Posts by casualharbor9

I’m looking for a response from one of the supermoderators or admins here, because I’d like to follow up on my question within that specific thread. And I want to make sure I don't get shut out of providing further clarification here, too.

crimsonsailor7 said:Logical questions that don't strictly follow standard practice? omg, what are you even talking about?

If you want to report someone to the authorities, just head over to the Democratic Party office and file a report; they'll tell you exactly who to talk to and how to do it. Given that this post was clearly just a follow-up to a previous trolling thread and got nuked, this one got wiped too. Hiding trolling under the guise of logical questions that don't strictly follow standard practice is still just trolling, and frankly, it doesn't belong in this specific discussion.

First off, I’d love to hear from an actual "insider" here—Brian Edwards6—about what I should realistically expect from the Democratic Party. Why was this even deleted?
Why is asking about a police investigation regarding a report of illegal conduct within a thread about police investigations considered trolling or "off-topic"? Is this discussion strictly limited to instances where the police physically beat someone or pull them over on the street?

And if you genuinely don't understand my point, what kind of criteria are you actually using for moderation?

Therefore, after having my post scrubbed, I’m returning to the "Police Investigation" thread on the Law subforum to ask a perfectly valid question for the second time:

I don't understand why my question was deleted when it specifically concerns police conduct.*

To reiterate: which division within the Department of Justice is responsible for investigating illegal actions taken by negligent employees at government agencies (such as the Federal Reserve) that could potentially result in someone's death?

*Sure, there might have been a hint of trolling involved, but I still think the core question is legitimate.

- and then I get an "explanation" from the moderator crimsonsailor7:

You have received a warning at Reddit.

Reason:
-------
Violation of subforum rules.

- so now I’m wondering, which specific rule am I breaking by asking about police investigations in a thread dedicated to police investigations? Is it against the rules to pose logical questions that simply don't follow the established status quo?

So, what exactly is this thread about? Are we dissecting Brian Edwards6’s role as a moderator, or are we actually looking at him as an individual and his specific actions?

Nicholas King said:Honestly, this is perfectly fine.

and that's how arguments start

This point is rather pointless—why do you assume (and it seems quite obvious that you do) that an argument is the only way to express that something is bothering you?

I want to change it—my reaction to certain situations, even if they are just those small daily squabbles with my parents, brother, or sister—but somehow it feels impossible. 🙂

As long as you believe it is impossible, it will remain impossible. As long as you continue to justify your own selfish rudeness—and let's be clear, "saying whatever comes to mind" in the heat of the moment is both selfish and rude—by hiding behind some supposed "vigilante nature" that simply cannot tolerate being annoyed, nothing will change.

Otherwise, of course, it isn't impossible.

How many times have you actually apologized to the people you "said everything" to? How many times have you told them to stop you the next time you start acting like that? How many times have you genuinely attempted to have a dialogue with people when your opinions differ? Communication is a skill—one we aren't born with—and it certainly requires practice and learning.

BTW, it isn't illogical for someone with such tragic literacy levels to struggle with communication. It isn't illogical for someone with such poor command of language to "solve" their conversational issues by just lashing out—essentially replacing coherent, well-articulated arguments with a barrage of insults.

I honestly don't think literacy has anything to do with eloquence. I know plenty of people who can express themselves thoroughly, extensively, and clearly without following a single rule of grammar.
For what it's worth, I write everything in lowercase too, so (hopefully) I’m making myself clear enough...

Self-control is vital when you're communicating—and let's be real, a lot of it depends on the other person; some people make it easy to pick a fight, while others make it nearly impossible... so how do you actually maintain self-control? There must be some techniques out there (Zen, Bushido, counting to a hundred, digging a ditch... 🤷)

hook 22

... me too

Look, my sense of smell is basically non-existent at this point, but I’m still pretty much blind and deaf too—not to mention struggling with these arthritic cramps... and honestly, my libido isn't what it used to be either.

But you should probably ask Daredevil about that...

Keith Gonzalez said:Out of everything you just quoted, my only oversight was one. Just one. I don't care what other mods choose to do or not do on their own dashboard. Also, I have no idea how you managed to quote deleted posts. It’s obvious you have a vendetta against this specific individual, and it's up to you people to settle that among yourselves.

I don't have a vendetta against them; they have a vendetta against the entire world, and they aren't the only ones on this sub-board... You mentioned earlier that people like that are allowed to express their opinions because they contribute to the topic, but from where I'm sitting, that’s all just total bullshit—from the way those "opinions" are voiced to the blatant double standards used to protect them...
And the posts I quoted were visible at the time (I assume someone else noticed this thread too)... As for your suggestion that we "settle this among ourselves," how exactly am I supposed to do that? We can't do it here on the site, so what's the plan—sending obscene DMs, or meeting up in some dark alleyway?

