Posts by Carl Fisher7

Michelle Phillips54 said:You aren't.

The proof:

Look at the context of what I posted—and besides, I did mention I was "mostly generalizing."

Fair enough, I'll give you that. Just try to make sure your opinions don't turn into those situations where someone ends up having to defend themselves just because of how you phrased things.

I'll keep that in mind. That's exactly why I apologized.

Hey,

So, this isn't an official appeal—since I haven't actually been banned—so I’m not posting this on the Reddit ban thread. I haven't even been hit with a formal penalty, just a warning. But since I've been told not to reply to mods directly within a thread, here’s my take on things.

Michelle Phillips54 said:I didn't unpromptedly analyze your traumas, unlike you.
If you don't quite grasp how this forum works or what a moderator actually does, I can give you a quick refresher. When a user goes overboard, the moderator steps in with a warning. It isn't some grand power trip, so please, spare me the victim act.
There’s a massive difference between having a discussion—which is encouraged—and what you’re doing, which is performing amateur psychoanalysis on a user, dredging up her supposed traumas, and then playing therapist by offering unsolicited advice on how to fix them. She didn't come here looking for counseling; she shared an opinion on the topic. What you're doing is "user-hunting." She didn't start a thread asking for a deep dive into her psyche.

Don't reply to this post. This isn't a debate; it's a warning.

- I wasn't analyzing anyone's personal trauma. The person who started the thread was the one who brought those things up herself, and I was mostly speaking in generalities about how those issues apply to everyone.

- This wasn't psychoanalysis of a specific user; it was my perspective on certain causes, framed as a general observation rather than a targeted critique of an individual. To me, that's what a conversation is—it's exactly what this forum is for.

- And at no point did I offer any advice on how to "resolve" anyone's traumas, whether they were real or perceived.

As for the whole "targeting users" thing, you've got a point there. My apologies to Lucid Mynx and to you; that really wasn't my intention. It just happened because we were discussing her and talking with her, but the nature of these topics makes it incredibly hard to walk the line—people don't just share opinions here, they dump their life stories, and it's easy to accidentally cross over into making it about the person instead of the subject.

rustydrifter10 said:Carl Fisher7, look—whoever sent you those anonymous messages doesn't matter to us. It’s really none of our business. Seriously. dozens of people They can always reach out directly if they want to file a formal complaint—otherwise, what you're describing is just hearsay and doesn't actually follow the guidelines laid out in this PDF. Just sit tight and wait for the head moderator to weigh in on the rest.

Here we go again—another classic case of a loaded question. 🤦 I never actually said anything about... Dozens of people. I don't know what to tell you—it just is what it is. It’s been dozens of emails. Just endless ones.Oh, sure—now you’re going to try and tell me this wasn't built that way on purpose? That it isn't some kind of deliberate setup? Please.

Here’s a quote:

Carl Fisher7 said:I was talking about... Dozens of emails. Just dozens.Different people, different stories.

So far—total count—I've sent everything via DM. A handful. men

A few. Thanks.

She finally reached out to me... A handful. woman

If I had actually checked my inbox, I might have seen it. A few quick shoutouts. And just to confirm—I’m right.

These are... two Here are my thoughts on the moderation ratings I found sitting in my inbox.

And this, because we're dealing with nothing but pure fiction here.

Emily Patel70 said:So, let me get this straight—people are unhappy with how we’re handling the moderation, but instead of filing a formal complaint with us (since I haven't seen a single official grievance hit my desk), or reaching out to the admins, or even posting about it here... they’re just sliding into your DMs? That's certainly one way to run a feedback loop, I guess. 😕

I’m officially stepping up to be the first person here to file a formal complaint—though, let's be honest, there have been plenty of informal grumbles scattered throughout these threads already. In this particular instance, a user reached out to me and said...

I complained about how she was moderating, but they didn't give me any kind of response.

Look, I can't verify that myself, but I highly doubt she's making things up.

Chloe Wilson46 said:I totally missed this, but apparently, it’s being used as "logical proof" 🤦 that I’m the same user who slid into your DMs.

So, here are a few quick facts to clear things up:

- No, I am not the user who ever exchanged private messages with Carl Fisher7—and honestly, that isn't how I typically interact on this board anyway.

