Posts by brightcrane56

On a certain date back in the day, I first signed up for Reddit, which naturally meant I was also part of the community over at CNN.

II. My marriage to this platform has produced countless threads; currently, there are 59 active discussions spread across CNN and some other niche sites, racking up 15,106 replies and over 582,363 views.

III. Eventually, on a specific date, I had to walk away from that community because it simply wasn't sustainable anymore, thanks to a unilateral decision made by the CNN administration.

IV. There was no attempt at mediation through the Department of Social Services prior to my "divorce" from the site, mostly because we both knew it wouldn't have changed anything.

Since Reddit has effectively cut me off from my own content—even while claiming that the responsibility for those threads lies with the author rather than the platform itself—I am formally submitting this request and expect a proposal for an out-of-court settlement. I am insisting on either migrating all my threads to a space where I actually have access or having them promptly deleted. It is completely unacceptable to be left in a position where I can't reach my own posts, especially ones that have garnered over half a million reads, so I look forward to a swift response regarding my demand.

Sincerely,

/insert name here/

lonebadger6 said:I was just looking at one specific example, though I did say I generally agree with you on the core concept itself. There’s going to be endless complaining regardless, and even worse, if this hypothetical "forum defender" actually sides with the admins, half the people who got banned will start treating them like they're part of the moderation team, no matter how right they might be...

So, my take is that while the idea is fair in principle, it’s just not doable in practice. It feels like some people haven't really grasped what the proposal is actually about. It isn't about picking someone to bicker with the admins over every little thing or every obvious violation that anyone can see from a mile away... nor is it—to touch on what brightcrane56 mentioned—about users being "helpless" and unable to argue for themselves. It’s more about the fact that users are increasingly getting screwed over with the whole "that's trolling, bye" excuse, which is a huge issue right now. I think that's a legitimate problem facing the site, but I don't think this is the right way to fix it.

Nice one, genius—have you ever considered running for office?

stormyraven14 said:A moderator doesn't represent the views of the users, nor do they push their own personal opinions... much like how moderators shouldn't act in any other capacity, really.

So, they’ll back either one or neither—it all comes down to whether a punishment was unfair, rather than whether the user is pro-LGBTQ+ or anti-LGBTQ+.☕

You're talking nonsense.

One Reddit user claims that being gay is actually a sickness and reaches out to our resident veteran X for some guidance.
On the flip side, another Reddit user thinks being gay is perfectly fine and also turns to X for their take on the matter.
So, which side is our veteran X going to take?

Honestly, looking at your posts, you’ve got enough ammunition there to get a permanent ban. I wasn't lucky enough to get that kind of treatment myself.
Now I'm actually a little jealous! 😠

Have you caught a glimpse of the Zillow listings yet?

Instead of replying to everyone one by one, just head over to the main thread and take a look at the absolute circus the moderators are running regarding the Lady and everything else. It’s still happening, and they're doing it all under the heavy-handed protection of the mod team.
Of course, then it’s my fault for "misunderstanding" the post and being a troll. Honestly, kids... you guys are just kids...

electricjackal55 said:And the actual rest of the sentence is this.

So, I guess all of us who took that post as an insult to believers are just total idiots, while you guys (the moderators) are the only ones with any sense.
That’s exactly what I’m talking about—it really gets to the heart of why moderation on ZK is such a headache.

Sarah Doyle54 said:Let's stop pretending we don't know what's going on here.

First off, I’m done engaging with Mume's constant spinning of facts. For those who might be out of the loop: there was a previous post where I mentioned that people who are easily swayed are basically just mindless sheep, and that somehow got interpreted as me attacking believers. I included two different disclaimers, and honestly, everyone else in the thread explicitly told him he was overreacting and clearly understood my point.

Secondly, regarding Megan Torres's response. We looked at JPK's post, which was a subtle dig at A. border, and yeah, it was definitely a low blow. However, like I said before, we don't ban posts from A. border. If A. border hadn't responded by saying something like "you're an idiot" or "my dad has a better car than yours," he wouldn't have been carded either. Ultimately, the verdict is that the post doesn't warrant being carded, and we shouldn't be banning people just for the sake of reciprocity. In a more strictly moderated sub-forum, sure, it might get carded, but not here. Then there's Medin's post, where he claims pilgrims are uneducated—that isn't grounds for a ban either. I personally disagree with him and think it's a broad generalization that's pretty easy to debunk, but I simply can't go around carding people for opinions like that.

If you don't have anything else to contribute, I think we can wrap this discussion up. 🤷

Actually, we can't, because you aren't a moderator here and you don't have the authority to close or moderate this debate.
And just to clear up any confusion, the exact term I used was "empty-headed, gullible sheep."

Sarah Doyle54 said:1. I haven't insulted any believers, whether directly or indirectly.
2. I didn't use my moderator status to influence discussions.
3. Therefore, I have no intention of apologizing.

And are you planning on apologizing for maliciously misinterpreting everything I wrote?

That’s just not true.
On the ZK, it's clearly possible to decide that something doesn't exist or simply never happened, and then try to pass that off as the truth. But no matter how hard anyone tries to make it stick, it just isn't reality.

electricjackal55 said:Which post exactly?

First off, do I really look like your personal assistant to you?
Second, the fact that you’re asking me to point out the specific post pretty much speaks volumes about your moderation skills.

