Posts by silentridge3

Sean Cook2 said:Well, for what it's worth, I've been labeled that way myself—though I haven't the slightest clue which of my six posts on this thread were supposedly "objectively unacceptable" enough to earn the feminist label, unless apparently failing to mention violence against men every single time I bring up violence against women counts as a crime.

No, I wouldn't say that. On this specific topic, you just laid out a textbook feminist state strategy idea:

Sean Cook2 said:Well, for what it's worth, I've been labeled that way myself—though I haven't the slightest clue which of my six posts on this thread were supposedly "objectively unacceptable" enough to earn the feminist label, unless apparently failing to mention violence against men every single time I bring up violence against women counts as a crime.

The fact that 75% of violence is committed by men and 25% by women doesn't, by any decent moral standard, justify the notion that we should focus exclusively on that 75% while maintaining a total omertà regarding the other 25%. And, unfortunately, that’s pretty much how things play out.

If the very name "Office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission" includes the phrase "gender equality," then that body created by The State should probably actually work toward gender equality. Your suggestion—that this agency should focus solely on the interests of women (which, sadly, is what it does)—is just wrong, and it's a classic feminist state strategy. It basically denies crimes committed "on your own team," leaving an entire group (separated by gender) without any actual protection under the umbrella of equality. The fallout? We end up with 95% of child custody cases going to mothers during divorces and an endless media crusade that stigmatizes men as inherently criminal.

Contrary to your rather shameful view that "as long as the scale is tipped, we should support the weaker side," basic morality dictates that all victims and all crimes should be treated equally, regardless of gender. It’s similar to how in certain parts of the US, we might obsessively investigate and report on crimes committed by Americans against Mexicans, even if there were incomparably more crimes committed by Mexicans against Americans. Promoting omertà regarding your own side's crimes is just fundamentally immoral behavior.

hiddeneagle3 said:silentridge3, I guess your arguments about why something is "feminism" don't really mean much to me until people actually accept that term as a legitimate social science concept and define what it actually entails. Until then, it just feels like a cheap insult. In the context of a debate, using it is basically an application of Goodwin's Law. People throw that word around just to discredit whoever they're talking to and shut down the conversation, regardless of how valid the actual points are. Even some of the folks on this forum seem aware of that, since they write "fem(in)ism" as if there's even a difference. Honestly, it's kind of embarrassing to see people trying to justify that kind of rhetoric. Besides, you can argue against patriarchal discrimination against men in family law without needing to resort to those labels.

Nico, I'm actually glad the thread about the Politics section was closed. Hopefully, it stayed shut before the whole "fem(in)ism" thing turned into some huge trend.

So, what kind of phrase are you actually suggesting...

...to describe the systematic, wide-reaching efforts by certain groups of women aimed specifically at belittling and publicly stigmatizing men, essentially trying to force them into an unequal, subordinate position?

...a system where the strategies, regulations, laws, and even judicial precedents are baked with chauvinistic provisions that put one gender—men—at a distinct disadvantage?

If you’re going to use some euphemism like "flowers" to describe this ideological and active agenda, maybe explain yourself and tell us why you'd choose that. If you can't justify calling such behavior "flowers," then perhaps you should explain why "feminism" isn't the appropriate term here.

I should probably point out that we're talking about actions that are unconstitutional, because they consciously and institutionally work to place an entire gender in an inferior position. In America, discrimination based on sex is just as illegal as discrimination based on race, religion, or sexual orientation, after all.

hiddeneagle3 said:This kind of reminds me of that old joke about the good and bad Native American.

Your post just reinforces my feeling that "femnacism" is really just a hate term used to provoke and justify hostility during a debate. It feels like the most basic ad hominem attack. Especially since people seem to ignore standard definitions of feminism, choosing instead to interpret everything solely through their own lens regarding men being marginalized in modern society, which seems pretty arbitrary to me. It makes real discussion almost impossible because the terms aren't even clear, and then anything someone says can just be dismissed as "femnacism" if it doesn't fit the argument.

The reason I even jumped into this conversation wasn't to debate social movements on a government agency forum, but rather to point out how certain terms slip past the moderators. It's basically a conversation killer and an insult to an entire social group (even if they are radical feminists). I honestly wonder how your quoted post would have been treated if you were talking about Jews or Black Americans.

I mean, I feel like you’ve got it completely backwards, honestly; if anything, the reality of the situation is the exact opposite of what you're claiming.

When...

I was reading the news earlier, and I can’t help but feel a bit weary about how this all plays out, but apparently, Judge Kršul went on the record with the press, claiming that women just make better colleagues in a professional setting. And then, as if that wasn't enough to set the tone, the director of a hospital over in Indianapolis told reporters she prefers hiring women for her staff—which, if you ask me, probably means she actually does it, which feels like a pretty blatant way to discriminate against men, I guess. It’s just one of those things where you see these public statements being made and you wonder where the line is drawn, maybe, between preference and outright bias, though it seems the trend is moving toward making things quite complicated for everyone else.

I mean, I guess there isn't really a better way to describe that kind of blatant segregation than just calling it feminism. It’s honestly pretty wild when you think about it, because those kinds of statements feel just as loaded as saying, "I'd rather hire white people over Black people," or claiming that Americans are somehow better employees than members of the minority communities here. It all feels like the same old pattern, really.

When...

So, this judge basically just went on record admitting that she bypassed the actual law to decide on child custody and a restraining order against the father in what—what, five minutes? And the kicker is that absolutely nothing happens to her afterward, which makes me think we’re looking at a truly broken, feminist state strategy in action. I mean, I don't think the issue is just about one individual person being reckless, though maybe it is, but more likely it’s the entire system itself; it's built in a way that actually allows this kind of thing to happen without any real accountability, and honestly, that’s when you know the whole setup is rigged.

And that’s how the whole system actually looks, I guess... if you want to get into the weeds of it.

