Home › urbantrucker5 › Posts

Posts by urbantrucker5

23 posts shown.

Deleting posts in the Politics section in Feedback & Suggestions · Sep 15, 2013

bluecyclist64 said:Oh, come on, you're clearly misrepresenting what I said...

For the record, I never typed "screw you" or "get lost."

Fortunately, the moderators have access to the deleted logs, so they can verify this in a heartbeat. ☕

These amateurish attempts at defamation are frankly pathetic...

By the way, if I tell someone who's clearly clueless that they don't have a clue, that isn't exactly "verbal abuse," is it? 🤷

You wrote "immigrant kids, just get lost". Lying isn't nice, regardless of how old you are. Shame on you. And as for ignorance... when all you have left is insulting anyone who disagrees with you, it's pretty clear what your level of (un)knowledge and ability to have an actual debate is.

Maybe we "immigrant kids" are a messed up generation, but at least we learned how to talk somewhat civilly, unlike some people who seem stuck in the old regime where there's only one "truth"—where if you don't accept it, it's totally normal to insult them because you lack arguments and there's no way to send them to Alcatraz.

Btw—it’s great to see the American flag in front of institutions across Europe. Not long ago, there was even an exhibition of American landscapes in front of Congress; everything was done in the spirit of the Republic of America. Free, independent, democratic, beautiful America. But as for America, or its former republics... nothing anywhere. 😁

I get the frustration, but some should really learn to handle it already...😍

Deleting posts in the Politics section in Feedback & Suggestions · Sep 15, 2013

I was wondering, what kind of criteria do they actually use to delete posts on the politics board?

Even if we just overlook the fact that a moderator stepped in and wiped out two entire pages of discussion regarding communism—instead of actually handing out some visible warnings to bluecyclist64, who basically insulted the few of us here by calling us entitled expats with no right to speak on the subject—it still leaves me wondering. Why are certain posts being deleted when they don't even contain personal attacks?

Is bluecyclist64 part of some protected class or something? I mean, how does he get to delete a post like mine twice?

Quote: bluecyclist64 said:Look at this genius! 👏
Honestly, I guess any country where citizens actually have to pay taxes could be considered communist... 😵

In most normal countries, taxes are supposed to go toward things everyone actually uses—like infrastructure, the court system, and stuff like that. It shouldn't be some chaotic scramble where money just gets handed out to whoever happens to be in power at the moment. I guess that's just how it should work.

Is it actually against the rules to push back against bluecyclist64? It feels like any post trying to counter his points gets wiped, yet his provocative rants—which are basically just twisted logic—stay up on the thread without any issue.

I’m reposting this because I’d honestly rather just take the ban myself. That way, I can actually demand an explanation for why it happened. The way things are being handled makes me feel like bluecyclist64 is being given a free pass to provoke and insult everyone without consequences. Meanwhile, if any of us try to call out his nonsense using a polite tone, we get shut down. It feels like it's easier to silence the people trying to be civil and avoid personal attacks than it is to actually ban a troll. I guess it's just easier that way.

Updating the General code of conduct for the Politics subforum in Feedback & Suggestions · Apr 21, 2013

Since we're talking about updating the rules here on Reddit, there’s one specific behavior that I think really needs stricter penalties. We have a handful of permanent trolls who just tear apart every topic using the exact same playbook; they constantly accuse anyone they disagree with of being a party plant or a paid shill.

It’s a textbook ad hominem attack. But honestly, it goes unpunished way too often. I guess it should be an automatic ban without even a warning. It’s so frustrating when people refuse to actually argue points and instead just leave comments like, "How much is the Republican Party paying you?" or "As a Democratic Party voter, you don't even have the right to talk about..."

It’s an incredibly annoying habit and seems to be the go-to move for a lot of the trolls on this sub.

And yeah, I agree with the OP—promoting Communism as an ideology should probably be treated just as strictly as posts promoting fascism.

Unfair penalty points. in Feedback & Suggestions · Jan 19, 2013

Drew Lee7 said:Instead of actually penalizing Sea Princes for being a total troll, I’m the one getting hit with penalty points just for reporting her.

And of course, the moderator in charge is Apophis.

So, this user is playing dumb, acting like she didn't clearly write what she wrote.

Her little argument is basically:

It's perfectly fine to comment on this lady. What isn't okay is continuing to bother her with rude comments after she's already asked to be "left alone."

But look at the actual text:

when a middle-aged man approaches me and stares and/or makes a comment.

When we're talking about harassment, she's implying that just staring counts as harassment. The sentence says "stares and/or makes a comment." That means the comment is optional.

But instead of holding her accountable for trolling, they punish me for calling her out.

