Posts by Justin Harris12

slycrane94 said:Is that how the American principle works? That the truth hurts, so I'm taking offense? Constantly running for cover behind other people's opinions or demanding censorship to silence any form of criticism is a trendy way to act these days, but it doesn't make it any more ethical or civilized.

The truth hurts? You mean the "truth" about Muslims and Jews? 🤷
Look, I’m not asking you to kiss my ass, and I wasn't even specifically targeting you in this thread, but since you hold an admin position, I actually started out addressing you with formal respect—respect that you completely tossed aside after your third post. Your insinuations regarding all Muslims and Jews carry a different weight entirely; even if you claim you were speaking "off the record," it matters because you are a moderator.

As for your suggestion that I should just head over to some fundamentalist forum or leave this one if I don't like it, or your comment about how all Jews play the victim—I don't think I've given the impression in my own topic of being some fanatic or extreme religious zealot. An American news outlet that recently allowed the publication of those Muhammad caricatures and the insults directed at our prophets is truly failing when posts like yours continue to fuel interfaith hatred.

Yeah, part of AxMi's response was aimed directly at me—or rather, at all Muslims and Jews collectively. I can't tell if he actually holds a grudge against both groups, but I didn't want to jump in the moment he typed it. He’s an admin, while I'm just some random user without any kind of backing. Honestly, it rubbed me the wrong way when he said that; he basically insulted both Jews and Muslims without any consequence and without any real reason behind it.

Tyler Cruz32 said:Tell me, do you honestly—truly honestly—believe someone is sitting on standby online so that the very second I file a report and the email arrives, they can flag it instantly?

And if it isn't flagged immediately, then within five minutes you'll be claiming anything goes because there wasn't an instant response.

Tell me, am I allowed to eat or sleep?
How exactly do you imagine this works in practice?
Am I supposed to be a robot that isn't even permitted to step away from their inbox for five minutes?

Moderators typically have a 24-hour window to review reports and react.
Instead, you expect immediate flagging or other moderator actions the very second it happens.

Look, if you all behaved more appropriately, and I didn't have to spend every single day cleaning up the messes you repeatedly make, then perhaps I could actually dedicate myself to monitoring my email 24/7.

do I really have to do this, reporting things to the PŽK just so you will flag them?

Do you know what my actual issue is?

If I were to write everything out publicly, rustydrifter10 would ban me for a month because I'm not supposed to share certain information externally. I don't care about being banned; I couldn't care less. The problem is that if I stop, there will be no one left to clean up the Religion subforum, and then we'll be left with nothing but trolls, vandals, and total anarchy, which I cannot allow.

The fact that my hands are tied simply gives you the opportunity to constantly dodge accountability. And now you're going to turn this on ME, accusing ME of not flagging things? Me?

🤣

I am no longer moderating any threads whatsoever regarding Islam.

I have made my decision, and it is final.

Since people aren't satisfied—and I simply cannot do any better than I already do, as I believe I am performing my duties correctly—someone else will have to handle the reports, the trolls, the vandals, and those massive off-topic posts that run 30, 40, or more lines long.

I won't lift a single finger for any of it anymore.

rustydrifter10, please state Joe's current point standing PUBLICLY.

Post it publicly, so we can finally put an end to these false insinuations.

you all seem to realize you can get away with this because Tyler Cruz32 allows it,

Incredible.

I am quite curious to see who you intend to falsely accuse next, now that I have decided to stop engaging with these topics entirely.

prior to this, I attempted to resolve the matter through peaceful channels with the moderator to explain my grievances, but she refused to listen and subsequently barred me from further appeals after only two posts,

Indeed, the book is perfectly clear.
I previously advised you to contact Strila directly; I am certainly not hiding anything.

If rustydrifter10 agrees, and promises to police the Religion subforum while I am banned, I will present the evidence.

Why on earth would you want to moderate Islamic topics? 🤷
Are Muslims considered true believers and second-class citizens?
The more you write, the more it becomes obvious that everything I’ve been saying is actually coming true.
You’re acting like some kind of martyr here, playing the victim while you moderate this place as if you’re the sole authority over the entire forum. And what was that about Joe? What exactly are you getting at? Are you talking about what Joe wrote last night? 🤷
You’re going straight for the ad hominem attack against me, even though I haven't criticized you as a person—I only critiqued your moderation, because that is your role here. If your username was "Kitty Kitty," people would be complaining about the handle "Kitty Kitty" rather than targeting Tyler Cruz32 personally. You keep accusing me of using ad hominem tactics, but this isn't the first time you've resorted to lying; I’ve already proven that not a single sentence I wrote was a lie. By extension, that means you were just making up your own version of the truth, which is nothing more than blatant lying.

