Posts by Brenda Hayes16

rustydrifter10 said:There isn’t some official master list you can just download, honestly. You really just dive in, participate, and get a feel for the vibe—watching what flies and what gets shut down. It’s best to just give the internal guidelines a quick read, though, because most of those PDFs that explicitly ban spamming likes on posts lay everything out pretty clearly right there. 🙂

Makes sense that it's banned everywhere. Thanks for nothing, bye. 🙂

ok

I mostly just wanted to get a handle on what people actually meant when they talked about "liking" posts.
Now that I realize it’s just a way to send a PM, I'm over it. Honestly, just go ahead and like whatever posts you want.

btw, you still haven't told me which subforum actually allows mass-liking messages publicly through multi-quoting?

rustydrifter10 said:Honestly, if someone is so incredibly dim-witted that they can’t manage to type anything more than a lazy "I agree," their struggle probably starts with just figuring out how to boot up a computer, browse the web, or even read. Even getting registered on a forum requires a baseline level of intelligence beyond that. I mean, look—if a person is actually capable of processing a topic enough to form an opinion, whether they’re backing something up or pushing back, then they should definitely be capable of putting together two coherent, well-constructed sentences every once in a while.

Her parents or her sister could have set up the account for her. And I already mentioned that she doesn't necessarily need to *agree* with everything; she just needs to find the posts likable or funny. Clearly, she’s mastered the art of using the multi-quote button and tapping on a keyboard.

So? What's the verdict?

rustydrifter10 said:She clearly uses the word posts.

Well, sure, we exchange opinions—I totally agree with that part! But to me, that means someone actually writes out their thoughts on a topic or responds to someone else's take to keep the conversation moving and build a real discussion.

But what if someone is dealing with serious health issues or cognitive struggles and realizes they just can't contribute much to the actual debate? What if all they can manage is hitting the "like" button on posts they agree with or things they find interesting for whatever reason?

Are you really saying someone in that kind of situation shouldn't be allowed to participate on an American forum like this?

rustydrifter10 said:What exactly was I advising? I just mentioned that you can always send someone a private message to let them know you loved their post instead of cluttering up the public threads. Some message boards allow that kind of thing, while others are strictly against it.

If you actually look at the post I quoted, it’s pretty clear what you wrote. You specifically mentioned liking posts—you didn't say anything about PMs or DMs.

Which subforum even allows us to spam praise by quoting people ten times over?

And honestly, sending private messages just to "like" a post? That’s hilarious. Who actually does that? Only someone with way too much free time, probably. The whole point of an online community is to interact publicly and share opinions where everyone can see them.

Michelle Alvarez8 said:That’s exactly what the multi-quote feature is for, right?

I guarantee you, they wouldn't even tolerate it if you multi-quoted ten posts in a row just to write "I like this" under every single one.

Just try imagining what a total circus this place would turn into if everyone actually decided to start showering each other with praise all at once.

The only reason rustydrifter10 is making such a big deal out of it is because almost nobody actually does that here. Honestly, I’d love to see her try to flip the script if people actually started following her advice.

Give me a break.

rustydrifter10 said:Look, I really don't see the point in adding a "like" button to this forum. If you're looking for that quick hit of dopamine by clicking a thumb icon, go over to Facebook; that’s what it’s there for. This space is meant for actual discussion and deep dives. If someone drops a post that truly blows your mind or you just want to give them some props, then use the reply function and tell them! 😁

Funny and totally unprofessional take from an admin.

So, does that mean if someone decides to quote ten posts in a row just to say:

"I like this post," they won't get banned? I highly doubt it.

Steven Reed said:🤷 pulled some amateur move here 🤷
it’s been a whole two years since Anderlon promised to bring it back 🙂

Why on earth would he bring it back if everything relies on click counts? Does Anderson really think it's better for us to keep clicking around than to actually make the site easier to use? He probably tried it, saw the clicks drop, turned it off, and then just made up some story about bringing it back eventually.

Just open more tabs—one for each subforum—and then you can switch between them easily.

Bradley Sanders4 said:Brenda Hayes16, if the mods are the ones making the suggestions and then the users vote, how exactly would you stop moderator bias during the nomination process itself?

