Bradley Scott2 said:Give me one actual, specific instance where I was being rude or insulting to some single mother!
This whole thing you're doing is just baiting people and throwing out fake accusations.
I’m not even gonna go digging for more. Honestly, what was linked in the first post is enough. I have zero interest in debating this with you—I said what I thought about your posts, and I don't care if you disagree. In my book, it’s still trolling, lying, and being totally uncalled for.
I'm with Chloe Roberts2 on this one. It’s straight-up trolling, and honestly, it feels like a low blow toward single moms. You can see what I mean if you check it out. I honestly don't even know where to start with this one. It’s just... opus. Check out Bradley Scott2 over on the Greenpeace thread about domestic violence. He was trolling in basically the exact same way there, except the mods shut him down almost immediately. I’m pretty sure the admins can still see that deleted part, too—it feels like a chunk of his rant is missing.
rowdydrifter14 said:So, here’s the situation. I shared a thought—just a simple observation, mind you—without targeting anyone or trying to pick a fight. A standard post. And what do I get? A comment basically telling me to stop lying. Honestly, I’m at a bit of a loss here; I have absolutely zero interest in getting into some endless back-and-forth argument with strangers. If this forum isn't a space where one can share an idea or a personal conclusion without being attacked, then what is the point of any of this discussion? The use of profanity and hostility is just completely irrational. Perhaps the most sensible move is to simply ignore it, but I truly don't understand what drives people toward such unnecessary malice. Who is one even supposed to turn to in these instances? Thanks.
I don't see anything too crazy about someone calling you a liar 🤔, but you can always report them to the mods using the little triangle icon () down in the bottom left corner of the post..
Writing with a clone where you got your permit is strictly against the rules 😬 and honestly, I don't think it’s going to help you out when you finally need to get that permit cleared one day
That was actually two months ago, and Strile was the one who wrote that. In my own post, I made it pretty clear that Nica never even mentioned how long a ban lasts or if they’d be coming back down the line. Honestly, if she had answered the way Strile did, I doubt we'd be seeing half these open threads about it.
vividtiger922 said:I would, perhaps, like to have a little conversation about... well, just about everything...
Let’s kick things off with the Whereabout case. For those who haven't been following along, here is the situation... Reddit
Reddit
Reddit
Since that user already laid out her entire situation in such exhaustive detail—complete with an endless mountain of links and quotes—I don’t see much point in me trying to recap it all for you; just read the thread yourself... If you want my take, though, the whole thing feels like a classic case of "Why ask why? You already know why." Basically, she was penalized for breaking a rule that doesn't even exist, and when she calmly and logically filed an appeal through the proper channels, she was met with threats of a partial ban if she dared to speak up again. But honestly, that isn't even the worst part. The moderator's explanation was nothing short of grotesque, claiming they simply decided it would be "better" if she remained banned. Which really makes me wonder—who is this actually benefiting? Is it for the site, the community, for her, or perhaps just to protect the administration...
I find myself asking, what exactly am I to this community? Because, quite frankly, I cannot fathom a single logical reason why a constructive contributor—someone who has spent their time here volunteering and offering genuine, thoughtful critiques and suggestions—would be banned for no other reason than six months... For whose benefit is this decision actually being made? And what, precisely, is meant by the claim that this platform serves an "educational" purpose...
It’s a similar trajectory to what happened with Schmokljan, a user who was permanently banned from the forum and whose contributions were dismissed as mere garbage... He was once a moderator and the architect of several fascinating threads—sometimes provocative, occasionally incomprehensible, but always ingenious and genuinely authentic. His permanent ban finally came when he requested a partial removal of some Psychology content, during which he posed a question to the administration in his signature style. It might have been unpleasant, perhaps even rude, but it certainly didn't warrant anything more than a standard warning for trolling or insults...
It’s much like the whole Lord Byron situation—that one particular user whose ban was extended by ten days over these wild accusations of cloning accounts and posting on Unknown... all that esoteric speculation that never actually held up under scrutiny, only to be revealed later as nothing more than a complete fabrication...
I actually ended up serving a two-and-a-half-month suspension for supposedly "inciting conflict and leaking moderator information," all because I dared to recount the actual events from a certain corner of the internet regarding how decisions are made on this forum, our current priorities, and the administration's overall strategy...
There could easily be several more instances of indefinite bans, threats of partial restrictions, and the actual enforcement of those very same threats, but I won't dwell on them...
