Posts by Daniel Campbell5

Melissa Sanders33 said:If you actually had a problem, you could’ve just slid into my DMs and told me what was on your mind, like most people on this forum do. I definitely wouldn't have ignored you; I would've looked into your complaints. But hey, I guess being passive-aggressive publicly is just easier.

Look, smartypants, you’re the one who suggested I hit the report button the exact same way you’re suggesting DMs now. And when I clicked that button fifteen times, nothing happened. Zero. Zilch.

But whatever, if making things difficult makes you feel better, go for it. 😢

Anyway, I'm telling the mod to just lock this thread. This is a lost cause. 👋

Charles Fox10 said:So, it’s not a closed case just yet.

Just so we're clear, if you report something, someone on the team—probably all of us, including the admins—is going to take a look at it. And as you can see, nothing got nuked.

Take my call, for instance. I didn't delete it because we're talking about a father and son who were active in politics during the exact same era. That’s a totally different ballgame than something like Bajic and his old man, or Josipovic and his dad, where there's like a sixty-year gap between them.

So, calling someone a "plagiarist just like their father" counts as being politically relevant now? Wild. 🙄

slybison8, thanks for getting back to me.

I’m still sitting here wondering what happened to those fifteen posts in the M. Tuđman thread. They totally fly in the face of the rules laid out here. When I brought it up, the moderator didn't just suggest I report them—she actually gave me a hard time for not doing it sooner. So, I did exactly what I was told and filed the reports, and...

...nothing. Absolute radio silence. 🤷 Here they are. If the logic is "whatever goes in the Tuđman thread is fine, but we draw the line at Bajić/Josipović," then fine. You don't have to say it out loud. I get it.

🙂

Also, I’m gonna ask one more time for a straight answer on this:

Daniel Campbell5 said:So, basically, since you're the Politics mod, are you actually giving me the green light to use those arguments (about why bringing up parents matters) to drop a new post in the thread about M. Bajić? I'm planning to lay out the facts regarding his old man's history during the war.

I just don't want to waste my time writing something only for it to get nuked later.

I honestly don't get the point of this sub if nobody’s actually going to respond to a legitimate complaint.

So, the mod says:

Melissa Sanders33 said:If you noticed something shady while looking into the Miroslav Tuđman stuff, why didn't you just report it?

I'll take a crack at this:

Daniel Campbell5 said:So, I just spent about fifteen minutes clicking through ten different pages—honestly, my brain's fried so I didn't bother reading any further. Just wondering, though... is everyone going to get wiped out? I'll check back later. 😉 ).

Yeah, I actually went ahead and clicked on like fifteen of those little triangles. Just like the moderator suggested..

Checked back today, and from what I can see, nothing’s been wiped. Still all there. 🤷

For instance—and I’ve reported a whole bunch of others, this is just one example—it’s still sitting there:

I don't know what to tell you guys. Just feels like everything is moving too fast lately. One minute you're chilling, the next, things are spinning out of control. Not sure if I'm just getting old or if the world's actually losing its mind. Probably both. Anyway, just my two cents. kaže:
Honestly, Miroslav Tuđman is just completely speechless. He’s got zero capacity for this.
He’s just a total hack, ripping off Franjo’s playbook and using the exact same dirty tactics.

What if someone actually had the nerve to claim "The son of a spy is using the exact same tactics" when talking about Josipović or Bajić? 🤷

Besides, this totally flies in the face of "slybison8's principle"—which, let’s be honest, he breaks himself half the time anyway—about only bringing up parents if there's an actual reason it matters. So, why wasn't this scrubbed when I flagged it? Especially since you guys told me, "just report it and we'll take care of it."

Melissa Sanders33 said:Look, if you spotted something off in the Miroslav Tuđman thread, why didn't you just flag it? You've got that little triangle icon right there—just click it and move on. That goes for any other topic too, doesn't it?