Look, let's be clear. I'm all for having a discussion with the subforum members before installing a new mod, but I'm totally against adding unnecessary layers of bureaucracy. We shouldn't be creating rules just to check a box, especially when the end result is just swapping one undemocratic system for another. Don't take this personally.

IIRC, unless there’s a legitimate reason to object to a candidate, that "rule" doesn't actually get used. Honestly, mod elections usually go pretty smoothly.

Let it stay, but the overall impact through the whole voting process would definitely be lessened.

Sophia Thomas7 said:This is great. So, I'm "not objective" simply because I mentioned that one person impressed me. Brilliant. Thanks for the deep philosophical exchange. 😁

Look, even Superman doesn't impress me. We're talking about people who are capable of doing moderation—which basically means having a few more buttons than your average user to edit posts and hand out bans.
It’s not like we should be treating them like they have superpowers or anything. They really don't.

rustydrifter10 said:Maybe that person just doesn't want to be dragged through the mud here right now.

Regarding the whole moderator selection process—honestly, we've been over this a million times, and the conclusion always ends up being the same: nothing is changing. Look, I get it, the current system isn't perfect, but it’s the most workable option we have at the moment. That said, I'm totally open to chatting about it, because hey, maybe some genuinely great new ideas will surface, which is exactly what we're doing right now.

Someone mentioned that the users aren't asked who they'd prefer to see in charge. Now, I do ask sometimes, but usually, I'm reaching out to people I've personally offered a moderator role to who turned it down, or folks I think provide really high-quality content on the PDF, or people I just generally respect even if I don't think they're quite cut out for the actual job. I don't poll everyone every single time, but I do it occasionally. And honestly, those suggestions have actually helped me during later searches; there have even been times where I ended up suggesting someone because they were recommended to me, though only if I truly felt they were a solid candidate myself. For me, it’s not enough to just follow someone else's lead; I need to be able to stand behind my choices and say, "Yes, I personally believe this person would be an excellent mod." Some people just can't make a call like that, no matter how many other names are thrown around.

And we can always circle back to the fact that this forum isn't a democracy, and from what I can tell, it isn't going to become one anytime soon.

We can also reiterate that the owner has absolutely no intention of changing how mods are selected. If we happen to come up with a better idea—something actually superior to the current setup—we can certainly pass it along to him, and then it's entirely up to him whether he accepts it or shuts it down.

When it comes to the different methods being proposed here, I'm definitely on the same page as what dustyranger64 and Sophia Thomas7 have already pointed out.

One of the top three most important sentences in this thread (the other two are mine)

So, should we just close the thread then? Or is there some actual reason why you opened this whole thing, Nica, if it just leads to the fact that Anderlon isn't interested in changing the mod selection process?

Oh, right. People are suggesting better ideas than what we currently have, but Anderlon doesn't want to change anything.

Fine. Then why not start a new thread: Applications for specific subforum moderators

If that's not an option, then why not?

dustyranger64 said:Yeah, because the admins basically never turn down a suggestion for new mods. 😁

Haha, let's be real—he never turns down an admin's suggestion anyway!
Alright, look, it’s pretty obvious now that you're just trolling and talking nonsense for the hell of it.

I'm not joking around.
Go ahead and keep fighting amongst yourselves. You’re clearly just trying to stop a massive wave of interested folks from this sub ever getting a vote, all so you can keep running things however you want without anyone calling you out on your nonsense. 🤷

Sophia Thomas7 said:What kind of "objectivity" are we even talking about? I told you I found one candidate suitable for my pdf. You’re insisting I need to add several more, even though I can't get behind those choices.

How exactly is that being objective?

Look, you can't call it "objective" if you aren't being objective yourself. It’s a circular argument. Besides, moderating a community isn't exactly rocket science; the job shouldn't be so demanding that one single person has to shoulder the entire load for a thousand users. 🤷
And let’s not even get started on you guys actually putting in some real work on propaganda for the moderator slots just so you'd have actual candidates to pick from—though we all know that's the last thing you want to do. 🤷 So, we’re left asking the big question: why?

Sophia Thomas7 said:Honestly, what’s the point in even mentioning it? It doesn't change a thing about who I think would be an excellent candidate.