I have never seen such absolute nonsense in my life.

Where exactly do you see the lie, Drew?

Can you show me? Maybe a quote?

I actually showed how you twist things and troll—and backed it up with evidence—using your own quotes.

You’ve used ad hominem attacks several times now. Did I ever bite at your provocations? Every single time we dismantled your "arguments" like a house of cards, your only response was to claim we were trolling or that we'd lost our minds.

The whole thread is just you trolling—avoiding any questions that don't suit you and pivoting to random tangents. 🙄 These are simple yes or no questions. You basically gutted your own topic, as usual. You started this under the heading "street violence," with an intro describing women being harassed by cars, yet you spent the whole time trying to talk about "women making moves."

I guess the only mistake the mods made was letting you troll so shamelessly for this long without consequences, all while you accuse everyone else (not just me, but at least five or six others) of trolling.

Locking an interesting thread isn't the answer. Instead, the well-known trolls should get penalized for excessive trolling and relativism—which is basically what you've been doing this entire time.

Trash PDF moderation issues — again in Feedback & Suggestions · Jan 9, 2013

It’s pretty obvious that the PDF is short on moderators.

I honestly don't get why it's such a huge deal to just bring on one or two more mods. You could either pick from the people who are always hanging out on that subforum, or, if there isn't anyone suitable there, maybe just grab some users from another PDF?

It's not like you're paying the moderators, so I assume increasing the headcount isn't an issue for financial reasons.

I just don't understand this self-sabotage where you're basically creating more work for yourselves. From what I can see, there are plenty of people on that PDF who would be happy to step up and help out. 🙂

An appeal for Dell in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 24, 2012

Daniel Ward87 said:Dell had her perm removed for 3 weeks. It won't happen again next time.

Happy holidays.

~°~°~°~°~°~°~

Daniel Ward87, I guess nobody can really escape that holiday spirit.

Hope you have a blessed Bush!

I hope you get a ton of presents under the tree.

👋

~°~°~°~°~

An appeal for Dell in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 24, 2012

~°~°~°~°~~~°~~~°~~~

Christmas is really about forgiveness. 🙂

🙂 🙂

~°~°~°~°~

An appeal for Dell in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 23, 2012

I mean, she definitely went a bit overboard. But honestly, is a permanent ban really necessary just because of one thread?

The argument started, there weren't any mods around to step in, and things just kept escalating until someone finally showed up to shut it down.

And I guess, because the back-and-forth dragged on for so long, she accidentally racked up enough points for a permaban.

Maybe you could have just given her a custom month-long ban? It’s not like she’s some regular, typical troublemaker you guys deal with constantly, right?🤷

If we're being that strict, then Ego should have been kicked out of the Religion subforum ages ago. In my opinion, he's much more consistent when it comes to trolling. And it's not even limited to just one thread. 😁 I wonder if they'll just drop this on us out of nowhere, or if they'll serve it up on a silver platter, all fancy with laurel leaves and parsley. 🤷

P.S. Even though this isn't technically that thread, it's sort of related.

Your decisions are always going to be questioned and spark backlash regarding the Religion subforum as long as you have this specific admin team running things. You might want to make things easier on yourselves and remove the supermod from Religion; he's pretty much discredited himself on that subforum by now. It’s just an obvious fact, and there's really no debate there. I'm honestly just waiting for the day someone decides to dig through his most controversial statements and compile them into a single post calling for his removal. There's a huge difference between holding a viewpoint and the stuff he actually does. A supermod who makes sweeping generalizations about one "side" of the religion forum just can't call the shots in those situations. Especially not someone doing it so publicly. 🤦

And please, for heaven's sake, appoint at least one Christian moderator so the major religions are represented in a somewhat normal proportion. You can't seriously try to tell us that you can't find a single Christian in America capable of moderating the Religion subforum. 😬 Come on, please. 😁 It’s simply a matter of having at least a semblance of balance. It would actually make things easier for you too—it would give your decisions more weight. If people start making baseless complaints about warnings or accusing the staff of bias due to the Religion admins' views, you could shut them down immediately if a Christian mod supported those same warnings or bans (in cases where they actually did, of course). 😬

Admins, by covering for certain people on that subforum, you're really just doing yourselves a disservice. This is supposed to be your actual job, after all. I don't see how it's worth it. In return, you just end up having your credibility questioned constantly because of a few individuals. I wonder if that's really a fair trade. 🤷

Just saying.

Getting harassed by users on Reddit in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 21, 2012

Monica and I could probably each drop three off-topic posts, "wrapped" in just enough personal jabs to avoid direct insults, plus maybe two or three provocative on-topic comments without using any actual swear words, and we'd both get an automatic three-day ban.

