Nice post. We tend to overlook tourism outside of the coastal hubs, and it’s not just political—it's because people just don't have a business mindset and fail to see the potential profit sitting right in front of them. On the coast, obviously, everyone gets that...
Take the new aquarium project in a place like Karlovac, which is basically our version of an Aquatica—the first freshwater aquarium in the US and a huge deal for this entire region. People spent so much time whining and being dramatic in the comments about it... claiming there aren't enough preschools, complaining about flooding, or demanding we just build more factories instead... all the classic American idiocies, fueled by a total lack of understanding of how EU funds actually work. And of course, you hear all that "who cares, who would even go there" nonsense from the local internet experts...
In the end, after barely six months, the aquarium has already seen over 75,000 visitors, and half of that was during the off-season...
The U.S. Census Bureau puts out regular monthly updates along with the final annual reports...
Back in 2016, Washington, D.C. saw 1,152,598 tourists accounting for 2,016,107 overnight stays. Domestic travelers hit 232,295 people and 395,208 nights, while foreign visitors brought in 920,303 tourists and 1,620,899 nights...
As for the rest of the region, I don't have the exact numbers—depends on how you define "the region"—but roughly speaking, Vienna and Prague are leagues ahead, pulling in maybe 15 to 16 million overnight stays a year, and Budapest is right up there too with about 8 or 9 million, while Bratislava is doing slightly better than that...
For Mexico City, I found this: 809,273 tourists and 1,680,347 overnight stays. But that was just for 11 months, so the final count was probably a bit higher, though they still didn't catch up to Washington, D.C....
I couldn't find anything specific for Ottawa, but for all of Canada:
Between January and December 2016, tourists in Canada recorded 1,148,530 visits—an 11.6 percent increase—and 2,376,743 overnight stays.
Ljubljana had 1.2 million overnight stays in 2015, and since tourism was growing everywhere last year, they likely saw an uptick too, but nothing nearly enough to touch Washington, D.C....
I dugged this up, though it really just tracks foreign visitors—and honestly, domestic travelers count as tourists too, which is how these bigger countries keep their numbers so high since, well, there are just more of them traveling...
Look, those numbers are pretty concrete, and you can't just make stuff like that up... It’s entirely possible that things have actually tightened up over the years regarding under-the-table stays, now that there’s some actual oversight in place.
Generally speaking, our tourism industry isn't exactly terrible, but it's certainly not the powerhouse we love to brag about... The real issue is how much money travelers actually spend while they're here versus how much they blow at other destinations; I’d say we’re lagging way behind the heavy hitters in the global travel market.
When you look at the raw data for international arrivals, the US ranks eighth in the Western world—or ninth if you count Turkey—but you have to factor in the sheer size of the country... The biggest players see the most traffic, starting with Spain, followed by Italy, France, the United Kingdom, Austria, Germany, and Greece, before we even get a look in. Still, it’s not exactly an insignificant feat to be sitting ahead of Portugal, the Netherlands, or the Czech Republic with Prague....
Look, let's get one thing straight: the idea that anyone, anywhere, actually enjoys absolute freedom of speech or total press freedom is just a massive myth...
Even here in the USA, which everyone loves to point to as the gold standard, that freedom isn't even close to being absolute: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United...ech_exceptions
Then you have the whole messy debate about where the line should be drawn—trying to figure out how much you can restrict things before you start trampling on basic human rights, or deciding when the greater good of society outweighs an individual's liberty... but honestly, those boundaries exist everywhere on the planet, regardless of what people claim
No, they just thought they were being "enlightened" about terrorism. Just because someone points out the common-sense fact that everything the West does in the Middle East makes it easier to recruit terrorists and breed fanatics doesn't mean they actually support terrorists or think terrorism is fine...
Your entire post is written with nothing but pure trolling from start to finish, dripping with a level of cynicism that just isn't warranted since nobody else here said anything even remotely close to what you're "responding" to. And if they actually did, you should just report the post, because regardless, relativizing terrorism isn't allowed here...
Anyway, if you have a card complaint, there’s a dedicated thread for that pinned at the top of the page. We can't respond to every single question about a deleted post because that happens all too often on this forum. I'm only replying now because you actually did get a card for that specific post...
Just like you said, you were given an explanation 🙂 That’s just how it works, there isn't really another way... You didn't get a strike, but the post was pulled because it had the potential to spiral into those "certain groups don't belong in America" type of arguments. Since you didn't say that explicitly, you dodged the ban, but clearing out posts that steer the conversation toward those toxic waters is standard moderator procedure... It's about protecting the users, not the mods. It takes us all of three seconds to issue a strike, but someone ends up sitting out for three or seven days just because they let their temper get the better of them and claimed, for instance, that "Muslims have no business being in the US."
