Posts by Linda Price5

Jessica Kelly4 said:You can get literate reading Clark, Asimov, or Herbert too... 🙂

I have a distinct impression that you completely missed the point of my previous post. However, to clear the air, why don't you try paraphrasing what you think I actually said? Tell me exactly how you interpreted my argument and why you believe your response addresses it. Perhaps that will help us find some common ground. 😁

brisktiger56 said:What kind of "shot" are we talking about here?
A chance to read?

Anyone can learn to read, and books are everywhere—the real issue is the environment they’re raised in at home, isn't it?

To become literate.

Anyone can read, and books are readily available to kids—the issue lies primarily within the family dynamic, doesn't it?

If we assume the issue is strictly rooted in the home environment, then we might as well scrap the entire public school system. After all, they’d be largely redundant if intellectuals simply educate their own children, while carpenters do the same—just in a different direction—and call it a day. 😁

I maintain that a robust educational system should account for a student's social habitus and provide a genuine opportunity for high-quality learning. For instance, in Finland, the correlation between parental reading habits and a fifteen-year-old's literacy levels is remarkably slim; in other places, it is overwhelmingly significant. A teenager who lacks the capacity to grasp even a relatively straightforward piece of prose—a situation affecting roughly one-fifth of American fifteen-year-olds—will find virtually no value in any assigned reading material.

Our classrooms are filled with students who simply cannot read. Someone struggling through the works of družba prati kvržica at a pace of barely a hundred words per minute isn't suffering from a lack of access to books; they're suffering from a lack of fundamental skill.

Susan James said:Actually, I've been wanting to mention this for a few days now.

I don't see any issue with books being "uninteresting." The real problem lies with bad teachers and the mindset that required reading is just a chore or a waste of time (and honestly, parents play a part in that too by encouraging that attitude instead of helping, regardless of their own "school trauma" regarding assigned books).

I think it's vital to read as much as possible, to talk about what we read, and to ensure we don't all share the exact same opinion or taste.
Or, at the very least, to stay informed about different works.

Unlike a religion class where everyone is expected to read the same thing, think the same thing, and preach the same view, an American English class should be a place where students feel free to express whether they liked or disliked what they read.

In my experience with literature (both in middle school and high school), it really was a space where I could voice my own thoughts on a book.
Whether I was in the majority or the minority, I could defend my take.

While reading might help kids fall in love with literature, it shouldn't be forced solely through assigned reading.
Definitely not just through the syllabus.

That kind of love starts early—from having books available at home, to seeing Mom, Dad, Grandma, or Grandpa picking up a book. It's about how children see adults treating books, visiting the local library, buying books for themselves or others, and talking about them with people.

No matter who puts together the reading list, they'll never satisfy everyone's taste.
But it's up to the teachers to let every student express what they truly think.

But the purpose of the school system should be to ensure that even a kid like little Matthew—whose uncle works as a floor installer and whose mother only finished eighth grade—actually stands a chance.

A truly functional educational system is one that levels the playing field, regardless of whether your parents are intellectuals hosting salons for the literary elite or working-class folks just trying to scrape by through a grueling twenty-four-hour grind.

brisktiger56 said:I have no idea who wouldn't write that 😛
For you—and honestly, a lot of other believers—there’s just a massive amount of illogical stuff 😉 contradictions...

The most logical way this "scandal" works is if the church and the author sit down and hammer out the whole deal before a single word is even typed 😬. Once the book hits shelves, then comes the religious condemnation (basically a clever marketing spotlight) which triggers massive consumer interest—book lovers who go out and BUY everything from the books themselves to the toys, games, posters, DVD adaptations, and eventually the movie soundtrack that shares the book's title...
In the end, the profits flow to the author, the publisher, the government through taxes, and finally back to the church via state channels. Just like how the USA needs global terrorism to function, the church needs heretical literature. If it doesn't exist, they'll just manufacture it themselves 😛

Then you're just a victim of prejudice, pretty much like everyone else. Someone refuses to try octopus salad or salted herring, and someone else won't even pick up a book JUST because it was put on a school syllabus. Look, those books weren't ordered by the schools and they weren't written exclusively for kids... They get added to the curriculum much later on...

So, how am I supposed to explain that to kids?

Maybe we don't even need to overexplain things—maybe we just need to give them some actual choices so they can grab the books that actually resonate with them. Is there really anything wrong with our obsession with individualism? Required reading shouldn't be a chore; it could just be an extra lens to look through... you know, to help them get a better view of their own world.

I honestly have no clue. Based on the sheer volume of literature I've encountered, I’ve concluded that most of these "classics" must be absolute garbage; if they weren't, why would they be relegated to the required reading list in the first place? We started being emotionally tortured by Mark Twain and similar horrors quite early on in elementary school. And frankly, scolding a child for hating a required book—especially when they're already miserable because the local library only lets them check out two books for the entire weekend—is an art form in itself. What are they even supposed to read after Friday night hits?😁

rowdypanther12 said:Are you aware that Harry Potter is actually pretty hated in certain religious circles? 😬

I don't know, personally I feel like by age 15, kids are mature enough to just grit their teeth and get through a book. If they aren't given something engaging, they might end up hating reading altogether.
That’s why I think middle school reading lists should lean more toward pop lit; the goal there should be to hook them on reading. High school can then shift toward more formal education and general culture. 🤷

I don't know. There were plenty of times I almost threw in the towel. 😁 I eventually decided to save myself the headache by just refusing to read the required school books—because let's face it, if it's mandatory reading, it's usually garbage.