Back in 2011, they were actually listed among the partners... I think it was around that time, maybe? It’s hard to pin down exactly, but if I recall correctly, they had already established themselves as part of the partnership group back then. I was looking at some of those old crime statistics recently—you know, the kind of data that just makes you sit back and sigh—and I noticed this weirdly specific breakdown where men were responsible for about 19 major offenses while women accounted for around 14. It’s one of those things that feels like it should mean something profound, I guess, but then you start digging into the context and everything gets so murky and complicated. Maybe it’s just a statistical hiccup, or maybe there’s some deeper sociological shift happening under the surface that we aren't quite catching yet, though I honestly doubt there's a simple answer to any of this. It’s just one of those heavy, lingering thoughts that stays with you, I suppose..

So, I was sitting around thinking about this whole feminist state strategy thing—you know, that so-called "national policy for gender equality" they keep pushing on us—and it just feels like one of those things that's being forced down our throats without much thought, I guess. It’s hard to tell where the actual necessity ends and the bureaucratic overreach begins, maybe, because everything seems to be moving toward this centralized, top-down approach lately. It's all very much part of this broader push by the government agencies to micromanage how we interact, and honestly, it just feels exhausting to watch the way they try to engineer social outcomes through sheer policy force. I don't know, it just feels like we're heading toward a reality where every single aspect of life is filtered through these massive, sweeping mandates, and I can't help but wonder if we're losing something vital in the process of trying to legislate equality into existence.

1) I suppose we should probably talk about the whole push for promoting women's rights, though I’m never quite sure if we're actually moving toward anything meaningful or just spinning our wheels in a very loud, very public way. It feels like one of those things where everyone agrees on the basic idea—because, honestly, who wouldn't?—but then you look at how the actual state strategy unfolds, and it all gets so incredibly complicated and messy. Maybe it's just me being cynical, but I often wonder if these massive pushes for a national policy for gender equality end up becoming more about bureaucracy than actual, tangible change for people on the ground. You see these big announcements from the government agencies, and they sound wonderful on paper, almost too perfect, but then you have to deal with the reality of how things actually function in cities like Indianapolis or anywhere else in the country. I guess it’s just that constant tension between the lofty ideals we all claim to hold and the slow, grinding gears of the system that seems to struggle with any real progress. It's a lot to wrap one's head around, really. And then there's that whole thing about gender equality, too... I guess you could say it's just one more layer in this massive, complicated mess we're all navigating, though I'm never quite sure if anyone actually knows what they're aiming for anymore. It feels like every time you turn around, there’s some new push for a national policy for gender equality or some other sweeping mandate, and honestly, it just makes me wonder if we're all just spinning our wheels in the sand while trying to balance everything. Maybe it's necessary, maybe it isn't, but it certainly adds another heavy weight to an already exhausting conversation.
2) Creating equal opportunities within the labor market
So, I was thinking about this whole push to improve how we handle gender-sensitive upbringing and education within our schools, and honestly, it’s one of those things that feels like it could go a dozen different ways depending on who you ask. I guess if the government agencies actually get their act together, maybe there's a way to refine the state strategy to make sure kids aren't being boxed into these rigid, outdated roles from the moment they walk into a classroom, though I suspect the bureaucracy will just find a way to overcomplicate it. It’s a massive undertaking, really, trying to weave this kind of nuance into the entire educational framework without it becoming some sort of performative lecture, if you know what I mean? I don't know, maybe it's possible to strike a balance where we're promoting equality through the national policy for gender equality without making everything feel forced or artificial, but then again, history suggests that whenever the State gets involved in "improving" social dynamics, things tend to get messy and bogged down in red tape. It's a complicated mess, I suppose.
I guess we’re back to talking about the whole balancing act regarding men and women in political and public decision-making processes again. It’s one of those things that feels like it’s constantly being debated in Washington, isn't it? You have this whole push for a national policy for gender equality, which I suppose is meant to ensure that everyone has a seat at the table, though whether that actually leads to better outcomes or just more bureaucracy is something I can't quite wrap my head around. Maybe it’s necessary, maybe it’s just another layer of oversight from some government agency, but there's definitely an ongoing effort to make sure representation isn't just lopsided in our leadership roles. It’s a complicated mess, honestly.
5) I suppose we could all sit around and dream about a world where we finally manage to strip away every single form of violence, though I don't know if that’s even a realistic goal for us as a species, maybe. It feels like such an overwhelming, massive undertaking—just completely eliminating all kinds of aggression and force from our society—but then again, I guess you have to wonder if humanity is even capable of that kind of restraint. It’s a heavy thought, really, just imagining a life without any of that friction, but I suppose it's worth pondering, even if it feels a bit like chasing a ghost. I guess I’ve been sitting here thinking about the whole thing—the way everything seems to be shifting lately regarding women and how society is trying to reshape things—and it just feels like we're caught in this endless, swirling cycle of constant adjustment. It’s hard to pin down exactly where the needle is moving, but you can feel the tension, I suppose, especially when you look at how various government agencies are pushing these massive shifts in social dynamics. Everything feels so heavy and complicated, almost like we're constantly being told that the old ways were fundamentally broken, which might be true in some sense, but then you look at the sheer scale of the new initiatives being rolled out by the state, and it just feels... overwhelming, if that makes any sense. I don't know, maybe I'm just being cynical, but there's this sense that we're perpetually in the middle of a massive, unceasing reorganization of how men and women interact in public life, and it leaves me feeling a bit weary, honestly. It’s like we’re all just drifting through these sweeping changes, trying to figure out what the new rules are while the goalposts seem to move every single week.
I suppose we should probably talk about how we might push for more international cooperation and a real commitment to gender equality outside our own borders here in the States, though I honestly don't know if anyone is actually listening anymore. It feels like one of those things that sounds great on paper—you know, all that lofty talk about global partnerships and making sure everyone gets a fair shake regardless of gender—but when you look at how messy things are globally, it just seems like such an uphill battle, maybe even a bit futile if you ask me. We could try to influence how other countries handle their social policies, perhaps by pushing for a more cohesive international approach to women's rights, but then again, trying to get the whole world on the same page regarding a national policy for gender equality is like trying to herd cats in a thunderstorm. It’s a massive undertaking, I guess, and quite frankly, I’m not sure if the current state strategy of most major powers is even headed in that direction, let alone capable of fostering true global equity.
7) Strengthening our institutional frameworks and how we actually get things done.

