Posts by Michelle Evans

Please stop starting threads here that:

a) fail to provide actual links supporting your claims about how moderators operate—you're violating our community guidelines

b) call for polls regarding moderator performance, or demand the removal of moderation altogether, which we've been seeing pop up lately—you don't get a vote here; this is a private forum, not a democracy

c) involve using secondary accounts to vent general grievances about a moderator's decision after a single profile has been flagged.

Consider yourselves warned.

🙈 To be honest, I hadn't read the rules before, but I have now. My apologies...

I could have just given a heads-up first, so here we are, clearing the air.

At the end of the day, pointing out that people are starving in Africa, or that there are abandoned children and victims of disasters out there... it doesn't fix an individual's sense of emptiness. Not in the long run. Someone else might be fighting cancer, yet my ingrown toenail still hurts so much I can't walk properly, even though I know logically that a malignancy is a far bigger deal than my minor issue. Still, feeling empty and lost isn't exactly trivial. The detail about the silk sheets doesn't really matter. Or perhaps it does, if you view it as a symbol of outward abundance clashing with inner void...

Author, it sounds to me like your psychologist was trying to suggest that you identify your actual needs and work toward meeting them, rather than chasing what you think you *should* need...

silentridge3 said:Since there hasn't been even a whisper of a solution regarding these threads that get shut down without any justification (and then just stay locked forever)...

That primitive, sexist outburst from politician Tierley

...and considering how yesterday’s signing of that leftist coalition agreement went down, where the very same Tierley was a key signatory for her party...

...it makes me wonder: was the thread actually locked just to protect the reputation—if such a thing even exists anymore—of Tierley, who happens to lead a party currently backing the ruling administration?

The answer was already given in the previous thread:

William Bennett53 said:...If you're looking to dissect that specific incident or the politician behind those foolish remarks from Nancy Tierley, then we can certainly talk about that.

Look, posts generally can't be edited unless it's just minor cosmetic tweaks. Either way, the actual content stays put. That might have been allowed once upon a time, but it hasn't been the rule for years now. Please don't try to teach people how our moderation works here.

The Provenance, if you aren't clear on why the warning was issued, just ask a moderator over at the Democratic Party or start a thread in the official appeals section...

Once there's an actual discussion about the immigration thread—one based on full quotes rather than just snippets where the controversial parts are missing—then feel free to come here and file an appeal. This situation is just another example of why we don't support appeals filed on behalf of someone else. The person who received the warning knows exactly what happened, and they'll get a message showing their full post, which they can then use in their own appeal if the reasoning seems unclear. That way, the entire context is visible.

Exactly.

Charles Wells71 said:Oh, so you’re acting all smart with me now, huh? 😉 I ask what the weather is like in Split and you give me some nonsense answer about how things are over in $1.75. 😉

I don't moderate Politics, just this specific thread. You'd have to ask the moderator who gave you the warning or maybe a super-mod from Politics. Or even an admin if you want the final word.

Then where am I supposed to go to complain about an immigration thread and the warnings being handed out there if not here? If you don't have any authority to moderate how people behave in a thread that's literally your purpose for being here, then what are you even doing?

I already explained my authority to you. And I'm wondering who exactly is calling whom a 'smart-ass'...

Drew Brooks8 said:There, I posted the link. You all looked at the post and now everyone's staying silent. It’s just as ridiculous to demand links and then ignore what's actually provided.
Now, I’m going to report the post I just linked, along with a few of her others, just to see how "principled" you all really are. Let's see if you react the same way you did when you were punishing or banning other users.

Ja vas tražim linkove da žalbu konkretizirate i da ona ne ostane na razini postova u kojima su kometari na razini subotnje kave, a s čime ste počeli. Jer ovdje komentiranje ne bi trebalo biti samo sebi svrhom nego se treba pogledati što nije u redu. Kad to napravite, tako da stavite linkove, oni kojih se to tiče će pogledati o čemu se radi. Kada budu mogli. Prošlo je pola noći. Neki ljudi možda i spavaju. Strpite se malo i budite razumni.