Look, when it comes to all that behind-the-scenes drama, honestly, neither I nor the rest of the folks here on the forum really care. You just have to learn how to deal with it—it’s as simple as that. It's like at work; a regular employee doesn't need to be privy to the CEO's private strategic plans for the corporation. That shouldn't be their concern. An employee's job is to focus on their own tasks, hit their targets, and get paid according to their job description. Period.
So you can just go ahead and grab yourself a ban without actually telling us what's going on over there. Just mentioning that "something" is happening is nothing more than a pathetic excuse, and honestly, I don't think this whole situation should have even leaked onto this thread in the first place.

The decision has been made, and frankly, I’ve got nothing left to say about it. My only regret is that such a call was ever made, because this tendency to blindly defend the moderators is going to be the death of this forum. You all are going to learn the hard way that being a moderator shouldn't mean getting automatic protection; being an admin means making fair decisions that serve the community. Right now, the reputation of this site is being dragged through the mud, and if things keep going this way, it's nothing but a downward spiral from here.

Quote : Guns of Brixton

rustydrifter10 said:Look, the Religion subforum wasn't designed to be a safe space where you can't criticize religions or faith. If people want deep, faith-based discussions, we have the Theology and Religious Practice subforum for that.

Now, you should definitely report Trolling, but expressing an opinion that clashes with religious teachings, questions them, or even denies them? That isn't Trolling.

Honestly, Tyler Cruz32 is incredibly dedicated to the Religion subforum, and from what I've seen, there haven't been any major inconsistencies or signs of bias. I actually want to take this moment to thank her for all the hard work she puts in to keep the Religion subforum a civilized place.

I really don't see any truth to your accusation that some people are getting preferential treatment over others. Tyler Cruz32 communicated with you, sure, but at the end of the day, the decision rests with her. If she makes a final call, you can't just keep reopening the same argument in a new thread. If you're truly unhappy, you should take it up with the supermoderators or the admins.

I’m starting to realize that while the Religion subforum wasn't intended to be a safe haven where criticism is off-limits, there is a massive line between legitimate critique and the unpunished promotion of pure hatred. By making this decision, you, acting as an official moderator of this site, have effectively sided with bigotry, racial and religious intolerance, and sweeping generalizations against all Muslims. You've sent a crystal-clear message to those users I mentioned in my first post—the ones who are going to try and obstruct this thread just so they can keep doing exactly what they've been doing: posting caricatures of Muhammad, writing disgusting things about our revered Aisha, and disrespecting our prophets and our holy book. And all of this is happening right here in the Religion subforum.

Regarding the second part of your response—trolling gets reported, both by me and by other users on this forum. When people act like that, they get issued warnings to stop the spamming. Here’s an example:

post 2427,2428,2429

It took the mods quite a while to sort through all the reports and finally make sense of them. I’m guessing it probably took him at least an hour just to track down all those recent slips—you know, like those three massive, rule-breaking posts that somehow managed to fly under the radar without being flagged.

In order for the moderator to issue a warning regarding spamming in the next post, refer to post 2430.
The moderators did exactly what they were supposed to do and reported those posts in the correct thread.

The mods just aren't banning anyone, they aren't deleting anything, and they aren't handing out sanctions. And honestly, looking at the kind of posts being made right now? It’s a joke. They're easy enough to read, but I won't even go so far as to quote them in the third person—I don't dare.

Regarding the third part of your response—look, Tyler Cruz32 is incredibly active on the religion subforum, but she isn't actually committed to anything. I’ll say it again: I have absolutely nothing against her personally. I’ve never met this woman in my life, so how could I possibly harbor any personal hatred toward her? It just doesn't work that way. However, based on everything I read, and judging by the attempts made by myself and other Muslim users to actually engage her in conversation, the logical conclusion is pretty clear: she is biased against Muslims. She views us as either inferior or as savages. In fact, she’s even hinted at this indirectly several times before, suggesting that Muslims from Africa and other regions are fundamentally different from us—as if we are "civilized" while they are just "wild." You can thank her for all her "hard work" a thousand times over if you want, but all that does is highlight just how much of a massive misunderstanding there is regarding the religion subforum here.

