Posts by Steven Clark2

There is one more thing I should mention—if you reach out to the moderator with a PDF containing content you want to share, they will almost always get back to you. Aside from a few rare exceptions (😁), they'll let you know if there's already an existing thread for your topic or how best to proceed. It’s quite a practical tip, so please do give it a shot. It has certainly worked for me on a few occasions. 🙂

rowdyhawk10 said:Yeah... otherwise everyone just stays on their own little sub-forum, endlessly chanting their own hallelujahs in a closed loop.

It doesn't have to be limited to that; I could just as easily chant "allahu akbar" themes indefinitely. What’s the difference, really?

It is much nicer this way... together... Just as God intended for us to be in this world. Every part playing its role. 😬

You are absolutely right in principle, but when you start receiving 500 points for insulting Christians, Christian values, and traditions—which is exactly what you have done while receiving zero points—then I might begin to believe there is true justice here. Until then, I am not particularly convinced.

Then why are you asking for Islam to split off, claiming to speak for Muslims when we don't want that?

Frankly, I couldn't care less what you personally want or don't want. However, I do know two things: 1) You are not a representative Muslim who should be speaking for the community—in fact, you deviate so much from tradition that you have even less standing to speak on their behalf—and 2) there are certainly Muslims who wouldn't mind such a natural separation. About 25% of Muslims lead with Religion; anyone with half a brain can see there is nothing wrong with having a distinct section where Muslims hold the floor. Have you forgotten that your own forum is divided into multiple sections? 🙂

Fine, go ahead and request a Christianity sub-forum, okay... I understand. You are Christian, so you can ask for that. But you aren't Muslim! Why then are you requesting a separate space specifically for Muslims? We aren't interested in that. We don't prefer isolation; we know the truth... :Pacman: we love the crowd, the noise, the town squares, the forums... we've realized it's more interesting that way, and it suits us perfectly. 😁

Actually, I am not requesting anything. I simply stated that it isn't important to me at all, which stands in stark contrast to your fear of it happening. It seems you've exhausted your efforts with your missionary work and "lofty goals" on this forum—goals that, if I may remind you, involved insulting, mocking, sanctioning, and removing anyone who stood in your way, including Muslims whom you labeled as fanatics and extremists.

Well, that is my opinion. Does that mean I lack common sense? 🙂

It isn’t a matter of intellect. What you’re actually lacking is empathy, tolerance, and basic respect. So far, you haven't demonstrated any of those qualities—not in your role as a moderator, and frankly, not even just as a fellow forum member. I truly cannot wrap my head around who on earth appointed you to a moderator position there.

hollowtrucker77 said:I said it then, and I will say it again: if you are looking for an echo chamber, feel free to go find a specialized forum where you can sit around and debate only with people who already agree with you.
We don't support ghettoization here on this forum.

Have you ever truly paused to consider what we actually mean when we use the term "specialized forum"? 🙂 What if the issue isn't actually with Religion itself, but rather something else entirely? 🙂

hollowtrucker77, whether we decide to distribute or split a PDF doesn't actually depend on my opinion or yours—though, if I’m being honest, I suspect you only care about your own! It really comes down to one thing: does sharing it this way make the discussion easier? We have to consider if it's practical for the members participating in the thread and, just as importantly, for the moderators who are working hard to maintain a healthy atmosphere here. 🤷

You don't necessarily need to split up the PDF subforums; in the grand scheme of things, that’s a minor detail to me. However, I find myself struggling because, as of now, there hasn't been a single rational or logical explanation provided as to why Religion shouldn't be divided into three separate PDF sections. It seems quite inconsistent when I see that the Alternative category actually has five (!) different PDFs. It makes me wonder why we have such an extensive number of subforums in other categories. Wouldn't it simply be more efficient to head over to a specialized forum if one wanted to discuss something like IT? Why is this the case? Not quite. Isolation and the discourse surrounding Religion—it is indeed an issue. 😲 ? 🙂

Please, go ahead—try to convince me that I'm wrong. 🙂

I actually suggested last year that we categorize Religion into three distinct groups: atheism/agnosticism, Christianity, and Islam. I truly believe anyone with even a modicum of reason and an open mind will see this as the most logical way to organize things, especially since the majority of users on this particular forum tend to hold those specific worldviews.