Charles Wells71 said:But I did post them, didn't I? The moderator claims I'm trolling, but all I did was drop a link that completely contradicts what the other moderator is saying. Meadow thinks there's zero point even discussing Sharia in Europe and wonders why on earth we're debating it, yet the second I post a link where Muslims are explicitly stating they want to implement Sharia in Belgium, I get slapped with a warning just for repeating it. It's not like I had the brilliant idea to delete it; I don't see the logic there.

Not to mention I got a second warning basically just because of the timing—while I’m mid-sentence typing out my reply, Bradley Sanders4 swoops in with a moderator notification that I can't even see until after I hit post. So, I end up getting warned right after, and it wasn't even Bradley Sanders4, it was lonebadger6. Like, man, try to actually follow the flow and the rhythm of the conversation for once.

The only warning I actually deserve is the one where I commented on the mod alert. Everything else feels like a straight-up attempt to suppress free speech.

Not exactly where you’re complaining about the forum users' sign-ups (like Edi Bosanceros?) whom you think are trolling the thread, even though their posts are still there...

Charles Wells71 said:And how exactly was my response to Meadow considered trolling?

I don't moderate Politics, just this specific thread. You'd have to ask the moderator who issued the warning, or a senior Politics mod. Or maybe the admin, eventually...

Alex Barnes93 said:I mean, seriously? Saying that just sounds totally ridiculous. Like, come on.

Man, you can't even attach links to posts when they're getting deleted, lol! Like, what am I even supposed to link to in that case? One minute there's pages and pages of content in a thread, and the next—poof—it’s just gone. It’s exactly like how posts are vanishing right here in this one, too. Jebiga.

I’m talking about their specific comments regarding enrollment—comments they clearly left without permission, which is why they're being called out for being absolute muppets. Of course I'm not asking for a link to something that doesn't exist anymore. Please, next time, actually read the reason behind the warning before you come in here to laugh... and please don't quote my moderator warnings or try to debate my moderation decisions within this thread. That kind of back-and-forth isn't helpful for anyone here. My inbox is always open if you want to talk privately. The deleted posts were truly unnecessary. There's a reason the original post was kept general—because we're complaining about deleted content, making links impossible—so debating that point is just pointless...

Why should I be upset just because you're making assumptions about my history on this forum? 😁 Just as I can't see your ancient profiles, you and everyone else can't see mine either. Keep that in mind next time you decide to compare someone's tenure to your own... 😉

It's enough to say that the matter has been raised and a final decision will be posted once the moderators reach an agreement. If there hasn't been an update, it simply means they haven't settled on it yet. Until then, people should be free to post here—as long as they aren't being insulting or veering completely off-topic. In fact, it's better this way. Reading different perspectives actually helps us refine our own views...

briskotter13 said:I really enjoyed reading Thomas Morgan67's latest comment. I agree with much of his perspective on how discussions regarding male-female dynamics should be structured to foster actual constructive debate. Honestly, I’m becoming increasingly skeptical that this politics forum is even capable of hosting those kinds of talks right now. Anything outside of what Thomas Morgan67 laid out would just be opening a thread for the sake of it, rather than pursuing the goals a few of us actually care about. Given the two-day silence from the site admins, it feels like they're just looking for excuses to keep topics closed—all while hiding behind the guise of protecting free speech and democracy. In reality, they're avoiding the fact that "politically incorrect" dialogue is often the very foundation of a high-quality discussion.

On the topic of quotas, our colleague clumsily veered off-topic by dropping a link to a petition against an upcoming European Union Parliament report aimed at women's empowerment through education.
When you look at how boys are falling behind in education at every single level—from elementary school all the way through college—it's worth questioning the logic. If we operate under the assumption that girls are the ones being left behind and focus exclusively on their empowerment, won't they simply end up dominating the few remaining university majors where men still hold a significant lead in graduation numbers?
This is a subject that would be incredibly relevant for both current and future parents, especially those raising sons. But thanks to political correctness and a handful of snowflakes, it’s unlikely we'll ever get a real conversation started on it.

No excuse is necessary for that. As arrogant as it might sound, there simply isn't one.

Yes, we need to have a serious discussion about whether we should adjust our approach to these subjects, given what we've learned through moderating them...

Gerald Rivera17 said:I’m not complaining, I’m just observing how this works. I’m using the latest version, just commenting...