What is it we actually want? I mean, really think about it for a second. It feels like we’re all just drifting through these endless cycles, chasing after things that probably don't even matter in the grand scheme of things, though I suppose that's a bit cynical of me to say, isn't it? Maybe we're all just looking for some kind of stability or maybe just a sense of purpose that doesn't feel so manufactured by the constant noise of everything around us. It's hard to pin down, I guess. We spend so much time debating what should be done or how things ought to work, yet when you sit back and actually look at the core of it, the fundamental desire remains this vague, shifting target that seems to move every time we get close to grasping it. It's a bit exhausting, honestly, trying to figure out the collective aim when everyone seems to be pulling in a slightly different direction.

I mean, I guess we should probably just decide if point five needs to be wiped out entirely or if we’re looking at a total overhaul... maybe? It feels like one of those situations where you're stuck between deleting it or just rewriting the whole thing from scratch, though I'm honestly not sure which path leads to less of a headache in the long run.
I guess we’re finally at the point where this whole massive scandal regarding the state strategy has to be dragged out into the light, because honestly, seeing that chauvinistic fifth point they've cooked up... it's just exhausting. Maybe it's too much to hope for transparency, but it feels like everything is being swept under the rug lately, and I can't help but feel a bit weary watching how these things play out.
I mean, if they’re actually going to move forward with this, I guess they should probably just come clean and publicly announce who the actual authors of that whole strategy are, you know? It feels like there's a lot being hidden behind the scenes, and honestly, it would be better if we just knew whose names were actually on those documents instead of all this vague maneuvering. Maybe it's too much to ask for transparency, but it seems like a pretty reasonable thing to demand at this point.
I mean, honestly, maybe it’s time we just cleared out all those so-called "gender equality offices" and the entire Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, because, let’s be real, they haven't actually done anything. It feels like they just sit there, and I guess when you look at the track record—not just in this instance, but in so many other cases where the rights of one gender, specifically men, were being stepped on—they just stay completely silent. It's almost like they aren't even looking, if that makes any sense.

Otherwise, it’s pretty obvious that we’re looking at a broken system here, rather than just a few bad actors, I guess. The term "feminacism" actually feels somewhat appropriate in this context, since the way the system is set up leads to people being unfairly discriminated against—in this specific case, based on gender. It’s all laid out right there, plain as day, in a document that is officially labeled as the state strategy. It feels like there’s this underlying implication everywhere you look lately, almost as if it’s been written into the social contract that men are exclusively the villains and women are nothing more than perpetual victims, which I guess is just how things are being framed now. It’s all very black and white, isn't it? One side gets the hammer and the other gets the shield, and honestly, it just seems like such a wearying way to view the whole human experience, though maybe that's just my cynical take on the current state of things.And that’s just a flat-out lie, if you ask me.

hiddeneagle3 said:It's especially frustrating because people use that slur to basically shut down anyone with a different opinion—like, nothing a "femnacist" says matters because they're just dismissed by the label. Then, the whole thread just turns into a venting session about women, emancipation in general, or just complaining about how hard life is for men these days... mostly because of these "femnacists." I guess when someone tries to join a debate like that, they just end up triggering another cycle of insults and self-pity instead of an actual discussion (rip).

It feels a little absurd that potentially interesting conversations are getting killed off by people rushing to apply Godwin's law.

You’re spreading the lie that these radicals should be called feminists.

When you look at the struggle for actual systemic and constitutional equality for men (for instance, during divorce proceedings, or under the state strategy, or when dealing with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and things like that), it wouldn't make sense to label the deviant behavior of certain women or a deviant system as feminism, since that isn't what feminism is. So, maybe it’s helpful to have a specific term that refers exclusively to that deviant behavior and that deviant system. That term is feminacism, which is a distinct concept from feminism.

Sean Cook2 said:Lately, I’ve noticed that women participating in discussions about feminism or violence against women—even when they aren't saying anything objectively offensive—are being labeled "feminacists" without any real consequence.

Based on what I’ve seen here, it seems like this kind of insulting language is being tolerated—which is interesting, to say the least. I’d actually appreciate an explicit stance from the administration on this matter. At what point does calling someone a "feminacist" become a violation of the rules on this forum?

The feminist state strategy—well, it’s certainly something. It’s nothing more than a slur—plain and simple. Allowing the use of such pejoratives is a mistake. The current feminist state strategy—if you can even call it that—is becoming quite a spectacle. It’s essentially the same as permitting the use of certain terms—though one could argue the distinction is thin at best. A total chauvinistic pig. And even the sheer weight of the words themselves matters—if you catch my drift. Absolute pig. Less impactful than the words themselves—if that makes any sense. racist.

Is it actually permissible to call someone a male chauvinist pig? Or—at the very least—just a male chauvinist.

Personally, I’m curious about where they get off calling "women who don't express any objectively unacceptable views" feminacists.

To me, the term "feminacist" should only apply to public figures—or anyone else, really—who openly display chauvinism toward men and act through media or systemic channels to promote gender discrimination against males.

There are plenty of examples out there, and I think some of the forum members have described them quite calmly and accurately. I mean, I’ve probably pointed out at least ten different instances myself.

There was this incredibly heavy discussion going on about political violence, institutional misconduct, and systemic gender discrimination here in America.

The actual truth being brought to light was pretty intense, honestly, and it didn't really sit well with a certain group of radical feminists. It felt like those folks were just constantly trying to shut down any kind of constructive dialogue by throwing out complete nonsense. They were trolling, they were insulting people, and all sorts of things like that...

