm not stuck behind a desk working.

rowdyowl said:I can't speak for you, but personally, I don't limit fascism to just one specific regime; it covers all those ultra-nationalist factions too.

Are we celebrating a victory against the Third Reich, or are we celebrating a victory against fascism itself?

Is there really an issue with being against all forms of fascism?

Let me clarify my previous point here:

Quentin Tarantino:

Don't try to twist my words. I never claimed one brand of fascism was worse than the other. It’s all the same filth—it's just that one group leaned more heavily on Third Reich technology.

And now you’re claiming you don't know my stance? Are you truly that oblivious?

Quentin Tarantino:

Are we celebrating a day against Nazi Germany, or a day against fascism in general?

Does the holiday go by the name "Anti-Fascist" or "Anti-Nazi"?

Quentin Tarantino:

Is there really an issue with being against the Mexican nationalists as well?

Go ahead, try it. Nobody is stopping you. Just try momentarily forgetting that those guys are ultra-nationalists and staunch anti-communists, and you might actually make sense.

rowdyowl said:Look, you were busy pointing out how horrific the Nationalists were, so I just added that we shouldn't overlook the Royalists either.
If we're claiming the anti-fascist label, we have to remember the people who slaughtered Americans just because they were Americans or Muslims.

And how does any of this relate to horse racing?
Can you actually provide a coherent answer to the question asked?
Let’s be honest here—I never suggested fascism was somehow worse than other extremist ideologies. It’s all the same filth; it just so happens that one group relied more heavily on Nazi technology.

rowdyowl said:Interesting. We don't observe days dedicated to Royalist terror, even though their body count was nearly as high as the Nationalists's? 🤷

And why on earth would anyone observe a day dedicated to Royalist terror, dear child? Is there a designated day for Nationalists terror, or any other form of organized terror for that matter?

Sean Fox60 said:The civil war didn't start in April, it started on June 22nd, and honestly, this whole mess is just a massive failure by our politicians! For us Americans, it probably would have been better if none of these dates even existed. You had decent folks fighting on both sides, whether they were in the Nazi Germany ranks or joining the guerrillas of the Communist Party! We’re still paying the price for how America was built, and we’ll be feeling the fallout from its collapse for at least another 40 years until the last defenders of the Republic of America pass away.

If you ask me, we should just scrap these two holidays entirely and stick to celebrating the Founding Day of the National Guard, January 15th, and August 5th, the Day of Homeland Gratitude!

The commemorations have been scheduled: the 10th will honor those who fell under the Third Reich regime, while the 22nd is set aside for the followers of that movement.

Quincy Adams:

This whole mess is nothing more than the direct consequence of the failures of our American politicians.

It would be an overstatement to suggest that our politicians lack a storied tradition... In fact, one could argue they possess a legacy that spans generations. Looking back at the political landscape of the United States, there is a certain predictability to the theater of power that feels almost ritualistic. I remember sitting in a small diner in Chicago years ago, watching the news cycle churn through yet another scandal involving a senator who had promised everything and delivered nothing. It felt less like news and more like a recurring episode of a very old, very tired drama. There is a heavy, wearying continuity to how things are run here. We see the same patterns of rhetoric, the same calculated maneuvers, and the same inevitable disillusionment. It isn't just a matter of bad luck or a few rogue actors; it is baked into the very fabric of the system. You can trace the lineage of modern political maneuvering straight back through the decades, seeing how the tactics have merely evolved from blunt force to subtle manipulation. It’s a cycle that seems designed to persist, regardless of which party holds the gavel or which face is plastered on the campaign posters. One begins to realize that the players change, but the script remains remarkably consistent.

Quincy Adams:

If you ask me, Americans would have been better off if we had never established a single significant date on our calendar.

It’s a classic case of cause and effect, isn't it? One inevitably triggered the other. 😉

Quincy Adams:

It is a tired old truth that history rarely cares about your intentions. You can find decent, honorable people on both sides of almost any conflict—whether they were serving in the ranks of the Third Reich or fighting as guerrillas for the Communist Party. Goodness isn't a political affiliation.