And that’s just on a standard US site. This is a Religion sub, which I feel should be moderated way more strictly than this.

If this repeated disrespect doesn't at least get flagged as a massive insult to everyone here, then I honestly won't have any clue what the criteria are for banning people, or how they define trolling versus just being rude or straight-up abusive on this Reddit. 🤷

I suspect the mods haven't even seen the reports yet, because whether they're being objective or biased, I just can't ignore this. 🙂 Just hang tight until tomorrow; I think everyone watching this will be keeping a close eye on how it plays out. In the meantime, please don't bother responding to those actual rude trolls and kids. 😉

Psychocouch on Religion in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 10, 2012

Daniel Ward87, thanks for getting back to me.

😁

Daniel Ward87 said:Religion definitely shapes how people act, and I think sadism has its own behavioral component too. So, I don't really see why we shouldn't talk about whether there's actually a connection there or not. It’s interesting to look at, especially since some notorious sadists were also deeply religious—take Albert Fish, for example. We don't exactly know the extent to which religion influences sadistic behavior, but it seems like a conversation worth having.

Yeah, you're just forgetting that sadism actually gets its name from the Marquis de Sade, who used his pornographic novels to advocate for atheism. 😁

So, I guess it turns out the most famous sadist was actually an Atheist.

Just imagine if someone actually started a thread claiming that being an atheist makes you a sadist, using the Marquis de Sade as their main proof just because he didn't believe in God. I guess people will try to link anything these days.

I mean, come on guys, let's just act like normal people.

I guess I don't quite get what's wrong with having this kind of discussion on a forum that’s actually meant for debating things. It seems like it's exactly what we're here for, right?

Alright, let's make the topic about how religion—whether that's atheism or any other belief system—affects sadistic behavior. But we need to moderate this properly. I don't want to see some super-moderator jumping in and making massive generalizations just because one female user, who everyone knows has pretty "out there" ideas, posted something. That's just not how it should work.I guess some religious people are genuinely baffled by why someone wouldn't just kill. It’s like they can’t wrap their heads around anything stopping a person from committing murder unless there's the threat of divine punishment waiting in the afterlife. Maybe they just don't get it.

One believer. That's just a lazy generalization.

So, what kind of moderation can we actually expect on this thread? In my opening post, I pointed out how certain arguments have already started slipping through—which, honestly, wasn't that surprising given how the whole thing was set up. The way the topic is framed just isn't right, and I don't think it's heading in the right direction either.

I guess you could look at this whole topic as being pretty offensive to everyone involved, in a way. On one hand, you've got religious people who feel like the author is basically sabotaging the conversation—her words are framed as if they represent the views of the entire faith, which then gets echoed in a lot of the replies. Then, on the other hand, there are the Atheists who get labeled here as people lacking any real moral compass without God. And honestly, I'm not sure if acting out of fear of punishment can even be called morality in the first place.

Psychocouch on Religion in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 10, 2012

dustyranger64 said:I think Brenda Scott is right here. This feels like a total, nothing-out-of-the-ordinary provocation from an Atheist. That whole "morality comes from faith" argument is pretty much one of the dumbest points ever made, and I guess it just makes whoever uses it look bad.

I'm not saying she didn't have a reason to start such a twisted thread. Honestly, I already admitted that I agree the topic was basically set up to bait Atheists. If you look at her past posts, she’s pretty much been on a crusade against Masons, Atheists, Vuk Jeremić, Silvio Berlusconi, and pretty much everyone else. 😁

What I actually disagree with is this:

Why did the moderators even allow a thread like this on the Religion board? Why let someone try to segregate people by faith while talking about sadism and the motivation to kill or torture random strangers?

My gut feeling—based on that supermod's comment above (who, honestly, is being just as tactless and embarrassing as the author herself)—is that the thread was left up on purpose. Maybe I'm wrong, and it was just a mistake by the admin team, or maybe it wasn't a mistake at all. But if it wasn't a mistake, then I guess someone needs to explain my question above to me. I'd love to understand how religion determines whether or not someone turns into a sadist.

A. is talking about identifying pathological behavior... 😬

Are there any other comments on this thread suggesting someone is psychopathic? Maybe.
But based on what's been said, this thread might just be trolling and provocation. It's definitely a stupid generalization and probably based on questionable values, but bringing up the Psychocouch
without any further proof and claiming someone shows psychopathic behavior based on what's been posted here? Not really.

If it's just trolling and provocation, then the thread should still be locked.

I did consider that she might just be a typical troll rather than some kind of monster. But if those are our only two options, then either the thread gets locked because it's trolling, or it gets moved to the appropriate sub-forum mentioned earlier.