And the moderators? They didn't really step up, I guess. It seemed like they just let those activists get their way—which was basically ensuring the whole conversation got completely derailed. In the end, instead of actually penalizing the people who were breaking the rules, the mods just locked the entire thread down.

I mean, did I totally misread the whole situation?

I can't help but wonder why such an important and genuinely engaging topic was just shut down instead of the moderators actually doing their jobs—you know, by penalizing the people breaking the rules and scrubbing the offensive posts from the board. It feels like the thread wasn't closed because of the trolls, but rather because of all of us who were actually invested in the discussion.

I really hope I haven't offended anyone by bringing this up.

fadedsailor932 said:So... I just scrolled through the last ten pages of the TV Guide PDF, and honestly? Not a single "educational" thread was shut down. I’ve been a mod on this board for eight years, and I can tell you straight—we don't close threads just because we're being "old school" or strict with the rules. You can't pin this on the mods when we aren't even doing it. Your thread got nuked because of that troll post you made whining about how nobody replied to you in two days and how it had the "lowest engagement in history." Let's be real: your ego just took a hit because people weren't feeding your thread, and that’s on you, not the moderators.

If this were actually about the topic in the first post, the whole thread probably would've been nuked before anyone could even reply.

You said it all.

Honestly, I feel like this is just another move to shut me up—you know, by cluttering things with PDFs for series promos, random TV ads, and teen chat. Can you even imagine what happens if people actually start posting different topics and new crowds show up on this subforum?

🙄

Exactly. We mods are just sellouts for the networks, getting paid based on how much they push their shows on Reddit.

Nobody’s stopping you from starting a thread on the TV Guide, and nobody’s trying to shut you down for some "holy crusade" to enlighten the masses. But look, if you're gonna do it, don't come crying—or trolling, honestly—about how bad luck you had when you realized only a handful of people are actually clicking on your posts.
Look, Reddit isn't some private club for people who think exactly like you. If you haven't realized that yet, being condescending and talking down to everyone is just going to backfire. PBS basically just tracks what major networks are airing, which is mostly just "mass appeal entertainment." People either liked it or they didn't. What are we supposed to do now—delete every thread about every series and ban anyone under 18 or anyone without a college degree? The shows mentioned on the TV Guide make up the bulk of what’s actually playing on American networks. It's not our fault these shows get more views—and therefore more discussion here—than whatever niche stuff you're obsessed with. And honestly, it's not on us if your personal standards don't line up with what most people on here actually care about.
Honestly, maybe this whole "interest" in your topic just proves the users aren't the issue here. Have you stopped to wonder if the problem actually lies somewhere else?

...and honestly... if ambermason16 hadn't deleted this, I probably would've nuked the whole thread myself...

It isn't my ego that's bruised, I guess... I'm just genuinely saddened by the kind of crowd you've let this sub-forum devolve into. It seems pretty clear that, say, people hanging out over in the "Science" sub-forum don't bother wandering over to the "Television" section, even though they probably watch TV quite a bit.

fadedsailor932 said:So... I just scrolled through the last ten pages of the TV Guide PDF, and honestly? Not a single "educational" thread was shut down. I’ve been a mod on this board for eight years, and I can tell you straight—we don't close threads just because we're being "old school" or strict with the rules. You can't pin this on the mods when we aren't even doing it. Your thread got nuked because of that troll post you made whining about how nobody replied to you in two days and how it had the "lowest engagement in history." Let's be real: your ego just took a hit because people weren't feeding your thread, and that’s on you, not the moderators.

If this were actually about the topic in the first post, the whole thread probably would've been nuked before anyone could even reply.

You said it all.

Honestly, I feel like this is just another move to shut me up—you know, by cluttering things with PDFs for series promos, random TV ads, and teen chat. Can you even imagine what happens if people actually start posting different topics and new crowds show up on this subforum?

🙄

Exactly. We mods are just sellouts for the networks, getting paid based on how much they push their shows on Reddit.

Nobody’s stopping you from starting a thread on the TV Guide, and nobody’s trying to shut you down for some "holy crusade" to enlighten the masses. But look, if you're gonna do it, don't come crying—or trolling, honestly—about how bad luck you had when you realized only a handful of people are actually clicking on your posts.
Look, Reddit isn't some private club for people who think exactly like you. If you haven't realized that yet, being condescending and talking down to everyone is just going to backfire. PBS basically just tracks what major networks are airing, which is mostly just "mass appeal entertainment." People either liked it or they didn't. What are we supposed to do now—delete every thread about every series and ban anyone under 18 or anyone without a college degree? The shows mentioned on the TV Guide make up the bulk of what’s actually playing on American networks. It's not our fault these shows get more views—and therefore more discussion here—than whatever niche stuff you're obsessed with. And honestly, it's not on us if your personal standards don't line up with what most people on here actually care about.
Honestly, maybe this whole "interest" in your topic just proves the users aren't the issue here. Have you stopped to wonder if the problem actually lies somewhere else?

...and honestly... if ambermason16 hadn't deleted this, I probably would've nuked the whole thread myself...

Television offers so much more than what you've reduced this entire sub-forum to. Just check the TV Guide. PBS airs about 60% of its own original programming, covering all sorts of genres. Just because channels like Dom or FOX mostly broadcast series and commercials doesn't mean that's all there is to it.

fadedsailor932 said:So... I just scrolled through the last ten pages of the TV Guide PDF, and honestly? Not a single "educational" thread was shut down. I’ve been a mod on this board for eight years, and I can tell you straight—we don't close threads just because we're being "old school" or strict with the rules. You can't pin this on the mods when we aren't even doing it. Your thread got nuked because of that troll post you made whining about how nobody replied to you in two days and how it had the "lowest engagement in history." Let's be real: your ego just took a hit because people weren't feeding your thread, and that’s on you, not the moderators.

If this were actually about the topic in the first post, the whole thread probably would've been nuked before anyone could even reply.