So I did. Spent about fifteen clicks scrolling through ten pages before I lost interest (honestly, life is too short to read all this). Now I'm wondering if everyone’s gonna get nuked from the site (I'll have to check 😉). There's this one guy with like dozens of posts in the M. Tuđman thread, and I swear he can't go a single sentence without bringing up his old man. Seems like none of the mods thought that was worth calling out.

And yeah, you should probably just scrap those two posts too. They don't really make sense anymore now that you've wiped out what came before them: this one and this one.

casuallynx8 said:Look, the rules on this PDF clearly state that discussing moderator actions is a big no-no. If you break that rule, you get hit with a violation card.

So, basically, when a mod drops a warning on a thread, everyone else needs to just follow it. If you want to vent or criticize, take it over to the Governor subforum.

Alright, fine. I replied to the moderator right where she addressed me. That’s just how people talk, right? It’s like if you’re driving down a street and a cop tells you "you can't go this way," and you respond with, "but hey, that other guy just went through there!" And then he hands you a ticket because apparently, the "proper procedure" isn't talking back, it's filing an official complaint. 🙄 Seems a little extreme to me. If it were just a yellow card, I wouldn't care. But whatever, I haven't been on Reddit for eight years using four different handles and dropping ten thousand posts without ever getting a violation, so hey, might as well get the experience. 🙂

Still, I'll say it again: it would be pretty decent if the private message attached to a violation actually gave a specific reason, like "hey, move discussions about mods to the other subforum," instead of just some vague "violation of forum rules."

slybison8 said:Daniel Campbell5 - you should've brought up those reasons for why mentioning parents matters before you got hit with the ban, now we're kind of past that point.

Three things here:

1. 😁Is your move—just dropping "``here's some trivia about XY's dad``" —actually an argument? Does that mean I can jump into a thread about M. Bajić and write "``here's some trivia about his dad``" just to repost what was already deleted?

2. There was an actual point being made—not super deep, but there was a clear connection regarding how certain war crimes from the old regime weren't dealt with, and how power gets passed down through families. But the mods didn't catch the context (or maybe they just chose to ignore it) and just mechanically slapped on the "no mentioning parents" rule. Still, this third part is more important to me:

3. So, does this mean that since you're a moderator for Politics, you're giving me the green light to use that same logic (explaining why it's relevant to mention parents) to start a new post about M. Bajić where I lay out all the facts about his father's service during the partisan era?

slybison8 said:I reckon it’s fine to bring up parents, but only if it actually fits the conversation. Otherwise, it just feels a bit much. Can you actually show me a clear reason why this matters?

👍 Finally, someone making sense here. I'm with you 100%.

So, here’s a thought. It’s been twenty years, right? Twenty years since we started talking about this, yet not a single indictment has been handed down for those partisan war crimes. We know they happened—it’s an undisputed fact. There are still plenty of witnesses walking around out there, and honestly, probably even some of the perpetrators still breathing. It makes you wonder, doesn't it? If the evidence is sitting right there, isn't it pretty reasonable to ask: who exactly is sleeping on the job, and why aren't they doing it? Because let's be real, someone clearly isn't doing their part.

When you look at why those indictments haven't been filed, one big reason for the whole mess could be the Attorney General himself. It makes you wonder: why isn't he going after those war crimes committed by the resistance fighters, especially since he was so quick to prosecute everyone else’s war crimes and plenty of non-war stuff too? Honestly, there might be a pretty obvious answer: his own father could end up being one of the defendants.

If we were looking at an analog situation where a District Attorney refuses to prosecute mafia crimes, while everyone knows his old man is basically tied to the mob, wouldn't it be pretty damn relevant to ask if there's a connection between his dad and those dropped charges? 🤷

Second off, if my whole point was about this "caste" system where the same old crowd just refuses to let go of their seats, can you even really argue that without bringing up who their parents are?

Look, I get it. Finding decent moderators for the Politics section is a nightmare, so I’m not expecting much, but your* responses under every single criterion are just... off.

I didn't even need to go hunting for info on Miroslav Tuđman because I stumbled upon that thread about the terror attack in Norway, where a moderator from the two-party system was busy rambling about the Norwegian Prime Minister's father.