Austin Parker8 said:Do you guys think the mods are power tripping? Like, are they being arrogant or unfair? Feel free to vent or drop your thoughts here...

I will gladly offer my own perspective on this matter. 🙂

No, I don't believe so. In my view, most of the moderators are doing a perfectly respectable job. If someone happens to make a mistake, I would argue those instances are simply exceptions to the rule. After all, what else could one expect? Perfect moderators overseeing an imperfect community of users? I suspect that neither I, nor anyone else in this world, would be any better.

Since we previously discussed antisemitism—an area where I personally feel you lack even fundamental knowledge—I would appreciate it if you could provide specific quotes that you believe violate American laws (beyond just antisemitism). From my perspective, you have previously posted insults directed at Christians, theists, and specifically creationists without receiving so much as a yellow card. Therefore, I would simply like to see the weight of your accusations. There is a distinction between harboring an aversion toward Christianity or creationism (which you have criticized relentlessly without facing any warnings or penalties, often mocking members in the process—all of which is permitted on this forum) and whether such content is actually encouraged here or if links to similar material should be cited.

Please don't take this personally—do not misunderstand me; I am quite allergic to antisemitism, racism, and any other form of hate speech myself. If it turns out you are correct, I will gladly stand against any views that promote hatred, intolerance, or anything of that nature.

Susan Price30 said:Following that exact logic, I suppose I should assume that spam refers to your previous quote where you claim (I assume you're reading my mind here) that it is 'obvious to me why the posts were deleted'.

That is my point. I have noticed that certain moderators tend to "read the minds" of the users a bit too often, acting as if they "know" what people were thinking better than the individuals themselves.

Susan Brooks83 said:There is simply no excuse left for saying "maybe Tami went a bit too far." 🙄 It isn't just a case of "going too far"; he completely crossed the line. Regardless of who actually typed those words, if anyone else had written them, it would be classified as hate speech and as such
it must be sanctioned. To tell someone they are "technologically redundant," especially given the statement quoted above... 😲

Fair enough—you might be right regarding Tami. However, speaking strictly for myself, I would prefer not to demonize him unnecessarily. I truly believe he will apologize; I find him to be a cultured individual, even if he was swept up in the negative atmosphere that has been festering here for so long, leading him to write what he did. What he said was wrong—that much is indisputable—but I feel we should afford him the opportunity to explain himself, especially since he did, in one instance, directly suggest or at least imply that he may have overstepped.

Tami, if you happen to be reading this, it would be a gracious gesture to apologize to those you offended. Please try to ensure this doesn't happen again; after all, there is no sense in it, is there? While some Christians might behave even worse than you did, that certainly does not give you the right to retaliate in kind.

rowdyhawk10 said:The question raised in the opening post of this thread might actually be very, very well-founded.

I just stepped in preemptively on the controversial thread, specifically here, though we will certainly have more to say regarding that matter over there.

In the meantime, I ask all forum members to please exercise patience. 🙂

The situation is quite delicate—in fact, it isn't just one single issue, but rather a whole cluster of them—but with genuine goodwill, I believe everything can be resolved in an optimal manner.

Our moderation team is currently holding consultations, and we will follow up with a joint statement from the entire moderation staff both there and here.

Greetings to everyone, and thank you for responding to the introduction and for contributing to this discussion.

Snoop Dogg

To be honest, I have some thoughts regarding your use of the term "consultations."

First off, if by this you mean the moderation team consists exclusively of the moderators in the religion section, then they are simply incapable and incompetent of resolving this. To put it bluntly, the intolerance—if not outright hatred—that has characterized that section for years has happened right under the noses of the entire staff, including both former and current moderators. This issue didn't just spontaneously manifest because of today's thread on the unknown forum. Why hasn't it occurred to you to take action before, given the numerous statements made against certain ideologies (regardless of which ones they may be)?