Honestly, it doesn't even matter for this specific thread. I’ve seen on a few different subreddits that there were candidates who actually wanted the job—people who had the support of the majority and even went on record during the appeal process explicitly stating they wanted the position. But nope. Not a chance. That moderator didn't even blink at their statement.

So, let me get this straight: we don't even have any candidates lined up, and you guys aren't even trying to stop the whole thing from going completely south because you’re too busy protecting your own little cushy seats and pushing that propaganda around. 🤷

dustyranger64 said:No, it doesn't.
You're constantly cherry-picking keywords to fit your own narrative, which is honestly just rude.
Like this time—you're leaving out the word "interested." Such a huge detail.
Because plenty of incredibly high-quality posters—people way more capable than most mods—just don't want to, don't have the time, or whatever else. I've seen it happen plenty of times.

The idea that there are 5 to 10 amazing candidates just waiting in the wings on the PDF... ah well...

Btw, if it isn't a secret, how can you be so sure about those PDFs?

Oh sure, it's a total secret. Just like how one of you two refuses to actually name any candidates for your subforum.

Besides, it would be easy to just pop open a thread on the subforums, maybe even pin it to the top, titled something like: "Discussion regarding potential subforum moderators" or whatever. That way, you'd see a bunch of candidates—some actually serious ones—showing up, stating their availability, sharing their thoughts on the subforum, stuff like that.
Or, if you aren't going to do that for every single subforum, you could at least have one official, working thread somewhere on the site titled: "Applying for a Subforum Moderator Position."

Then you'd definitely have more interested people. Basically, you need to work on the propaganda for your own seats and show people they're actually available.

It's easy to just claim people aren't capable or simply don't want to.

dustyranger64 said:What's even the point? Once all the admins give the green light on a mod candidate, the whole thing just goes straight to Anderlon. If Anderlon says okay, boom—they’re officially a mod.
Just by the fact that someone actually landed a moderator spot, you already know exactly how the admins voted and how Anderlon handled the ruling.
You don't get any actual transparency if all three of them just show up and vote "yes." It’s pointless. Even if Anderlon shows up and says, "Sure, it works" or "No, it doesn't," we're still stuck. Just feels like a wash!

And honestly? He’s definitely not going to get dragged into endless arguments or petty back-and-forth debates with every single person on the forums. I mean, why bother? Or why not? It just isn't worth the energy.

If you say so. Totally legit.

The admins tend to stick together, and they rarely push back against a moderator's decision in a specific sub-forum if that person knows their stuff. Anderlon is basically just the seal of approval; you just grab it and stamp it at the end.

So, adding one more voting body would just be a way to curb the arbitrary power held by the moderators and admins.

dustyranger64 said:Look, at the end of the day, I said exactly what I meant. Simple as that! The exact opposite! Because of that.
I honestly feel like this whole "let’s see who actually wants to be a mod" system is exactly what fuels that issue you're talking about. It's just asking for trouble!

Anderlon actually knows everything about pdf x—he’s the one who owns the damn thing! Honestly, if he decides tomorrow that he wants to wipe it from the database like it never even existed, we're stuck. Not the admins, not the regulars on Reddit, not even the mods. We can't do a single thing about it.

Exactly. But honestly? Real-world practice tells a completely different story.

Honestly, you’d probably find another dozen of them hanging out on the higher-quality subreddits.

Honestly, when people start making claims like that, I really begin to wonder if this is even a serious discussion anymore.
If just one single PDF on Reddit had ten actually willing and capable candidates ready to step up as mods, Anderlon and the entire admin team would be losing their minds with pure joy. Honestly!

I’m going to have to disagree there. Claiming there aren't even two or three people on this entire subforum capable of stepping up as a mod is basically a straight-up insult to 🤷
And honestly, I don't buy it. It's not like I woke up yesterday; I know exactly what the vibe is like on a few of these subforums, and I know what the candidates are actually capable of.

Sorry, but that's just how it is. It makes it seem like you mods are some kind of rare, mythical species.

Sophia Thomas7 said:The issue lies right there with that word "have." I don't *have* to, and I certainly don't intend to.