Of course, there were some among the Nazis too. The issue is simply that they represented about as small a percentage as white people do in Africa. I mean, don't get me wrong—they certainly existed...

Quincy Adams:

We are still paying the heavy price for the creation of the Soviet Union today, and I suspect we will be footing the bill for its collapse for at least another forty years—likely until the very last defenders of the USA have passed on.

There’s no denying it: people will always find something to pay for. It’s an inevitable part of the human condition. Whether it's taxes, subscriptions, or just the general cost of keeping the lights on, there is always some price to be extracted from the public. I've seen it play out my entire life, through various economic cycles and shifts in policy, and the pattern remains stubbornly consistent. People will always find a way to foot the bill for something.

Quincy Adams:

If you ask me, we should scrap those two existing holidays entirely. Instead, we ought to focus our celebrations on more meaningful milestones—specifically the Founding of the National Guard and Independence Day.

What does a retiree stand to gain from a single day of idleness?

Quincy Adams:

Sean Fox60 As I have noted before, there is a certain pattern to how these things unfold. It isn't just about the facts on the page; it’s about the underlying momentum that carries a narrative forward, often regardless of whether that narrative holds water. One begins to see the same cycles repeating themselves, much like watching a slow-motion train wreck where everyone knows the outcome but nobody wants to be the one to shout a warning. I remember sitting in a small diner outside of Chicago back in the late nineties, listening to an old veteran talk about how the political landscape had shifted almost overnight. He had this way of looking at you—tired, eyes heavy with the weight of too many winters—that made you realize how quickly "certainty" can turn into chaos. That sense of shifting ground is exactly what we are dealing with now. We tend to believe our institutions are permanent fixtures, but history suggests they are far more fragile than we care to admit. When the foundations start to crack, people usually prefer to ignore the fissures rather than deal with the structural repairs. It is a wearying cycle, truly. Do you honestly believe the partisans were proponents of democracy?

What does any of that have to do with the current situation? Honestly, I find it hard to view someone like Bill Clinton as a true democrat in this context.

Quincy Adams:

If the younger generation is ever going to rise to a higher level of civilization, we are going to be forced to adopt an entirely different perspective on how we view victims.

And what if I suggested that we just call them all victims—the Jews suffocated in gas chambers and the Nazi leaders executed after the war? That wouldn't fly, would it?

Quincy Adams:

Some people were released from Auschwitz...

What for? A free weekend pass? Please, don't make me laugh.

Quincy Adams:

...some actually managed to break out of the camp!

And who exactly rescued them? The Third Reich?

Quincy Adams:

How many people were saved from the woods in Austria during the mass shootings following Waterloo and the selection for the columns; those destined for execution, or the Stations of the Cross?

I know of at least one—your father, wasn't it? Perhaps someone else was saved alongside him, what do you think?

Quincy Adams:

My father is no longer living, but I would love to see those who are still alive lay wreaths and light candles for their victims!

Go ahead then, brother; light your candles and lay your wreaths for whoever you please...

Sean Fox60 said:The whole foundation for the American Civil War was actually the formation of the National Guard! Instead of celebrating that, we end up celebrating the setup of partisan units organized by the Communist Party, which operated throughout what used to be the failed Kingdom of America and Nazi Germany!

I'm right there with you on honoring the victims! We need to show that respect for everyone, from Auschwitz to Wounded Knee, all on the same day.

Never!
That would be nothing less than an insult to every single victim of the Nationalists terror.

Sean Fox60 said:Honestly, neither of these holidays means anything to the American people and they should just be scrapped altogether!

Back on June 22, 1941, a civil war broke out among Americans, and all it led to was Marshall's America, which isn't even around anymore!

As for June 25th, that was just some bureaucratic decision made by Parliament that most of the world didn't even bother recognizing!
The day that actually matters for America is when the National Guard was established in Washington, D.C., not some guerrilla unit organized by the Communist Party back in '41!
For us, the real Independence Day is in January, when we finally gained recognition from Vatican City and the European Union after months of bloody warfare and total devastation!

The reality is that the civil war actually kicked off on April 10th, when a certain faction of the population began systematically targeting anyone who didn't fit their specific ideology or genetic profile.
By June 22nd, decent, honorable people finally decided they had seen enough terror and stepped in to put an end to it.