Nope, I can confirm you aren't her, and I never said or even hinted at anything to the contrary. I also confirm that you and I have never swapped PMs. So, there goes that little bit of gossip. 😁

I’ve already filed a formal complaint, laid out my reasoning, and sent over a lengthy follow-up email explaining everything. Honestly, it’s more than enough—just try reading it with a bit of actual comprehension for once.

Continuing this thread is just pointless at this stage because you're all just cherry-picking snippets to discredit me using gossip and other nonsense. You aren't even addressing the blatant lie told about Mrs. X—a lie that was obviously cooked up from a post by speculas, who even admitted it here (taking the fall himself). An apology to Mrs. X would have actually helped your credibility. But since it didn't happen, any apology now will feel forced. This is just poor moderation, plain and simple.

Emily Patel70 said:That's strange—maybe your friend just has a bad memory.

👏 Bravo. We're still stuck trying to pin things on some nonexistent "friend." See? This is exactly the level of moderation I'm talking about.😁

Emily Patel70 said:Look, nobody has come to complain to us in the last week.

I complained about her moderating, but they haven't replied to me at all.

I don't know, someone is clearly lying!

Emily Patel70 said:So, let me get this straight—people are unhappy with how we’re moderating, yet they aren't reaching out to us (since I haven't seen a single formal complaint), nor are they contacting the site admins, nor posting about it here... they're just sliding into your DMs instead? 😕

That's a lie. I've filed my own complaints at least once before—probably more, honestly—and some other user reached out to me to vent, too. It’s perfectly normal that people aren't filing official grievances every single day, even if they’re fed up with how you guys moderate. And trust me, they are. I am, and so are all the people who have messaged me about it.

I might be able to suspect you're telling the truth.

You can suspect it all you want, but you've got no grounds. Because I'm telling the truth.

I can tell you one more time that I'm sorry someone your age has sunk so low as to try and take it out on the moderators in such an immature way.

How sad.

Personally, I'm sorry about the decline in moderation quality—which, let's be honest, wasn't exactly objective to begin with. That's the real tragedy here.

says:
What's actually funny is that neither you nor your "DM buddy"

Man, you really didn't need to go there. I was talking about dozens of emails from all sorts of different people—not some specific "friend" of mine, because, frankly, I don't have those types of friends.

Emily Patel70 said:Carl Fisher7, honestly, I didn't expect you to start bringing up hooking up via DM. That’s some high school level stuff—definitely not how a grown man acts at your age.

Besides, the fact that some users supposedly slide into your inbox doesn't actually change the point of this discussion.

You've thrown a lot of nonsense out there, but if we strip away all your claims about what you're doing in your spare time, it really just boils down to two things: you aren't happy with how the ZouD mods handle things, and we aren't happy with the way you treat other people on this forum.

All those deleted posts are still sitting right there for the admins to see, along with any issues stemming from your private messages—so there's really no need to sink this low.

Be as clever as you want, but that kind of behavior isn't tolerated on ZouD. If it bothers you and your (alleged) buddies so much, feel free to take your little hookups to private email instead.

I think we're done here; I have no intention of lowering myself to your level.

Talking about how your moderation was handled in my DMs isn't "gossip." People only resort to that because you guys refuse to accept a single actual argument.

Ashley Evans71 said:That whole bit about friendship was just a joke,

Well, obviously it was a joke. The real question is whether everyone else actually caught the punchline.

tearing people apart, insulting them, making false accusations, trolling...

Look, I think my choice of the word "dissecting" was just as clumsy as your comment above. I tried to clarify what I actually meant afterward, but apparently, that didn't help much either...

Emily Patel70 said:On Reddit, everyone who actually contributes something useful to the discussion should be treated equally, regardless of where they're posting from.

"Aren't some users more equal than others?" (More equal? 🤔 Sounds familiar. Haven't I heard that somewhere before?)

Am I really "equal"? Because when I write "this sucks," suddenly my tone is unacceptable. But when Scott Miller4 writes it, it's perfectly fine, right?

