Posts by Bradley White73

Sam Alvarez4 has shared so many funny little stories on the chat about her tourists so far, giving examples of how much they loved it when she spoke their native language or showed she actually understood where they were coming from.

If we look at how most booking platforms actually encourage hosts to list every language they speak—since being able to communicate clearly with guests is such a massive advantage—would it be fair logic to suggest that Sam Alvarez4 deserves a permanent ban just because she knows multiple cultures and shares those anecdotes?

I mean, I guess you could argue her whole persona is basically one big advertisement (she even gives English lessons, so what are we supposed to do with that?), but still.

And yeah, it was pretty obvious she was offering two free days. It would have been redundant and honestly a bit tacky to explicitly state that. She reached out because she had what hosts call a gap between bookings.

I really don't buy that you didn't see that yourself—not right now, but the moment you saw the post and decided to just ban it and wipe it away.

I’m stepping away from this thread feeling a bit deflated and honestly, pretty disillusioned. I really believe that if we all just pull together, we can make the world a good place. 👍

edit
Just as a gesture of goodwill, I went ahead and deleted my thank you note too.

Thanks so much for providing all that context on this.

ps
I figure, since I’m an active user here, maybe I could help out with managing my favorite PDF by reporting any trolling posts whenever they pop up. 👍 It might make the forum a better place overall, and I suppose it would lighten your workload a bit too.

Best regards.

It didn't take very long, I guess.

Now, this isn't really meant as a personal sanction against the user for breaking any rules—though I suppose one could wonder exactly which ones were violated—but rather it feels like a message to everyone else reading along. It’s just a few points, but it definitely makes an impact. It seems our moderator, driftingtinker, has decided to make the PDF public to the whole world. I imagine we might see some revisions to certain partials and perms in the near future, maybe.

There's just no hope left for this forum; the atmosphere has become quite unhealthy, and that’s really all there is to say. You might as well just forget about it. As for what happens next on this site—well, I suppose the only small consolation is that fewer and fewer people seem to be visiting or reading anymore.

I used to come here specifically for the high-quality discussions, but nowadays, I find myself dropping in just to check the chat. I can't even remember the last time I left this place feeling like I had actually gained some insight or truly understood a complex issue.

They’ve completely ruined it, honestly. There was that brief little window of hope right after Anderlonov appeared, but nothing ever really came of it. Now, it feels like we're just stuck with a hollow script that will keep running until eventually, both the site and we users simply fade away.

Seriously though, just let it go. It doesn't really make sense to stay.

My apologies, I was absolutely certain you had. The thread was up for such a short window that it honestly just flashed before my eyes and then it was gone.

Mark Cruz15 said:Honestly, this topic is probably even a bit much for Alternative. I thought about just skipping it entirely, but it turned into such massive trolling so quickly that I figured nothing productive would come of it anyway.

She only really had a few posts up before you and the other moderator started trolling her. I don't have anything against anyone personally, but since I've been watching, I can tell you're misrepresenting what actually happened here.