Even worse—how could you fail to notice that even in your own posts, you have used rhetoric that can hardly be described as positive toward certain ideologies, particularly when it comes to Christianity? While this specific topic may have been triggered by a single post or thread, this is an issue the administration should have addressed years ago. Not every single post in the religion section involved hate speech, but there was certainly plenty of intolerant speech. And it all happened under your supervision, especially yours. Because otherwise, how else am I supposed to interpret your statement here:

So, look, good angel, I’m telling you—I am only human. I live on this earth. But to me, that does not represent any kind of salvation. Please don't be angry, because what I wrote just now is my core truth. Okay?

And I will say the same: I will never bow down to something as evil as the symbol of the brutal torture used by the Roman occupier. God is love, not torture. This symbol is actually more of a political symbol than anything else. And whoever represents it as such, or wears it around their neck, is representing a politics of oppression—often quite unconsciously. Again, I am emphasizing that this is simply my sincere, human opinion.

Link.

This is your "sincere, human opinion," yet it carries significant implications. And this isn't your first time. You have mocked Christian views and their ideology repeatedly. In doing so, acting as a moderator (!), you have openly violated—without a shred of guilt or any objection from anyone—the Constitution of the United States, Article 1, provided that applies, which states:

Any calls for war or the incitement of violence—as well as any promotion of hatred based on nationality, race, religion, or any other form of intolerance—are strictly prohibited and subject to punishment. (link)

And that whole period when you were...poticao" "Religious intolerance.Just as...Any form of intolerance whatsoever.That is an interesting point—every single Christian.Quite unconsciously.He truly carries his cross.He actively advocates for policies that facilitate human trafficking.I suspect you are likely aware of the exact same issue, yet you feel entitled to insult someone’s feelings or deeply held beliefs, regardless. You see, when you, in your capacity as a moderator, make statements of this nature—or anything even remotely similar—what kind of standard does that set for the rest of us on this forum?

Here is what some people had to say:

I feel compelled to express my thoughts on this matter. I must admit, I am perhaps being a bit too earnest here, but I truly believe we need to address this directly. It is important that we remain thoughtful and structured in our approach if we want to reach any meaningful conclusion. Please bear with me as I try to articulate this clearly. As I have previously stated:
I am certainly not someone who goes out of my way to spread hate; I truly harbor no animosity toward anyone. However, I find it incredibly aggravating when people claim that Muhammad (PBUH) was a false prophet. Would I ever dare to speak about Jesus in such a disrespectful manner? Absolutely not.
I hold deep faith in Him, just as I do in Muhammad (peace be upon him).
a Shady is here Those photos of the Pope— Little Nazi, this is exactly how they manipulate you.🤣

I believe this perspective is likely correct, wouldn't you agree? It certainly doesn't strike me as an invitation toward intolerance or anything of that nature. Please note that this was post #65 in that specific thread, dated January 6, 2010. You had entries both before and after that particular post, yet you didn't offer a single reaction to any of them.

Zapazi ovaj post:

I must admit, I feel a bit awkward stepping into this discussion, but I find myself compelled to share my perspective on this matter. It is quite a complex situation, isn't it? One can't help but feel a certain weight when contemplating these issues, though perhaps that is simply my own tendency toward overthinking things. Regardless, I believe there is more to be said if we approach it with sincerity. Steven Clark2 says:
You really ought to take a look at the records my brothers put together—it will make everything crystal clear for you. It seems your father has been doing nothing but leading you astray. That very same Pope was actually a Nazi. Some people look at the imagery within our churches and see nothing more than art, but others believe certain depictions serve as ominous symbols signaling the arrival of the Antichrist—think of those cryptic illustrations involving pyramids and the all-seeing eye, and so on.
There is a rather intriguing depiction of Satanism out there—one where two fingers touch, symbolizing the thin veil between our world and the demonic realm.

It is essentially the same topic where you missed that other comment, number 65, only this one was posted earlier—it's actually number 31 in the sequence. And if you want to make matters even more absurd, you actually caught this one, specifically because you handed that particular forum member red cards and docked them 10 points. The reason being:

This thread is strictly for off-topic discussions and spam. Please keep the conversation relevant to the subject at hand.