Dear moderators,

I still find your moderation style to be exactly what I’ve described before—actually, it’s getting significantly worse. My inbox is full of proof; the emails I’ve been receiving (both recently and in the past) regarding your moderation are, frankly, a total disaster from everyone who has bothered to reach out to me. Take, for example, the very first response on a thread I opened in the Psychology section per your instructions. It’s clear from the opening post that the author feels she's dealing with an impotent partner and is herself a victim of sexual abuse, despite having given him plenty of time and support to seek treatment... which, predictably, hasn't happened. I actually tried to provoke the long-term Debt in a thread titled "Impotent Husband" to get him to reveal the real reason he isn't taking action, but the moderation stepped in specifically to stop me from doing so.

boldwalker12 said:...and you especially love to gloat over problems involving impotence.
Your fake concern for the author isn't fooling anyone. And it certainly isn't fooling the moderators.

The accusations against me are flying left, and they're being taken to ridiculous extremes—ranging from claims that if I write about impotence, I must be impotent myself, to the idea that I'm somehow "enjoying" these men's struggles or offering sexual services to their wives. They're basically painting me as a psychopath. For the record, I am not (yet) impotent, nor am I "gloating" over anyone. In fact, I just grabbed coffee with a guy from the forum who reached out to me for the second time. He’s a perfectly normal, married, straight guy—not exactly the type to seek out the company of a psychopath. And this is the second time he's done it.

It’s pretty funny when you think about it, because so far, several men have hit my inbox asking about potential causes for their RC's, followed by genuine thanks for the clarity or advice I provided—advice that clearly helped them. I highly doubt they’d be thanking me if I were the monster being described.

I've also had several women reach out with similar issues regarding their husbands. They want to help solve the problem so they can eventually return to a normal sexual life. They understand that while sex isn't the *only* thing in a relationship, it is a fundamental component that a healthy marriage simply cannot survive without long-term. I've even heard from women who, after years of fruitless effort, ended up entering affairs because they felt they had no other choice.

And then there's the accusation that I'm the reason threads like "To be a mistress" get shut down, based on this reasoning...

boldwalker12 said:That thread lasted four whole years until you dragged it through the mud with your fantasies and insults. It wasn't necessarily closed forever, but you certainly won't be allowed to communicate like that again if it ever reopens—not just there, but on any other topic. Save that vulgar, insulting, self-indulgent attitude for somewhere else; ZouD actually maintains a certain standard.

... regarding the alleged "degradation" of this thread...

boldwalker12 said:Look, I’m sorry, but asking things like "how many times a week are you having sex with your husband" or "does he make you wet" isn't some deep, raw truth—it's just degrading the topic. This whole discussion had produced a ton of high-quality posts, and now it's sliding into a cheap, sleazy level. Plus, if you hadn't noticed, the woman you directed those questions toward wasn't exactly impressed by your "logic."

... even though the questions I asked were perfectly valid and prompted for good reason. It isn't "degrading" the conversation to a sleazy level; it’s just using a slightly less polite way of getting to the point. And I use that approach intentionally.

I should mention that my inbox has actually been filled with praise and confirmation that I'm right—coming specifically from the very women you’re citing as an argument. They wrote to me privately saying they would never admit these things "publicly" in their posts because they view their own situations as pathetic or bottom-of-the-barrel, but they agreed that what I wrote was essentially the blunt truth.

One user even commented publicly that she had never read anything that was simultaneously so disgusting and so brutally honest. I’ll take that as a compliment.

A while back, I was watching a show on an American news network featuring one of their top urologists—actually, one of the most renowned experts in urological surgery globally. He mentioned that his very first question to a new patient is always: "How are your erections?" Most patients are shocked and start stuttering, but he knows a 40-year-old man isn't walking into his office because he has trouble peeing; he's there because he can't get laid. It’s not like we're dealing with an 80-year-old. Is his approach blunt? Absolutely. But he wants to hit the core of the problem immediately instead of wasting time on polite, sugar-coated small talk.

As for "arguments," people are even pulling out unmoderated posts like this one...

Carl Fisher7 said:I look forward to someone else screwing her. I'm sure it won't just be you.

Why does it matter if the post isn't sanctioned? Besides, it was just a harmless provocation intended to push the previous discussion further. If the mods didn't like it, they could have just deleted it.