I sent you a response via PM regarding that yellow warning you picked up for commenting on moderator guidelines... do you really want us to go through the motions here too?
If you’re curious about why your post was nuked, just reach out 🙂 In a civilized manner, obviously.
Feel free to draw your own conclusions 👍 but please don't clog up the subforum with it; we've already made it clear that deleting posts is just standard moderator procedure. If you think you've cracked the code, there's really no need to start a whole thread about it. This space is for actual questions and people looking for answers.
First things first—there’s actually a dedicated thread for appeals regarding bans. It's called "Ban Appeals." Given how much time you've spent around here, I'm sure you can find it... So, if you're genuinely curious about why you were flagged, rather than just using this space to vent your frustrations, try heading over to the proper channel and asking politely. We aren't really interested in engaging with these kinds of outbursts... Best regards.
You’ve already received an answer, and if any of the admins have anything else to add to the conversation, whether it's directed at you or me, they'll step in... so just stop the trolling. Nobody here is interested in listening to some pathetic sob story about censorship, and frankly, we don't have the time to sit here and explain basic common sense to you ten times over.
You asked a question, you got a response from the moderator, and you'll get one from the super-mods or the administrators if they decide it's actually worth their while...
His... Just trolling at this point. It’s none of your business and certainly not your problem, so let's just call it a day on this discussion... unless an admin actually has something useful to add, in which case they'll step in...
You’ve tried bringing back deleted posts twice now—once we let it slide, but the second time was a bridge too far. If you’re ever feeling confused or just plain lost about how things work around here, just ask... restoring deleted content is strictly against the rules, and that’s really all there is to it...
That’s exactly why you didn't get a warning for your content; they just wiped the whole thing. Moderators aren't allowed to go in and edit posts just to scrub out a quote... The issue lies within the specific post you're quoting, which was nothing more than pure trolling for the sake of it. Because that original post was nuked, all the replies went down with it—making it impossible to tell which responses were genuine thoughts and which ones were just people lashing out at the troll...
Your post was nuked because it was replying to a deleted thread and included it in the quote. It’s such a charming little setup, though it’s hardly a Sisyphus task to see why the logic falls apart... It doesn't make much sense to scrap a troll post while leaving all the replies that quoted it intact. As for the ban, you got it for being repetitive. Don't worry about how the server runs; it does plenty of nonsense, but it doesn't just delete posts on its own. If a post vanishes, it means the mods took it down. And if you look just a few threads down, you'll see this is standard procedure, and we aren't planning on explaining the reasoning behind every single removal... especially when the inquiry isn't a civilized question, but just a whine.
Did you start this thread just to thank the mods for being in such a good mood today so you didn't get slapped with a 500-point penalty for your racist garbage, or are you just here to troll?
If it’s the former—don't mention it, but let's not make a habit of it.
If it's the latter—I'm not interested, because as I've already made clear, thousands upon thousands of posts fly through the Politics section every single day, and dozens get scrubbed for all sorts of reasons, so we aren't obligated, nor do we have the spare time, to explain to every single person why their specific post was deleted... and we certainly aren't doing it for you. Take care.
crimsonjackal63 said:You didn't bother addressing my counterarguments, which is totally your prerogative...
In reality, your one and only argument so far regarding those "high principles by which the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops should select its members" has completely fallen apart for the exact reason I already mentioned—since Željka Markić has absolutely nothing to do with this—and there’s also this little detail: - You tried to defend our fellow forum member Alexis by claiming the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is at fault because they failed to figure out that this guy sodomizes his dogs.
The police get zero points, the neighbors get zero, friends get zero, acquaintances get zero, family gets zero, society gets zero, everyone else gets zero, but apparently the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops was supposed to investigate and uncover it all...
Besides, we all know how incredibly complicated the hiring procedures are within European Union institutions. The dog rapist passed the check, but sure, let's just dump all the blame onto the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops; and why stop there? Let's generalize and go after Željka Markić, the Church, the conservative worldview, and anything else that breathes and walks conservatively.
Trolling, insults, off-topic tangents, and sweeping generalizations shouldn't be tolerated, and that's exactly what's happening here. You, me, everyone knows I'm right... I'm disappointed in you... 👎
I'm sorry, but you're taking this way too personally. Look, William Bennett53 agrees with you, but I don't agree with you or him, and clearly, neither do the rest of our colleagues. So, what now? 🙂 And please, don't make this about us personally; I simply decided to reach out and reply, and besides, it wasn't me who got the post flagged by nine moderators, not you.
Just to answer your direct question—yes, the USCCB is in the spotlight because it's an institution. It would be the same if the Democratic Party had a dog rapist on their executive board; people would be talking about them, not about the guy's family or friends... 😉 Just like the person who made that comment about the "murderer of Bruna Esih" got a warning because it was nonsense, though if it were someone third on her ballot, I probably wouldn't have handed out a warning...