You said it all.

Honestly, I feel like this is just another move to shut me up—you know, by cluttering things with PDFs for series promos, random TV ads, and teen chat. Can you even imagine what happens if people actually start posting different topics and new crowds show up on this subforum?

🙄

Exactly. We mods are just sellouts for the networks, getting paid based on how much they push their shows on Reddit.

Nobody’s stopping you from starting a thread on the TV Guide, and nobody’s trying to shut you down for some "holy crusade" to enlighten the masses. But look, if you're gonna do it, don't come crying—or trolling, honestly—about how bad luck you had when you realized only a handful of people are actually clicking on your posts.
Look, Reddit isn't some private club for people who think exactly like you. If you haven't realized that yet, being condescending and talking down to everyone is just going to backfire. PBS basically just tracks what major networks are airing, which is mostly just "mass appeal entertainment." People either liked it or they didn't. What are we supposed to do now—delete every thread about every series and ban anyone under 18 or anyone without a college degree? The shows mentioned on the TV Guide make up the bulk of what’s actually playing on American networks. It's not our fault these shows get more views—and therefore more discussion here—than whatever niche stuff you're obsessed with. And honestly, it's not on us if your personal standards don't line up with what most people on here actually care about.
Honestly, maybe this whole "interest" in your topic just proves the users aren't the issue here. Have you stopped to wonder if the problem actually lies somewhere else?

...and honestly... if ambermason16 hadn't deleted this, I probably would've nuked the whole thread myself...

No. I mean, if you moderators insist on constantly opening threads for specific TV shows while simultaneously praising the private networks that air them , then surely you could open a few threads for other types of programming too. You know, things like science, educational content, religious programs, sports, news, stuff like that. That way, your attempt to wash your hands of all those TV series commercials would actually look somewhat convincing.

If you aren't even the ones opening these threads, and it's just some random passerby (which is me, I suppose), then there really shouldn't be a reason to delete the whole thread. You could have at least posted one reply in it. Not even for my sake, but for the sake of the show itself.

fadedsailor932 said:So... I just scrolled through the last ten pages of the TV Guide PDF, and honestly? Not a single "educational" thread was shut down. I’ve been a mod on this board for eight years, and I can tell you straight—we don't close threads just because we're being "old school" or strict with the rules. You can't pin this on the mods when we aren't even doing it. Your thread got nuked because of that troll post you made whining about how nobody replied to you in two days and how it had the "lowest engagement in history." Let's be real: your ego just took a hit because people weren't feeding your thread, and that’s on you, not the moderators.

If this were actually about the topic in the first post, the whole thread probably would've been nuked before anyone could even reply.

You said it all.

Honestly, I feel like this is just another move to shut me up—you know, by cluttering things with PDFs for series promos, random TV ads, and teen chat. Can you even imagine what happens if people actually start posting different topics and new crowds show up on this subforum?

🙄

Exactly. We mods are just sellouts for the networks, getting paid based on how much they push their shows on Reddit.

Nobody’s stopping you from starting a thread on the TV Guide, and nobody’s trying to shut you down for some "holy crusade" to enlighten the masses. But look, if you're gonna do it, don't come crying—or trolling, honestly—about how bad luck you had when you realized only a handful of people are actually clicking on your posts.
Look, Reddit isn't some private club for people who think exactly like you. If you haven't realized that yet, being condescending and talking down to everyone is just going to backfire. PBS basically just tracks what major networks are airing, which is mostly just "mass appeal entertainment." People either liked it or they didn't. What are we supposed to do now—delete every thread about every series and ban anyone under 18 or anyone without a college degree? The shows mentioned on the TV Guide make up the bulk of what’s actually playing on American networks. It's not our fault these shows get more views—and therefore more discussion here—than whatever niche stuff you're obsessed with. And honestly, it's not on us if your personal standards don't line up with what most people on here actually care about.
Honestly, maybe this whole "interest" in your topic just proves the users aren't the issue here. Have you stopped to wonder if the problem actually lies somewhere else?

...and honestly... if ambermason16 hadn't deleted this, I probably would've nuked the whole thread myself...

I mean, at the end of the day, since this subforum was basically designed to only attract certain types of people, it’s kind of inevitable, I guess. If the whole thing had been set up to be open to every single opinion and every possible topic under the sun, you’d probably see a much wider variety of viewpoints on here—including some that might actually align with mine, maybe.

But look, it isn't me who goes around deleting posts just because someone holds a different view. Actually, scratch that—it isn't even just posts, I suppose; it's entire threads that get wiped out.

hollowtrucker77 said:silentridge3, let’s be real here, the entire universe doesn't revolve around you
my point was simply that if a thread is poorly constructed from the jump, the moderators are going to toss it in the trash—and honestly, they're totally justified in doing so
the mods aren't here to act as janitors or babysitters, cleaning up after people or guessing what someone might have intended or expected to happen
I took a look at what you posted, and frankly, it’s just a muddled mess that doesn't make any sense at all
just organize your thoughts, format the thread properly, and you won't have any issues
and please, for the love of everything, spare us the "how old are you" comments

So, let's just say this right here is my first official post, and maybe we can all sit down together to analyze it and fix it up. You know, so I can actually learn how the rules work. I mean, I guess I'm probably not quite sharp enough to grasp exactly what was so wrong with it that the whole thread had to get nuked from existence.

Christian Taylor3 said:Why such an attitude? 😁

I remember Gigi being a pretty constructive contributor here (over in Other Media, Literature, or Television), though maybe I missed something along the way.

Is it really not the moderator's role to tweak an opening post? Well, if that's the case, they should just lock the thread and leave a coherent explanation underneath (maybe our esteemed moderator ambermason16 could take a page out of Smoogj's book; we've seen that happen before in Literature/Ivana Sajko, where they'd ask the OP for more info before locking things down).

