Posts by Anthony Collins4

I haven't personally had the opportunity to witness any instances of true Gentleness when it comes to discarding those cards, not even the ones produced out of pure confusion.

That sentence probably could have wrapped up right after the word Gentleness 😁

Paul Green31 said:Look, they don't own the content itself, but they *do* own the posts you published on their site. In other words, the forum is legally the publisher of your posts. But since you clearly can't grasp that, I guess everything in this thread just feels "fluid" to you.

Sure, they're the 'publisher,' but that doesn't give them any exclusive rights to my intellectual property, nor are they permitted to use it for anything else.

I guess you just don't get it. 😁

I mean, Paul Green31, I honestly can't tell if you're acting as a double agent or what. You're out here feeding people these incredible ideas to sue the forum and the moderators over their day-to-day tasks 🙏

Paul Green31 said:So, what exactly can she even post on her profile?

Oh, so you've gone and become all holy and sanctimonious now, have you?

Jobs? Does anyone here actually have a real employment contract or even just a volunteer gig?

Are you absolutely certain there isn't?
Don't they just email the mods a Word doc containing all the code of conduct? You know, the stuff that actually lays out the rules for this kind of thing under the regulation law...
I don't know, honestly. But based on my experience dealing with other places, I'm pretty sure I'm right.

Email is part of it too, especially under the digital signature laws. That’s why you register everything with an email address—by clicking that confirmation link, you’re basically digitally signing the terms and conditions. Legally speaking, that carries the exact same weight as your actual handwritten signature. You really think they aren't watching?

By emailing over a formal code of conduct when someone signs their "moderator agreement," you’ve effectively covered your bases. It's basically a verified, legally binding contract at that point. The moderator can't claim ignorance—they've been officially notified of exactly what they're responsible for. Simple as that.

Look, buying a copy of Story at a newsstand is still a legally binding contract with clearly defined rights and obligations. You don't need to sign anything for it to be treated as a contract under the law. Simple as that.

Wherever you feel like. You could even publish your own website if you wanted to.

Well, I suppose you've decided to take the high road and act all saintly about it.

For heaven's sake, please don't go violating my privacy.

Are you absolutely certain there isn't? I mean, I suppose it's possible, but one can never be entirely sure about these things, I guess.
I mean, wouldn't it be more efficient if the moderators were actually sent a single, cohesive document via email—something formatted in Word that clearly outlines all the rules of conduct? It feels like everything regarding this specific issue should already be regulated within those guidelines.
I honestly don't know; I suppose, based on my past experiences with other places, that I might be right.

Yeah, I'm aware they don't have any formal employment or volunteer contracts in place.
I suppose I've also heard the claim that by checking some little box on a forum—you know, the kind you click during registration—you can somehow just wipe your entire existence clean.

Email plays a significant role in this too, particularly under the provisions of the electronic signature laws. That’s why you end up registering everything via email; by confirming that registration through your inbox, you are essentially providing an electronic signature for the terms and conditions. Legally speaking, that action is considered just as binding as if you had signed the document with a pen in your hand. I guess that's just how the legal framework operates these days.

You know, I suppose there are various different categories of emails.
Anything that doesn't include your private details—or information that could be used to figure out someone's identity—doesn't actually qualify as private data. If you want the technical breakdown, the definition of what constitutes private information is right there in the link to the Privacy Act (you can find it on that website you posted earlier).

I suppose sending over a formal code of conduct via email when someone signs their "moderator agreement" should technically cover all the bases regarding behavior. In my view, that process serves as a way to ensure they've been properly briefed on their responsibilities, effectively acting as a verified and legally binding contract. It’s a way to make sure every moderator is officially aware of what's expected of them under the regulation law.

I suppose I should clarify how that works. Under which specific regulation law are the obligations of someone working without a formal contract actually governed? Please, enlighten me.

I suppose, if you really think about it, buying a copy of Story at a newsstand is technically a legally binding contract with clearly defined rights and obligations for both parties. You don't actually need to sign anything for it to be treated as a formal agreement under the law, I guess.