Look, regarding the fourth part of your response: these aren't just accusations. These are hard, cold facts—direct links that I haven't touched or manipulated, presented exactly as they exist. It’s the same situation as last night when I was insulted personally and our Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was disparaged; that user tried to pin my ban on me, claiming I forced those words into his mouth, but I didn't provoke him at all. It's the same with these links and posts; I didn't manufacture them, they are simply what they are. And honestly, what you wrote about waiting 24 hours for every single report is completely irrelevant. Whether someone waits 24 hours or 24 days, the post stays up, and there are way too many of these posts cluttering everything up.
The moderator Tyler Cruz32 didn't actually communicate with me; she might have been talking *at* me, but that isn't communication. Real communication requires a two-way street where both parties actually listen to one another.

I am deeply disappointed by the decision made by this forum to permit racial and interfaith intolerance toward people of different faiths.
In my opinion, they should just go ahead and allow that avatar featuring Muhammad too; there’s no logic in banning that specific one while caricatures depicting Muhammad holding a weapon are permitted under the guise of free speech.

Let this thread serve as a permanent monument to the shame of this entire platform.

slycrane94 said:Weakening children isn't civilized behavior, regardless of whatever excuse someone tries to throw at it. Any data regarding the benefits of circumcision comes from Jewish and Muslim doctors, so if we're being honest, it’s inherently subjective.

Once they hit 18, fine, let them cut or stab themselves however they want, but until then, please just leave them alone.

I'm with you on this—kids are kids, and our job is to protect them, but you have to consider the context of how people lived in desert climates where sand was everywhere and impossible to avoid; it led to incredibly dangerous infections, and since people wore thin garments because of the heat, sand would get into everything. A child might cry, but they wouldn't hold onto the memory and it would pass, whereas once you grow up, you start hesitating and it becomes much harder to go through with things, leaving you to suffer the consequences of the sand; that’s one side of the story, but personally, I wouldn't do it to my own children even under those conditions.

Bradley White73 said:Quote : Guns of Brixton

I don't really know, for instance, what ROIBOSS eats for breakfast, whether he prays, or even what kind of jokes he tells, but personally, I find him to be incredibly polite. He’s definitely one of those positive examples you encounter here.

I guess I wonder if people truly grasp the distinction between the concept of freedom of speech and the actual impact of what someone says out loud. It’s one thing to have an opinion, but it’s another thing entirely to express it. For instance, do you think it’s okay to joke around at someone else's expense, even if you know they're feeling uncomfortable in that social setting? Maybe there's a fine line there that gets blurred more often than we realize.
I wonder, do you think it would be appropriate for newspapers or TV news stations to start labeling Muhammad as a pedophile or a murderer, or even comparing him to Hitler and running caricatures of him? It would probably seem pretty ridiculous, wouldn't it? I guess it makes you wonder... if that's actually an option, then why on earth isn't anyone doing it? Maybe there's some reason I'm missing, but it seems like a missed opportunity, doesn't it?

I guess it’s because people are either weighed down by a sense of guilt—or perhaps they're just reacting to the passive-aggressiveness you're using here—or maybe they're simply terrified of the fallout. There's always that fear of the chaos, the disorder, and the actual bloodshed that tends to erupt even after provocations that are far less intense than what you've written about.

If words and actions like that supposedly trigger bloodshed and violence, then why do it in the first place? Why incite intolerance and violence at all? Why preach this stuff? Do you just enjoy the carnage? 🤷
And exactly what kind of aggression am I practicing, and against whom? Please, go ahead—name a single person who has felt threatened or targeted by my posts.
It's starting to feel like you're just trying to dump all the blame and responsibility onto me; what's next, are you going to try and pin the Oklahoma City bombing on me too? 🤷

Bradley White73 said:I suppose I am wrapping this up, mostly because I feel like continuing this discussion in the direction you're heading might actually lead me toward a real aversion to an entire religion. I don't think that's particularly fair or okay, and I personally wouldn't want to let those kinds of feelings take root in me. So, I guess you just aren't someone I should be continuing to talk to. I've come across some truly wonderful Muslim forum members on here, and I'd much rather focus my energy on those positive examples instead. Take care.

