Posts by wanderingcanyon61

I honestly think this turned out pretty well 😁

View on imgur

Rebecca Campbell34 said:Well, you just can't help yourself, can you? 😳

I really have to wonder what on earth keeps pulling you toward those forbidden places... 🕺 😁

Honestly, you know what the issue is—I'm basically banned from everywhere else, but at least things are actually fun over here! 🤣

Drew Ross2 said:I'm not just messing around with them; it’s more like a full-on, heavy-handed, authoritarian grip! 😁

Just stick to that story if you're talking to the public...
🙂🤣

Rebecca Campbell34 said:Yeah, we get it—you’re basically being held hostage by the authorities at this point! 😳

It’s certainly not easy for you either 😳

I guess I'm just persona non grata now 😳

bluebadger112 said:That’s how it looks, even if I’m just making an analogy here.

And honestly, I’m not even upset about it—I’m just interpreting things. Correctly, of course!

😁 Honestly, I think you just don't know how to handle all this sudden popularity of yours... 😳 😁

Rebecca Campbell34 said:Someone with actual guts should go ahead and open a different poll.🥳

I can't do it myself... 😳

bluebadger112 said:Honestly, this poll is a total joke. The "most interesting" person on a forum is usually just the one guy everyone else pretty much ignores. 😁 It reminds me of this little playground over by my house where all the kids hang out—there's always that one kid who's a bit of an outcast that the rest of them just pick on.

If this were a legitimate poll, you’d definitely have my vote! 😉

🤣 Wait, are you calling yourself an outcast then? 😳

steelorca5

There isn't a single clone in sight...

I’m totally with you on that. With everything being so quiet and stagnant during this quarantine, it’s definitely better to have as many people active on the forum as possible, otherwise we're all just going to be bored out of our minds 😳

Edward Fisher86 said:And who exactly is the expert here?
You've got participants posting right at the start of this thread claiming that panicking now is better than having regrets later. Truly top-tier expertise right there.

I'm not following this thread closely—just glancing at it every now and then—but even I get the impression things have become way too tense. A much better approach would have been to take a post that’s actively fueling this mass hysteria and systematically dismantle its arguments.
That’s how lonebadger6 was handling it early on, and I found myself just quoting his posts. I have no idea what changed or why, but for the record, I'm barely even keeping up with this.

So you aren't following the thread, yet you're still here commenting and judging the moderation? Are you just bored?

velvetmoose9 said:Thanks to everyone for the feedback aimed at making this two-way communication "highway"—with all its intersections and bridges—a little smoother for everyone traveling in any direction.

Just like you’ve got road signs out there regulating traffic (speed limits, one-way streets, no entry, etc.), we have certain rules here on the forum set and maintained by the moderators.
Please stick to the moderator guidelines, the forum rules, and the moderator pdf politics.

Looking at everything written in this thread, the moderation team is trying to steer things toward cooling down the passions and keeping panic at bay, though they're still being pretty liberal and relaxed with how they handle things.

There’s another major point to address here.

In this open discussion, not a single person has actually commented on a single sentence I made in my previous appeal regarding the moderation of the Corona saga.
Instead, you've all just focused on commenting on the moderators as a function.
Nobody has shown even the slightest desire to touch upon the following facts I laid out (and am repeating here):
- We need to show respect and consideration toward every (especially relatively new) virus.
- It's been proven that the Corona virus can lead to fatal outcomes, primarily among the elderly, those with chronic illnesses, the malnourished, or the exhausted (for instance, medical staff in a certain Chinese province were subjected to days of grueling labor—they weren't exactly eating and drinking well, and sleep was basically non-existent).
- It has an extremely high potential for spreading.
- For a very illustrative and educational look at the actual reality of the Corona virus, check out the deep dives online—specifically the Nu2 segment with Aleksandar Stanković on March 1st, 2020, featuring guest Professor Dr. sc. Igor Rudan.
It calls for caution, but without the panic or the hysteria.
It dismantles and demystifies myths and fears.
It’s presented in a way that’s incredibly easy to understand, even for laypeople (honestly, an impressive presentation, much like a packed Dodger Stadium).

The only thing you guys did was repeatedly and biasedly twist my points.