But what I really want to know is how someone can label me—or anyone else who actually uses consistent logic—as mentally unstable (with clear intent to insult), and then somehow come out looking better when that person hits back with an equally reasoned response. Or do you honestly think it's normal for someone in an anonymous online space to react with furious personal attacks just because someone pointed out facts that prove them wrong? This specifically refers to my blunt response to the user named none (just look at all the posts you deleted from him directed at me, and tell me who actually has a vendetta against whom), though the pattern is visible elsewhere...
Actually, it doesn't even matter; I see the situation for what it is. I just wanted to call this out clearly in its own context, because if I had posted this in the Ban Appeals section, it would have been swept under the rug by an automated process without anyone bothering to look at the details.

I'm writing this because I genuinely want the communication on this sub-board to improve. It could be a great supplement or a counterweight to the natural science sections (in terms of debunking myths and taboos in both science and pseudoscience), but that won't happen as long as various psychotic outbursts from the edge of sanity are tolerated while the reactions to them are suppressed. Fine, maybe I'm partly to blame because I don't have the patience I used to to correct every single tiny error in this forest of nonsense—but for heaven's sake, I don't have moderator tools at my disposal. 🤷

...
The whole point of this sub is so people like henkak and none can actually speak their minds. Otherwise, if they went over to, say, Reddit, they’d get banned instantly—probably face-to-face with a permanent suspension. This has been common knowledge on the internet for ages.

Look, I agree that just spewing vitriol isn't acceptable. But if we strictly follow that rule, half this subreddit is gone. You don't even realize how much content gets nuked just because someone decides it's "too much."

And you honestly consider this expressing an opinion?

henkak said:there’s a ton of stupidity on this site, but this is the absolute PEAK HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
what kind of nonsense is this? 😂🤦
90 percent of these empty-headed idiots list what they call "criteria," but they fall apart the second anyone looks at them 🤣
the best ones are the ones rambling about grip strength—if I could see your powerful handshakes, man, hahaha, pure peak idiocy, just peak 😂

henkak said:what an idiot 😂

henkak said:aaaaaahahahahahahahahhahahahaha
this guy can't even string a coherent sentence together 😂🤣

henkak said:we should tax the morons who have over 20,000 posts across various message boards.
A guy with 27,000 posts is really out here calling someone a coward? That’s rich. Hahaha. 😂🤣

henkak said:So, I guess it’s time to head back over to the General Discussion boards or the Women's Corner to keep going with that same trash conversation you guys were already having there.

henkak said:Honestly, the religious crowd always gets on my nerves—whether they’re Christians or any other faith group—but let's be real: you're being a complete idiot here, too.

I don't know what to make of this one. Is there actually any substance here, or are we just shouting into the void again? It feels like we're circling the same drain without ever reaching a point. Does anyone else feel that sense of total futility when looking at these discussions lately? It’s almost impressive how little progress is made despite all the noise. Just curious if I'm the only one noticing the pattern. kaže:
Of course, it’s always easiest to just sit there and talk trash. Everywhere you look, you run into these idiots who will laugh in your face the second you actually try to step up or change something. They act like they’ve swallowed all the wisdom in the world when they're sitting safely behind their own four walls, but in reality? They're just pathetic, spineless losers. Their entire worldview is trapped inside that tiny little box they built for themselves. Honestly, how can we even expect to see any real progress when we're dealing with people like that? Not anytime soon, that's for sure.

I don't know what to make of this. Is there any actual substance here, or are we just shouting into the void again? It feels like we're circling the same drain without ever actually getting anywhere. Does anyone else feel that, or am I just overthinking the entire situation? The user says:
I’m honestly just spitting in the face of you, AstroBob, and every other self-proclaimed "scientist" on this site. Seriously, go find a life, you little parasites.

henkak said:🤣
I see your posts on this thread, and honestly, I can only assume you and everyone else here are cut from the same cloth. It’s just not worth my time to scroll through all of this. To be blunt? I think you’re just an insecure idiot. Anyway, take care.

... and so on...

The guy is truly an invaluable asset to the community, to the entire internet, and honestly, to the human race at large. He’s only ever opened one single thread... I won't bother quoting the other users with similar handles, but you get the idea.
What does this supposed "excessive behavior" actually look like when they start deleting posts and banning people? -Oh, I think I know; it's when casualharbor9 finally points out that someone clearly needs professional help...