Either way, I don't see why this belongs on the Religion board.

Psychocouch on Religion in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 10, 2012

Maybe philosophy or sociology? 🤷

Personally, I think using religious themes to fuel sadism is just wrong.

To be honest, though, I wouldn't want to read a sadist's inner thoughts even if they were in a digital file—that sounds more like something for Psychocouch. But if this kind of content is necessary, it definitely shouldn't be placed under religion, where it'll just stir up more tension between Atheists and believers based on the ramblings of a disturbed mind.

The topic didn't really make me angry, it just left me feeling pretty shocked. "Late Night Talks with a Sadist."😲

I'm almost waiting for a thread to pop up on Reddit saying, "Q&A with Paranoia."

"What motivated you to do something like that?"

"Did the smell of blood turn you on?"

"Did God tell you to do it?"

Psychocouch on Religion in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 10, 2012

@Brenda Scott/">@@Brenda Scott, I think you're right—the author was being pretty rude, and it definitely felt like she was trying to take a jab at Atheists. But honestly, her whole argument is just plain absurd. She seems to be operating on this idea that everyone is a closet sadist and that religion is the only thing keeping believers from killing people.

That kind of logic is insulting to everyone, whether they're religious or Atheist, so I don't really get how this was even allowed 🤷

It’s just sick. Reading through it felt genuinely twisted. All that stuff about bloody dreams, fighting, and playing games with someone tied up on an island...

I can see why she started the thread, though. It feels like a deliberate insult to Atheists. But letting a topic like this stay up is an insult to believers, too. And really, it's an insult to any decent person who isn't a sadist—and I'm pretty sure most of us aren't. 😉

Psychocouch on Religion in Feedback & Suggestions · Dec 10, 2012

I don't really read the True Crime section. I barely even followed that Paranoia case, mostly because I just don't want to know about stuff like that, nor do I want to spend any time thinking about it. I always skip those pages when I'm going through the paper. I guess I just have no interest in reading about the confessions of some young, eager psychopaths—even if that’s exactly the kind of thing that fills up the columns and keeps the circulation high for your average newspaper.

That’s probably why. I hardly ever check the Psychocouch subforum. I just don't really want to know what goes on inside some people's heads.

It actually means a lot to me when I stumble upon topics from Psychocouch over on Religion.

I was scrolling through the religion subforum yesterday and stumbled upon a thread that really belonged over in Psychocouch, mostly because it was diving deep into the mindset of a psychopath. And look, I’m not afraid to say this, nor am I worried about getting banned—especially since the rules for this specific thread allow people to call the author a "monster," "sick," or a "psychopath" without getting flagged. It seems totally fair to me. Some people were being pretty blunt, telling her straight up, "you're a monster," while others were taking a slightly softer approach by claiming her thought process is pathological. Which, honestly, it is.

This is about the following topic:

The author basically argues that everyone is a sadist. I don't know, I think that’s wrong from the jump. Sadism is actually classified by professionals as a psychological disorder—it's pretty much considered unnatural behavior.

I guess you could technically file this thread under Sociology or Philosophy if you framed it around one question: "Are formal social norms and religion really the only things stopping people from just killing their own kind for no reason at all?" Even then, I think that’s a pretty debatable point.

No, it’s written this way, making these specific claims:

Isolation urbantrucker5 said:If I were an Atheist, I guess nothing would stop me from playing around with him a little bit.
Punch, punch...
Just getting things moving... 😁
It really depends on who you're talking about and what exactly is going on, I guess. But if there aren't any rules on that island—and you're absolutely certain that nothing you do will ever result in any kind of punishment—then most people should probably admit that... They wouldn't be able to resist..

Isolation said:Why did I bring up that island scenario? Well, it’s because a few years back, I had this dream that followed that exact same pattern. I really shouldn't get into the specifics of what actually happened in the dream, though... But there was blood, though.. 😁

Isolation said:If that guy isn't helping me out on this island—basically, if there's no benefit to keeping him around—then I'd probably kill him.
.

I feel like this thread really belongs over in Psychocouch.

When someone describes and admits they’d hurt or kill another person without any real motive, that’s just being a sadist. You don't need to be a psychiatrist to know that kind of sadism is a pathological disorder that needs clinical help.

I guess I have to wonder why a topic like this is even allowed on Religion????

Personally, I can't shake the feeling that this thread is being kept alive just so people can attack believers. It's used to push the idea that, you know, "look how religious people think," painting them all as lunatics or sociopaths who are only kept from killing others by a fear of God. There have been claims like that floating around here in one form or another. I'll set aside how those making such claims aren't exactly using common sense, because a rational, intelligent person wouldn't take a single pathological case like this and generalize it to an entire group of people.