Morgan Peterson said:I’ve been moderating that PDF for quite some time now, so I guess I might be in a position to offer a little insight, if you don't mind.
I think I’ll pass on weighing in on that mess Hilderik got caught up in. It feels like one of those things where you just have to look at the long-term outlook, I guess. Maybe it's better to just stay out of it for now.
Well, regarding Permu, I guess Hilderik was actually the one who asked for it, which honestly makes the whole thing feel a bit like blackmail now. It’s like, either the moderation follows his lead, or he just takes his little scraps and leaves. He's clearly lost his cool, which... yeah, seems pretty immature, I suppose.
By the way, I don't really think Hilderik needs to be given a permanent pass here, nor should we be looking to restrict him from posting on that PDF at all—unless, of course, he starts being disrespectful toward others.
Regarding that thread you all seem to think is total garbage—it actually got started right when the COVID document first went live, mostly because people were debating whether such a thing would even exist in the first place. I guess some of the more seasoned users here saw exactly where things were headed. They figured out pretty early on just how messy the discussion could get, which is honestly the exact opposite of the level of discourse we’re all trying to maintain over on the main pandemic file.
We decided to just let her be, really. I guess we wanted to give everyone a chance to vent and write as much as they want, almost like a pressure valve for all that energy. We figured we’d keep the moderation pretty light-handed—you know, only stepping in for the heavy stuff, like major violations, outright insults, or hate speech and things of that nature.
Given everything we know—especially since it seems like nobody is actually going to hold him accountable for the views he's pushing—I guess Hilderik, being such a regular fixture in the Corona PDF threads, could probably just be a little more mindful of his word choice and the general context of what he's saying. Maybe just watch the tone a bit?
Regarding the whole situation with Woobij—who seems to be a bit of a thorn in everyone's side lately, especially over on the Corona PDF and the wider threads—I’ve been thinking about something. Since when did this forum become a place where people are penalized just because they actually have the spare time to sit down and write out coherent, on-topic, and even relatively peaceful posts? I mean, it’s pretty obvious that those who disagree with him are getting worked up, and I suppose we mods probably get on their nerves just as much, too. But it makes me wonder... is having a different opinion, or even being in the minority on certain topics, really a valid reason to punish someone? Should we just let people get insulted, called a paid troll, or subjected to all sorts of other nasty comments? Personally, I don't think so.
They really have this wonderful option to just ignore things, which I think is honestly great. It’s such a solid way to completely sidestep those high-tension arguments, I guess. Maybe it's the best approach for keeping things calm.
That’s pretty much all I have to say for now, I guess.

Yeah, I know, it wasn't exactly my most mature moment—I actually mentioned that myself earlier. And honestly, I doubt they’re going to back down on demanding that permanent ban until their record is cleared of what they feel is an unfair strike. People can be just like that sometimes, nothing too out of the ordinary, I guess. Personally, I think the strike was a mistake. It seems reasonable enough to accept their explanation and just look past the heated tone they used over in Ban Corner. That said, it's pretty obvious they really stepped in it, so the final call is definitely up to you guys. I'd just suggest trying to keep a cool head while you re-examine that controversial post.

By the way, I finally tracked down that post I was telling you about in the quote section:

ColdHearted said:Take a look at this post
And yeah, I suppose Hitler was fighting against those same kinds of structures, though he didn't exactly succeed. It actually took me quite a while to wrap my head around what drove him to harbor such intense hatred. But looking at things now, it’s all so obvious. I honestly fear that the battle was already lost back in '45; maybe what we're seeing today is just the final, lingering struggle.

It was deleted—honestly, it had been sitting there for way too long anyway. I guess we all just need to be a bit more careful with those kinds of posts in the future. It’s probably best to just expect that sort of thing to happen, especially since the whole topic is centered around conspiracy theories.
I suppose that’s actually hate speech rather than just saying "hero instead of villain" with a smiley face. I really wouldn't want to go around making unfair accusations against anyone, but honestly, that post sat there unaddressed for quite a while. Even after it was reported, it seemed like it stayed up—at least in my estimation, since there were several mods on the thread and plenty of other users around too.

Regarding A woobie—it feels like the main issue is just how much they post. They tend to overproduce content, which can really suffocate a discussion thread. I guess it might be better now, though I honestly have no clue. Still, I feel like there isn't much you guys can actually do about it. They have the right to post, and as far as I can tell, they aren't breaking any rules. Even if they do drag things out sometimes and become incredibly tedious, well, I suppose that’s allowed too. Everyone has that right.

Jacob Williams said:I suppose I’ll jump in here with a few extra thoughts. It’s a bit unfortunate that our friend decided to post in that digital dumpster fire, since it ultimately led to him getting banned, I guess.