So it's perfectly fine as long as one Muslim eats pork, skips prayer, drinks alcohol, allows Muhammad to be called a pedophile, and tells jokes about him? 🤷
Is that what it takes to fit in? Are all the others just not "okay" then?
Do you actually grasp the distinction between freedom of speech and the actual impact of what a person says? Are you really going to joke at someone else's expense when they clearly feel uncomfortable in your presence?
Do you honestly believe that newspapers or TV news stations should be running segments calling Muhammad a pedophile or a murderer, comparing him to Hitler, or broadcasting caricatures of him? It would look ridiculous, wouldn't it? So why isn't that happening?

rowdytiger13 said:The pressure being put on the moderators over on the Religion subreddits lately has been intense, and honestly, it’s being directed at some really decent people who don't act entitled at all.
I actually stumbled onto the Religion community by accident, but I stayed because the vibe was great—until now.
I feel bad about starting that "serieses and non-Muslims" thread; I have zero intention of discussing anything related to Islam ever again, and I’d suggest everyone else does the same, especially since people are now threatening each other with police involvement (if someone had told me that was happening, I wouldn't have believed them).

You are one of the primary examples of what I am complaining about; you only need to look back at your post history to see it. You focus exclusively on Islamic topics while being incredibly sneaky about how you quote and twist people's posts. Sure, you can choose to avoid Islamic threads, but I doubt you'll actually stick to it. As for the moderators, they seem "good" to you only because they leave you alone; you write whatever you want, much like the user Nicholas Williams7, who was penalized tonight specifically because of me—otherwise, he wouldn't have been causing trouble. That’s my point. You, Anthony Perez9, Charles Wells71, Nicholas Williams7, Joe, and a whole bunch of other users think you can get away with anything because Tyler Cruz32 lets you. Personally, I have nothing against this moderator; I haven't met her and she might be a perfectly fine person in real life, but I am complaining about her handling of the Religion subforum, the overall state of that section, and what that subforum is turning into: a playground for anti-religion sentiment and an anti-religious dumping ground.

Posts claiming Muhammad was a pedophile or a murderer, saying Aisha was only six years old, or posting fake images of Muhammad that aren't even him—all of this is just blatant trolling, and it's being permitted simply because of the intolerance toward Muslims.

If the forum rules were actually respected—which is all I'm asking for—none of this would happen. Threads would be cleaner, higher quality, and someone might actually learn something about a religion. I have questions myself, but I don't intend to post them there because I know a handful of people will jump in to spread lies, falsehoods, and insults without facing any consequences.

Before this, I tried to resolve things through the proper channels by talking to the moderator and explaining what's bothering me, but she wouldn't listen. After just two posts, she banned me from further appeals. So, the moderator essentially publicly invites me to complain to the Administrator, but when I actually do it, it's treated like it came completely out of nowhere.

Nicholas Williams7 said:So, I got banned just for you. Does that not sit right with you either? Because by your logic, I should’ve been flagged for my comments on Muhammad too. Honestly, I couldn't care less what he was about; having my own opinion on a guy who supposedly had sex with a six or nine-year-old girl is my god-given right.

The fact that it bothers you personally that people today call those types of actions pedophilia? I don't give a damn.☕

Oh, and go ahead, call the cops on me.☕

You aren't "punished" because of me; I never forced my words down your throat or tried to provoke you, you just decided to write that yourself. Truth is, I never even addressed you directly.🤷

Tyler Cruz32 said:Nick, this guy is just a troll; it is obvious his brain is completely fried.

It’s not a troll. If you actually look at the screenshot, the post wasn't flagged when I originally submitted it; it was done after I posted this. Do you want me to upload the image again? Also, before I even attached the picture here, I already reported the post using the flag icon, which means I did my part, added the evidence, and still nothing happened until after my reply.

All the other posts haven't been flagged, probably because I didn't attach a screenshot right away, but there are dozens of similar posts from tonight. Should I just dump all of them here so you can flag those too? Am I really expected to jump through all these hoops and report everything to the mods just so you'll finally take action?

