Posts by Sophia Thomas7

original post : http://www.reddit.com/r/post/123

Jacob Chase42 said:In the post in question, they used the word "disorder." Since the rulebook forbids using the term "patient," and these quotes clearly make it known that a disorder isn't the same thing as an illness, what exactly was violated?

edit: A quick suggestion for the admins—take a look at some of the old debates on homosexuality over on apple, and you’ll see that everyone who held an opinion different from the "honored" users (and even Matthew Anderson himself) ended up being mocked or banned, regardless of whether their arguments actually made sense.

It’s the same principle. If you tell someone they have a "disorder," the conversation always ends the same way: a mountain of deleted posts and a bunch of bans.

The rules weren't just dreamed up by one single moderator (the stuff regarding homosexuality was already in place before I stepped into a mod role), but rather the current moderation team is in agreement on them. If you're really that obsessed with technicalities, we can always add "disorder" to the list.

If someone is truly looking to dive deep into disorders or clinical diagnoses, there are plenty of PDFs out there for that. apple isn't one of them, and we aren't going to tolerate that kind of thing here—mostly because we want to protect actual discussion among the users.

John Newman34 said:I didn't report it because your buddy jumped into the thread right after that post, so I just assumed he’d actually read what came before!

Since I can't get a straight answer from him, I’m curious about whether that ban actually made sense during our debate—you know, back when we were arguing from completely opposite sides. Honestly, I don't think the moderator was being objective, and as far as I can tell, I didn't even break any of the subforum rules.

You broke one of the core rules listed in the Apple guidelines, so honestly, that strike was totally justified. The rules explicitly state you can't refer to homosexuals—or anyone else, for that matter—as "sick," and they strictly prohibit sharing medical diagnoses.

John Newman34 said:So, apparently, you aren't allowed to call gay people "disordered" or "sick" anymore. Got it.
But hey, just to be clear, I'm speaking strictly from my own perspective here. 😕
I didn't go as far as calling homosexuals sick or mentally ill. I simply stated my personal opinion that homosexuality is an anomaly and a disorder—and for that, I got slapped with a warning from the very same moderator who jumped into the thread to argue with me, clearly holding a completely different view.
It looks like you might have cut off your message! What's on your mind? recently Homosexuality was officially removed from the list of psychological disorders ages ago, yet there’s still a significant chunk of people out there who refuse to accept that. Honestly, at the moment, that skeptical crowd seems to be gaining a bit of momentum.
Honestly, it’s not even that big of a deal.

If someone’s personal opinion ends up being offensive, we step in and ban them. I’ve explained this a few times already, but since there seems to be some confusion, I’ll say it again. We don't want people throwing out medical diagnoses on Apple. Honestly, every single time someone tries to diagnose another user, the debate turns toxic, nobody walks away happy, and things just spiral. There is simply no way to post a diagnosis without triggering a chain reaction of follow-up posts that inevitably devolve into insults, dozens of deleted comments, and mass bans. To keep the peace, we treat those kinds of posts as rule violations and issue a 35-point penalty.

John Newman34 said:It’s pretty interesting—I was actually just thinking about how people who reach a certain age without ever having had any real romantic, emotional, or sexual connection with anyone (regardless of gender, really) might be dealing with some kind of underlying issue. Whether it’s a socio-psychological thing or even something physical, like a hormonal imbalance, there’s usually something deeper going on.
That wasn't just some cardboard cutout opinion; it was a genuine perspective that I laid out and defended. But the second anyone brought up a "different view" regarding homosexuality, they immediately shut it down like it was nothing more than a flimsy piece of cardboard!

I took a look at that post, and honestly, it should have been flagged—it wasn't. If you want me to go back and take care of that, just let me know. I'm happy to jump back in and handle it.

original post : http://www.reddit.com/r/post/123

John Newman34 said:I used to think all those stories about some massive gay lobby were just a joke. Honestly, I don't find them funny anymore.

Look, I'm really not interested in any conspiracy theories regarding a gay lobby.