So, what's the deal? Are these posts getting nuked? Is slybison8 getting a warning card?

Let's be real here, 🙄they shouldn't be deleted, and slybison8 definitely shouldn't be getting a strike.

*EDIT: This is directed at Chuck and Robert Hall7.

Daniel Campbell5 said:Isn't it kind of a big deal who someone's parents are when you're talking about Prince Charles and his whole public role?

Or look at it this way: wouldn't it be pretty relevant to both the political standing and the general vibe people get from Miroslav Tuđman to talk about who his father was? 🤷

I'd bet money—not that I'm looking for a reason to dig through old threads right now, fingers crossed I don't have to—that if you check any discussion about Miroslav Tuđman, his dad comes up more than once.

Charles Fox10 said:Oh, come on. Now we're just gonna drag extended family into political debates whenever it suits us? Everyone’s an individual. You answer for your own actions, not your parents or your siblings—that goes for politicians too.

Doing that on this PDF is against the rules and counts as a violation.

Maybe try actually reading everything before jumping in. For one thing, it clearly mentions that moderator slybison8 did the exact same thing. I was just pointing out the facts and got slapped with a warning for it.

Breaking news: even moderator slybison8 was doing it just an hour ago:

So, I guess the rules apply to him just as much as they do to me. Why'd I get flagged just for calling it out?

Plus, someone's parents can definitely be relevant. It's not exactly irrelevant to Prince Charles's public role who his parents are, right?

Over on the Mladen Bajić thread on Powerlock, someone posted some stuff about his dad along with a link to this article. I actually weighed in on that one. My whole point was basically that even today, the biggest political power in America is still held by the same old establishment families that ran things back before 1990. In that context, I mentioned that Josipović’s father was also acting as a sort of partisan leader during that same era.

The moderator jumps in:

teta-elza said: I’d kindly ask everyone not to mention anyone's parents. thanks.

One user pointed out how pointless it is to ban something like that, and honestly, they're right. Why?

If your argument is that power is passed down through dynasties—basically from ancestors to descendants—then mentioning someone's parents is totally relevant. If you're arguing something is genetic, then yeah, parents matter. Or, if we're talking about the career of some young keyboardist from Rolling Stone, it's obviously relevant to mention his dad is Tonči Huljić. 🤷

Also, if people are wondering why zero wartime crimes from the partisans were ever prosecuted 20 years after the old regime lost control, a valid answer might be: maybe because the prosecutor is the kid of someone who could have been implicated.

The fact that this "don't mention parents" rule is total nonsense was proven the very same day when the Powerlock moderator was busy writing about the Norwegian Prime Minister's father in a different thread.

So, last night I shot back at the moderator like this:

Quote: teta-elza said: I’d kindly ask everyone not to mention anyone's parents. thanks.

Just agree with Powerlock. 🤷


Woke up today to find the whole exchange had been wiped, and the moderator under the politika clouseau banner handed me a strike. 😕

So, there are two issues here.

First, there's this completely unnecessary and mindless ban on looking at a public figure's family context when it actually matters to the discussion.

The whole thing is just a mess of conflicting vibes from the Powerlock mods, and honestly, getting slapped with a ban for it feels pretty pointless. One mod warns us not to do something, then another mod goes ahead and does that exact same thing. I calmly point out the hypocrisy, and then a third mod hands me a red card. Just great.

Also, if you're gonna toss a card at me for "breaking subforum rules," maybe be a little more specific? Like, which rule did I actually break? A little clarity would go a long way. 😕

So, just checking in with the resident experts on the Reptilian Empire—what’s your take on Joe Biden? 😲

By the way, in certain anti-European circles over in the UK, people describe the European Union as this "Vatican conspiracy"—basically a Catholic (and therefore anti-Masonic by definition) setup designed to seize control of Europe all over again.

nimblewalker58 said:They got kicked out of there.

But honestly, to the OP—are these reptilians some kind of parody aimed at the Masons, or are you actually being serious right now?

Man, calling it a conspiracy theory is an understatement.