In fact, you even had plenty of room to lament, comment, or correct things over on the PŽK.

You probably didn't even listen to—let alone comment on—one of the greatest (true) authorities on epidemiology from this part of the world; which is exactly why I recommended listening to the views of the esteemed Professor Dr. sc. Igor Rudan right here.

You’re free to read the NYT from February 28th of this year; it has a solid editorial, and you can comment on that too (though, after all this, please don't accidentally wander back onto the PŽK).

You had the chance to develop this discussion in a correct and constructive way.

But instead, many of you went (and kept going) straight for the ad hominem attacks.

The fact that you haven't received your well-deserved "red cards" yet just means that from now on, even the smallest infraction (trolling, insults, acting stupid, ad hominem attacks, playing lawyer, or critiquing the moderation) will be more seriously "rewarded."
Issuing warnings can also be retroactive.

Let's move on in a more casual tone. ☕

Can I actually answer you here, or will I get banned if I do? I don't understand anything anymore, but it doesn't matter.

Here is today's interview with Rudan on Index.

"Basically, it’s been CONFIRMED that the only people being counted as infected are those who actually ended up needing hospital care and were tested there. These numbers aren't representative of anything; you can't just take their mortality rates and apply them to the total number of people infected in Wuhan, let alone the entire population of Wuhan—meaning both the sick and the healthy. Because of that, looking at confirmed cases versus deaths online and trying to draw conclusions by simply dividing one by the other is totally misguided," writes Rudan. "In fact, both the numerator and the denominator are completely off. Even the death counts in the numerator are misleading because if you're tracking confirmed infections and deaths in 'real-time' day by day, obviously a huge chunk of those newly infected haven't even had a chance to recover or pass away yet. People in intensive care will be passing away over the coming days, weeks, maybe even months, so your death count will continue to climb against the pool of infected people you already have on record. This means your fatality rate—calculated as 'deaths among confirmed cases'—won't stay stuck at 2% or 3%; it could actually climb to 7% over time. So, while saying '3% or 4% of confirmed cases have died so far' isn't technically a lie, that's exactly what the WHO did," Rudan explains. "But what they failed to mention is that this fatality rate among the CONFIRMED cases is completely unrepresentative of the fatality rate among ALL infected individuals, which is significantly, significantly lower. As an epidemiologist, it wouldn't surprise me if it were ten times lower. Actually, I wouldn't even be surprised if it were 50 times lower. And that would make it less deadly and dangerous than a common flu. However, since the virus is new and unknown, I have to allow for the possibility that it might be slightly more dangerous, and perhaps the death rate among confirmed cases is only 3 to 5 times lower than the rate among the total infected. The only thing I am absolutely certain about is that the number of CONFIRMED cases is definitely not equal to the TOTAL number of infections in Wuhan. And current global figures for COVID-19 are still largely determined by what happened in Wuhan at the start of the epidemic, since more than two-thirds of cases worldwide still trace back to Wuhan," says our Scientist.

So, the guy is essentially saying that both the numerator and the denominator are flawed and that we can't draw any real conclusions based on these current numbers. He believes that, from a professional standpoint, the actual numbers are much better, which is a legitimate take, though he leaves the door open to the idea that things could be worse since the virus is still a mystery to us.

I'll put it this way myself:

Let's try this—even though I don't know why I'm even bothering with this nonsense since I'll probably just get banned for "trolling."

You simply cannot perform an analysis using incomplete, inaccurate, and most importantly, highly dynamic data through static mathematical methods. It's all wrong.
What that biologist from Toronto wrote is absolute mathematical nonsense, and it's honestly laughable that a Scientist would go public with such foolishness.

What's the deal here?

The infection data is inaccurate. It's obvious to everyone that nobody knows the true number of infected people in any country in the world. Therefore, the number of infected is not a relevant metric at all.
What data is actually exact? The number of deaths and the number of recoveries. Those are the only two numbers we truly know. These are the so-called "closed cases" (though, okay, it complicates the math because recovered people can get reinfected, but let's ignore that for now). Out of all the closed cases, 8% have died. Of course, again, this is a snapshot in time and might not mean much because the window is so short. But, you can certainly draw *something* from it.