Here’s the latest post where some user is getting away with talking trash about me and Muhammad. They’ll probably claim it’s all under "freedom of speech," while I’m certain they’ll try to find some technicality to get me flagged—maybe claiming an image is too big or something equally ridiculous. That's what I'm talking about.



http://www.reddit.com/showthread.php?t=480339&page=123

Regarding the police, let me be clear: I didn't say I was heading down to the station tonight. I was supposed to take everything over this evening, but I didn't make it. Tomorrow, though, I’m going to head over to the local Islamic community center a bit earlier to have a serious talk with them. I've already been in contact with them, and since they have people involved in politics and even on the City Council, I'm confident that if there's enough evidence, they will report this to the authorities. The police might not be able to unmask everyone behind these racist posts, but one thing is certain: they can shut down any platform that spreads racial and interfaith hatred. Don't kid yourselves into thinking you're running some untouchable site that exists outside of American law. If there's sufficient evidence, a court expert could easily request a temporary injunction to shut things down. I don't know exactly how it will play out, I'm just laying out the possibilities.

We'll see how Tyler Cruz32 and Nicole James respond, and we'll see exactly how things unfold on the Religion subforum firsthand.

Nicole James said:Haha, seriously—just call the police and tell them you want to file a formal report for mocking Islam.

Is this even what we call communication?

And you're supposed to be the "super moderator" of this subforum, apparently.

slycrane94 said:I already told you, my opinion isn't an official stance. My views don't align much with how this forum is run, which is exactly why nobody asks me for them.

The idea that Western countries aren't civilized is obvious. Just because someone lives in the West doesn't make them civilized. On the other hand, there are certainly issues regarding religious demands. For instance, something like incest is something the law would forbid, and those who do it would face 20+ years in prison. It's the same issue with women who cover their entire faces. How are you supposed to identify someone if you can't see their face? There has to be a limit to what is permitted in the name of religious freedom.

As for debating who qualifies as a moral giant, we could talk about that from sunrise to sunset.

Look, I agree with most of what you said, but let's be real: circumcision is basically a routine medical procedure in hospitals nowadays for hygiene reasons, regardless of any religious tie. That said, I wouldn't do it to my own kids, and I definitely don't plan to.

William Bennett53 said:If I may offer my perspective: freedom of speech is a complicated matter. Most people seem perfectly happy to champion the right to say whatever they please, yet they often struggle when that same liberty allows others to criticize—or even mock—them. Within the context of an online forum, I believe free expression should be restricted just enough to exclude targeted personal insults and the promotion of behavior that violates US law. As long as those boundaries are respected, both proponents and critics of religion (of any kind) should be allowed their space to speak.

That’s exactly what I was getting at. I'm not trying to force my personal preferences on anyone; I was simply reacting to the fact that the first post in this thread was riddled with oversights and unpunished rule violations. In my view, some of this crosses the line regarding American legal standards, but since I've clearly become too subjective about this, I'll leave it to those with cooler heads to make the final call.

Sam Alvarez4 said:By the way, are you going to ask that local group if everyone who disagrees with the "beauties" of Sharia law (as your buddy put it) needs to be immediately slapped with cardboard boxes and punished?
Though, honestly, we should probably be grateful since, hey, Sharia would be introduced gradually. Just so the rest of us non-Muslims don't commit collective suicide. You'd give us time to adjust...
Wow, how generous!

While you're at it, ask that group about implementing Sharia in Canada when they hit 80% (see the link above)—would that be gradual too, or what?

That’s not how it works.

Sharia isn't happening in Europe. Nor is any other theocracy. Not today, not tomorrow, forget it!
Europe is secular. It will stay that way, whether you like it or not...

I honestly have no idea why everyone keeps assuming I'm some kind of Canadian nationalist, where is this coming from? 🤷
Or that I'm actually living in Canada right now?
Do you really think Muslims only exist in Canada? You're making assumptions out of thin air. I haven't been advocating for Sharia in America or anywhere else in the West; that’s a total fabrication and a lie. And I have no clue why you claimed he was my "colleague"? Just because we're both Muslim? There are over a billion Muslims on this planet; does that make every single one of them my colleague?

slycrane94 said:I'm not an admin involved in management policy, so I couldn't care less about that. I'm responding because I'm bothered by the logic that "when something dear to me is mocked/criticized/insulted, it's a tragedy, but when the same happens to anything else, it's fine."