A system where a moderator is forced to list several candidates just to satisfy some idea of transparency—even when they don't actually agree with those choices—isn't any better than the current setup everyone is complaining about.

It’s better, sure—but not from your perspective or the view the moderators have. I mean it from the perspective of the vast majority of people hanging out on Reddit.
A system of checks and balances to keep moderators from going rogue. Anyone got an issue with that? Yeah, the mods do.
Look, let's try to be a little objective here. You can't just have a handful of people making all the calls, or one single person running the whole show. At the very least, there should be an attempt to actually shake things up. If the admins or the Anderlon family decide to shut it down, fine—whatever. Good grief, they’re the bosses. Life goes on.

dustyranger64 said:Look, you clearly feel like this isn't a real democracy and that we can all just take a hike. But if a suggestion hits the admins, and then makes its way to Anderlon and he doesn't like it, what happens then? Nothing.

The whole idea of forcing nominations just for the sake of having a vote? It's just bad.

Look, fine. Let them hold a public admin vote or whatever happens at Anderlon. That’s really all anyone is asking for.

It’s not some kind of massive force or anything. It’s really just on you to pick out a few favorites based on what you actually like. Besides, nobody is forcing your hand here—the folks on Reddit usually just make their own choices anyway.

Look, the claims that everyone except for one single candidate is completely incompetent? They just don't hold water. Period. 🤷

dustyranger64 said:We can do that. But then what? Who actually decides which applicants make the cut? Is it just the mods? Honestly, you aren't gaining anything there. You’re just spinning your wheels. It usually ends up being the same old loop—we look around to see who seems decent, and once we spot someone, we just ask them if they want to moderate. That's it.
That way, anyone who actually wants to moderate could step up. Then we could see who’s actually decent and how many good ones we've got!

So, picture this: ten people apply—let's say they’re all just spammers or trolls, right? If the mods look at that group and decide none of them are actually fit for the job, everyone’s gonna start whining. They'll claim the mods are being narrow-minded or just don't have an eye for talent. It's always something!

Just like everything else, it’s all about people connecting with people. Simple as that!

Or maybe twenty people apply and three or four are actually okay. Either way, one thing is certain: we won't know until we try.

But your whole point was basically that volunteers don't exist, or whatever. Personally, I maintain that even on the absolute worst subreddits, you can find at least two or three solid candidates. Mods don't exactly hold themselves to impossible standards when they're doing their own jobs.
On the higher-quality boards, you'd probably find a dozen.

Sophia Thomas7 said:I just feel like they're all inferior choices compared to that specific candidate, so I don't see the point in nominating them.

In other words, aside from that one person, nobody really stood out to me. So what? According to you, I'm supposed to nominate people I can't actually get behind.

No, you have to nominate a few others who, in your eyes, come closest to that "extraordinary" quality that one individual has.

That’s literally the whole point of an election. Not everyone is equally qualified, but people still get a choice.
Just look at any election around the world—governors, presidents, whatever.

dustyranger64 said:How much longer are you going to keep repeating stuff that nobody even said and isn't true?

- No, there isn't "high demand." It's not like there's a massive horde of interested candidates.
- And I didn't say a single thing about how well any specific person would do the job.

No one's interested?

Now I'm genuinely curious if that's actually true.
Let's just start threads in every sub-forum titled:
"Who wants to moderate this section?"

Just to see what happens.
Besides, I haven't really gotten the impression that mods find it easy to just peel themselves away from their desks once they settle in.

Sophia Thomas7 said:Sure, it *could* happen, but it doesn't *have* to be taken as a given. Of course, it's a possibility.

I'll say it again regarding this famous list. You're claiming there need to be several candidates. Right now, looking at my own PDF, I only see one. I'm not going to go out of my way and add two more candidates just to satisfy your obsession with "transparency" just so people have someone else to vote for.

Get it?

And I'm telling you, the issue lies with you, not with this subforum.

Anyone in power can claim there isn't a decent alternative—except for maybe that one person who's almost as bad as you lot.

I've already explained why this is your problem twice now, in a couple of posts just a little while ago.

Fine. Let's try this: why on earth do you think everyone else is too incompetent to be a moderator, aside from that one guy and, obviously, yourself?