Another interesting fact is that out of those currently infected (again, that’s a totally flawed metric since we don't actually know the total number of infections, just the number of people who tested positive), 18% are in critical or serious condition.

It is still incredibly difficult to draw any real conclusions here. From a statistical standpoint, the situation on the Diamond Princess provides some fascinating data because we have controlled conditions there, much like what we see in countries that are running massive testing operations, such as Italy.
China, for instance, is an extreme outlier.

So, what I'm trying to get at is that you can't predict anything or explain anything using simple math right now. The data is misleading, messy, and inaccurate, so we really need to stop with these silly little calculations.
Of course, we need to calm the panic, but we also need to stay cautious, because as I said, we don't even fully grasp what we're dealing with yet.

And then I get banned for trolling and spreading panic.

That is exactly the kind of moderation inconsistency I am always talking about! Why do I get banned for saying the exact same thing as Professor Igor Rudan, especially if you agree with him? From what I can see, myself and several other forum members are simply warning against jumping to conclusions based on faulty data. Our goal isn't to cause panic—it's actually the opposite! Let's be rational, look strictly at the facts, and evaluate potential risks so we can protect ourselves in time. That’s it. That is just rational thinking. It's called risk management.

It’s like if I went to get comprehensive auto insurance and posted in a thread that I was doing it because there might be a big storm this summer that could wreck my car, just to cover my bases... and then you ban me for "spreading panic" about a storm.
I'm not spreading fear. And I don't want there to be a storm. I just want to be protected from the risk factor.

Besides, that is precisely why hospitals here have set aside spaces for quarantine. They probably won't need them—it would be wonderful if they didn't, nobody wants that—but... if it becomes necessary, they are ready. Hospitals aren't spreading panic by being prepared. Or do you disagree, and now I'm going to lose 300 points for that?

Joseph Watson3 said:This thread is basically a car crash.

The moderator seems to be really leaning into this role of being the public savior—protecting us from any supposed panic—by deleting posts and banning anyone who dares to disagree with his "analysis."
The backbone of this alleged analysis? Unreliable statistics, blatant cherry-picking of those same unreliable stats, and a total failure to grasp how exponential growth actually works. Not to mention a complete misunderstanding of the risks involved when dealing with something largely unknown that happens to be spreading exponentially.

briskjackal5 is one of the few people actually writing quality posts and asking intelligent questions, yet the moderator is acting like a toddler in a sandbox, throwing tantrums under the guise of "preventing panic." He’s so caught up in the drama—as if he’s the only thing standing between us and everyone jumping off buildings out of pure terror.

I just don't get it. They present themselves and their fellow moderator as top-tier experts, even though their analysis is completely off base. Meanwhile, they treat the rest of the community like they're all uneducated peasants who can barely find the keys on a keyboard.
I've personally tried to politely point out twice that you can't apply static analysis to dynamic models—that it's a complete mathematical error showing a deep lack of statistical understanding regarding future projections—and what do I get? A ban, all because apparently, I was "inciting panic."
And from what I can see, that's exactly what happened to Steve, too. He tries to explain why the methodology is flawed, and he ends up banned... 😁
It's reached a level where if you were on a fringe conspiracy forum and said the Earth was round, you'd get banned because the moderator decided it wasn't, and since they're such a "world-class expert," they know best. 😁 Then, if you show them a photo of Earth from space taken by NASA, they'll just ban you for implying the people at NASA are idiots.

lonebadger6 said:Just keep breathing and living off the land, you'll make it through... Don't sweat the small stuff. Everything is perfectly clear, just as clear as the fact that you won't be coming back here to vent once this whole hysteria dies down.

As for those "fellow moderators" and the "far more expert forum users," I've got just one thing to say:

🤣 🤦 🤣 🤦 🤣 🤦 🤣 🤦 🤣

It seems you just can't grasp that the entire point isn't about mortality rates, or whether it's targeting the elderly versus the young, or if the sick are more at risk than the healthy, or even if this virus is deadlier than the flu or just a bad cold.
The real crux of the matter is that we simply don't know for sure yet. No one in the entire world has reached a definitive "this is it, let's go home" conclusion (except for you and our dear moderator).
And while the question remains open and the scientific community hasn't reached a unified consensus, most cases of Corona end up in hospital quarantine.
We are all painfully aware that there isn't enough capacity for that. Nor is there enough capacity for any additional measures should they become necessary.
If we are being honest about that, then we also have to acknowledge that if things get worse, some severe cases will inevitably receive inadequate treatment. And that could very well lead to an increase in mortality.