I've been rightfully sanctioned a few times, and once I was banned. I didn't complain because I knew I crossed a line. But when it comes to plain old bad moderation—and yours is catastrophically bad and only getting worse—I can't just stay silent.

This morning, a user pointed out the following to me:

Basically, I've concluded that the moderators on this Reddit act completely arbitrarily and subjectively when handing out warnings whenever a post doesn't fit their specific vision... so, unfortunately, nothing new there for me on this site. At the same time, certain posts—even entire threads—pass by completely unnoticed. For example, a few years ago in the "Men's Corner," there was talk about rape in a way that glorified it as something women "loved" and "wanted," and where victims were insulted, yet not a single person was sanctioned. The same goes for...So now we have this political thread about gender discrimination that’s basically just a breeding ground for misogyny... yet, nobody is lifting a finger—in fact, it feels like people are actually encouraging it.

Does this even require a comment 🤔?

I tend to write on the edge quite often, and I have zero intention of stopping. I’m not out here trying to win anyone over, score some sexual favors, or humiliate anyone for sport—even if certain people, like boldwalker12 for instance, will obviously find it easy to label me a psychopath.

Whether you decide to sanction me, ban me, or hit me with a permanent ban... I can't stop that. But like I said, I don't plan on backing down from what I say. If my writing has helped even one single person, then the effort was worth it. And I know it has been. Writing under a specific handle gives you a certain level of recognition, but that’s just a formality; the content is what matters to me. So, if you permaban me, I’ll just pick a different name. After ten or fifty posts, people will realize which idiot they're dealing with anyway. 😁

And as for this female user you're using as "evidence"...

boldwalker12 said:The female user you mentioned wasn't exactly impressed by your "arguments."

...she actually wrote in a post that my writing helped her resolve her own issue. She went into much more detail about the same thing via private message. The mods can verify everything by checking my inbox if they really want to.

Ashley Evans71 said:Regarding the mention of that music enthusiast—I already told you I personally deleted your posts and hers whenever you two were insulting each other, and if you see any unmoderated posts, just report them to me. Those posts don't exist and I don't let things slide, and you know that, so don't come at me with these ugly lies and fabrications..

Sean Cruz provided those links above. So much for my "lying and fabricating." That person didn't just insult me. Someone who was driven away from the chat by that woman's insults reached out to my inbox to tell me how many other users she's chased off similarly. She can't drive me away, obviously, because frankly, I stopped caring about her opinion a long time ago—to put it politely. To put it less politely, her opinion is garbage, and she's just peddling smoke wrapped in a bunch of technical jargon, waving it around because she knows most users will be too impressed by her vocabulary to actually challenge her logic. I'll stick to common sense, whatever intelligence is left, and the ability to draw a logical conclusion.

Ashley Evans71 said:You got a warning because you were picking apart another user and derailing the thread into territory nobody asked for. You ignored the warning, so you got a strike. Why are you making such a massive deal out of this?

I dug through my inbox this morning and found two prime examples of how you handle moderation:

I should probably mention that my impression is this whole site is crawling with moralizers regarding sex—everyone from the religious types to people like LJES and ZouD... just trying to lecture others about their private lives, especially whenever someone wanders even slightly away from a traditional patriarchal setup...
I’ve been posting here for years, and I know exactly how this place used to be versus what it is now—and that goes for the mods, too. It’s night and day. Honestly, it makes me lose the drive to even write, especially when it comes to discussing different perspectives on sexuality.

What can I even say? This style of moderation feels like a daycare center. If you say something that doesn't sit right with the "favorite child," you're kicked out of the sandbox. 🙂 It's pathetic.

You really ought to ask yourself, dear moderator, if it isn't time to change your approach. By exclusively punishing posts and users you deem "inappropriate," you're effectively killing the very soul and purpose of this platform.

Best, Carl Fisher7.

Edit:

Ashley Evans71 said:Yeah, she's my friend, and frankly, I don't give a damn why it bothers you so much. 😉

There you have it—a real masterclass in vocabulary. 😲 So, how is mine any different? 🤣 By admitting she's your friend, you're basically proving you can't moderate her posts objectively. In the political world, they'd call that a conflict of interest.