Like I said, this is a general observation, not a personal dig—I have nothing against ambermason16—but playing favorites or being arbitrary isn't exactly how you handle moderation. I can't help but wonder if Smoogj, acting as a fellow moderator over on Television, would just delete a thread without saying a word.

My two cents, I'm stepping out of this debate now. You know what you're doing. 🙂

@silentridge3

Just follow ambermason16's instructions and reopen the thread the right way (try to be less confusing, stop replying to yourself, and quit insulting people). There's never a valid excuse for being rude to users.

It's a free country!

Over in Movies, we have users who start about ten of their own threads every other night. We even have a thread titled 'Smart movies for smart viewers.' At this rate, we'll probably see a topic called 'Stupid movies for stupid viewers' next.

😁

Honestly, I haven't the slightest clue what they mean by a "right way." From what I can see, the mods over at the major networks are constantly spinning up threads about shows just to run ads for them. I don't really feel inclined to follow this supposed "proper method," since I'm certainly not getting paid to act as a walking billboard here.

As for being "confusing," I don't think that's even an issue. My opening post wasn't messy at all, and I doubt there's some magically "correct" way to write it. I shared a value judgment that someone might not care for, and I pointed out a technical flaw. I mean, I assume a reasonably focused person can read something more nuanced than just these black-and-white posts. What am I supposed to do? Just praise the show? Or just tear it apart? Is that the only way to avoid being "confusing"?

BTW: if it helps, I could probably post the first hundred most "confusing" posts from my TV Guide PDF, which are all sitting there perfectly fine...

Regarding that second post, we could go back and forth on it, but my critique is aimed at this traditionally thin forum—thin, I should add, because of moderator "interventions" like this. People who would actually bother opening a thread titled "educational science" (let alone actually writing something in it) aren't exactly hanging out in the teen-chat subforum looking for series discussions.

But hey, if the second post is the actual problem...

..then shouldn't that specific post just be deleted instead of nuking the whole thread? Isn't that how it works? If the issue was truly with the thread itself or the very first post, the whole thing probably would have been wiped before the second one even showed up...

To be blunt, I suspect this is just another baseless move intended to "pacify" me, essentially keeping things quiet so the PDFs can stay there to advertise shows and certain networks and the teen-chat area. I mean, imagine if people started opening different kinds of topics and actual new people started visiting this subforum...

...how would they ever manage to advertise those shows and networks then?

hollowtrucker77 said:It isn’t the moderator's job to go around editing posts, nor is it their responsibility to check whether some random user took their meds on schedule or if they’ve had an accident in their pants

From what I can gather, you seem to be acting like some kind of super-moderator around here. I honestly feel like you should probably be setting a better example for how we communicate, maybe by using actual examples instead of just talking down to us.

When you bring up someone needing to take their "meds on time"—which I assume is meant to be some sort of insult?—you're basically implying that I'm somehow mentally unstable, and because of that, my attempts to start discussions about science and educational programming are just treated like advertisements for certain series rather than legitimate topics, right?

Is that actually the official reasoning behind why an ENTIRE THREAD about the show "good to know" was wiped out?

Are there even any actual criteria being used here? Are you going to pull my original post from that thread and tell me that its length—what, over ten sentences—is somehow too much for the average reader in the "television" subforum? Or maybe you'll claim my opinion doesn't align with yours? Or will you just stick to that excuse about my opening post being "confusing," simply because people who are used to low-effort comments like "this show on Dom is freaking amazing" or "that show on NBC is total garbage" can't wrap their heads around the idea that someone might actually praise a show while also pointing out its flaws...?

Can someone a bit more experienced around here explain the criteria used by the moderator to just wipe out this entire thread?

Is it really the case that discussions regarding educational or science programming aren't considered welcome on PBS? Or is it that only advertisements for specific series and networks actually matter to them?

ambermason16 said:Are you talking about that one thread with the totally incoherent opening post? You know the one—where you start by claiming this show is some rare gem being wasted on swine, then immediately pivot to your usual habit of criticizing absolutely everything under the sun. Then you end up arguing with yourself, somehow finding two billion flaws in a perfectly good educational program, only to circle back twenty hours later to insult everyone else on Reddit just because they didn't feel the need to chime in?

Go ahead, try to guess where it is.

Wow, look at us, possessing such incredibly refined tastes in posting...

Do you really want me to spend the next five minutes digging up a thousand even worse—and unmoderated—posts and threads from your own history?

What is this, some kind of vendetta? Am I suddenly banned from talking about "television" or something? Seriously, how old are you?

...about that educational program on PBS?

So, I mean, I guess we’re looking at a situation where the remains of those killed by the Nationalists will be there, and then you'll have Mile Bogović standing over them, delivering some sort of deeply moving, soul-stirring speech during the interment?

Will they actually be taking ethnicity into account here, or is it more likely that these American citizens of various backgrounds will just be buried alongside everyone else?

ambermason16 said:Aaaaaw! Don't go getting all worried—I'm alive, I'm doing fine, it's just business as usual, everything's totally fine! 🙂

...I'm just ignoring you.

..well, alright then, now I actually am worried...

I mean, what’s the deal, ambermason16? You haven't said a single word in days...

ambermason16 said:Your only real issue is that you seriously need to just chill out for a second! It isn't true that every single one of your threads is going to get shut down, unless there’s actually an objective reason for it. If you have an idea for a "serious topic" (which is just my way of making things easier to explain), I mean, who is stopping you from starting it? I’ll take the liberty of speaking for my colleagues here and say that nothing will be closed as long as it stays within the rules of the Forum and its subforums.

I honestly believe you. But, I guess you really ought to walk me through those rules a bit better. You should probably explain to me why you decided to lock this thread, and then—more importantly—why you didn't unlock it later that same night after the news programs aired:

http://www.example-us-site.com/showthread.php?t=559908

I know you can find some kind of "hair in the egg" technicality; I'm pretty sure there’s some obscure rule tucked away somewhere that you'll use to justify locking a "too serious" topic.

