Posts by Amanda Hughes37

Once the moderator decided the whole thing was just because leftists are better in bed, there wasn't much left to argue about...🤷🤣

Nicholas King said:I suspect there might even be some specific statutes out there that were violated by all of this—though I suppose it really depends on how strictly one interprets the legal framework.

I have to say, back then, they actually handed out a study guide containing maybe 300 potential questions—and you could be pretty certain that at least 20 of them would show up on the actual entrance exam—which, I guess, made the whole preparation process significantly easier.

Unless we’re talking about some specialized training program designed specifically to churn out call center operators, this whole classification method is—honestly—one of the most idiotic things I have ever had the misfortune of hearing.

If you happen to take a tumble weighing less than a hundred pounds, I suppose a few hundred bucks should probably do the trick.

High school entrance exams.
I remember it like it was yesterday—they had this massive green binder filled with every single question for every subject they tested at the various schools...

In my opinion, measuring a kid's success based on their performance in fifth or sixth grade—especially when they weren't even aware of the stakes back then—is just wrong.
I don't care what anyone says about "consistent effort across all school years."
It’s like being at work—you can't have someone tell you that you needed specific results or certain milestones to get a promotion, only to drop that info on you after the window for achieving them has already slammed shut.
Period.

Don't get me wrong, I support tracking progress through all the grades, but the system from my era was probably the most logical... 40% coursework, 60% entrance exam, and that's that.

For instance, I aced my entrance exam perfectly, even though my grades during middle school weren't exactly stellar.

Though, I should admit, we were given study guides back then with maybe 300 potential questions, where 20 were guaranteed to show up on the test. It certainly made prepping a lot easier...

Susan Price30 said:And what specifically were you planning on reporting? (I seem to recall you pointing out some hate speech in another thread—basically stuff you felt was hateful and kept being repeated).

I never once wrote or suggested that things should be reported to moderators instead of the police. Honestly, I don't care who gets reported—my only concern is that this stuff doesn't clutter up the discussion as trollish threats. If there's actual grounds for a report, just handle it quietly. Amen

The last thing I'd ever think to do is report something happening in another country, or even here in the States... it makes no difference to me at all.

Nothing right now—just curious how the process actually works in practice.

Can someone tell me how I even go about reporting a personal threat or hate speech to the police?

hiddenlynx66 said:It's because it feels like you can't find a single prominent politician who isn't a pathological liar acting solely out of pure selfishness. I'm not saying there aren't dishonest activists out there too, but when someone dedicates their entire life, their money, and their sanity to a cause, I expect them to have at least a shred more integrity than a politician who wouldn't even wish you a good morning unless there was something in it for them.

Well, that’s just the nature of the job—lying occasionally and playing nice with crowds out of sheer courtesy... anyway, I'm done here.🙂

hiddenlynx66 said:Slander gets thrown around all the time here, often forgetting that these are actual people with real names and reputations. I honestly don't get why people find it so easy to trash anyone who holds a different view. Sure, I get targeting politicians, but I can't stand seeing non-partisan activists get attacked just for thinking differently. It’s like you aren't allowed to have an opinion unless you're a paid shill! You see it everywhere on these boards, and I usually only speak up when I finally hit my breaking point, because if I reacted to everything, I'd never get anything done. 😂

And why should it be considered "normal" to attack politicians when we're already stuck in this pointless debate, yet somehow it's fine to target activists? 😕

Since when did we decide to sort everyone into little boxes where activists are the good guys and politicians are the villains?

hiddenlynx66 said:Just tell me: if you were out there doing something because you truly believe in it, and then someone on Reddit starts spitting on you, calling you nothing more than a paid hack who's just doing it for the paycheck—would you feel insulted? Would you feel slandered? 🙂

Look, let’s be real—we say a lot of things on Reddit with an air of absolute certainty... even when we shouldn't.
It’ll just slip away...
Just look at all those heavy insults being thrown at politicians—and don't even try telling me we didn't call them thieves long before they were even facing indictment...

James Patel20 said:It’s the threat of being reported that really gets to me, and honestly, I feel like that’s something that should be handled pretty easily...

Of course, the idea that someone might actually follow through and file a report is unsettling too, 🙂 but there isn't much I can do about that side of things, I suppose.