And I suspect I missed out on quite a few great stories that I would have loved if they hadn't been forced upon me by some school district curriculum. Especially back in fourth grade.

steelskipper5 said:It’s almost like you’ve never had to deal with American bureaucracy before. 🤷
The whole process is basically a masterclass in how life works.

Personally, I’m bummed that Animal Farm wasn't on the required reading list, along with a few other dystopian stories. They actually help you make sense of the world, even if they are pretty dark and depressing. And honestly? That’s exactly why people end up loving them.

not at all. The Bible, the Iliad, the Odyssey?! Give me a break!! For a 15-year-old—which was freshman year, if I remember right—it’s just pure nonsense. It's a total turn-off and a complete trauma when it comes to reading.

If they’re taught correctly, they aren't traumatic at all. But then we run into the issue of teaching competence, which seems to be hitting new lows every day. And things might get even worse once teacher salaries take another hit.

A smart woman I know once put it this way—and I’m certainly not trying to steal her thunder—that there is absolutely no point in reading any of this until you have some serious business to settle with the American bureaucracy. 😁

Quincy:

I find myself wondering if anyone else feels this particular brand of restlessness as the heat settles over the city. It’s that specific, heavy stillness you only get during a mid-August night in Chicago—where the air feels less like atmosphere and more like a physical weight pressing against your skin. You try to find a breeze, but even the fans just seem to be recirculating the same exhausted warmth. It makes one contemplate the sheer inefficiency of our modern climate control systems, doesn't it? We spend millions trying to engineer comfort, yet we remain entirely at the mercy of a single humid front moving in from the Gulf. kaže: Good grief. You’re telling me we should be organizing books like Judith or Shakespeare—authors who are practically unreadable to most people because of their dense, archaic language—but then you throw Kafka into that mix? That's a bold move. I mean, I’ve been diving into thick, dense literature since my elementary school days.

I haven't actually laid eyes on anything by Shakespeare since elementary school, aside from a handful of sonnets. At this point, my brain might have officially atrophied from lack of use; honestly, I wouldn't be surprised. 😳Honestly, I have to admit, watching him play with his words back then was pretty damn entertaining. 🤷 I read him strictly for the pleasure of it, not because some professor assigned it as required reading.

There were times when, immediately after finishing a required school reading, I’d sprint to the local library just to find something decent to read—anything to cleanse my palate so I wouldn't grow to loathe literature entirely. It was much like needing to get back behind the wheel of a car as quickly as possible after being stuck in a gridlock of bumper-to-bumper traffic.

I honestly fail to see the objective here. Is the goal of the curriculum to ensure students graduate thinking books are an absolute misery, ensuring they never pick up a single page again for the rest of their lives? 🤷

Dear Moderator Jack Bishop94, I’m asking you quite simply: while I am engaged in a constructive discussion, please refrain from merging my posts without any valid justification. As I have already pointed out, I am perfectly capable of using the EDIT function. However, when my comments aren't just continuations of a single thought but represent distinct, separate ideas, I see no reason to rely on an edit. I would truly appreciate it if you would stop meddling with my posts unnecessarily. If you wish to contribute to the conversation, perhaps consider composing your own thoughts instead of nitpicking mine just to make a pointless display of moderator authority.

With all due respect, thank you.

In the meantime, I’ve gone ahead and split this post into two separate threads. 🥳

Respectfully, Jack Bishop94, I was unable to use Multiquoting because by the time I sat down to compose my response, the second post I intended to address had already vanished from the thread.

Furthermore, even if it were available, the content of my second post isn't a continuation of the first; they are two entirely distinct logical points. I wouldn't combine them myself. You haven't improved the readability of the thread; you've simply forced me to endure two unrelated thoughts crammed into a single block of text.

None of my posts qualify as one-liners. I have been active on this forum long enough to understand how to use the EDIT function when necessary—which I believe is essential—and the tool is working perfectly fine for me. I never requested that you merge my posts.

Could you please stop targeting my posts with these hysterical justifications for merging them? Standard netiquette dictates that typing in all caps is the digital equivalent of shouting, a concept a moderator should certainly be aware of.

What’s actually going to be left on the root directory? 😁

I assume it’s because a thread for the rainbow bridge already exists, though I can't quite wrap my head around why they didn't just merge them. If it was shut down with a note saying "check the topic list," then it’s clearly just a duplicate.

brightpuma said:How can you use the whole toolbox if they're only allowed one parenting method—the one based on positive reinforcement? You're forgetting that no type of punishment is actually permitted under that law... meaning, nothing like a time-out, or taking away an iPhone, or banning TV/computers/etc...

And apparently, they're allowed to eat ice cream whenever they feel like it, too. According to the fine print.

bluemason3 said:It’s real nice of you to come out like that.