Regarding where he’s coming from politically, I honestly think it doesn't matter much. Even people who aren't strictly leftists can oppose any kind of fascism, including what we're seeing lately. I know a few such people. The real issue, maybe, is just that everyone seems so disconnected; they don't realize there are others like them out there because there isn't really a solid platform to bring together people from all sorts of different social and political backgrounds.

I'm hoping Hilderik might reach out to me. He usually knows the best way to handle things. Best wishes to everyone.

And regarding the whole "dumpster fire" topic—it might not be for the reasons you think. In the first part, I actually reported the post for hate speech; no excuses, no "buts," and certainly no smiley faces to soften the blow (you could compare it to Hilderik's post if you wanted). It wasn't deleted, nobody was penalized, and it didn't really stir up the discussion. So, I've mostly stopped reading. Plus, there's Woobie, of course—just thousands upon thousands of Woobie's posts. Honestly, both of you have kind of soured my view of things, each in your own unique way (not that I'm grouping you together, I guess).

Hilderik, though, doesn't actually use hate speech. I know him from Politics (where things can get pretty heated), and he just has this somewhat explosive way of writing—sort of a "drop a bomb, chase the gang" style. You can see it in his thread over in the Ban Corner. If you just read that, it's pretty clear that even someone labeled a "villain" would find his comment acceptable. His style stays within the forum's character, which I think is perfectly fine.

So, if he's being unfairly accused, it makes sense that he'd get upset, and I feel like that should probably be considered when deciding on his permanent status.

One more thing—this might be a radical idea, so bear with me (especially the admins): why don't we just take his word for it if he says his comment was misunderstood? He made a pretty decent argument about it in his own thread, after all.

Good grief, please don't hit him with a permanent ban; just give the guy some space to cool off. He’s actually been a fantastic member of this community.

He has never once engaged in hate speech. For instance, living in Venice, he was naturally concerned about the rise of nationalist factions taking power in Mexico, and he wrote quite a bit on the subject of Mexico—but always in the most civilized, human way possible. Not a single offensive post, not toward anyone. Plus, he’s a conservative, if you need that for context.

I think I understand why being labeled as spreading hate speech upset him, since he feels he’s just telling the truth. His post was meant to be sarcastic, which is the same style he uses over at Chatterbox. In my opinion, his Ego might have been a bit off, but I feel like a permanent ban would be an even bigger mistake for someone as provoked as Hilderik right now.

I know you guys aren't exactly fans of legalistic arguments here, especially coming from someone who is also part of a faction, but honestly, I didn't have a more respectable username available, so there it is.

ps
As for Hilderik—forget about the ban. You came here to argue about a warning, not to act like a total loose cannon. Besides, asking for a permaban is just cowardly; it's such a passive-aggressive, drama queen move. ☕

Arthur Smith15 said:Your own track record on this forum is absolute garbage, yet here you are, hypocritically leading the charge against someone else, rambling on about "behavior," "trolling," and "rules."🤦

Go ahead, you complainers—keep opening your little polls, but make sure to include a mandatory question about Auschwitz. I’ll bet my bottom dollar that every single one of you is a hardcore revisionist who would spend all day recounting bones, because clearly, it couldn't possibly be that many victims on little Floramya's watch... There is a clear correlation here between being dissatisfied with the moderator and the specific brand of nonsense you'd be spewing in the History section if that moderator weren't standing in your way.

Oh, and can someone tell me if I even made it onto that secret Jonathan Wright2 list—you know, that poll? 😁 The funniest part is how he comes out looking like a fraud either way: if I'm not on it, he's just polling his own supporters; if I am, then he's a fraud (given the latest news...) because he never actually polled me. 😁 Come on, Jonathan Wright2, man, find some backbone and some dignity and just answer the question...

A faker, definitely. He counted me as "surveyed" just because of my posts supporting Smith on the PZK. Since I sided with the Smith camp, he basically checked me off, and then acted surprised when I complained about it. I guess he's doing this because he needs the highest possible number of "respondents"—even if they aren't real—to try and pressure the admins into putting Smith's moderation under a public vote.
The ultimate goal here is History without moderation. I'm not even joking. Just thought you all should know who you're really dealing with.
PS
You would have received a notification if you were actually on the list.