A bit of an off-topic tangent here, but I have to ask—which specific regulation law are you actually referring to, and what kind of obligations are you talking about?

Paul Green31 Asks:
Well, the reason for that is pretty straightforward: posting private information is strictly prohibited on this forum, and under the Privacy Act, an email address is legally classified as private data.

It isn't against the rules here to post MSN Messenger Handles, even if they follow an email address format. As I understand it, those don't actually fall under the definition of private data according to the Privacy Act.

It seems to me that the forum really ought to be doing more to prevent the posting of private information, whether a user is sharing their own sensitive details or someone else's. I suppose there should be some kind of standard in place to stop that sort of thing from happening.

Technically, under the Privacy Act, I could choose to post my own private information right here on the forum, and then subsequently sue the platform for publishing it. It’s a bit of a legal gray area, I suppose, but the theory holds up. 😁
Pretty decent, wouldn't you say?

It seems to me that once I hit that "send" button, the forum essentially becomes the owner of my content, which would imply they also inherit all the liability for whatever I’ve written. I suppose that's just how these digital spaces operate nowadays, though it feels a bit heavy-handed, if you ask me.

Alright, look, I’d appreciate it if you could take a moment to revisit the original post. I’m struggling to see how this specific situation actually connects to my constant rambling about regulation laws. Honestly, there seems to be absolutely no link between the two—none at all, really.

The forum doesn't own my content. I don't know where you got that idea from—maybe it was that little clause next to the checkbox? I guess people tend to overlook those things. 😁

Paul Green31 As specified by:
The point is this: let's go looking for the speck in Sasha's eye.

🤣 Sasha's personal finances.

I suppose you could at least try to read with a bit more comprehension, especially since you seem so driven by this desperate need to defend someone in a position of power. It’s honestly a bit pathetic, if you ask me.
Those conservatives... it’s always the exact same tired narrative. ☕

Paul Green31 said:If you actually caught onto all that, I guess I have to give you some credit for paying attention. But honestly? You’re still missing the bigger picture. You've got the gist, sure, but you need to dig a little deeper if you want to truly get it. Do your homework.

Look, when it comes to the moderators—we're talking about a forum with a hundred of them who aren't even bound by any contract to protect my privacy—you're seriously claiming that them snooping at my email address isn't a violation of the Privacy Act? You didn't even bother to cite the actual law, which you really should be doing if you're going to throw it around like that.

Are you actually kidding me right now? Do you seriously not get what I'm asking? 🤷

Of course they aren't. Moderators fall right under the category of administrative staff, and because of that, they’re legally bound to follow the exact same procedures as anyone else working those types of roles. Isn't that just how it works?
And they can absolutely be held responsible for any screw-ups in that department, though I bet most people don't even realize it.

Just so you know, a ton of users' private info is sitting right there on the moderator side. It’s not just the current mods who can see it, either—it's former mods too, plus anyone who happens to know the passwords for the current or past moderation staff. Pretty wild, right?

Well, good luck finding a lawyer who can actually make sense of those regulations for you. Why don't you just sue the forum for handing over your private info to third parties? Once you land that massive settlement, give me a call and we'll grab a drink. We could even bring hollowtrucker77 along. 🙂

You're trolling.

Of course they aren't. Moderators fall under the category of forum administrative staff, and as such, they are legally obligated to follow the procedures that apply to anyone performing those types of roles.
They can absolutely be held accountable for lapses in that area, even if many people aren't aware of it.

Roles? Does anyone there actually have an employment contract or are they just volunteering?

Well, by all means, go find yourself a lawyer who can interpret those laws mentioned above. Sue the forum for handing over your private data to third parties, and once you win your settlement, give me a call so we can grab a drink. We could even invite hollowtrucker77 along. 🙂

I don't have any intention of doing that, but thanks for the suggestion. And hollowtrucker77 thanks you as well.

hollowtrucker77 said:And where on earth would they even get a hold of those names and surnames?
Paranoia is actually something you can get treatment for, you know?