I posted something similar on politics too, so now I’m just waiting for a ban from them as well...🙂

It's safe to assume the mods aren't thrilled about the brevity of my posts, which makes me wonder why these other ones on the same thread are fine...

Well, since the mods want us sharing links, here are ten examples from the same thread that are nearly identical to my banned post, yet they haven't been flagged...

And that's only looking five pages back. Imagine what would happen if I scrolled to the beginning...

Fair enough, you've made your point. There isn't much to discuss if you aren't actually looking for a resolution...
Key.

Please include links to the specific posts. Otherwise, it’s impossible to tell which ones you're referring to.

If something was posted today, please report it and then give us some time... None of our moderators are online 24/7, so we need a moment to react. If there's still no response after 24 hours, feel free to follow up here.

Let's slow down a second. Please don't go assuming there's some moderator bias at play here, because your assumption is simply incorrect.

I truly apologize that this thread has gone unaddressed for so long. The moderation should have been handled a bit differently. It was an oversight on our part. I’ve only been popping onto the forum occasionally lately, while others haven't checked in at all. I hope an explanation and an apology help...

The supermoderator will likely be online tomorrow to review everything regarding the Ukrainian theme.

Gerald Rivera17 said:After just a few hours, both the division's thread and my own have been wiped. If the division was being offensive, fine, but why delete mine when I didn't insult anyone?...

It all lined up right when I opened that thread regarding ŽK and her criticism of Klonka—plus those posts of hers that somehow never get flagged.

I pointed out examples of her work—or lack thereof—and ended up getting 30 points from Prigles for "mixing topics." If I actually put in some effort, I could list dozens of posts that should be sanctioned for the exact same reasons they aren't.

And when I started a thread about how Prigles protects Klonka, she just moved it over to Appeals... 🤦

I'm not complaining about the warnings, I'm complaining about the way Klonka and Prigles operate.

I'm frustrated that my thread on PŽK was deleted, goodbye division...

And I'm upset my farewell post to the division was removed, but since he's banned, he can't even respond.

What work of yours? Unless you mean this deserved warning. Moving a post because it isn't clear what you're trying to say? Come on, please. We don't have time for these antics. You can go throw your tantrums at your own people instead.

Stop making accusations based on pure guesswork. You're blaming a moderator who has nothing to do with deleting those two threads on this forum— feel free to check your own flagged post if you can't remember . You claim you mostly stepped away from politics for Klonka, yet she has zero warnings and only two deleted posts—one in January and one in February.

Let’s make a deal, specifically to find a constructive way to handle actual moderation issues on this forum:
The next time you file an appeal without providing links, where you just hurl accusations at a moderator based on your assumptions—especially regarding who deleted what—I will personally issue you a three-day ban. Don't bother complaining to the corner for banned users if that happens. Consider this your only warning.

Regarding someone else's deleted thread on KzB, that's between them and the mods. But let me be clear: KzB isn't a place to vent rage. We never leave posts visible when they contain the kind of toxic nonsense seen in that deleted thread, where someone spent hours or days promising more insults unless a permanent ban was issued. That is strictly against the rules of this forum.

As for your farewell message, there are plenty of other ways to say goodbye. It’s obvious you know how to communicate elsewhere, seeing as you're aware you can't vent on KzB.

Best regards!

Patrick Brown7 said:Why the hell are you treating me like an idiot? I know exactly what I wrote.
Tell me WHY I can't say that some breasts—which belong to one of the billions of women on this planet—are stuck on the internet, looking gross and ugly?
I AM NOT APPEALING THE WARNING.
Put my thread back where I opened it; I'm not a moron.

Just take a breath.
I moved it back...

But you didn't mention which thread it was at the end of your opening post, nor did you provide a link to the topic or the specific post so someone could actually see it. You didn't even specify which PDF you were talking about, either. Plus, the title didn't make the nature of the complaint clear. That’s why I asked you to be more specific, and when you mentioned the card, I mistakenly assumed that was your grievance. My apologies...

First you say you aren't complaining about the warning, yet here you are starting a whole debate about what's allowed in comments. Most of those general discussions don't really lead anywhere on this forum anyway.

Alright, so it actually is an appeal against the warning; I'll move the thread over there...