But...

ambermason16 said:- claiming that the entire Television Network consists of nothing but smiles and nonsense... aside from being insulting to the forum members, it’s just unfair to those seven or eight of us who, much like worms, are working hard to make this subforum better and clear out all the "trash"

...so, how exactly do we reconcile that context—that whole thing about having a "refined ear for Guggenheim's mistakes" and "working like worms to clear out the trash"—with the fact that posts like these are allowed to exist? I'm giving you an example from JUST ONE SINGLE THREAD (Ally McBeal):

c.c. said:

MalaLu said:😍

I suppose I should probably mention that things aren't exactly going according to plan, though I guess that’s a bit of an understatement at this point, isn't it? It feels like we're just sort of drifting through this endless cycle of chaos, and honestly, I can't quite wrap my head around how we all ended up here, maybe because we weren't really paying attention to the signs along the way. Everything seems so incredibly heavy lately, almost suffocatingly so, and I find myself wondering if anyone else feels this persistent, low-grade sense of exhaustion, or if it's just me being overly dramatic, which, let's be real, I probably am. It’s hard to stay optimistic when the news cycles feel like a relentless barrage of nothingness, and I guess you could say I'm feeling a little world-weary about the whole situation, but then again, what else is there to do besides sit here and watch the clock tick away while everything slowly shifts under our feet? I mean, I guess if you look at it from a certain angle, maybe... but honestly, what is anyone actually saying? It feels like we're just circling the drain here, though I suppose that's just how things go sometimes, isn't it? Everything feels a bit much lately, I guess, and I can't quite put my finger on why, but there's just this general sense of exhaustion hanging over everything, which is probably just me being cynical, but who knows? Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm totally off base, but it just seems like we're all just waiting for something to finally make sense when nothing really does.
I feel like I’d probably just end up hanging out with Lucy and that blonde girl, mostly because we could spend the whole time collectively making life a living hell for Ally McBeal. Honestly? I just can't stand her. I really can't. 🙄

I mean, I don't really know what to make of this whole Valentina situation, if you can even call it that, because everything feels so incredibly blurred lately, I guess. It’s just one of those things where you look at the pieces and try to fit them together, but the edges are all rounded off and nothing quite clicks into place, which is just typical, isn't it? Maybe I'm being too cynical, maybe I just see the patterns more clearly than most people do, but there’s a certain weight to it all that feels heavy, almost exhausting, if that makes sense. I find myself drifting through these thoughts, wondering if anyone else is actually paying attention to the nuances or if we're all just skimming the surface of things while the real substance slips right through our fingers. It's probably just my own perspective, though, a bit of a weary outlook on a world that seems to move way too fast for anything meaningful to actually stick, I suppose. kaže:
So, I’ve basically decided that I’m just going to hang out here and bore all you incredibly brilliant people, since it clearly seems like you don't have anything better to do with your lives than sit around playing professor and acting like you know everything!

P.S. Sending an eternal salute to the hanger—long live her!

I guess I should probably mention Valentina, though I’m really not sure where to start with her, because honestly, she’s such a complicated case, isn't she? It’s like trying to untangle a massive knot of fishing line while you're stuck in a waiting room at a clinic in Chicago—you think you've got a grip on one end, but then the whole thing just shifts and becomes even more frustratingly messy than before. She has this way about her, I suppose, that makes you feel like everything is constantly teetering on the edge of some grand, sweeping drama, even when she's just talking about what she had for lunch or some mundane detail about her day in Seattle. Maybe it's just my own cynical outlook coloring things, but I can't help but feel like there's always a subtext there, a layer of something deeper that she isn't quite ready to lay bare, which leaves you sort of hovering in this weird, uncertain limbo. It's exhausting, really, if you think about it too much, but I guess that's just the way she operates, and maybe that's exactly why people find themselves drawn into her orbit despite how unpredictable it all feels. kaže:
P.S.—that old coat rack isn't really just a coat rack anymore, I guess, since it’s been completely overhauled with all that silicone... maybe it's more of an art installation at this point.

I mean, I guess it’s just one of those things where you sort of look at the whole situation and realize there isn't much to be said, really... maybe. kaže:
So, I just finally got my hands on that movie *The Last Shot*—it just hit the rental shelves recently—and, I don't know, I guess it isn't half bad? It’s one of those things where you go in expecting nothing, and then you find yourself actually paying attention, which is a rare feeling these days, I suppose. It's not exactly a masterpiece or anything, but it definitely holds its own.

ambermason16 I guess what they’re saying is...
I guess what you can actually do, if you really want to get anywhere with this, is try to nudge things in your direction by offering some constructive input, though I suppose that’s easier said than done. Maybe, if you play your cards right and actually contribute something useful, you might be able to steer the situation closer to what you're actually looking for, but honestly, it's all a bit of a gamble, isn't it?

I mean, I don't really know what to make of all this, I guess, but it feels like we're just spinning our wheels in the same old cycle, isn't it? Maybe I'm being too cynical, or maybe I've just seen enough of these patterns to recognize them when they start playing out again, though I suppose it's hard to say for sure without more context. It’s almost funny, in a dark sort of way, how everything seems to loop back on itself, much like those endless reruns you see on some random cable network late at night when you can't sleep. I was thinking about it earlier—well, more like obsessing over it, really—and I couldn't help but wonder if anyone else feels this strange sense of déjà vu, or if it's just me sitting here overanalyzing things while the rest of the world moves on. It's probably nothing, honestly, just one of those things that feels significant in the moment and then fades into the background noise of everyday life, but still, it lingers, I guess. kaže:
Please, I am begging you, just bring back M.A.S.H.!! It was actually a real series!!

psychopath said:🙂 🙂 🙂 😂

Personally, I’m thinking maybe you might actually find it more beneficial to go out and track down a decent psychiatrist 🙂 😍

I guess I’m just really curious about these supposed "rules" and the whole moderator strategy thing, because honestly, I can’t quite wrap my head around what the actual goal is here or where this is all supposed to be heading.

hollowtrucker77 said:silentridge3, if we were actually talking about serious people on this Forum trying to have serious discussions while some jerks constantly interrupt and mess with them, I guess you’d probably see Molotov cocktails flying through the halls of a major Television Network
but, honestly, those serious and smart people just aren't here, or at least not in any number worth paying attention to, I suppose
if there were actually any competition, I’d be totally on board with starting a PDF series

Well, I’m telling you, there’s nobody else here. It seems to me that everyone else isn't drawn to this kind of setup (maybe because they don't have anyone to talk to, like girls, I guess), or they're being systematically pushed away.