But honestly, I can't help but think this stays on Religion specifically for that reason: to leave room for portraying believers as "pathological and sociopathic." And I felt even more convinced of that after reading a comment from a supermoderator on this thread:

Ego said:In any case, when someone asks me why I think religion is inherently harmful to the human mind, I could either write a twenty-page essay or just point to posts like these, where believers seem genuinely surprised that nothing stops a person from killing besides the threat of divine punishment...

That kind of thing implies this way of thinking is typical for believers. Look, there are pathologists and sadists among both believers and non-believers. But I assume you realize that too, Ego.😉
Anyway, moving on.

Can someone explain to me why this thread is under Religion? Is there some scientific study proving that believers are just sadists by default? Because if not, why are we discussing someone's "bloodthirsty dreams" and their urge to just "kill, kill" in a religious context?

If there isn't, then I really think it's time to close this thread or move it to the right subforum. Otherwise, it's hard not to feel like it's being left open just to target faith and frame believers as sociopaths and sadists, which is exactly what some people here seem happy to do.

And if there is such a study, then please, just open a "Psychocouch" subforum under Religion where you can deal with cases of "crazy believers." That way, the people here who actually care about Religion can avoid these sociopathic threads, since they aren't looking for that stuff in the main forum.

Thanks for understanding.
👋

Interior Design - Moderator: Appeal regarding moderation decision in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 3, 2012

I honestly feel like someone who's clearly just trolling isn't really cut out for a moderator role 😲

This whole thread kind of shocked me 😁

It’s not even necessarily about what was said in the opening post. I mean, if everything being said about this moderator is actually true, then it’s bad news.

But, I guess it doesn't really matter whether the OP is telling the truth or not, especially since the way things have played out in this thread seems to support her side anyway.

The real issue here is how the moderator is behaving right here in this discussion.

Basically, the author is laying out her "accusations" against the mod, providing links to the thread and specific posts. And the mod is supposed to offer a "defense."

Instead, here is what he’s doing:

silversailor said:Several lies and accusations have been made against me, both there and here—and it's all summarized nicely right here.

Well, yeah, some accusations were made, but you have to actually defend yourself before you can call them lies.

silversailor said:If I say something is a lie, I don't really need to explain myself further, especially not to people who obviously have certain frustrations in their lives.

I mean, who are you to expect us to just take your word for it when you claim something is untrue? Do you think being a moderator gives you the right to skip providing arguments and just treat your word as gospel? Give me a break. 😁

Just because you don't feel like explaining yourself doesn't mean we should just accept it. If you won't present a defense, any reasonable person is going to assume you're "guilty" and that the author is telling the truth.

silversailor said:If anyone (even just one person on the forum) is offended by my moderation or doesn't know the difference between off-topic talk and trolling, they are free to report me to the admins, and the admins can remove me from my position—even without any arguments. Short and simple.

The admins don't even need to argue. The OP provided her arguments, and you didn't refute them. Honestly, given how this has gone, it would be pretty normal for you to be removed from your position immediately.

silversailor said:I don't have an issue with anyone on this forum. My only problem is that I can't just let people spread insinuations about me or make serious accusations like the ones being made in this thread.

It’s not really up to you to decide what to allow. You should be defending yourself with actual arguments. You aren't doing that.

silversailor said:If the admins think the stuff being said in the first two posts isn't a serious, baseless accusation, then they might as well just strip me of my duties right now.

The accusation is serious.

And it isn't baseless. There's material evidence from the last few days. You had a chance to explain your actions, but you didn't. What you're doing is called trolling. As a mod, you should know that. Clearly, you don't.

silversailor said:If the admins don't see certain frustrations—or maybe even some complexes described in those first three posts—then there's nothing I can do about it, unfortunately.
Some users noticed certain, how should I put this, mental states, and they reached out to me via PMove. So, I'm not an isolated case.

Trolling. 😁

Reminds me of one of the biggest trolls from Reddit. He used to claim that men wanted things they actually didn't want. The mods eventually banned him because he was making claims on behalf of all men without any real arguments. Then he started rambling about how he gets support through PMoves 🙄

silversailor said:And finally, I'm not in the business of selling furniture; I'm not a supplier.
The reason I might be able to get someone something cheaper isn't to make a profit; it's because I want to help people here save money whenever I have the opportunity. I think I've already mentioned that a few times.

That doesn't really matter.

silversailor said:I hope that's clearer now? Or maybe it still isn't? I guess it’s hard to tell if this was just you being off-topic, trolling, or just straight-up insulting other users here.