Ryan Perez said:I actually took part in the poll, so there’s really no point in trying to hide that.

...

I didn't participate, yet somehow I ended up on the list of people who responded to the Initiative's poll. I suspect the number of participants is going to be used as leverage to demand that the Poll be made public and to force a vote regarding Smith's moderation.

That's why I've been asking publicly to have my name removed from the list. I just don't trust that tired old character to actually follow through unless he's pressured by the Democratic Party.

Arthur Smith15 said:So, what’s the count then? Honestly, just looking at those absolute losers who managed to blow it... 😁

I don't think Jonathan Wright2 is some kind of lost cause, honestly. He knows exactly what he’s doing by trying to carve out this specific space over on the History subreddit. It isn't all as innocent as it looks, I guess; there's definitely a deeper layer to it all, even if it's wrapped up in pretty, polished packaging.

Jonathan Wright2 said:If you're actually interested in History, then maybe you're just missing one specific spark—that kind of fuel every single person on the History subreddits seems to have. It feels like you're lacking a sense of purpose, or perhaps just one fundamental question: Why?

I suppose if you look back at the old threads, and really examine the dynamics between the users and our moderator, lonetrucker4, you might find yourself asking... why?
Why did things even get to this point?

Who exactly is all this open hostility directed toward?
Look, friend, I think it's best to just stay calm... I don't believe anyone here is truly anyone else's enemy.
Reddit doesn't go out of its way to create animosity.
It’s probably something much deeper than that.

Please take my username off that list you're passing around. I never signed up for any sort of Initiative, and I think you might have overinterpreted my response to the thread a bit too freely.

Jonathan Wright2 said:Nobody is dragging anyone's name through the mud here..
We aren't inciting any kind of hostility.
We’re just having a conversation.
There's nothing being hidden.

Honestly, I’d much rather deal with open hostility than this sugary sweet babbling you've been doing for months just to try and push lonetrucker4 out of the picture..

Ryan Perez said:How much is that actually different from the forced conversions used by the fascists?

I think I see where the disconnect is. Whenever we start talking about core principles, things seem to get a bit lost in the shuffle. It feels like you're leaning on specific, isolated examples that really should be treated as exceptions to the rule, I guess.

I wouldn't say I've lost my way, but maybe you just revealed your hand a little early. There’s a massive difference when you consider concentration camps, genocide, and all those other grim details. People were being forced to convert just to stay alive. I don't think anyone is forcing you to marry in Israel according to the rules of some minor religion that doesn't impact your basic survival, right?

Ryan Perez said:Maybe you could present that fact on History as just a little interesting tidbit (nota bene). The context might involve preserving "race," where you draw a parallel to how Jews—as the primary victims of World War II—have this somewhat peculiar phrasing that seems to hint at "racial preservation."

Everything makes sense now. I guess lonetrucker4 has some very specific triggers. But honestly, I don't think this is about preserving race at all; it feels more like it's about religion. That's probably why conversion is even an option. You have Jews in China, for example, or Black Americans. I suppose if you were truly interested in the racial aspect, we'd be talking about that, but it doesn't seem to be the case here, I think.

Sarah Cooper58 said:So, here’s the post—written a few years after the fact—from the woman who actually went through it. She's expressing some doubt about whether everything was handled according to protocol, specifically regarding the legal request for intellectual property and all that...

http://www.example.com/post...postcount=3849

Thanks. I guess I find it a little strange that she didn't feel the need to verify if everything followed the official procedure mentioned in the letter, especially since she already hired an attorney. But, oh well, it's probably not the main point. You did a great job digging this up, by the way.
ps
Now I'm just curious about who usamljen Rudy from 2014 actually was, but I suppose I'll have to look into that myself whenever I get a spare moment. 🙂

As for the topic at hand, I might add a few thoughts regarding the PDF Policy:

- maybe start by issuing warnings (you'd be surprised how much that actually works), then move to yellow cards, and only then go for the red ones. If you could just align the enforcement so that, as a user, I don't have to worry about which specific moderator is on duty... because I'd like to know exactly what to expect for the same violation in the same place.