This obsession with forced politeness toward people who claim to be "contributing to the discussion" while acting like total jerks is starting to feel like an insult to common sense... even here on this site...

Kimberly White63 said:And where did I say you were the only one at fault?

No, you didn't, but looking at the sequence of events, that’s exactly how it comes across...

It's just that most people on here send me immoral private messages because their posts got deleted, yet you're the one complaining about the general rules.😬

So, now is it clear who actually has some morals left? 😬

Keith Gonzalez said:
Besides the whole mental instability thing, the constant confusion, and their self-proclaimed status as "logical thinkers," what else is left?

Do you honestly believe that someone who responds to a simple presentation of facts with a furious, personal attack—simply because those facts prove they're wrong—is somehow exempt from having mental health issues?

So, let me get this straight. Is it actually a punishable offense to conclude a debate by pointing out that someone clearly hasn't a clue what's going on?

Is nerazuman actually a logician, or just someone playing dress-up as one? Ever since they started cloning themselves, post after post, they keep dropping these absolute gems that have nothing to do with the actual topic at hand. Is it logic, or just a complete lack of it?

Honestly, science hasn't exactly been a silver bullet for us. It feels like we’re just spinning our wheels. Until we actually nail the basics—like making sure everyone has reliable access to clean water and enough food on the table—can we even sit here and debate whether scientific progress is actually "improving" our lives? It seems a bit premature, doesn't it?
The wealth gap we’re seeing today is unprecedented. Honestly, it hasn't been this extreme even two millennia ago, yet here we are, still clinging to the idea that we live in some kind of progressive, humanitarian society. Is anyone actually buying that?

So, let me get this straight: we’re allowed to tear down reason, logic, and actual science without having to back any of it up, but the second someone tries to push back? That’s strictly off-limits?

Other people's business isn't your concern, sorry. And honestly, how many times do we have to say this? Just learn when to sit this one out and stop commenting on everything.

It definitely hits home for me. What's the point of being penalized if I’m just treating everyone with the same level of scrutiny that they apply to those who don't get flagged? It feels pretty one-sided.

And who exactly is supposed to hold their tongue? What does "everything" even mean in this context? An off-topic thread is perfectly fine, but apparently, casualharbor9’s comments on them aren't tolerated? Just so I know how to navigate things moving forward...

You aren't necessarily the first one to point this out. But surely you get that their body of work is necessary, especially since they represent the Alternative. In that sense, they’re actually right on-topic. And believe me, half the people on this forum don't even realize how much nonsense gets scrubbed from the boards.

Excuse me? So, someone like Henkak is suddenly the center of attention, and apparently, he needs an entire opus written just for him? Or is this just nerazuman trying to shove something down our throats that wouldn't even fly in a Religion or Philosophy seminar? He hasn't written a single meaningful word regarding the Nibir topic, yet here we are, watching him attempt to push an agenda that most people wouldn't dare touch in those academic circles.

If this is supposed to be an "alternative" viewpoint, then it isn't some psychiatric ward where patients lose their minds just because someone presents them with actual facts that don't align with their delusions.
If you’re actually serious about maintaining even a shred of tolerance, you have to prove that trashing everyone's views isn't okay—and I don't just mean the "alternative" ones.

Kimberly White63 said:Harame, please understand one thing: you frequently post responses that trigger chain reactions of posts which are mostly just bickering and are only marginally, if at all, related to the topic. That’s why, when a post (not just yours) starts smelling like that kind of escalation, we delete it.

Regarding bans: I tend to overlook minor violations of the site rules, but when a user keeps doing the same thing after multiple warnings, I'm going to hand out a ban. It might look like an overkill violation if you look at that single post in isolation, but I am looking at the entire body of work.

This is a general policy, not just a response to your specific complaint above.

So, Harame is the one responsible for these chain reactions of out-of-this-world bickering?

And users like Tomatix, Henkak, Unreasonable, and Kerefek... they’re all just having perfectly normal, on-topic discussions? (Just take a look at the track record of those names)

Because from what I can see, moderation usually seems to start—and most often ends—with Harame.

Keith Gonzalez said:Nothing unusual there. I delete low-effort posts all the time. Especially if they're off-topic or just cluttering things up.

... what I'm actually asking about is that specific Kerefek post—is it also considered low-effort or flagged for the same reasons?

I think you know exactly what you quoted.

Look, I know what I quoted, and I'm sure everyone else does too. But I’m not entirely sure which part you're claiming is an exaggeration, so I'd appreciate it if you could be specific about that...