Honestly, it felt like trolling. You just keep going in circles, talking a lot without actually saying anything meaningful or proving any points.

There was also some indirect insults and sexism involved, too.

silversailor said:If people are getting offended by stuff I bought—for myself—I don't even know how to respond to that. What do you think, admins?

I get the feeling people are reacting to your arrogant attitude, the way you talk without making actual points, and how you rely on ad hominem attacks instead of arguments.

silversailor said:As usual, you're just being dramatic. Just come up with a new title and we'll change it. The End.
.

That right there is an attempt to discredit someone else, which is an ad hominem attack. It's what people do when they don't have any real arguments left.

As a moderator, you really should know that.

silversailor said:Look, please stop insisting on this nonsense and just leave me alone. Goodbye.

The only person in this thread talking in circles and sticking to nonsense is you.

silversailor said:It's pretty funny to me that you're bringing up "those days" as your main argument now.

It isn't funny. You haven't provided any other kind of argument besides that.

silversailor said:I know I might have gone overboard mentioning the number of days in a month lately, and I realize that’s a sensitive topic for some people.
But honestly, I don't think there's any excuse for acting frustrated or making a huge drama out of nothing.

In my opinion, there's just no justification for this kind of arrogance from a moderator who hasn't even offered a single real argument in their defense. When I see how much respect the mods over at Reddit handle the biggest trolls—even when they're explaining a ban for the 77th time—and then I see you, things seem pretty clear. It feels like the chance of you being a good moderator is almost zero. I mean, how is a troll supposed to stop trolling if this is how it works?

I really hope the admins step in ASAP. Even though you don't moderate any of the specific subreddits I hang out in, if I see your username in black text in a few days, it'll tell me something about the current administration that I'd rather not know. Since I don't really have any issues with them so far, I'm hopeful they'll show themselves to be fair and just.

rustydrifter10 said:A certain level of communication on Reddit isn't allowed, and that applies to everyone.

The controversial posts will be reviewed by one of the admins in the coming days, so please bear with us.

rustydrifter10, are those controversial posts really that important? Just look at how the moderator handled this thread.

At the same time, you've got a bunch of patient mods on Reddit fighting against the well-known trolls in a totally logical way, still responding politely and explaining their decisions. Because, well, that's what they're supposed to do.

That's what you do, and that's what the mods on Politics, Sports, and Religion do... So why is this moderator an exception?

Sorry for the long post, but I felt like I needed to call out one of the "gems" currently serving as a moderator. I just wanted to show how little he seems to understand the definition of a reasoned debate, trolling, or any of the other terms you absolutely need to know to moderate any forum.

Post count in Feedback & Suggestions · Oct 9, 2012

Joseph Gomez39 said:That’s just nonsense. Every single thread has people rambling, so those random comments end up counting toward your total anyway. People who stick to threads where they don't count feel like they aren't contributing enough to the community. Some threads are even meant for joking around. I actually got chewed out recently on a serious topic because someone told me I had nothing useful to say since I was just posting in the off-topic section.

😕

Come on, where are you getting that from? 🤷

Besides, as far as I know, all the chat threads eventually get deleted at some point. When that happens, everyone's post count gets lowered accordingly.

I honestly won't be losing any sleep if my 3,500 posts from the USA chat disappear. 🤣

If you actually have something smart to say, I guess nobody will really care about your post count. 😉

Are we finally going to see stricter sanctions for "famous" trolls? in Feedback & Suggestions · Oct 3, 2012

urbantrucker5 said:Like I said, I’m not really complaining. It’s more like feedback—maybe even constructive—and you don't have to take it to heart. Just something to think about, I guess.

Think, think, think. 🤦 I don't know how I managed to type that out; none of those letters are even near each other on a keyboard. 😵

That's a pretty harsh way to put it. 🤦

Are we finally going to see stricter sanctions for "famous" trolls? in Feedback & Suggestions · Oct 3, 2012

dustyranger64 and Matthew Anderson, thanks for the comments—I guess that’s why I like you guys as mods 😁 (though I probably won't post in your specific threads anymore; you're a bit too strict for me 🙂) 😛

Anyway—this isn't really about the LjES thread. I should've added a disclaimer, but I figured that might just make it look like I was specifically targeting that one PDF. This is more of a general observation. Honestly, the stuff mentioned above is a minor issue when it comes to LjES, mostly because that board doesn't usually get this heavy
.
(dustyranger64 and Matthew Anderson, I mainly come to your sections to troll, I read the others for real 😛)

I'm actually glad steelskipper5 chimed in. What really pushed me over the edge was this one thread over in Social Science where he was participating; I was there too for a bit, but I eventually lost my patience and just walked away.

