Posts by Morgan Rodriguez57

So, this is basically one of those teen flicks—kind of like if you mixed The Last of Us meets Hunger Games... 🙂
In the HBO version, the teenage lead is torn between two guys, but here, the kid’s dealing with two girls instead...

Kimberly White63 said:I don't think that's quite right—part of being a moderator is keeping the conversation on track and making sure everything stays at a high level... which is pretty tough to do if you aren't actually jumping into the discussions themselves.

Actually, I'd argue you can definitely do it without getting involved in the debates... in fact, maybe even better that way...

Nicholas Watson said:I’d say a perfect example would be those two moderators from the TV network PDF—you know, the ones who were just given extra authority today to... They’re basically running the show over at the political moderation desk... just keeping everything in line... turns out that's how they handle things there...

You've gotta be kidding me, right?... 😁

The "objectivity" that the OP keeps bringing up... honestly, I think it’s really just a fancy way of saying some moderators can't seem to untangle their own personal worldviews from the actual job at hand—you know, the part where they're supposed to be impartial... it's like they let their own biases bleed right into everything they do... which makes things tricky...

lonebadger6 said:🤦

At this point, you're just trolling... honestly.

You guys have totally worn that word out until it doesn't even mean anything anymore—it’s kind of wild... It seems like whenever someone expresses an opinion you don't like, you just label it as "trolling" to shut it down. 🙄

brightpuma said:The only way you're actually going to see how the moderators are handling things is if you're specifically looking for those kinds of interactions... 🤷

I'm with you there—they really seem to have gone a bit overboard lately...

I find myself typing "I don't want to go off-topic, but..." quite often—mostly because I'm trying to avoid getting a warning from the mods...

Wait, is this also considered commenting on the moderation staff? 🍿

Sam Green73 said:Wait, isn't that previous message basically just an invitation for the mods to jump in and comment?

Nah, not really...

lonebadger6 Asks:
Do you have the right to speak your mind? Yeah, absolutely... I mean, of course you do...

Do you have the right to comment on how the moderation is handled? Well, nope—you don't... it’s clearly laid out in the forum rules, then again in the sub-forum guidelines, and honestly, it's been pointed out about a thousand other times too... anyway, getting a strike for that kind of thing carries a 30-point penalty.

lonebadger6 said:Maybe I didn't quite make myself clear—so let me try this again, but much shorter...

So, just a heads-up for everyone hanging out here—on this forum, we have a strict rule against commenting on the moderation itself within the discussion threads... it keeps things from getting too messy, I guess—so let's just keep the focus on the topics at hand and leave the mod talk for elsewhere... stays much calmer that way...

Do you remember what I wrote—I think I mentioned this to you specifically once—about how moderation isn't just about slapping stickers on things wherever you feel like... it’s more about making sure the environment and the whole atmosphere stay right for everyone to have a comfortable discussion...

Check out these revolutionary ideas... so, yeah, apparently there's a non-moderation policy regarding commenting on the mods—but instead of just dropping a massive, angry rant or getting hit with a ban, you could just delete or edit your post. Honestly, isn't that kind of genius?... 🙂

lonebadger6 said:Not at all, I don't take it personally 😁
Ali if you ever worked as a moderator, you know firsthand that a post like can land you a serious warning 😉 Ryan Vaughn7 was pretty chill, so he didn't really hand out any penalties 🙂

That’s just what I can't stand about the current crew—they just start handing out strikes left and right without any real logic behind it. There's zero distinction made between the users who are generally chill and the ones who are actual troublemakers. You have those folks who might crack a joke here or there—just being a little cheeky, really—but they're fundamentally good members, you know? You know they'll behave after a nudge... there's no point in punishing them for that, we aren't back in grade school where you get sent to the principal's office for everything. Strikes should be reserved for those restless spirits who just won't settle down—the first couple of strikes act as a warning, and then if they don't take the hint, they get sent to the wilderness... At least, that's how I used to handle things...🥳

lonebadger6 said:Let’s play a little game, shall we... let's pretend I'm the moderator of this politics forum just so I can walk you through how I’d handle things, along with my reasoning (it doesn't matter if I moderate somewhere else; here I'm just a user, and there I'm just a user, so feel free to play along)...

0. Taking everything that follows into account, I actually agree with what Ryan Vaughn7 did, because honestly, you all brought this on yourselves. From the very jump, the thread wasn't normal, wasn't argued, and lacked any kind of actual quality discussion.

But, let's say it hadn't been locked.

1. The whole thing kicked off because of some banal comment by a man claiming women are more intelligent. It was a pretty stupid take, but calling it outright misandry is a massive stretch. Comparing it to skin color is completely off base, but I won't dive too deep into that, since the point isn't the opening post, but rather how I would have moderated it.
I'd agree that the Morning somewhat misanthropic headline is basically misandrist—though really, it's less about misandry and more just pure stupidity...

2. Morgan Rodriguez57 gets a custom 100 points for trolling, commenting on moderation, and being intentionally obtuse since they know they shouldn't be doing that (there's a separate thread for those kinds of comments).

3. dernakamal gets 30 points for trolling/off-topic posts.

4. Whatever anyone personally thinks about Hap's post—it's fine.

5. Jesse Cook4 -- deletion and a yellow card.

6. dernakamal—this is where you start seeing why the thread needs to be shut down; an unargued claim.