Catholics have complained here multiple times about being constantly told that a bunch of priests are pedophiles and such. I haven't seen you jump up to defend the Catholic Church or whatever.

Regarding civilization, you have a point. Any country that restricts free speech and creates "sacred cows" that cannot be mocked is not a civilized country.

For instance, over in Germany, some crazy priest in Bavaria tried to push for a law to protect the Catholic Church from criticism, and people basically told him where to go. That's a relatively civilized nation.

PS: There's a reason why I'm not consulted on the forum's editorial policy. Just wait for Nicole James to give the official response.

Look, I’m not out here advocating for or endorsing the desecration of any religion. But when people start coming for mine? I’m ready to run straight to the police. I haven't said otherwise, and I'm not complaining about that stance. When you look at how civilization works, take France, for example—they’ve actually banned the wearing of the burka. You have a Western nation dictating dress codes; a country that restricts freedom of clothing, especially when its neighbor, the Netherlands, allows nudists but still bans the burka. It’s a strange contradiction. I am not calling for a ban on criticizing Islam. There is a massive difference between legitimate criticism and blatant insults. To take a figure like Muhammad, who is recognized by not just Muslims but by many around the world and within other faiths as one of the greatest moral leaders to ever walk this earth, and label him a pedophile or a murderer—claiming he was just like Hitler—that is beyond critique. Putting up caricatures of him with exaggerated eyebrows, a huge nose, and a scimitar in his hand isn't "debate." It’s nothing more than inciting hatred and religious intolerance.

If I recall correctly, you guys actually stripped an avatar off one of our members once, didn't you? He had an image of an Israeli flag being trampled in his hand, and shortly after that, he was hit with a permanent ban. That whole "incident" was cited as part of the reason for the ban, too. Yet, on the flip side, you always seem to hide behind the banner of free speech whenever people start attacking or labeling Muslims on this forum. It's a bit of a double standard, isn't it?

slycrane94 said:I don't know where you live, but in a civilized society, people are allowed to mock anything—including religion.
If you can't handle it, stop reading their posts and move on.
It's especially obvious since you only complain when your own faith is mocked, yet stay silent when others face the same treatment. That doesn't work. Either criticizing every religion is wrong (as if), or criticism is allowed for everything. In a civilized society, it's the latter.

So, according to you, Muslims aren't "civilized," and America and Western nations are the ultimate yardstick for civilization?
By what metric, if I may ask?

It isn't really about whether I read the posts or not; the issue is that this is a discussion forum meant for debate. There are certain things written against Islam that I simply don't like, and that's fine—I'm going to try to defend them with actual arguments. What I'm writing here goes way deeper than just mocking Islam; I'm not that thin-skinned. The point is that myself and a few other users have provided proof of constant rule-breaking and the refusal to follow guidelines by almost the same group of people, and it's always specifically regarding Islam. You've accused me of only defending Islam and not other religions; well, yes, that's true. While I don't disrespect or belittle any other faiths, I am here to defend Islam, and I will continue to do so as long as I am able. That is my interest, and I follow my interests. Other religions aren't my concern, even though I respect their followers.

So, you admins didn't actually bother reading my first post, did you? Instead, you decided to jump in with this response out of some sense of agenda, making it look like my only complaint is the mockery of Islam. Is that really how this is being framed?
As administrators, do you honestly believe that mocking religion, inciting hatred, and promoting racial intolerance are permitted on this forum?

According to one part of the sub-forum rules:

"Insulting other users, intentionally provoking personal arguments, non-constructive nationalistic, religious, or similar conflicts (trolling), or starting threads about other members (except for celebratory purposes)."

If one user writes that Muhammad was a pedophile and a murderer, another compares him to Hitler, and a third posts a caricature of Muhammad that incites malice and racial or interfaith hatred—and if you guys approve of all that—then I don't think I'm overreacting. But again, I truly hope someone will actually read my initial post without jumping to conclusions beforehand.

I am formally requesting a review of a user's report regarding the religion sub-forum. This individual filed a complaint within the appeals book instead of using the designated thread for reports, which led to a moderator named Meadow warning them about spamming.