Though, I think I mentioned this in another thread already, but it seems almost nonsensical to hold a person accountable for what they write under a pseudonym, provided that the handle itself isn't some legally protected identity...

I mean, who is going to guarantee that tomorrow someone won't just hijack my username to cause trouble, essentially posting something illegal or actionable in my name just so they can report me to the police...

But that really opens up a much larger conversation than we have here...

We ought to do what we can, which would be to ban anyone who uses reports as a way to threaten others, because that kind of behavior just kills any real discussion...

People eventually stop sharing their actual thoughts because they start worrying that someone might actually take action against them...

But they really can report you.
You claimed a certain group was paid off without providing any proof.
Even if you did have evidence, a court still has to decide if it's actually valid or sufficient.
As it stands, you defamed them.
If I remember correctly, that wasn't just an opinion—it was a direct assertion that money changed hands.
Regardless of anything else, I wish people would be a bit more careful about what they write and say.

James Patel20 said:I’ve been sitting here thinking about how we handle things around here, and I honestly feel like there should be an immediate rule added to the guidelines regarding users who threaten to call the police or file legal reports against other members during a discussion... it just seems like such a heavy-handed way to escalate a debate, and maybe a permanent ban should be on the table for anyone who uses that kind of intimidation tactic instead of just sticking to the argument at hand... it would certainly change the energy of the conversations if people knew they couldn't just weaponize the authorities to shut someone down... anyway, just a thought that's been weighing on my mind lately...

Since there have been quite a few instances lately where people actually ended up facing police reports or even full-blown court rulings just because of things they wrote online, I’ve noticed some users on Reddit starting to weaponize that concept... you know, using it as this sort of unspoken subtext or a veiled threat to shut people down, claiming they're "just joking" while they try to intimidate their conversational partners into silence by threatening them with legal action...

Just one example...

I've been noticing certain trends heading in that direction lately, and I can't help but feel a growing sense of unease... I truly fear it could end up causing permanent damage to this community and, more broadly, to the very concept of free speech that I believe almost all of us here stand for...

I don't get it.
Is your issue that someone reported you, or that they actually said what they said out loud on Reddit?

The term "Catholic-Taliban" has been firmly embedded in the Religion and Social Sciences section for ages—and I haven't seen any attempt to moderate or ban it.
It’s tossed around in debates to describe certain groups of people whom some user decides, by their own arbitrary standards, are basically imposing KC values like Talibans... it's all a bit vague, but whatever.
Honestly, when I first stumbled onto the Religion sub-forum, I felt like Alice in Wonderland. I expected discussions on various aspects of different faiths—comparisons, traditions, interpretations, things of that nature.
I was looking for atheists who actually care about the subject matter—people seeking information, engaging, asking questions.
I imagined this would be an oasis of peace, love, and tranquility.
Instead... it's a pit.
Pure horror.
Entire threads dedicated to someone trying to convince another person that their deeply held beliefs are nothing short of idiocy.
Mocking faith, mocking believers... that's the usual routine. And if I'm being honest, what shocked me even more—though it's less frequent, still present—is the blatant disrespect between believers of different faiths.

Arthur Flores2 said:Empty arguments, steelskipper5—for one simple reason. It turns out I’m not the only believer here who’s been banned from posting jokes about atheists. Basically, it’s just forum policy to prevent mocking atheism—the exact same policy that, until recently, allowed people to openly hunt believers right here on this board, or write whatever trash they wanted about anything Catholic (not that things have improved much lately). So, you lot get to dump all your crap on our heads, but we aren't even allowed to crack a joke about you. And then you have the nerve to complain about a joke being "funny" or try to police whether it counts as a little bit of payback. Pathetic...🤮

I don't get it... since when was it forbidden to post jokes about atheists?😕
Where?... Who decided that?

Just a bunch of pathetic whining—not a single actual example of what the issue is.
Citing some random PDF from the Washington Post as proof of bad moderation on Reddit...🙄

rowdypanther12 said:I’ve been lurking here for a bit just thinking... where do kids with a 4.0 GPA actually end up applying?
Like, I don't mean someone with a 3.6, but more like a 4.2 or something?

Business school, pre-med tracks, hospitality management, logistics... you get the idea.

Word is, lately there's been a decent number of high achievers heading into culinary programs over in Newport.