That is exactly what people are debating! Whatever happens... how we prepare for it and what specific measures are required. I mean, China is doing a hell of a job keeping it under control. That’s clearly a good thing, but nobody else in the world is implementing it like that.

So why on earth would you two "experts" try to stop people from discussing it? These are incredibly pressing topics within the scientific community itself. There is zero global consensus right now.

It’s honestly ridiculous to shut down the conversation and act like you're the ultimate authorities, refusing any debate just because you're certain of something that you can't actually prove—not that anyone else relevant in the world can prove it either!

In fact, if you're so confident, I suggest you publish a paper in the Scientist and maybe even make a little money off it. You might even snag a Nobel Prize while you're at it.

Go ahead and laugh all you want, but this kind of narrow-mindedness really just highlights how shallow your understanding of the subject is and how much you're actually embarrassing yourselves... 😢

If you honestly believe that silencing users—or even just cutting down the number of people participating in a thread who actually understand statistical modeling and viral impact way better than you and your fellow moderator—is some kind of effective strategy to fight an obvious pandemic, then by all means, keep going 👍
I could actually (statistically) prove to you that reducing the number of people discussing the virus, while stubbornly insisting that your own lack of understanding is the only truth, does absolutely nothing to stop the spread. In fact, I’m pretty sure I could demonstrate that the virus doesn't care whether you write about it or not.
But hey... who am I to question the methods of two moderators on a major US forum?

So, please, carry on 👍

briskjackal5 said:We don't have a backup plan.
So, I guess we really ought to try and make what we currently have even better, assuming there’s actually a need for it and a way to pull it off. 😁

It’s honestly not that easy to get all the loose ends tied up and manage the moderation side of things properly.
And, hey, I definitely wouldn't frame this as "mods versus the users." I really hope the mods won't see it that way either. 😁

-Steve

It’s impossible when they’re the only ones holding the tools to silence anyone who dares to disagree with them.🙂
In my opinion, the only way to deal with political threads is to just ignore them entirely, because discussing them becomes totally pointless with this style of moderation.

What’s the point of having a discussion where a moderator insists that 2+2=3, and if you dare to correct them, they just delete your post and hand out a ban?
Well, if that's the case, they can just enjoy their thread all by themselves, patting themselves on the back alongside everyone else who agrees with them, and leave it at that... It won't stop the virus, it won't change its characteristics, it won't lower mortality rates, and it certainly won't reduce panic in the end. All it does is drive away active users, which, honestly, is already a long-term trend on this forum anyway... 😁

It just makes zero sense. A moderator hands out 200 points just for "trolling" or "spreading panic," even when you're simply explaining why it's methodologically flawed to run statistics based on inaccurate or incomplete data. Anything that doesn't align with what two moderators think—even if it comes from top-tier universities or major health organizations—gets labeled as fear-mongering and results in a ban.
So, there's really no point in trying to have a debate over there, because the whole thing is basically just a platform for people to suck up to the moderators, which is incredibly boring 😁

Check out this little song I found! 😳

A tiny lizard crawled right in,
Sneaking up on the little one,
Yeah, a sneaky little lizard girl,
Crept up on the little guy,
Oh yeah...



I don't own the rights to this one, but man, it's actually pretty catchy ☕

You’ve really hit on a great topic here 👍 🤣
...

Balcony 😁
Basil
Feral

I’m standing firmly against the perm ☕ Honestly, someone who has been contributing to this forum since 2008 shouldn't be losing their status just because a small group of current chatty users doesn't like them on a specific thread. It's not fair to any part of the ☕
community. This forum shouldn't be punishing long-term, dedicated members. The reality is that younger generations aren't really using forums as their main way to communicate anymore, so if we drive away the people who actually keep this place alive today, the whole site is going to fade away ☕
...