The rhetoric being used over there—especially those caricatures of Muhammad being posted—has crossed every possible line. If you all are looking for trouble with the police, fine, go ahead, but I’m warning you now: things are boiling over in that thread, and it might just end that way.
If the site administration decides to shut down the forum to investigate whether there are criminal grounds for filing hate speech charges, or if they decide whether this platform actually tolerates such content, don't come crying to me. I'm not the one at fault here.

Maybe we should invite the owner, Anderson, to drop by the forum once his bank account runs dry and the site goes dark. These aren't empty threats; I'm not making threats. I'm simply saying I intend to seek advice from a local Islamic association. We are going to review everything, and then we will decide whether or not to take this to the authorities.

This isn't something that can be swept under the rug, and everyone involved will have to answer legally for their actions.

I have tried to handle this politely, civilly, and strictly according to the forum rules by attempting a diplomatic solution internally. However, it's clear to me that this issue is being ignored and there is no desire to address the very problem I warned you about.

I’ve started this thread because I need to vent about the Religion subforum.
There are several fundamental issues with the Religion section right now.

First off, the subforum itself doesn't actually function as a space for religious discussion at all. Second, there is a specific group of users who constantly poison and troll every single thread that gets opened, regardless of whether they actually know anything about the subject matter; they just fabricate nonsense, and when serious users try to refute their lies with actual evidence, they simply ignore them by doubling down on more falsehoods and repetitive mantras until the more thoughtful contributors are completely exhausted. Lately, the Religion subforum has spiraled out of control, turning into nothing more than a breeding ground for insults and endless bickering.

The third issue involves the moderator, Meadow, who openly sides with the exact group I just described while simultaneously demonstrating an undeniable intolerance toward Muslims within the subforum.

In this thread, I intend to present evidence regarding the poor moderation of the Religion subforum and how certain users, alongside Meadow, are effectively destroying it.

I’d like to remind everyone of the appeal I filed regarding the Aisha thread and how poorly it was handled; what could have been a productive discussion was completely ruined. There wasn't even a real debate in that thread from the moment it opened—just a few posts before everything was moved from another thread's off-topic section. You all took the moderator's side in that instance, and now the thread is gone; if nothing is done, this will happen to every other decent topic on the site.

Expect the same group of trolls to show up here to try and obstruct this complaint as well.

I attempted to speak with Meadow directly to explain my frustrations with her moderation style in the appropriate feedback thread, but she shut me down curtly, telling me to take my complaints exclusively to the administrator via PM and warning me not to reply to her posts again.

posts 2356, 2357, 2358, 2359

A recent example is a post by an anonymous user on a serious topic titled "The Supernatural Works of Muhammad," where they posted a caricature of Muhammad to mock him, followed immediately by a post from another user saying, "Wow, you're so wicked," accompanied by a laughing emoji.

posts 64 and 65

posts 142, 143, 163
And finally, look at the moderator's post at 147.

posts 2967, 2971, 2972, 2974, 2975, 2977

posts 369, 371, 373, 375, 380

These are just the most recent threads and posts; I have clicked the report button countless times to no avail. How long is this mockery of believers going to be permitted in the Religion subforum?
Where does the freedom of atheists end and the protection of a believer's dignity begin? Is it really acceptable to ridicule someone just because they believe in aliens, God, or anything else that hasn't been scientifically proven yet?

Do those who don't believe in God or religion have the right to spread blatant lies under the guise of free speech whenever they feel like it?

I sincerely hope this is reviewed seriously, even though I am just one ordinary user.

If you ask me, Tyndalla and rustydrifter10 should be stripped of their admin roles immediately. We need to keep Strilet on the team because he actually provides quality oversight; sure, he might be a bit strict sometimes, but at least you can actually have a conversation with him. rustydrifter10 just doesn't have the right temperament—she’s way too overbearing, shuts down any real discussion, and constantly hands out penalties where an admin shouldn't even be getting involved. Let me remind everyone here: an admin is supposed to act as a supervisor for the moderators and oversee the overall health of the forum, not behave like a low-level moderator by handing out cards for things like spam, trolling, or off-topic posts, which I see happening all the time, often without any justification. On top of that, Tyndalla is basically useless when it comes to actually addressing user inquiries.

As far as I'm concerned, that question for administration thread should never have been closed. All those minor questions being asked were perfectly valid, and honestly, opening a whole separate topic just to deal with them was incredibly stupid, truly stupid.🤷