As for that "birds of a feather" comment—the user wasn't calling every single woman a slut. If you actually look at what they wrote, you'll see that isn't the case.

original post : http://www.reddit.com/r/post/123

John Newman34 said:I ended up getting flagged during a debate over over on Apple where we were talking about same-sex marriage. I shared my view that homosexuality (as such) is personally something I consider a disorder.
No response from anyone, though.
And now I’m looking at threads where guys are systematically calling women sluts—and there aren't even any consequences.

Aren't the standards just wonderful?

Don't sweat the flag or the deletion, it's fine. We aren't online 24/7, but we always sort this stuff out, even if it takes a little while to catch up. By the way, why not report those posts so we can see them right away?

hiddenstag16 said:...of a seventh son? 😬

Oh, they're definitely the heavy hitters. 😁

Director: Sergey Bodrov
Cast: Jeff Bridges, Julianna Moore, Ben Barnes

The Witcher

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4zX--5Ils8

It’s Jeff Bridges again, just like in RIPD—I've gotta see this. 😁

If you want to check out the books: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wardstone_Chronicles

northerncyclist2 said:Could you walk me through why a brand-new server would actually cost more to maintain than this old junk? 😁

Don't sweat it, it's just a silly misconception. Honestly, trying to keep end-of-life gear running is way more expensive than just buying something new.

Jeffrey Bennett77 said:If you start charging people, then you actually have to pay the moderators to make sure they do their jobs right, so this can function as a legitimate forum where everything runs smoothly. 🙂There's just way too much work involved...

I think you have your own specific definition of what "doing things right" looks like. This is the kind of forum I was talking about—where you pay an entry fee—and these are some of the bans people are getting. So, don't go thinking the grass is any greener on this side. Some of these mods are actually paid staff.

Brian Edwards78 said:That was just a donation to keep the forum running. This is about paying membership dues. Either way, you can see which account or card was used for both types of payments. 🤷

If you use a general money order, they won't be able to track it easily. You still get a field to fill out for the payer, though. Even when using something like Zelle, I don't think you actually have to put your full, specific details in the "payer" field.

Jeffrey Bennett77 said:I really hope they aren't trying to compare this to Reddit. 😁 We’re just talking about this whole attempt at a forum here. 🙂

You completely missed the mark on this one. Seriously, you're totally off base. I’m talking about how on a paid subscription forum, you can still get banned or kicked off the site entirely regardless of what you've paid.

graniteridge6 said:Look, Matthew Anderson, that’s not even what I was getting at.
My point is that the rules should primarily be there to protect users from harassment, data leaks, and stuff like that.
Sure, they're necessary for keeping some semblance of order on the forum, but I feel like you guys as mods should focus more on attracting and keeping new people around. It would go a long way if you actually guided them toward the rules instead of just handing out a Cardboard warning immediately.
I'm not saying it's your job description, but it’s just... nicer.
It’s the same logic as multi-quoting—you don't just slap someone with a penalty right away; you give them a heads-up first. I think it should work the same way here. Of course, that doesn't apply to the trolls who won't listen to reason, but I'd bet they're in the minority.

Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. If someone can't be bothered to read the rules, I don't see much point in trying to "keep" them on the site.

graniteridge6 said:Look, it’s not that I didn't care enough to read them; I honestly just had no idea they even existed.

Not reading the rules—or being oblivious to the fact that they exist—doesn't exempt you from the penalty. As long as people keep using that kind of logic, there's really no reason to change the rule, at least not here on Lies.

Jeffrey Bennett77 said:What happens if the subscribers decide to revolt because they’re being penalized while everyone else is getting payouts, leaving the owner completely broke? 🙂

One of the big global forums out there, Something Awful, actually charges a ten-dollar entry fee just to join. It’s kind of wild when you think about it—you pay up front, and you can still end up getting banned anyway, even though their moderation team is getting bigger by the day.

graniteridge6 said:Not everyone here treats this place like their full-time job.
Back when I first joined, I didn't dream of becoming a regular fixture on this forum; I just had one specific question, answered it, and moved on. Most of my visits were just landing directly on certain threads via Google.
I wasn't even aware there were specific rules for every single PDF that I was supposed to study, and honestly, I got lucky that I didn't rack up a massive stack of Cardboard warnings early on by accidentally breaking something. 😁
The people who just drop a single smiley face are usually the ones with almost no post history. I know because I'm constantly sending them private messages asking them to actually edit their posts.

Whether they take it seriously or not, the rules are still there. People tend to ignore them or just couldn't care less. Regardless, thanks for pointing that out.

graniteridge6 said:but I honestly feel bad whenever I see someone get a Cardboard just because they didn't catch some "trick."

Look, they got the Cardboard because they didn't bother reading the rules. There isn't some secret trick involved here.

graniteridge6 said:Sometimes the only response I actually want to write is just "I agree."🤷

It would be nice if "I agree" didn't always come wrapped in a massive wall of quoted text. Or, alternatively, if people didn't quote the entire damn page just to say 🙂 .

The rules on Lies are pretty straightforward. When someone decides to ignore them, to me, it signals they either don't care about the guidelines or they couldn't be bothered to read them properly. Honestly, I don't see any reason not to issue a Cardboard. (And truthfully, those are usually the same people who slide into my DMs asking why they got flagged because they skipped the rules entirely.) But most of the time, we just delete it.

Drew Carter10 said:There are countless concrete examples popping up all the time, and honestly, some of you have even reached out to me privately. It would be only fair if we at least acknowledged them—even if you happen to think I’m completely off base.

The mods aren't liable for this:
a) Explaining why a certain post was taken down.
b) You need to reply to the report and explain exactly why a post was either carded or not. If we decide not to card something, it’s usually because we don't think it meets the criteria for it.

If you’re going to claim there’s an "uncountable and ever-growing" number of issues here, I’m going to need you to be specific. Give me some actual examples and walk me through your logic—tell me exactly why something *should* be boxed up when it currently isn't. It’s entirely possible we simply missed something, so if there’s a legitimate gap, let's just circle back to the original post and fix it.

Drew Carter10 said:Look, I know that just because I filed a report doesn't mean an automatic penalty is coming down the hammer. Honestly, I assumed there wouldn't even be a formal warning, let alone anything drastic, especially since this is all about... For those receiving disability benefits. Which ones are actually doing that on a full-time basis?

Could someone please give me an example of these "protected users" who are supposedly "constantly doing the things mentioned above"? Thanks. Look, the vibe here at the forum is pretty laid-back. We aren't interested in sanitizing discussions or censoring people unless it’s absolutely necessary. The bottom line is that we get very few formal complaints on this board.

Drew Carter10 said:What do you actually have to do to get into these inner circles? Do I really need to spend my life hanging around their offices and sucking up to the DJ just to earn some kind of VIP status? 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣

DJ was never one of us on here.

Drew Carter10 said:Besides, it wouldn't hurt if you adjusted your tone when responding to our feedback. At the end of the day, you're working for us, not the other way around—and you're being paid to get this right. Regular users tend to be very vocal about reminding us.

Look, the moderators aren't getting paid a dime here. If there’s an actual issue with my "tone" when I respond to "your" comments, please just send me a direct link to the specific part so I can adjust it if necessary. I'm just a guy—I make mistakes, and I'll be the first to admit I'm not perfectly objective, because let's face it, nobody is.

Drew Carter10 said:What on earth is going on in this forum?

Can we please give the new moderators a heads-up to actually do their jobs properly? We need a total crackdown on off-topic rambling and trolling, and more actual, decent moderation. If I lose my cool and start venting, am I even going to be heard?!

Could you give me a specific example? Also, just because you file a report doesn't mean an action is automatically taken.

Could you please drop the number for LJES IMG down to 5? Thanks!

What actually makes a specific work example a joke or even funny? Why would you call it an atheist joke instead of, say, a joke about Romani people?

Miky0 is also on board with FIFA.