Are you aware that handing out diagnoses is considered an insult to forum members? 🙂

In most cases, you have those specific names because the users provided them to you themselves.
Please don't try to attribute things to me that I never actually said.

hollowtrucker77 said:total bullshit from Anthony Collins4
I mean, seriously, the mods have access to everything—your photos, your home addresses, even the names of your pets—and on top of all that, they’re sitting there reading through your private messages, your emails, and your freaking bills

Yeah, it's bullshit, though really it's just having access to full names and being able to comment on the private data of various forum users and such.
But I suppose that isn't my concern; I'm not really trying to make a point about the illegality of it all, rather I'm thinking of Paul Green31. 😉

Paul Green31 said:Let’s say the topic was "why isn't it allowed to post recipes for making bombs out of kitchen supplies."

So you care about the vibe of the forum rather than the legalities, right? Well, guess what? You're still stuck with the law. 🙂

The forum has to "operate" according to the law, and that law says it's a bad idea to go around sharing private data. So yeah, you're technically right, but if you want exact definitions, you're going to have to dig through links and hire a lawyer.

By the way, if a moderator hands your email address over to a third party, that’s a violation of the Privacy Act and you could sue over it. If it were proven, the forum would be legally liable.

Wait a second, let me wrap my head around this. So, according to you, I can post a recipe for a bomb in my profile, but in some random thread, I cannot. 😁
Okay, I think I see what's happening here.

Regarding the moderators—on a forum where there are 100 moderators who aren't bound by any formal contract to protect my privacy, you're claiming that their access to my email address isn't actually a violation of the law (though you haven't cited the specific statute, which you really should if you're going to lean on it).

I wonder if you truly grasp the essence of my question? 🤷

Just so you're aware, a significant amount of users' private data sits on the moderator panel. It’s visible not just to active moderators, but also to former ones, and even to anyone who happens to know the passwords of past or present staff.

Paul Green31 As specified by:
Everything you need to know is right there in the link I sent you. Honestly, I think your best bet would be to find a decent lawyer who can sit down and actually walk you through the legalities of it all. Maybe they can make sense of it for you. 🙂

I’m more interested in the current vibe here on the forum, rather than any legalistic nonsense. 😉
What exactly have you gotten yourself worked up about?

Paul Green31 said:It’s right there in plain English. Maybe take a second to actually read the links to the regulation laws governing this stuff...

Skype isn't legally considered personal data, but an email address definitely is. That's the bottom line.
If a forum allows people to post email addresses, they're breaking the law. Every single website out there has legal obligations regarding personal data, just like anyone else.

That's why any site collecting private info has to have a "Privacy Act" statement and actually follow it. If they don't, handing over user data to third parties is a total violation of the law—and they'd get sued for it, quite successfully too.

And that's just one reason. There are plenty more where that came from...

For instance, how is an admin or a mod even supposed to verify that a user actually owns the address they provided?

Am I allowed to list it in my profile?

Or am I not?

If all the moderators can see my (unlisted) email address, what kind of protection does that actually provide?

What is truly more private than my forum handle, if my actual email is hrilium@something.com?

Are you suggesting this is yet another instance where the regulation law is being ignored on this forum?

Well, I suppose while I sit here waiting for my carrier pigeon to return—assuming it hasn't gone on strike or perhaps just taken an unannounced vacation—I feel compelled to revisit this topic. It seems the disputed posts haven't been cleared yet, yet somehow, my own post, which hasn't even been contested, remains flagged 🙏

To make this whole situation even more farcical, they’ve implemented three days entirely without any moderation at all 🙏

It appears that instead of actually penalizing genuine offenses—you know, things like blatant trolling or insulting other users—they've pivoted toward these vague, unwritten, and practically unenforceable rules. It honestly feels as though calling someone a Liger is treated as a far more grievous offense than telling a fellow user they aren't quite right in the head 🙏

And really, I probably deserve a good smack upside the head myself for expecting even a modicum of responsibility or logic from the rules of some random American forum