I have a question for the administration: what exactly are your priorities here? It seems to me that you’re quick to ban long-standing community members for no apparent reason, often without any clear timeline, and if this isn't meant to be an educational measure, then what is the actual purpose... It’s baffling how offenses like hate speech, justifying violence, insults, or doxxing—things that truly poison the platform and its integrity—only result in a few days' suspension or a minor point deduction. Meanwhile, we see draconian punishments handed out for things that barely touch upon the quality of the content itself, where the common denominator is simply a disagreement with management. To be honest, the whole thing feels a bit like Huxley’s *Brave New World*... It appears as though you care far more about maintaining a rigid hierarchy and preserving order—ensuring everyone knows who is Alpha, who is Beta, and who is Delta—than you do about the actual substance of our discussions or the creators who provide them. I struggle to find any other explanation for why you would indefinitely sideline veteran users who, despite their flaws, are the ones actually building and sustaining the content of this site...
From what I can gather from the threads, it’s not even a six-month ban (which would be bad, but manageable), it’s a permanent one. So saying it’s "exactly" six months isn't right—it's way worse than that. I don't recall Nica ever saying anything like "check back in three months"; everywhere she posts, it just says "account banned."
I just noticed it happening with pet photos too. I totally blanked on the whole "images aren't loading" thing and was just scrolling along casually, then five minutes later it hits me—wait, why is there zero sign of any links here?
Brenda Hayes16 said:My bad, I definitely misread that.
So, if that's how it works, there'll be plenty of actual criticism for every single candidate, and then the admins just get to play judge and decide whose feedback counts as objective and whose doesn't. In my opinion, that means the "voice of the people" isn't really being heard at all.
though honestly, it’d probably be more than we have now. if they actually (publicly) respected the opinion of just one single user, that would be a literal 100% increase in respected user opinions compared to right now.
Brenda Hayes16 said:That’s not really an "idea." You can vent about the moderators every single day, but they only actually get replaced if they lose touch with reality or decide to quit on their own. The chances of users being able to vote a moderator out just two days after the admin council picked them? About as likely as the sun not coming up tomorrow.
You totally missed the point here. The admins pick a candidate—then the users weigh in with their comments—and then the administration finally decides whether to actually promote them to mod or pass.
Timothy Davis59 said:The idea of letting users vote on moderator selections just isn't feasible on this forum. It’s a weak concept, and I sincerely hope you don't move forward with it. The only real input users should have is the ability to comment on a dedicated thread once the administration selects a potential candidate. Let that thread stay open for a few days before the official appointment; if people drop some heavy, legitimate criticism that makes the candidate look totally unqualified, then fine... the administration could take those serious concerns into account before making a final decision 🤷
Now that sounds like the best idea yet. 🙂 I'm with you on that..
Mobile browsing is driving me nuts lately. I don't have Reddit on my phone—just because I don't want it, honestly—but I've been dealing with this annoying bug for months now. The quick reply button just won't show up. Every single time, I have to hunt down the "post reply" button, which makes scrolling through threads on my phone feel like a chore. It really kills the flow.
Look, if you want to complain, you can just flag their post and list "illegal signature" as the reason. Or, you could just shoot a DM to a mod or an admin, or even bring it up on the Federal Reserve thread in the admin questions section. You could even just start your own separate thread over on the Federal Reserve board, kind of like this one 😁 . (The mods will be the ones to tell you if it actually breaks any rules 🙂)
Maybe just shoot them an email and ask? Honestly, tracking down old issues from back in 2010 sounds like a headache. They switched publishers around then and the editors changed too, so who knows if the old house even exists anymore or if they just went bust. 🤔 That was right around when "Stylist" magazine first launched.
Usually, you buy these things in bulk—like a 12-issue subscription pack through the publisher. 🙂 I’m telling you, just email Cosmo and see what happens. I actually reached out to them once about some "Cosmo Index" stuff they were handing out around town; I couldn't find my copy anywhere, and they just mailed me a fresh one with zero hassle. They're cool like that, so don't sweat it. 🙂
People have been asking for more emojis for a while now, but apparently, they're saying it’s just not technically doable right now 🤷. On top of that, I really didn't see them cutting features like this coming—especially when it comes to losing images 😢
When I saw that notification, driftingbear29, my first thought was actually of you (even though I don't think we've ever really chatted). To me, you've always been the absolute definition of a "smiley face girl," so I honestly wondered how you'd manage without all those extras. Then I saw this thread 🤣
Yeah, I 🤷 did. I went through all those rules pinned at the top of the forum. Honestly, I got burned once on some other site, so ever since then, I make sure to read the fine print wherever I sign up. 😳 🙂
From what I gather, that wasn't her point. The posts would still be under the threads, they just wouldn't show up when you're browsing someone's profile.
Aha. Still feels a bit sketchy to me—totally "potato." People could still dig up what she wrote just by searching for a keyword (since if someone quotes her, her handle becomes a searchable term anyway).