Personally, I don't have any complaints about any individual moderator or any of the boards I've been on. If anything, I've been lucky enough to hang out in threads with really decent mods.

I do have a grievance, though, which I'd like you to take as constructive criticism regarding a forum practice that seems to go beyond just an individual moderator's call.

I've been reading a lot more Social Science lately, along with some philosophy and politics, and the sheer amount of arrogance some trolls show toward people they're arguing with is wild. You'll see these same trolls parrot the exact same sentence for twenty pages, just rephrasing it sixty different ways. Eventually, even the most patient, civil people start to lose it and end up getting banned. 😬

Sure, true, we shouldn't lose our cool. We should wait for a Supreme Court ruling or whatever. But at the end of the day, we're all human. We make mistakes, and you guys do too.

But some people seem to mess up constantly, maybe even on purpose. 🙂

And it makes me wonder: what are we actually supposed to report? What counts as a violation? I had a situation once where a moderator asked me why I didn't report a post, even though a user was indirectly trivializing and twisting my private life, even though I didn't see a direct insult aimed at me. 🤷

What happens when someone who clearly doesn't know the difference between a common and collective noun (and they definitely need to know it to be discussing the topic) says—completely unprovoked, just because their point was questioned "Just some friendly advice—don't embarrass yourself"? What is that? Is it an insult? Trolling? Something else?

And what kind of penalty would they face? A warning? A ban? Nothing?

What if you respond with: Aren't you ashamed to live with such ignorance? Which is objectively a massive lack of knowledge and isn't even a lie.

Bans for both? Warnings? Nothing?

Or what if someone uses an argument like, "I'm liberal and support same-sex marriage because I was raised by divorced parents," and then uses that to claim they grew up in an overly liberal environment?

Is that an insult? Well, not exactly not quite. It's trolling. Definitely. Especially when it comes from someone whose best argument after several pages of nonsense is basically, "Same-sex marriage isn't equal to marriage between a man and a woman."

And that user has to deal with people like that—they handle it pretty stoically, and I honestly admire them, even if we don't see eye to eye on everything and I don't agree with all their points. But since their common sense is constantly being insulted and people keep poking at their private lives instead of sticking to the topic, they might end up getting banned just like everyone else. Maybe one day they'll just snap and resort to a blatant ad hominem attack.
(Just to be clear, I’m not attacking the Social Science moderators—this is something I’ve noticed across every single sub-forum I’ve read lately)

I want to reiterate: I don't have any issues whatsoever with any specific moderator on any board. Honestly, they all seem pretty consistent, which makes me think this is just how the forum is being run lately. Maybe I'm just unlucky and keep running into the same pattern every time I visit a new section.

So, I was just wondering if I'm the only one who finds this annoying, and if there are any plans to address it? It's a shame because great discussions—especially the serious ones—tend to fall apart. Personally, I find the Social Science and politics boards really helpful for my work, and I enjoy reading them, even if I don't participate much (I just don't always have the patience for it 🙂). But it becomes a real issue when you have a troll in the house 🤷

EDIT: P.S. I didn't include specific links because I'm more interested in knowing where the line is drawn regarding this kind of trolling across the whole site. Going through individual cases doesn't really help me, and I wouldn't want it to look like I'm targeting one specific board, because that's truly not the case 🙂

Like I said, this isn't a formal complaint. It's more of a critique—which can be constructive, I guess—that you can choose to take or leave. Just something to think about.

Are we finally going to see stricter sanctions for "famous" trolls? in Feedback & Suggestions · Oct 2, 2012

I have a quick little question? 🤞

I wonder if the administration has ever thought about being a bit tougher on trolls. Especially those people who just keep hitting the same topics over and over again with the exact same tactics. Maybe they should look into stricter penalties for that kind of stuff. 😬

I’m not even talking about the trolls. You know, the ones who clearly lack any capacity for rational thought? Those people should be sanctioned quickly and harshly, but honestly, they’re probably the least "dangerous" group when it comes to this issue.

I’m talking about those trolls who don't even look like harmless twelve-year-olds. Sometimes, you really can't tell if they're actually trying to insult your intelligence or if they're just being accidental about it. I guess it's hard to know for sure.

It’s funny how you can stumble upon all this within a single day on just one thread:

It’s that constant appeal to authority—people dropping lines like, "Well, I'm a psychiatrist," or "I'm a professor of logic." Honestly, what worries me most is the thought that people like that might actually be the ones teaching our kids in school.