So, like I said, it’s either shut down unknown (and all its associates) or deal with the fallout. These modern "victim vs. villain" narratives aren't going to work on people who clearly exist just to stir the pot and troll for fun. 😉

There is also such a thing as politically incorrect satire—the kind that is actually intelligent, witty, and far from primitive. 🙂

bluemason3 said:Federal law prohibits inciting hatred based on race, gender, or other protected characteristics. If you’re going to go after every single "sexist" or "homophobic" comment on Reddit, you might as well just shut the whole site down right now—it's the exact same logic applied to the people being discussed here. Look, you need to make a choice: either accept Reddit for what its users actually want it to be and apply standards similar to how you'd judge a joke, or keep letting a few frustrated, immature women run the show until everyone else boycotts the platform. ☕

Believe me, I am absolutely counting down the days until some LGBTQ+ advocacy group decides that unknown is the perfect target for their legal team to sink their teeth into. 🙂

Lisa Rodriguez84 said:Why are you so hell-bent on getting moderators punished? They have rights, too.
Look, I’d appreciate it if you just started a thread to actually educate the mods on what they can and can't do, instead of trying to solve every single little issue by calling for someone's head.

Besides, since laws are always open to interpretation—and given that this specific law protects against anything humiliating—a parent who forces a kid to wear a blue jacket when the kid absolutely hates blue and feels humiliated by it is technically violating Article 88 of the Family Law.

By that same logic, if a neighbor—someone who isn't family—slaps a kid, they aren't violating Article 88.

Makes sense?

Stop trolling, you absolute amateur.

Lisa Rodriguez84 said:Look, he isn't encouraging domestic violence, and honestly, what you're doing here is bordering on straight-up lying.
Do us all a favor and just stop. 🙂

The whole point of this forum is to share our views and swap experiences. I KNOW for a fact that nobody in that thread wrote, "Yeah, you should definitely beat your kids regardless of the situation, hit them as much as possible." You can say whatever you want, but nobody is inciting violence here. 😉

Just realize that I actually used the word violence.

No, he's simply advocating for slapping kids with ADHD—and he's slapping his own while he's at it. 😁

rustydrifter10 said:Look, I’m really not trying to go out of my way to defend what he wrote, but honestly? I think that post was aimed at spoiled kids, not children actually living with an ADHD diagnosis. Either way, it just wasn't appropriate.

Honestly, looking back at that thread, I was just completely repulsed by the sheer amount of violence being promoted. It was genuinely stomach-turning to read. Now, don't get me wrong—I totally get the whole "locker room talk" vibe. I have zero issues with the typical jabs at "man-hating feminists who should stick to baking pies" or whatever usual nonsense people throw around about MK. That’s just part of the culture there. But this specific topic? It went way too far. Even by the standards of how politically incorrect things are allowed to be in that space, this was crossing lines that shouldn't be crossed.

Unfortunately, a massive chunk of posts has been edited, which means I can't moderate things properly anymore. It puts me in a tough spot because if I try to hand out sanctions now, it’s going to look like I'm just picking and choosing who to target, and that’s the last thing I want. Honestly, I’d much rather hold off on handing out any warnings or penalties entirely than deal with being accused of playing favorites—I only want to go after the people who actually deserve it.

Look, I get it—I really do. I know you don't like this, and I know you probably think there was a much better way for me to handle everything. But honestly? This time, I’m sticking with my guns and choosing this path. Maybe it's the wrong call, maybe it's a total mistake—I honestly couldn't tell you. All I know is that I am just not happy with how any of this turned out, and at this point, I feel like the door has completely slammed shut on any other possibility.

Please, just don't bring that up again in the future. I honestly can't make a fair call on this matter anymore because, no matter how I look at it, any decision I make is going to come across as biased. And hey, if I absolutely have to be unfair, I'd much rather pick the route that results in fewer penalties. You can try to be understanding about that, or you can not—it's entirely up to you.

And why shouldn't I? I suppose if they just granted me unlimited editing privileges and promised the mods would leave me alone, then whenever someone on the PŽK complained about me, I could simply delete my own posts and call it a day.

It’s a joke. A red card for some harmless trolling, yet absolutely nothing for a moderator (!!) suggesting we lay hands on sick children—and I highly doubt any "virtuous" moderator actually understands what ADHD is, likely assuming it's just a synonym for being difficult. Since the moderator was sweet enough to scrub the evidence, his own preserved post remains unpunished, even though he went out of his way to delete everyone else's.

It’s revolting.

Alright. What kind of disciplinary action is the administration planning regarding moderator Charles Fox10? He’s been abusing his authority by editing posts to scrub out any parts he finds controversial. 🥳

rustydrifter10 said:Look, I really don't want to be selective about who I call out here, especially since there was so much going on in that mess.

So, let me get this straight: in your capacity as administrator, you refuse to discipline moderator Charles Fox10 because he is openly advocating for physical violence against children suffering from ADHD?

Brilliant.

From here on out, I request to be exempt from any moderator-led disciplinary actions. I give you my word that I won't commit any offense more egregious than a moderator actively endorsing violence against sick children.