You haven't responded to either of these posts—and let’s be clear, these aren't even the only instances of this kind of content—certainly not regarding the spread of religious intolerance or similar nonsense. In fact, you were actually a participant in those very discussions yourself. You didn't even react to the complaints filed under the Religion category, despite the fact that both Grazia and I...linkMe too.linkThey suggested the exact same thing—and then they actually have the nerve to ask, "Why don't you just head over to the Appeals section and state your case?" It’s quite bold, if you ask me. Furthermore, that post by Tammy has already been reported to the Oversight Committee. Yet, there hasn't been a single response from any of the moderators in the Appeals section, and I am particularly disappointed by the lack of action from you specifically.

Was it because you were unfamiliar with the concept of religious intolerance—or perhaps its active spread (if we’re being honest, let's call it "religious hatred")—or was it actually triggered by this statement of yours? You seem to be expressing what you truly thought about those Christians who kept calling you out for your various remarks, many of which, I must admit, were quite valid criticisms:

Beyond that, I make it a point never to write anything malicious or untruthful. My intention isn't to attack religion itself, but rather to challenge the politics that have managed to seep into it. It seems to me that whenever you encounter something you dislike, you immediately resort to lamenting and inciting rebellions. Personally, I find that quite disheartening. To my mind, such behavior serves as a clear indicator of disrespect toward an individual's freedom to speak and to believe in whatever way they feel satisfies God. I simply cannot be expected to think with your conscience; I have my own. 🤷

I believe you forgot to include the link! If you could provide it, I would be more than happy to take a look.

First, if your intention was to critique policy within the church—though I must point out that you tended to conflate religious sentiment with politics, which is a choice in itself—then you completely missed the mark regarding the forum's structure. You were posting in the Religion sub-forum, a space specifically designed to nurture religious sentiments. Regardless of whether you agree with those views, it isn't always appropriate to lash out against them. It is quite well-known how you tend to proselytize, frequently attacking stances and beliefs that you personally disagree with in a rather unfortunate manner. Secondly, it should be perfectly clear now why no one could ever truly reach an understanding with you. The issue was your improper approach to moderation; you fostered religious intolerance and encouraged it, while simultaneously "blessing" every single post that aligned with your views, all while dismissing anyone who dared to offer a dissenting opinion as...They are simply being contrarians.I am truly at a loss for words regarding this matter.They are rising up in revolt."What is your take on this?"It is truly disheartening.And honestly, it really just boils down to...Is there any greater indicator of an assault on human liberty than when someone attempts to dictate how a person should speak or believe, simply under the guise of what they claim satisfies God?"

So, you have actually gone so far as to characterize your own speech as...Freedom of speech.You consistently treated any form of speech that challenged your ideology or religious convictions as a direct violation of the rules, responding with increasingly harsh sanctions. At the same time, you dismissed every single objection as entirely worthless or beneath your notice, while effectively ghettoizing Christians by labeling them as being "infected by the virus of dogma."

You know, Shady, I’m a Christian, but I don’t feel the need to wear a cross around my neck. I don't have one hanging on my wall, either. To me, the Bible isn't any more sacred just because there happens to be a cross on the cover. I personally view the Pope as one of the most significant intellectuals of our time; he leads an organization of over a billion people—an institution that many truly cherish and consider a gift from God. Even if someone were to claim the Pope was a Nazi, that the cross is an ultimate evil, or that Catholics are merely infected by the viruses of dogma—those kinds of views shouldn't be championed by moderators. It is simply unacceptable for a major, representative American media platform to promote such things. Personally, having seen how these examples play out, I would never want to behave that way.

Why did you even bother doing this job? Honestly, you could have walked away at any time. Or perhaps you felt like no one could stop you, simply because you dismissed every single legitimate grievance as nothing more than "whining" or "rebellion." To be perfectly blunt, much of the time you spent acting as a moderator—especially lately—has actually involved spreading religious intolerance and fostering what you call "intolerance," whatever that term is supposed to mean in your vocabulary (if anyone who actually understands the nuances of the language wouldn't mind providing a more detailed explanation of that word, I would truly appreciate it, just so I am not left in doubt).