It’s when people just throw out claims without a shred of actual evidence. You ask them for some objective facts to back it up, and they just start trolling. They'll hit you with stuff like, "Well, prove me wrong," or if they're feeling generous, "I can't remember exactly where I read that." Then you're stuck spinning in circles, turning the whole conversation into this endless, pointless loop of "Yes"—"No"—"Yes"—"No."

It’s funny how this always happens. You make a generalization, and someone successfully calls you out on it. Then, instead of actually addressing the point, the trolls just pivot to that classic line: "Well, I meant it in principle." Suddenly, the whole debate shifts away from the actual topic and turns into this weird, circular argument about what a generalization even is or the definition of common nouns. It’s such a predictable way to dodge the point. 🤦

It feels like they’re just trying to relativize everything—living things, inanimate objects, even basic concepts like what counts as intelligence or a serious relationship. I guess it’s funny how that same troll didn't bother questioning their own logic while they were busy making a claim that completely contradicted itself.

When people start debating preferences, things can get pretty stupid fast. You see all these ridiculous arguments based on bad interpretations of Wikipedia entries—which, let's be honest, shouldn't even be considered a valid source in a serious discussion. On top of that, people end up insulting others who are just calmly and politely sharing what they like or don't like. It's kind of a mess.

Misquoting someone or constantly using the "I didn't say that" excuse... doing that a few times within just three pages seems pretty wild, doesn't it? I mean, it’s kind of crazy to deal with on a forum like this.🙂It feels like once they actually see the disputed quotes laid out in front of them, they just double down on their old arguments. It’s like we're right back at square one, and the whole cycle starts all over again.

Honestly, this is just an insult to common sense. It wears down even the most patient people you talk to, and at the end of the day, it just kills any interesting conversation.

There are already certain people out there who are famous for using the exact same predictable, flawed logic every single time. It seems like their ultimate goal—if they realize they can't actually win an argument—is just to abandon their own point entirely and retreat into some vague gray area, dragging everyone else down with them.

It feels like some people just flat-out ignore moderator warnings. They keep doing it page after page, and honestly, the most they ever get is having their posts deleted. I guess that's just how it goes. 🙂 Then they just vanish for a day or two—and everything goes right back to the way it was.

How much longer?

At the same time, they’re being really strict with certain people—which, honestly, they deserve. It’s those folks who can't even put together a simple sentence like "The boy is good" without making four different typos. They just don't seem to grasp that what they're doing is wrong or, well, pretty mindless.

The group I’m talking about is the one that sprinkles in those little comments here and there—the kind that seems designed to shut down any actual, constructive debate. Honestly, they’re just as "dangerous" to a healthy discussion as the other group mentioned above, so I think they should face the same level of moderation. Whether they’re making these logical errors on purpose or they just don't realize they're doing it, I don't know. And to be honest, I really don't care anymore, especially since the moderators have already warned them multiple times to stop using these same tactics to derail discussions. 🙂

Sometimes, stuff like this gets under the skin of even the most patient people on these forums. It reaches a point where you might actually risk getting hit with a ban or some low-level moderation just because you realize there’s absolutely no room for logic or actual discussion on a particular topic. At best, people just walk away from the thread entirely—but I guess you have to wonder if that's actually a good thing for the quality of the conversation in the long run.

I just needed to vent for a second. Maybe I'm the only one getting worked up by these pseudo-intellectual trolls who keep throwing out random facts that have absolutely nothing to do with their actual point. I don't know, maybe I'm being too nitpicky, but at the end of the day, the admins make the calls.

Honestly, if I end up getting a warning or a ban myself because I'm being too intense about this, I won't complain. I mean, I definitely troll sometimes—whether I mean to or not—but I really wish this stuff would just stop. 🙂

If you actually stuck around long enough to read this far, thanks for listening. 😁

👋

Moderation on LJES / Arranged marriages in Feedback & Suggestions · Oct 1, 2012

I’ve got a complaint about how things are moderated here on the forum. You guys have let trolling go on for way too long, letting people like Carl Fisher7 run wild at the expense of everyone else trying to have a real conversation.

The guy spent ten pages completely misinterpreting the law. Then he admitted he was wrong, but claimed he only said it because we supposedly implied something we didn't actually say. Once people would quote him directly to show what was actually said, he’d just deny he ever said it. Then they'd quote him again, call out his lies, and he’d just pivot right back to marriage laws. It was just one endless loop.

He totally derailed an perfectly fine topic, which prompted a lot of complaints. So, yeah, I’m also frustrated with the moderation here—you’ve been way too lenient with Carl Fisher7, just like you’ve been too soft on other trolls in the past.

After he started lying about what people had said—or denying his own words—the whole thread basically turned into a troll fest.

A few of us ended up complaining and just walking away from a really interesting discussion, all because of Carl Fisher7.