7. surround—all good.

8. Jesse Cook4—confirming there is absolutely no appetite, not just from him, but generally, for even attempting a normal, reasoned debate on this topic.

Ryan Vaughn7 simply took the shortcut and closed the thread without handing out a few deserved cards, which means certain people, especially Morgan Rodriguez57, got off easy. There you have it 🙂

For some reason that I can't quite put my finger on... I just don't seem to be clicking with you guys... 😁

First off—you really shouldn't be starting threads about certain topics... and secondly, you definitely shouldn't be going around warning others not to do it either... 🙏 😵

Since I’ve actually pulled moderator duty a couple of times back in the day, here is how I’d handle things—if it were up to me... This specific thread being discussed right now? It’s really just about one isolated incident. On its own, it doesn't have much legs—it’s a bit thin, honestly. My approach would be to either broaden the scope of the topic if a more general thread didn't already exist—or, you know, just merge it into an existing master thread on the subject. I'd definitely keep a close eye on the off-topic stuff and those inevitable trolls—because we all know how that goes—but I'd make sure the actual conversation keeps flowing instead of just shutting it down... 🙂

The latest example from Policy 🍿

Samuel Lopez9 said:Sorry, I just don't follow... Are we saying we aren't allowed to talk about that topic here?

It's a no-go. And honestly, it’s not because the discussions turn into misogyny—if things go south there, that’s really on the moderators for not stepping in properly—it's more because it messes with the specific ideological narrative this forum has going... you know, the one where only women can be victims and men are somehow exempt. ☕

driftingcanyon16 said:And which of Gilda's posts are actually xenophobic or racist?

God, I could go back and forth with you all day, but I won't. It’s just too much. It’s actually kind of sad that you view yourself as some bastion of tolerance...

And that right there is exactly the issue. Some people just decide they are "something"—you know, deciding they're somehow better than the rest of us, or more enlightened, or whatever... ☕

So, is a person really supposed to just close their eyes and act like a total pushover 🙂 just to avoid looking backward or intolerant? 🍿

jadecyclist36 said:Fine, then why won't you label people as fascists on the politics board?
Honestly, I don't think you even read the thread. You're just jumping in with disconnected comments, or maybe you've confused this with the Politics section. 🤔
radical politics posts were worse coming from Morgan Rodriguez57, which makes this nothing compared to the stuff that regularly appears on the Politics boards.

Wait, excuse me? What exactly was I saying that qualifies as radical politics...? 🍿

restlesshound3 said:The topic was honestly pretty fascinating, and I was actually kind of caught off guard when it got locked. 👎 Either it should have been moderated from the jump, or they just should have let the debate play out.

But even beyond this, I’ve always found the rules and how the mods handle things over in the Women's Corner to be a bit strange. It’s not rare to see someone get sent a private message, or for people to be called complete idiots—even having new users pushed away from a thread—all without a moderator stepping in. (And by the way, this happens even with some of the folks who get labeled as fascists during those heated debates about immigration. 😁 )

Well, those have been the "jungle rules" of the Women's Corner for a long time now... 🙂

The way the rules are set up isn't exactly an accident, either. A specific little group gathered there—the "progressive" crowd, you know?—to talk about all sorts of social issues. They could have easily just hung out in the Politics section like everyone else, but apparently, they're so "advanced" that even the left-leaning moderation team over in Politics wasn't quite enough for them... so they found themselves a cozy little sanctuary instead.

Everything was running smoothly for the longest time, with them just patting themselves on the back, praising how enlightened and smart they all are... while basically kicking anyone "backward" or "Catholic zealot" out of the fold if they accidentally wandered too close to the edge.

That is, until now. This latest crisis has been so intense that some of those "progressives" are finally starting to see things clearly... and now, suddenly, they're being tossed aside just like the people they used to look down on.

I guess revolution really does eat its own children... 🙂

I didn't really mind the constant sniping from the mod crew for a few days—honestly, there are so many moderators in that group, it felt almost expected—but then things took this weird, sudden turn... you know? Like, once the majority of people finally stopped seeing things through rose-colored glasses and actually started looking at the facts for themselves, that little bubble of consensus just popped, and suddenly the whole thread gets shut down. ☕

From what I’ve gathered through my own little observations—and I say this quite calmly—it seems like some folks put such an absolute, blind faith in "common sense" and "science"... it's almost funny... they trust these concepts so much that they don't actually bother to use their own logic, nor do they truly grasp the science itself. They just sort of accept that science exists as a thing, you know? Like a given, without ever looking under the hood...

Just about a month ago, I found myself in a discussion with two people who were, well, let's just say they weren't exactly the brightest bulbs in the box... Not to get too carried away here—but despite having zero clue about the subject matter, and despite the fact that they don't follow any actual data—whereas I've spent countless hours buried in books trying to wrap my head around how everything connects—from politics and history to religion and economics... it felt like my perspective didn't carry a single ounce of weight simply because I have religious beliefs. Meanwhile, their arguments—which honestly had absolutely no foundation at all—were treated as gospel just because they aren't religious... 🙏

None of that stuff actually works in real life... honestly... ☕

And those fables—especially the one about the goose that lays the golden eggs... ☕