Emily Patel70 said:It’s possible. Go ahead—give me an example from your own life. 🤷

And then comes the inevitable wave of accusations and vitriol I've dealt with more than a few times. But fine, if you think I need to scrub this, I'll wipe it clean.

Edit: I've removed all the controversial parts. I'm not going to cite the examples I know. This only made sense because he was the only one actually contributing anything to the thread.

boldwalker12 said:Which part of the ZouD moderation did you decide to spit on? You know perfectly well we don't comment on moderation within threads, and then you went ahead and brought up Debt again. I already flagged the supermod about it.

Fixed it. I couldn't fix the second one because it was basically the only example in the thread where anyone was actually addressing the topic head-on. How am I supposed to avoid that? It’s pretty much impossible.

So, based on your own logic, people get penalized just for commenting on highlighted posts?
I wouldn't say that. You knew you were going to get flagged because you were breaking the rules. Plain and simple.

I was hoping it would be taken as me clarifying my own previous point, rather than just "commenting on a highlighted post." But, strictly speaking, you're right.

boldwalker12 said:...instead of the women who are clearly impressed by how you attack impotent husbands.

That's just not true. Read what I actually wrote—and I'm not the only one who said it. The issue is willful refusal to seek treatment, not impotence. And most of the women here have pointed out the exact same thing.

Likewise, we also have plenty of info on the women who can't stand your posts, so there's really no point in even debating it.

Fair enough. Besides, I truly couldn't care less what anyone thinks of me.

Emily Patel70 said:We really need to start cleaning up the language on ZouD to make it more forum-friendly. That means cutting down on the insults and the constant personal attacks on other users—or better yet, just getting rid of them entirely.

Well, you and I clearly see this differently. When I’m reading through the barrage of insults some people—like nausicaja, though certainly not the only one—have thrown my way on several occasions, I have to wonder why that behavior is fine for some but a violation for others. Not to mention a few other "incidents," if we're being polite about it.

Emily Patel70 said:Even you knew what you were writing was just filler, just like you admitted at the start of your post.

No, what I knew was that certain mods handle things based on whatever mood they happen to be in.

boldwalker12 said:I won't even mention how you called those exact same women—the ones you’re so desperate to help—"frustrated second-hand goods":

That thread dragged on for four whole years until you basically dragged it through the mud with your fantasies and insults. It might not be closed forever, but let’s be real: if it ever reopens, you aren't going to be allowed to communicate like this anymore—not just there, but across other threads too. Take that vulgar, insult-heavy, self-indulgent attitude somewhere else; ZouD actually maintains a certain standard.

Yeah, I’m with you on that—the issue is pretty obvious when you strip everything down to its brutal essence. It’s never a problem when that same essence is wrapped up in some "socially acceptable" packaging.

acting like some sort of perfect lover who could do a better job than him

That’s just a narrative you’ve cooked up, because I never said or even hinted at anything like that. Besides, RC and his views were torn apart by almost everyone reading or writing back then—and not just by me. Find a better example.

Look, it’s fair to say I’ve crossed the line occasionally. And whenever I did, I took the hit and didn't complain about losing points. But this moderation today? It’s unacceptable. This is exactly what kills the conversation. And to top it off, you’re practically accusing me of being a psychopath. I’ve already asked a few people on Reddit about my writing style, and their feedback doesn't sound anything like your assessment. And we're talking about women here.

By the way, you still haven't apologized to one of them, even though you told an obvious lie. You won't even address that.

Anyway, I started a thread in the psychology section like I was advised. I tried to keep the presentation polished, but the core message remains the same.

Emily Patel70 said:If you're dealing with these issues yourself—or if you just want to dive deeper into the psychological fallout of being impotent—I’d suggest starting a thread over in Psychology. Just, you know, try to keep it civil and refrain from psychoanalyzing everyone else.

I feel like I’ve made that pretty clear in several of my posts by now. As for your suggestion, I’ll probably take it; let's face it, the original poster isn't going to get any real answers in this specific thread anyway.

I noticed you keep bringing up those chats about mistresses—those were closed for a reason, per an agreement with the admin. There’s really no point in constantly questioning why those specific rooms are locked. If you're looking for that kind of discussion, ZouD has a dedicated thread for it.