Technically speaking, this solution is flawless—if it were actually in effect right now, my daughter definitely wouldn't be enrolling in a prep school.
Personally, I was fine with it, but the sheer stupidity at play here is staggering.
We aren't going to see a situation where top-tier students who miss their first-choice school "fail out" during freshman year and get stuck in some mediocre institution, while those who fought tooth and nail somehow get in.

The idea that you can only apply to one single school... I mean, whose brilliant idea was that?🤦
And the potential for abuse is massive.

As for looking at grades starting from 5th grade—I’m all for it.
Pressure is always going to exist; it's part of life. It's up to the teachers to actually do their jobs properly.

Charles Fox10 said:Context matters, sure—but ultimately, it’s on the mods to decide what counts as trolling. That makes calling someone out for it a bit of a gray area...

Penalty points—aka credits—have actual value and an expiration date. Once you hit 100 active points, you get three days of vacation...

I know that—just got back from my own time off yesterday☕...it's just that when you see a red card next to a post without a full ban, how many points does that actually represent?

Quote:

rezon@tor says: Labeling someone else’s posts as spam or trolling should be an immediate red card.

Did I get that right—if you call someone out for trolling, you get hit with a red card?... It seems we aren't supposed to judge what qualifies as trolling, which probably just depends on the topic at hand.

Second thing... what exactly constitutes a red card?... How many points until a full ban?🤷

darkridge28 said:So, here’s the thing... I might be slightly off-topic here, but whatever. I’m 20, and my younger brother just got home from school two weeks ago; he’s in 8th grade, and they were sitting there in biology class discussing male and female reproductive organs, pregnancy, and all that standard curriculum stuff. When the conversation drifted toward how a woman gets pregnant through intercourse involving sperm, the teacher asked if anyone had anything to contribute. Well, one of his friends actually asked if a woman could get pregnant if someone were to, say, "dump" sperm into a swimming pool and it somehow made its way into her. Instead of just answering the question, the teacher basically told him how "stupid" he was for even asking something so ridiculous. She did clarify that it wasn't possible, sure, but she used this condescending tone—not that she called him a moron outright, but you knew where she stood.
...Honestly, I feel like some teachers really need to develop a bit more empathy when dealing with middle schoolers on topics like this, because, at the end of the day, it was a valid question, wasn't it? Especially since kids that age are usually too embarrassed to even bring these things up!

Do you honestly believe an 8th grader doesn't know how conception works? He probably asked that just to see her reaction, especially since they likely covered the basics back in 5th or 6th grade...🤣🤣
Look, take my advice—next time, listen to what middle schoolers are actually doing when they think nobody's watching.☕
That kid probably watches at least two or three questionable videos a day while his mom thinks he's just researching for a school report.

Sam Murphy said:Please, enlighten those of us who aren't in the loop, because from everything I see and observe, kids haven't been more difficult than they are right now, and back in our day, none of us would have dreamed of disrespecting a teacher because we knew exactly what the consequences were... but today, teachers have lost almost all their authority, and if this trend of extreme liberalism and hyper-focus on "student rights" continues, we're going to see kids physically attacking them as early as elementary school. Honestly, when the kids come home from school, they act like little savages because they’ve been allowed to do whatever they want there; now, my own children don't cause trouble at school, but plenty of others do, and my kids witness it and talk about it at home, leaving me wondering how on earth I’m supposed to explain to them that such behavior is unacceptable when the school just sits there and tolerates it...

Either you went to some weird private academy or you have selective memory. Based on what kids tell me, people were starting to smoke even earlier than they do now... boys in my class used to set fire to their journals after breaking into the school building and peeing on them (I'm 39)... the stories I hear from others aren't much different, and everyone agrees physical fights were actually more common back then since they weren't treated as something unusual.
The only thing is, professors used to drill us—now they aren't allowed to.
And don't even get me started on how my parents' generation lived—both here and in the US—having sex with whoever they wanted, hitting the bars, and doing drugs off spoons... they could show that crowd at Quincy what a real party looks like.☕
Besides, even Aristotle expressed disgust over the youth of his day and worried about where the world was heading...

Lisa Rivera said:I realize I’m just dropping this in out of nowhere, but... a ten-year-old child simply has no business playing around with fireworks.🙂

I completely agree—though I don't know any other moms besides myself who have actually dug their heels in on this... In a perfect world, the kids would be lighting those fireworks only when Dad is right there to supervise.