Sure; and what exactly did I overstep on?

Just so I know for next time...

Keith Gonzalez said:Oh, thanks for the reminder. I guess I should go ahead and delete that post of yours too. 🥳 Seeing as the one you quoted has been wiped from existence as well.
And yeah—you got flagged because you crossed the line. And from here on out, that’s how it’s going to be. Every single time. For every user on this board, even if it means people start walking out the door.

So, let me get this straight—even the quoted post was nuked and deleted?

... alright, let's dive back into those bafflingly vague criteria they're using on this subforum:

So, I actually get banned for insulting people on the forum because of this:

Quote: Kerefek76 casualharbor9 said:casualharbor9

Insulting someone's religious beliefs and bringing their mother into the argument? That really tells us everything we need to know about who you are. Honestly, if I were you, I’d consider talking to a therapist—it’s not like there’s any stigma attached to seeking mental health support these days. It seems pretty obvious you're struggling with some serious ego issues and a distorted self-image. I have no idea what exactly you're trying to prove here, but you've clearly lost the plot.

And you see? It strikes me once again that you and the rest of these self-proclaimed "alternative" types are dealing with some serious psychological issues. I mean, really—how can you react with such raw emotion and zero context when someone simply presents the facts that prove you wrong?
I always kick things off with solid, scientific, and rational arguments. Then, halfway through, these self-proclaimed geniuses come flying in—completely oblivious to the flow of the discussion or the actual point I’m making—just to attack me for things I never even said.
You probably won't wrap your head around this one either...

Even my mother would feel sorry if she had a "logician" like him for a son. 😍 ...

Since we’re already circling the drain on this whole Nibiru topic, I have to say: I haven't received a single concrete counterargument from you yet. Not one. Every time you attempt to push back, it just turns into some sort of logical or semantic wordplay, or you retreat into vague appeals to "mainstream science" without ever providing an actual link to something tangible. Is there an actual point buried under all those semantics, or are we just dancing around the issue?

So, here we go again? To you, a "logical-semantic riddle" is just some pedantic exercise in defining terms that you claim are supposedly used in physics or astrophysics, while everything else you call an "argument" is nothing more than arbitrary nonsense?
And when I drop a link? Then I get hit with the critique that I’m "not saying anything smart or original, just linking stuff." Is that how this works now?

Another one. 😍+🤦 For you and that asylum for all kinds of madmen...

My question: Why exactly is my response considered an insult, while Kerefek's goes completely unpunished? It’s pretty fascinating to watch these kind of chameleon-like shifts during an argument. You see someone flip-flop on their entire stance just to stay relevant. And let's be honest, we aren't just talking about me here—if you look at his recent deleted posts, it’s clear he has a habit of reacting to basic facts or logical questions with nothing but pure, unbridled rage. It's become quite a predictable pattern. So, why exactly does my response, phrased in the exact same way, suddenly become an insult? Wait, am I missing something? Is there seriously no red card for that post?

And before anyone starts handing out red cards or issuing bans based on their personal interpretation of my character and my work, I’d actually like us to take a moment to dive a bit deeper into how this whole "debate" is actually unfolding.

Keith Gonzalez said:My bad—I accidentally left this post marked while I was deleting something else. Anyway, it’s back. 😍

Fair enough.

... so, why were my last few posts in the thread about the Giza pyramids just wiped away? Was I insulting someone, or did I just drift too far off-topic?

Kimberly White63 said:Harame, look, I’m sorry, but like my colleague mentioned, we aren't glued to this forum 24/7. I don't usually hand out warnings for posts like these—I typically just wipe them from existence the moment I spot them—but sometimes they slip past me. So, if anyone thinks a post is problematic, please just hit the report button.

... oh, please. 😵

You don't need to apologize—not when you're the one letting everyone slide, often way more than they deserve 😁... but honestly, I'm a little intrigued. Who saw my reply to tomatix but missed his actual post? It’s not an issue if I’m allowed to respond in kind... it just feels stupid and pointless to be left looking like a fool in mid-air. I'd rather go "debate" at a local pub if that's how this works... 🙂

Keith Gonzalez said:...
And regarding the off-topic stuff and insults—everyone is playing it so sanitized, and there's really no point in me nuking everything right out of the gate. I’d end up deleting half the PDF!😲

... so what then? Either we all wear gloves, or nobody does...

Also, if someone writes that "there are Judeo-Masons responsible for this whole NWO," I can't penalize that as antisemitism. Good grief.

... no, just leave enough room for a fair response that highlights the sheer stupidity of that entire concept...