And now you expect us to actually hear something? Notice To the moderation teams from Religion who were responsible for fostering such an incredibly toxic atmosphere on the Religion boards—what exactly was going on there? Why did you suddenly decide that Tammy’s controversial post actually contained enough substance to be classified as hate speech or something similar?

My apologies, Snoop Dogg, but... 🙂 I am far more concerned with ensuring that the administration considers more than just the posts from Ford, Princess XX, and that TT thread. It is vital that they take your specific viewpoints and contributions into account as well. Currently, you are being unfairly blamed for supposedly allowing content that should have been restricted, all while you were busy labeling every legitimate grievance as "rebellion" and dismissing any controversial rhetoric as mere "freedom of speech." Given how this has unfolded, am I to expect any meaningful outcome from your upcoming moderator meeting?

I am open to that, provided we discuss it in the private section. That is actually where my interest lies, because I want us to address this issue at its very foundation together. I would much rather tackle the root cause than watch you all spend eternity debating moderation policies while simultaneously allowing the situation to deteriorate—to varying degrees, depending on who you ask.

_________________________________________

* Referring to the cross.

** To be perfectly honest—this might sound extreme—but I believe this reflects your overall approach to the Religion forum, as well as that of other moderators who have, to some extent, permitted similar behavior.

*** Typically, this manifests through the imposition of various dictates, handing out heavy penalties for posts that don't warrant them, or even violating the rules yourselves... Not everyone does this, and certainly not always, but in many instances, they do.

Chris Peterson53 said:In my estimation, your complaint, as you have framed it, does not justify Tamia's post.

P.S. I kindly request that my posts be read and quoted in their entirety.

"In your estimation"? Well, if I may be so bold, I believe your judgment might be slightly misguided. It appears you could benefit from some further education regarding the definition of hate speech, intolerance, and similar rhetoric; under our own Constitution, such things remain legally prohibited. If you continue to view matters through such a one-sided lens, you run the risk of fostering a deeply negative atmosphere, given that the implications of certain statements can be quite profound—regardless of which group is being discussed.

A little course correction wouldn't hurt. Perhaps Tamia went a bit too far, and I certainly understand where he is coming from; after all, he likely grew up in a different environment with a different religious background, and those influences matter. Sometimes, one simply fails to realize how much weight certain words can carry. This same logic applies to anyone speaking about Islam in a similar fashion. princess xx—that specific post you wrote, which Veronica quoted—simply doesn't hold water. As a Christian myself, I do not believe Muhammad is the final prophet, nor do I view the Quran as being the same as the Bible, but I would certainly not tempt fate by labeling all Muslims based on those beliefs, just as you did. It is illogical, as it does not align with the truth.

I would suggest that both you and Tamia dial it back a notch and refrain from making such broad generalizations. 🙂

Amy Doyle81 said:I am of the opinion that sentiments such as these have no business being hosted on the Religion forum. It is my sincere hope that comments of this nature—and those similar to them—will be dealt with appropriately, serving as a clear example to everyone else that hate speech will not be tolerated in a public forum.

😕 Are you truly labeling that specific post as hate speech?

If so, how would you characterize these:

Zero points awarded, not even a yellow card.

And what about this one:

10 points. Reason: off-topic/spam (!).

Or perhaps this:

Zero points. Even though it was written by a moderator (!).

According to Article 39 of our Constitution, if that remains the standard we follow (link):

Any incitement to war or the use of violence, or to national, racial, or religious hatred or any form of intolerance, is prohibited and punishable.

rowdyhawk10 said:Listen, the discussion has been moved here.
We’ve actually had several threads titled "Ten Commandments"—at least five of them! :0rofl:
Someone opened an identical one just a few days ago, so I decided to merge them all together.

If you had read the opening post, you would have known I was already aware of that. 🙂

I suggest practicing your search engine skills a bit more. 🙂 Best regards.

If you had read the opening post, you would have seen that I had already handled the issue that way. Personally, I would recommend sending a quick private message next time; it certainly wouldn't hurt. 🙂

shadowpilot8 said:Well, you certainly tend to be more prolific, so it isn't easy to track everything. 😁

Please, don't trouble yourself; I have logged over 4,500 posts since September 2008. 😁 I arrived at that figure using a slightly different methodology. 🙂

However, if you use the "Find posts from a year ago and newer" feature—
and adjust how the results are displayed via the "Sort results..." option,
for instance, you would see you've contributed to about 12 different thread pages from that point until today. 😁

There is quite a lot of material there to read.
It becomes even simpler if you know which specific sub-forum you want to search.

I will certainly keep those tips in mind for the future, but I truly appreciate the advice, just as I appreciate everyone else's help. 🙂

How exactly should we go about testing this? Could you provide an example? 🙂 Honestly, if everyone were already fully informed, there wouldn't be such a pressing need for us to constantly ask questions here on the forum. 🙂 I have a general understanding of how search functions work, but I am struggling with the specifics: how can I use it to locate my own posts from a certain window, say, between April 2nd and April 22nd of last year?

Aaron Harris2 said:Hey Nick. 🙂

On our Reddit (which is the largest one in the country), we have an incredible amount of threads.
It happens that us moderators make mistakes in our decisions sometimes, and I suppose what you pointed out falls under that category of minor mishaps.
It is absolutely true that sending a private message to the thread author can be very helpful in these situations.
From now on, I will make sure to always send a PM to the author explaining why their thread was merged and including a link to the new one (I've done this sporadically in the past—sometimes I did, sometimes I didn't—but I always left a redirect up for a few days so people could click and see where the topic moved).

I hope you can accept this explanation, and perhaps we can conclude this matter now without dragging the discussion out any further? 😉

No, I certainly didn't expect this kind of "dragging on" (as my uncle would say, just making things longer than they need to be, LOL); I honestly thought this would be resolved and locked within two or three replies. 🙂

The "mishap" itself isn't really the issue, nor am I looking to point fingers at anyone in particular—even if I don't have total confidence in the moderators from that PDF where my thread was merged. I'm not blaming anyone; I simply wanted to understand the process. If nothing else, it might be useful for everyone to know that notifying the original poster is a good practice. There really should be at least a redirect, though a private message is clearly the best way to go.

P.S. I heard there was some wild party going on in Washington, D.C. last night for someone's birthday. 😍

rapidrider3 said:I follow a similar approach, though I don't broadcast it. On rare occasions, we might wait about a day—provided we know they’ll be online for several hours—before making the move so they notice. We also have a dedicated thread where we document everything, so users can see that their content was moved from one spot to another, which keeps everyone happy and satisfied.

I suspect some people might find receiving those kinds of private messages a bit grating. We all have different temperaments here, and frankly, it is impossible to please everyone.

Now, given how much time has passed since that incident, I suspect there isn't much left to be done about it.

The only real fix would be to post a general notice stating that users won't be notified when threads are moved.

We are a diverse group, but perhaps it would be wise to establish a consensus among the moderators on this Reddit, just for future reference. It would prevent anyone with bad intentions from misinterpreting a thread relocation. 🙂

To be perfectly honest, personally, I see no logical reason why moving or merging a thread shouldn't involve a notification. 🤷 However, I believe in practicing a certain level of tolerance. 🙂 If the moderation team decides there is no need to announce every single move or merge, that is perfectly fine; if they choose to do so, that is also fine.

Just yesterday, another moderator deleted a thread of mine, but at least they sent me a message to let me know. It seems we all have slightly different philosophies on the matter.

Jacob Foster11 said:Yes, it actually worked...

👍 I suppose I am fortunate that I occasionally possess the ability to connect the dots (largely by selecting a word that wasn't already overused in my vocabulary), which is how I stumbled upon it. It truly meant a lot to me to be able to review it.

Alright, I wasn't aware of that. Please don't worry, I'm certainly not angry. Even moderators make mistakes. Besides, I am still quite new to the moderator role myself. My apologies for spreading misinformation. 😉

I haven't utilized those search functions very often, so I simply didn't know. Now I do.

We all make errors, but you should strive to better understand your interlocutor; you will find it necessary in your role as a moderator. Had you been reading my posts from the very beginning, you would have understood exactly what I was getting at. 🙂

I wanted to explain my thought process. When you use the advanced search, there is an option to search by title. Since every post can have a title assigned to it, I assumed that approach would work.

I located the thread using a single specific word (though, admittedly, it could have been another word—it hardly matters), and I was quite surprised to find it had been "merged" into another topic without any prior notice. I couldn't help but think it was rather wonderful that it was merged without my knowledge or presence. 🙂

Jacob Foster11 said:Goodness, it’s as if you simply refuse to listen to what people are telling you. Finding your own posts and threads is actually quite straightforward. Just take a look at this screenshot:


You can even subscribe to specific threads:


Check out these images (just click on them).

Alright, since I am apparently being thick-headed here, perhaps you could try—using your moderator privileges, if you have them—to visit my profile and locate a thread I started. It is titled (or was titled) "The Ten Commandments." It is entirely possible that I failed to notice it four separate times in the list of threads I've posted on my profile—but the truth is, it simply isn't there.

By the way, it is standard practice for moderators to move, merge, or delete threads whenever necessary.

Based on my past experiences, I understood that moderators typically post notifications regarding such actions, especially when a new topic is opened. If they choose not to do so because they don't feel it's necessary to announce a thread merger, then that is a different matter entirely. I suppose I should have been clearer in my reasoning. 🙂

mistywolf17 said:I cannot say for certain regarding the subscription, as I don't personally utilize that service. However, my intuition suggests it would likely disappear. 😕

I have never once utilized a "subscription" feature on any forum, and certainly not here; besides, I suspect such a thing would simply vanish anyway.

mistywolf17 said:How on earth is one supposed to use the "Find all posts" feature when it only displays the last 300 entries? It feels quite limiting, doesn't it?
He was able to locate it by utilizing the search engine and specific keywords, just as he had done previously. 🤷

I have officially abandoned my attempt to use the "Find all posts" feature. I estimate that I have written perhaps 2,000 posts since last April—though it might actually be more than that, if I am being honest. Regardless, there is simply no way for me to locate them using that specific method.

rapidrider3 said:I find myself agreeing that this is likely what’s weighing on him most heavily. It's one thing to hunt her down via a search engine, but now that he has actually found her, he's stuck in this agonizing loop of wondering why she was transferred—especially since nobody bothered to give him any official notice about it.

It simply makes no sense if they don't reach out to me. 😢 Having served as both a moderator and an administrator on another forum, I find myself reflecting on the etiquette of thread management. In my own experience, moving a topic without any prior notice feels quite counterintuitive; I have always made it a point to notify users whenever I relocate a discussion. It leaves me wondering: does being a moderator grant someone the liberty to manipulate my threads however they see fit simply by virtue of their title? 😕 To me, this simply doesn't make any sense.

Jacob Foster11 said:What happens if someone subscribed to this thread? Does the subscription expire, or does it carry over to a new one?

By the way, you can always just use the "Find all posts by..." feature. 😉

Goodness, I feel like an outsider here, suggesting you hunt for fifty posts that are easily accessible. Since I first started this specific thread, I’ve written at least another 500 posts—in my estimation, anyway, though it feels like much more. How could anyone be expected to spend fifty hours searching for a single topic? It simply doesn't make sense.

I explained exactly how I located it. I was reviewing my notes in Word—specifically the introduction to the thread—and wondered which keyword would work best in a search engine. The word "collection" stood out to me, as I don't recall using it very often. The opening sentence reads:

The Ten Commandments are a collection of biblical laws found in Exodus 20:1-17 and Deut. 5:6-21.

I used the advanced search function, entered the word "collection," added the username "no Nick" (without quotes, naturally), and there it was.

http://forum.us/search.php?searchid=7570587

Give it a try and see if it works for you. 🙂