I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one. And just to be clear, I’m speaking strictly for myself here... why the other mods decided to hand out bans is anyone's guess, though I assume the reasoning was similar, but I can't exactly speak for them.
To me, that post wasn't even in the same league as calling someone a "Democratic pedophile" or a "murderer who loves Bruna Esih." None of us are saints, but contrary to what some people on this forum might think, the moderators over at USA Today don't all share the exact same political agenda or worldview, so it's not like there's some unified front deciding who gets a ban...
Sure, I respond to private messages, but I don't usually deal with post reports via PM, especially when they’ve already been flagged multiple times using the little triangle icon...
You got your answer, and honestly, your comparisons in this post are pretty weak. There is a massive difference between being a member of a major political party like the Democratic Party or the Republican Party—which have millions of members—and becoming a member of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' council for ecumenism and dialogue. It’s the same logic as becoming a Cabinet Secretary or a member of a party's executive committee... So, right from the jump, there's a clear distinction here. You can't expect Andrej Plenković or Zoran Bernardić to dig into the history and personal lives of every single person who signs up for their party, nor would any organization run special investigative commissions just for membership. However, once someone is appointed to a high-ranking office, then you absolutely can—and should—expect that kind of scrutiny. That goes for the Democratic Party, the Republican Party, the USCCB, all of them...
There is also a higher level of accountability in certain sectors of society depending on the transgression. A scandal will hit much harder if a leftist has a Nazi flag and a Hitler poster on their wall than if an extremist right-winger does. A drunk cop causing a traffic accident creates a way bigger mess than a plumber or a chemistry professor doing the same thing...
Look, there are creeps and degenerates in every corner of society. But you're fundamentally wrong to ignore the varying levels of responsibility. A drunk idiot hitting two pedestrians at a crosswalk is the same person regardless of whether they're a cop, a plumber, or a professor, but with the officer, there is a question of broader professional responsibility, and that is a fair point to make. It’s the same logic: it won't be the same level of fallout if a member of the Democratic Party's executive committee is a pedophile (which would cause a massive uproar here on the forum) versus some random, nobody member of the Young Democrats from the sticks... Because obviously, the first instance wouldn't mean every Democrat is a pedophile, but they certainly bear the responsibility for letting someone like that reach the top tier...
Listen, being gay is perfectly fine. But if it came out tomorrow that Željka Markić had a girlfriend, she would face a wave of anger and insults. Not because of her orientation, but for a whole host of other reasons. You can't come here and ask why we punished people for insulting some random person, yet we're letting Željka Markić get dragged through the mud. It’s simply not the same thing. Not even close...
That covers the comparisons...
As for the bans, I think you know well enough that other people's warnings aren't anyone else's business, whether they get them or not. And you've had your explanation. Pringles was participating here as a regular user, but since she's also a supermoderator, it was mentioned just to show you that administration is clearly aware of the controversial post. Honestly, it’s asking too much to expect us to answer inquiries about every single post that *wasn't* penalized; I assume you realize that... though I think both this and your previous post provided enough for you to draw your own conclusions...
One more thing—yes, the troll who was messing around with that "Democratic" pedophile story got banned. Just like the troll who was baiting people with that story about a murderer from Washington, D.C., who happens to be a fan of Bruna Esih. So, this isn't about picking favorites or playing politics...
Regarding what's bothering you, none of the moderators or supermoderators in the Politics section feel a ban was warranted here. Take care...
It’s honestly pathetic how you both are getting so worked up and frantic waiting for an answer, clearly too blinded by your own excitement to notice the supermoderator's reaction on that very same page, or the follow-up clarification from Forumasica right after...
By the way, crimsonjackal63, you know you have the report button, so just use it. I don't deal with private messages, especially when they're nothing more than pure provocation. Every moderator over in Politics received your report—which was basically just you spamming the same post repeatedly—and nobody saw any reason to issue a warning. The reason for that is likely because anything even remotely controversial was settled immediately right there in the thread itself.
You’re more than welcome to disagree with that, but you don't have the right to troll or spam the forum just because you're unhappy, especially when the response and clarification you're looking for happened to be posted right in front of you on the thread...
It’s always a real joy when you try to actually explain something or have a civil conversation, only for them to completely ignore the point and just double down on their own nonsense 😍 (they don't have to agree, but this is a different story entirely). And of course, it inevitably devolves into a total circus... I stand by what I said, and honestly, I can't imagine handing out a ban for something like this personally—unless it was strictly off-topic, though if no one was discussing gender reassignment surgery, I'm not sure how it could even be flagged, hmm...—but as a moderator, I should have been sharper and anticipated where this was heading, so please, feel free to strip my permissions: