It looks like partial restrictions were triggered following your last 500-point outburst. I’m not entirely sure if you were notified once your ban was lifted—if not, please accept my apologies. It should have been communicated, but given how long the suspension lasted and the fact that it was summer, perhaps it simply slipped through the cracks.
(I haven't been keeping up with the practice sessions for quite some time now, though my lack of insight is clearly reflected in my results during the 2016 tournament. 🤣 )
Hamilton's strategy regarding tire and engine conservation really threw our predictions right out the window. It seems like only TBD actually called it, but even then, he missed the winner... 😁
ruggedhawk20 said:Jergica is such a sweetheart. Honestly, I'm stoked he's back.
Do you remember how anonymous users on his portal were hunting him and Jagica down—or whoever it was—just to comment on your claims about how you could tell by the sound alone that the Renault engine had the most torque?🤣
I am genuinely pleased to see Mladen Jergović returning to active commentary on Formula 1 news. In fact, the GP1 portal is in desperate need of an editor who actually knows what they are doing. This is a fantastic development for those of us following the coverage. The second point—and frankly, the one thing that drove me absolutely mad about his declining portal—was how incredibly sensitive he was to any opinion that strayed from his own. This predictably led to instances of mockery, such as when he uncritically defended Hamilton in Mario's style, only for TBF to debunk him with actual footage, causing him to spiral and delete TBF's comments. Ultimately, I believe everything will turn out perfectly if he simply sticks to the style of the discussions found in the forum comment sections.
It has happened more times than I can count. In many cases we've seen, it’s simply because people couldn't stomach being told they had to follow basic rules of conduct. It follows the same tired script: why shouldn't I be allowed to equate Muslims with terrorists? Why can't I link the leftists with old-school communists? Or why is it forbidden to claim that "anti-fascism" is just a facade for communism—which is arguably just as bad as fascism itself?
We certainly don't need another one of these debates. And as for explaining why progressivism is inherently tied to the left rather than the right... well, I don't see any point in bothering to explain that.
If I recall correctly, PowerLock was the one who came up with those headlines during the last election cycle, and I don't remember anyone coming to your defense back then, nor am I seeing it now. The headlines remain unchanged.
It seems to me that there is nothing left here to clarify, so I shall close this thread. The initial example regarding the removal of Black patrons from a restaurant was misguided and easily debunked. A more apt comparison would be a restaurant that enforces a specific dress code for entry. In such a scenario, whether you are Black, white, male, female, a billionaire, or a cobbler, your identity is irrelevant; access is granted based on adherence to the rules, not on who you are. Much appreciated.
I’ll catch up with Dim. In the meantime, since your last partial was three and a half months ago, you haven't even met the bare minimum requirements to qualify for a wire transfer withdrawal. Furthermore, if someone is insulting you somewhere without being penalized for it, send me the links.
Deleting content is the most standard and frequent action taken by moderation teams. Furthermore, when you were criticizing the staff regarding your deleted posts, you were addressing the moderation team as a whole, rather than targeting a single individual. Since everyone seems to be present, I took a quick look at the recent deletions: in one instance, you quoted a user who had been sanctioned and had their post removed, which necessitated the removal of your own post even though your specific wording wasn't necessarily problematic; in the subsequent few cases, you were debating moderation policies on topics where you hadn't actually received a formal strike, but merely had your comments cleared.
Well, that should settle the matter quite quickly. 👍
Here is a quick response while I’m away on vacation: I need to review this thread more thoroughly from my desktop rather than my phone, but even now, it seems clear that we need much stricter moderation in the Politics section. We have to stop these trolls from attempting to harass moderators who are simply performing their duties with an immense sense of responsibility.
If anyone has a legitimate grievance regarding how a moderator handles a situation, please back it up with links or don't bother showing up at all. Anyone who arrives without actual arguments, intending only to spout vitriol, can expect nothing more than a ban and the immediate deletion of their comments. Once I have had a chance to take a closer look at the threads in the Politics subforum, I will post again if there is anything further worth noting.
Patrick Bailey4, did it never occur to you to simply stop this trolling? If you want to play, then play. If you don't, then don't. It is as simple as that for everyone else. This isn't your concern, so there is really no need to get worked up in such an inappropriate manner.
No, there’s absolutely no need to write a dissertation on this; in fact, quite the opposite is true. You simply need to follow the steps I outlined above.
I realize you all seem split into two distinct camps here, but I think there's an expectation for both sides to maintain the same level of decorum. We really don't need another endless, rambling thread about movies—we certainly haven't recovered from the last one that turned into a complete circus. 🙂
Friends, this is the Final Review Period. If you believe anyone has been unfairly penalized or overlooked, please provide specific examples so we can examine the asymmetry in our decisions. If you find no such discrepancies, then our business here is concluded.