Because why would rules and moderation ever exist to improve the quality of discussion, when they can so easily be used to foster chaos, disorder, and the petty whims of the 'elite'—those privileged users and mods

I believe I already mentioned this in the bulletin PDF, but I am hoping it gets noticed here as well. For the upcoming season, I might suggest implementing a rule against writing in secret code
Or perhaps that was already part of this season's repertoire 🤔

By all means, feel free to continue with your usual routine—labeling me irrelevant, a troll, or some sort of barbarian if that makes you feel better. But the reality remains: this style of moderation does absolutely nothing to improve the quality of discussion on this forum. In fact, I’d argue it actually makes your job harder in several different ways. I suppose I'll assume that you and your colleagues are intelligent enough to figure out exactly what those issues are on your own, as I have very little desire to sit here and spell it all out for you.

I am sorry, but you still haven't actually answered my question—which specific rule did my post supposedly violate?

And if you are going to characterize that post as wild trolling (much like my other posts, which I would appreciate it if the admins or someone else took a look at), then how is it that others who are significantly more malicious in nature managed to slip by unnoticed?

Regarding the reporting process, if you had been slightly more careful in reading the introductory post and the links provided, you would see that posts were indeed reported and that the moderators did respond accordingly.

I realize that moderating an American message board is a difficult task, but these disparities in disciplinary action are frankly glaring, counterproductive, and quite senseless.

----

Well, as for whether my opening quote warrants punishment—and being called mentally unstable in the process—no, because then I honestly have no idea what is permitted to be written on this forum and what isn't.

Smith?

----

I also feel I must comment on this:

If something slips through the cracks, the right move is to report the post and give us time to react. Don't quote it, don't escalate the trolling, and then act surprised when you get a warning.

One moment I’ve reported a post, the next a moderator issues a warning, only for another moderator to come along and rescind it (you), all while I haven't engaged in any trolling or responded to provocations.

I’ve dealt with a similar situation before involving you and that user Metropolis, who also sent me a provocative, trolling post that mentioned little Marina; I didn't respond and instead reported him, you sanctioned him, only to later exonerate him here, much to the confusion of both the user and myself.
Just keep in mind, there is a post I could easily lose 65 points for without a second thought (just compare my flagged posts to his unflagged ones).

How am I supposed to have any confidence in your judgment?

Look, I sympathize with you, but the users didn't ask for the rules to be tightened to the point of absurdity. Since you've set yourselves such an ambitious task, at least try not to shift the blame onto us "wildcards and trolls."

Well, I suppose I’ve thought about that too, but it seems somewhat futile when you consider how often terms like "squid" or any of those endless variations pop up in thousands of other posts without anyone ever facing a single disciplinary action.

It shows up in the links above, and I could just quote them right here:

This is merely a cursory glance at two pages from the same thread.
Not to mention that the insults "slimy" or "greasy," along with the nickname Liger, are pretty much standard whenever Neil is mentioned in any topic.
I guess nobody really cares, though. 🤷

By the way, it isn't just that using that specific nickname or those descriptors goes unpunished; they don't even bother to penalize people for mocking Neil's physical appearance—things like his complexion, his lack of an athletic build, and so on.

With this post:

Amy Edwards15 said:As long as that household remains occupied by that specific trio of Liger types and two fools, Nirvana remains a legend and will always be 🙏

Warrior, a good soul, an intellectual 🎉

30 points—red card.

I sent a private message to the moderator, but I haven't received a response yet.

On a side note, I suppose I should point out some rather peculiar disciplinary criteria within this thread, though they seem to apply to the general site rules as well. This isn't coming from some irrational urge to criticize the moderators, I guess; it’s more of a sincere desire to understand the reasoning behind these inconsistencies. In my view, such illogicality can't really lead to a positive relationship between the users and the mods, or even toward the site itself.

A post that is pure trolling (yellow card):

Trolling (no sanction applied):

Insulting behavior (no sanction applied):

I'm not even quite sure what this falls under, but it keeps happening (no sanction applied):

And so on. These are just some posts directed at me specifically, which I have already reported.