Sarah Doyle54 said:Mume, don't twist my words. I never once suggested that making fun of a glowing statue was an insult to believers.

Oh, please, you know that’s not true—you went straight for the jugular and insulted believers directly. To make matters worse, you actually pulled rank and used your moderator status just to shut down anyone who disagreed with you.
Do you have enough integrity to at least offer an apology?

velvettrucker52 said:I actually stepped away from the mystery thread just yesterday because the debate was starting to get a little too heated for my liking.
That’s how we differentiate everything that gains traction here on Mystery. In those specific cases, we look at the very first post—the one that actually kicked off the discussion on Mystery—rather than those overly polished, manufactured opening posts that people usually aim for.
Also, in... According to the ZK rules. He’s explaining how we’re going to handle those controversial topics, which is exactly what we settled on during our last round of ZK correspondence, so I honestly don't see why everyone is acting so surprised.

You forgot to mention that the moderator just turned this thread into a total powder keg. Was that just an accident, or is there something else going on here?
Quote: Ace of Diamonds

I haven't seen anything from brightcrane56 yet, but I'm definitely keeping an eye out! Asks: ... plus all you moderators, because you truly have each other's backs, even when it isn't strictly necessary.

electricjackal55 said:The thread was pulled from the mystery section and started in a chatty style, just like all the other similar ones. I honestly don't see any issue with how it was handled.
Last time around, everyone on the forum was complaining because they didn't understand the rules regarding cardboard limits and what's actually allowed, but now that the debate has really heated up, those rules are sitting right there clearly laid out in the intro post.

Oh, no we aren't doing that. 🙂
This whole argument blew up because the moderators completely messed up the thread; you were the first one to kick things off with that "who cares" attitude when opening it, then Sarah Doyle54 used her mod powers to insult believers, then you went ahead and switched the thread status from casual chat to strictly moderated, and frankly, all the moderators together are just looking out for each other whenever it suits you.

I was actually going to start a new thread myself, but I see Megan Torres has already jumped in.

First off, let’s look at how Moderator1 actually kicks off a topic:

Quote: aryna said:In which one? That Westgate mall in Nairobi? Man, you really dodged a bullet there!

Anyway, what do you guys think about the miracles in Medjugorje? Is it all just leftover Christmas lights?

That is a textbook example of how *not* to open a discussion.

Secondly, Moderator2 goes ahead and insults people, which just turns the whole thread toxic and leads to nothing but warnings and bans.

Thirdly, after fourteen pages of back-and-forth, Moderator1 decides to "correct" the original post like this:

This thread will be strictly moderated, so the rules for conduct and posting remain the same as the rest of the forum. Because of that, the usual ZK trolling and mockery won't be tolerated here.

In short:
1. Participants are expected to refrain from insults, armchair diagnosing, or labeling other users and groups.
2. Posts containing controversial content won't be deleted; instead, they will result in a warning. A warning for insults is 45 points. Trolling warnings will be issued as custom explanations and carry 35 points.
3. Commenting on moderator warnings or discussing moderation within this thread is strictly prohibited. Ignoring or responding to them results in a 30-point warning for commenting on moderation, which violates sub-forum rules.
4. Replying to warned posts is forbidden. Replying to a warned post carries a 10-point penalty.
5. If the thread gets too heated, it may be locked for one or more days.

And of course, they did that just so nobody would dare ask who is actually responsible for the mess this thread has become.
This is embarrassing. It's an absolute disgrace!!!

Bradley Sanders4 said:Dammit, I’m copy-pasting this thing, I swear I’m checking it, and yet somehow I still manage to screw it up. 🙈

I think what you were actually trying to quote was that old folks' saying: "Give a woman a shovel, and she'll dig her own way through."

Bradley Sanders4 said:Honestly, I think we barely interfere at all. Especially when it comes to those "nudges." It’s pretty obvious if you look closely. I might as well put a massive disclaimer over the entrance to Zelenskyy's headquarters: Abandon all hope, ye who enter here. 😁 😁 😁

Abandon.
All hope.

To those who enter.

velvettrucker52 said:http://www.forum.com/showpost.php?p=2...&postcount=135

http://www.forum.com/showpost.php?p=1...&postcount=123

http://www.forum.com/showpost.php?p=2...&postcount=116

http://www.forum.com/showpost.php?p=2...&postcount=120

It took me less than three minutes of superficial searching to pull this together.🤷

And that's just looking at Erpov.

If I actually started digging into Till, 🤣

I honestly don't know what else to tell you. If Paul Morales3 had slapped you with a ban just because you talked back, I would have called her a terrible moderator, and frankly, I might have suggested she was about as bright as a broken flashlight. But she didn't issue a ban.
You both had a little spat, and that was it.
The same thing happened recently with her and her, and nothing came of it. No bans, no warnings, no emails, nothing.

There's a real difference here: Herp actually has a sense of humor, whereas you guys don't. But the bigger issue is that you've both gotten so lost in the drama that you don't even realize it yourselves.

I’m going to go ahead and make my suggestion once again: we really need to abolish the distinction between men's and women's sports, because honestly, seeing them split up like that is just such a blatant example of sexism and gender inequality.

slydrifter39 said:Exactly. It used to be that you could rattle off a whole list of different nations you’d visited, but now? It all just feels like one big blur. :/

I guess those girls from the big city won't be the easiest local catch anymore... 😳