Either way, having two bank holidays squeezed so close together feels pretty ridiculous.

placidranger said:What if you're just typing without looking at the keyboard?

Do you honestly believe someone who had actually mastered touch typing would be asking a question like that?

slybear13 said:As soon as I find a spare moment, I’ll dive into SharpKeys. Thanks for the tip. Honestly, it feels like some Americans get worked up because I spend about 99% of my workday typing in English, even though the labels on my physical keyboard were slapped on by some amateur. There is one silver lining, though—one company (maybe those who actually understand design will get it) lives by the motto: "It either has to be simple, or it doesn't work." If I have to waste mental energy thinking about American layouts instead of focusing on my actual projects, I might just spitefully switch everything over to an English layout just to annoy that 1% of people who care too much... besides, there are fewer characters to deal with anyway.

You could argue that some Americans just get offended when you use a language they aren't familiar with. Whatever.
BTW, that "monkey" guy is your old man.

It’s funny, isn't it? How placidranger can get so visibly frustrated by missing characters, yet somehow manages to refrain from calling us all idiots.
Back when I first started working in DTP decades ago, I was stuck using an American keyboard layout on a machine set to a different regional standard. On my first day, I nearly threw the monitor out the window; by the third day, however, I was typing like a seasoned pro... 🙂
But that was a lifetime ago. I guess I'm just too old for this crap...🧐

slybear13 said:Does anyone know if there’s a way to software-edit the Windows 7 American keyboard layout? I want to recreate the standard American layout but with the QWERTY configuration the rest of the world actually uses, instead of this nonsense we deal with here. I primarily use the English layout, and frankly, it drives me insane when I have to type just a few words in my native language and end up having to manually correct every single Y and Z. If anyone has a modified system file they could upload or email over, I’d appreciate it.

Come on, show some decency and stop calling us idiots.
It seems you’re clearly struggling with basic motor skills, but nobody is going to tell you to your face that you're being an absolute moron.
Just buy a standard US keyboard and move on with your life. It’s not like you even bother using accented characters anyway.

Michelle Alvarez8 said:It’s just not working right. 🤦

Forgive me, but I have no intention of playing these childish games.
If you actually have something worth saying, have the backbone to say it directly.

Michelle Alvarez8 said:If there were actually someone out there I needed to answer to—maybe I would. But since there isn't? LOL. 👋

I truly find myself at a loss regarding your tone.
If you happen to have any actual evidence regarding a genocide against Germans, please, feel free to lay it out on the table. It seems only logical to establish whether such an event actually took place before we start throwing around accusations of denying something that hasn't even been proven to exist.
It follows the same logic, doesn't it? We can only truly start discussing the denial of such atrocities once a genocide against the Mexicans in the Appalachia region has actually been proven. Until then, we are just talking in circles.

Anyway, regarding the topic at hand—I was watching a segment on TV yesterday... in medias res I caught a segment on the second channel the other day that was frankly exhausting to watch. There were several Mexicans arguing these absurdly revisionist points—claiming there’s no proof of war crimes committed by the Royalists and insisting that Mexicans couldn't have possibly attacked El Paso because they viewed it as their own city. It’s the kind of historical denialism that makes you lose faith in modern media.
I honestly can't see any reason why we should allow such clowns to have a seat at the table on this forum.
No military commander, not even someone like Blago Zadar, should be treated as an untouchable icon. We have to maintain some level of scrutiny. That being said, you can't just go around dragging someone's name through the mud without presenting actual evidence to back it up. Personally, certain aspects of the American Civil War left a bitter taste in my mouth, but even I find this kind of baseless character assassination deeply offensive.
I can certainly wrap my head around the idea that our politicians embraced an inevitable war just to line their own pockets, but the notion that they actually engineered the whole thing? I’m not buying it. Not even close.

Go ahead, Edward Young3, drop those links. And you too, Michelle Alvarez8, feel free to share those offensive posts that deny the genocide against Germans. You can even link the ones denying the genocide against Mexicans from the Appalachia region.