- please don't issue cards to forum members just because you're debating them; if they seem worth it, maybe suggest a different moderator. (Personally, I think being that petty would be such a massive failure that I'd rather hang myself with a mouse cord than do that as a mod).

- let's not label every slight difference of opinion as "trolling." If there's a suspicion that someone is trolling, maybe don't just mechanically penalize the post, but instead judge whether it's actually disrupting the flow of conversation or if it's just one or two posts that aren't pulling anyone else down. Maintaining a smooth, readable discussion where people feel free to speak is probably more important than making sure everyone gets hit with a penalty in a super pedantic way.

Try to look at the big picture and not just sanitize every single thread. Moderate the conversation itself, rather than just picking apart individual posts.

There's more I could say, but I don't really feel like typing anymore right now. I think I'll go hunt down usamljen Rudy from 2014 instead. 😍

bluemason3 said:So, looking at it now... one of those two ladies mentioned she doesn't think it actually came from the forum, but with the other one, it’s just unclear if there's any real proof. I guess it's hard to tell if someone told her that (unverified, of course) or if she just made a "gut feeling" assumption about how they reached her, which honestly seems pretty likely.

And when she claimed it was just some random user's assertion, she presented it as an absolute fact, quoting:

It’s almost like she’s treating this as some kind of standard, official procedure from higher authorities—as if it wasn't just a friend or a moderator passing info along, but rather that "she requested it from the forum."
Even if she actually did get that info, it wouldn't be enough; an ousted public figure would have to go all the way to the ISP to try and track down an address. Maybe she was Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović back then and just tapped the secret services? 😁Eit: Fuck, back then it was Jacqueline and Ivo Josipović 🤣

I respect all those points, but honestly, if I had stumbled upon that gossip myself, I probably would have jumped off the boat with the exact same conviction she had. And in a few years, that rumor might have just calcified into "truth" for me too, unless someone corrected me or my source. In that sense, I suppose her explanation is enough for me.

Sarah Cooper58 said:...

I don't think anyone actually expects to get this kind of information while riding the subway. 🙄

....

This is probably a bit off-topic, I guess, but I really love that phrase. I appreciate that they took us coastal folks into account too; you can definitely hear those sentiments out on the ferries, too. 🤣

bluemason3 said:There isn't really anything here that addresses what was said earlier.

The woman even mentioned herself that she doesn't actually believe this originated from the forum.

If the police were truly at her door, then I guess it probably happened through legal channels—you know, like a formal warrant or something similar.

The post she’s responding to is already a bit more complicated, but honestly, even she doesn't know where that information actually came from(and, as I've said before, an IP address alone is never quite enough; you'd always need some other agency involved).

Of course, that's all assuming everyone mentioned is telling the truth...

Well, it seems they enjoy a certain level of trust from their colleagues on this thread. For what it's worth. I suppose if someone were to show up at a workplace or ring a doorbell, obtaining an IP address—whether through a forum leak or a legal court order—is just the first step; the internet provider would also have to get involved to provide the identity behind that IP. I mean, it's possible. It's also possible that back in 2010, this forum was a bit like the Wild West. I don't know. Some reassurance from the admins and Anderson regarding privacy on the Forum definitely wouldn't hurt.

But if we head back to the beginning, Mark Harris66 started this whole story by saying she heard about it over in Women's Corner, and after a brief (and somewhat unusual) explanation, she provided links to the source. So, she wasn't lying here; she was basing her conviction on a story shared by two female forum members whom many others had trusted.

For me, that's enough when it comes to nn (to whom I apologize), as everything else kind of falls outside the scope of this specific thread (what was actually happening at the time). Although, I suppose I would love to know the truth.