You've completely missed the mark here. I wasn't even talking about that locked mistress chat—I don't care about that. I was referring to a different thread that got shut down under some pretty flimsy reasoning, not the one you're obsessing over.

Please watch your tone when interacting with other Reddit users and moderators; there have already been multiple complaints filed against you.

Look, I write how I want, using blunt language that isn't always wrapped in polite little bows. Somewhere in the Rules or the admin notes, it's stated that readers or users might encounter language that isn't exactly for kids or seniors. Honestly, I don't see the issue—we're discussing sexual topics on a public forum, not on a Catholic forum or some religious site.

Best to you.

boldwalker12 said:and you clearly get a kick out of dragging out discussions about impotence.
Your "saintly" concern for the author isn't fooling anyone. And it certainly isn't fooling the moderators.

That is a complete fabrication.

boldwalker12 said:After that disgusting ad hominem attack on Debt—and I already pointed out exactly why that specific post was so repulsive—you really think opening a whole new thread to discuss the issue in general terms is the move here? 😁
As if.

Honestly, I find it absolutely revolting—the way he and every other guy like him consciously does this to their wives.

Look, this thread isn't meant for tearing apart anyone's Debt or picking apart any other user on this Reddit. By over-moderating like this, you’re basically making sure the original poster never gets a straight answer. I laid out exactly what my intentions were right in the opening post—I thought I was being clear enough.

If you keep opening this up, you're just asking to get cooled down. And seriously—drop the ad hominem attacks and stop spitting on people on Reddit.

It’s pretty obvious you’re just trying to shut me down—I mean, anyone with half a brain reading this can see that. And honestly? You're insulting my intelligence in the process.

Emily Patel70 said:You weren't making general points—you were taking direct shots at a specific user in this thread. We don't allow that here.

Look, I wasn't attacking anyone; I was just laying out the facts. I even started a separate thread to make sure I wasn't being personal, but that got nuked immediately too. So, what gives? How exactly does starting a new discussion constitute an insult to someone?

stormylynx4 said:I’ve been following this thread, and even though I have absolutely nothing to do with that appeal above, I couldn't help but notice you totally misread the situation with Ms. X—accusing her of sliding into DMs with those photos was a massive reach. Honestly, you probably owe her an apology. ☕

boldwalker12 said:That's all I've got for you.

Oh, sure. You conveniently skipped over the part where you spent the whole time trolling and throwing around fake accusations. Not to mention, you haven't even bothered to offer the author a single apology for that blatant lie you tried to pin on her.

Look, I hear you on the rest of that—point taken. But just so we’re clear, I’m not posting here to win any popularity contests, hunt for a date, or even just to kill time by wasting everyone's breath with useless chatter.

I try to write stuff that actually makes sense once in a while—sometimes even digging into the actual root of why men won't lift a finger to fix their issues, which is usually what leads to their partners hitting a breaking point of pure frustration. That’s basically the whole point of my thread and the core question I'm asking. But honestly, with the way this place is moderated, there's no way anyone is going to get a coherent answer here.

Edit: I still stand by the question I posted earlier—I think it’s a perfectly logical follow-up given the context of the topic and everything he shared about himself. It wasn't meant to be an insult, honestly. But how do you even phrase a question like that without making the person feel attacked? You can't. There just isn't a way.

So, I just noticed my thread got nuked in the meantime. Honestly, I’m curious—who exactly did I offend, and what was the crime?

Hey there—so, on the main thread, I first got a warning from the mod team, and then I was sanctioned by boldwalker12 for supposedly trolling in the post below:

Carl Fisher7 said:Look, I know I’m risking a warning or a ban... whatever, but I’m not actually commenting on the moderator's post here. I’m trying to explain the actual point of my previous post. It isn't about nitpicking the guy's specific situation—and I'll give him credit for being upfront about that part 👍—but rather, I wanted the OP to get an honest answer. Since she's the only man in this thread who actually had the guts to be blunt, I wanted her to receive a real response to her question. She's asking how someone can verbally say "I love you" while consciously choosing to do nothing to fix a problem—even though they know exactly what's causing it—thereby deliberately withholding intimacy and essentially sabotaging their partner. This is directly tied to the core issue of this thread; it's really just the same fundamental problem wearing two different masks.

An honest answer didn't exactly follow, but even the non-answer—or the kind of answer I did get—is the sort of thing where the OP, who clearly has enough intelligence 😉 , can figure out the reasons herself.

And those reasons, based on everything I've learned from Reddit, observing people in real life, or just my own past experiences, are pretty clear: most men who deal with total or partial impotence, or any form of ED that prevents them from satisfying their partner, act as if their wives should just accept their condition, suppress their own sexuality, and basically kill off their own libido.

That isn't how you treat someone you love. In fact, you shouldn't do that to anyone. Back when we had that closed thread about affairs, we saw several examples of people stepping out precisely because of these exact issues in marriages. In every single one of those cases, over time, the love died, the respect vanished, and it turned into lethargy and contempt. Eventually, all those women sought fulfillment through affairs. Usually more than once. The root cause wasn't the erectile dysfunction itself, but the complete lack of will to actually solve the problem.

boldwalker12 said:You've crossed the line. This isn't the first time you've pushed your agenda despite knowing the rules, and you continue to express your opinions about other users in such a crude and disrespectful way. My suggestion? Back off and change your attitude toward these threads, because the next step might not just be a warning—it could be a partial ban.

There was zero trolling on my part, nor was there any insulting or belittling of other users. The question was asked right in the OP's opening post, and it goes like this...

Ms. X said:I’m curious what the guys think: if your wife is trying to help but you refuse it and just suppress the issue, is it because you feel like you aren't being masculine enough or ?

... and I specifically used or because, based on everything I’ve seen, anyone smart enough can see that these men are doing this consciously—and they honestly don't give a damn about their wives in the process. Looking at the thread and the replies from Carl Fisher7, it's pretty obvious that people don't want to write down the actual reason why they act the way they do. It’s fairly clear where the roots lie when men consciously deny their wives sexual satisfaction (everything I've said is strictly within the scope of the topic the author is asking about). Plenty of women have described similar experiences, including in that locked thread about affairs—which, frankly, I still don't get why it was even deemed relevant, whether temporary or permanent.

Then there are posts like these...

north wind said:Exactly... it isn't love, at least not by any definition of the word I recognize. It would be more like sexual abuse.

... which weren't flagged as insulting users on the Reddit, even though it's the exact same sentiment on the exact same topic, yet those kinds of comments go completely unpunished.

And then there's the moderating trolling...

boldwalker12 said:Not every single one. But this one definitely gives off that vibe. The whole post feels like an ad to me. Artistic impression matters, for God's sake. 🤷

... which was even repeated, while simultaneously making false claims...

boldwalker12 said:Is it possible? I mean, I don't trust women who advertise themselves as being "good," "righteous," or "hot" and send photos via DM while acting all worried about marriage problems.

... which was exactly what the OP herself had to say about it...

I don't even know where to start with this one—it’s like watching a slow-motion train wreck in downtown Chicago. You see someone acting like they own the room, thinking they're some kind of untouchable icon, and then reality hits them like a freight train. It's honestly almost funny if it wasn't so exhausting. kaže:
Moderator, I really hope you actually take a second to read what you wrote yourself. I told you to go back and look at my post—it’s not about me twisting your words, it’s about the fact that you’re doing exactly that. She claimed she was sending me a photo via DM—something that’s just plain false.Look, as a moderator—if you’re even bothering to engage with a thread—could you at least make an effort to read the opening post? That's really all I'm asking.

... which is exactly why they got slapped with a totally unnecessary—and honestly, pretty harsh—reprimand from the same management.

boldwalker12 said:Stop responding to warnings that have been highlighted. I’m telling you one more time: Reddit isn't some customer support group where you can demand attention just because you want certain people to answer you. This is your final warning. Dial back the attitude and quit acting like you're entitled to settle scores with other users here.

Instead of getting a formal apology from the mod for pushing false claims and straight-up trolling, she just got... nothing.

Your moderation style is honestly pretty pathetic—it’s actually kind of tragicomic. If you ask anyone with even a shred of common sense, they'll tell you it's nothing more than a joke.

In the slim hope that I might actually encounter a shred of common sense around here—fingers crossed—I wish you all the best. Carl Fisher7