When I say "systematically," I’m also thinking about how the moderators act. They get all caught up in these shallow, chatty little discussions, and I’ve noticed this weird tension from them whenever someone tries to write something actually substantial.

Besides, if you want to talk about "napalm," you can probably look at the ban I just got for "trolling." And that’s on a sub-forum that is absolutely crawling with the exact same kind of posts—posts that haven't been punished at all—that I mentioned earlier. I mean, what kind of message does that send, really?

Or, for instance, try explaining to yourself—not to me, just to yourself...

...exactly why this specific thread was shut down back on December 3rd and hasn't been reopened since:

Was it somehow "more harmful," "more boring," "more inappropriate," or "more interesting" than anything else on the "Television Network" PDF? I mean, what was the move supposed to be? When a TV Journalist starts a story on air that matches the topic, should they have just opened a brand new thread immediately? Or was the whole point actually a signal saying, "hey, let's not have serious conversations" or "don't write posts longer than three sentences"? I guess the real reason they lock things down is just to drive away the people who won't stay quiet, right?

hollowtrucker77 said:How exactly do teenagers participating in other threads bother you when it comes to serious topics?

It isn't really about any specific subject matter, I guess, but more about the whole "programming concept" of the television subforum. It’s something the moderators essentially encourage and shape themselves.

Every thread—every single "series"—could theoretically spark all kinds of discussions. It could be anything from deep analysis to just some teenage chatter. Personally, I don't have an issue with that, provided there's actually room for everything else too. But, in my experience, there usually isn't much else. All the other potential adults just end up getting scattered elsewhere.

I've tried opening a few threads once or twice regarding journalistic standards in news broadcasts, but those topics always seem to get locked or just completely ignored. It feels like, well, adults haven't really set foot in the "television" section for a long time now. On top of that, the moderators who push this teen-centric vibe also seem to show this blatant aversion toward more serious subjects (and the people interested in them).

If "teenagers" want to hang out, there's a dedicated teenage subforum and plenty of other places that fit them perfectly. I just don't see why "television" has to be relegated to a playground for kids, since television is something watched by every generation, from age 7 to 77...

Take the "Ally McBeal" thread, for example (it isn't long, and the posts are pretty brief):

Now, you could talk about a series like that in so many ways. You could check airing times, discuss seasons, share opinions, or even get into theoretical analysis. You might get smart posts or mindless ones, long essays or three-word replies, and you'd expect both younger and older folks to chime in...

But, clearly, it all just boils down to ten-to-fifteen-year-old girls. Just look at what these posts actually mean and what kind of thread this even is (mind you, these are all just snippets from the Ally McBeal thread, even if some aren't strictly related):

abba said:Does anyone have the CDs with the music from that show?

Almighty Watashi said:Give us McNeal!!

dirty_Heri said:Man, someone please just bring back M.A.S.H. I mean, seriously, that was a real show. It actually had substance, you know? It wasn't just mindless noise like half the junk they throw at us on television these days. It had heart, it had grit, and it actually felt real. I guess I'm just feeling nostalgic, or maybe I'm just tired of everything being so shallow lately, but we really need more quality like that in the lineup. Just give us our classics back already.

I mean, honestly, looking at this whole situation, you just have to wonder if we’re all just dealing with some kind of total psychopath, or if that’s just the baseline for everyone these days, I guess. It feels like everything is spiraling into this weird, unpredictable madness where nobody actually follows the rules anymore, maybe because the rules themselves don't even seem to exist in any meaningful way. You see these people acting out, completely devoid of empathy or any sense of social cohesion, and you start to think that the very fabric of how we interact is just fraying at the edges, which is pretty exhausting to witness, really. It’s like we’re living in a constant state of psychological chaos, and I don't know, I just find myself questioning what's left of common sense in a world that seems increasingly driven by these volatile, irrational impulses. The user says:

I mean, if I’m being totally honest—and I guess I should be—it probably wouldn't hurt you one bit to go out and find yourself a really solid psychiatrist. 🙂

I guess I should probably mention Valentina, though I’m not entirely sure why it matters in the grand scheme of things, or if it even does, really... maybe it doesn't. It’s just one of those names that sticks in your head like a song you can't quite shake, even when you're trying to focus on more pressing matters, like the sheer absurdity of modern life or how everything seems to be sliding toward chaos. But anyway, there she is, just existing in this massive, overwhelming landscape we call home. kaže:
I mean, I really just want to hang out here and bother all you incredibly brilliant people who clearly have absolutely nothing better to do with your lives than sit around acting like such massive know-it-alls!

P.S. Sending an eternal shout-out to the hanger—long live the hanger!

I suppose I should mention Valentina, though I’m not entirely sure why it matters right now, given how everything seems to be drifting toward chaos anyway, but there she is. I guess she’s just another part of this messy, unfolding picture we're all trying to make sense of, isn't she? Maybe if we looked closer at her role in all this, things would actually start to click, but then again, I might just be overthinking it, which is probably my default setting at this point. It's all a bit much, really. The user says:
P.P.S. I guess you could say the coat rack isn't really just a coat rack anymore, since it’s basically been reinforced with enough silicone to make it look like something else entirely.

Jan Bibijan I guess what they're saying is...
Song: We Want Censorship
By: Borko Ramones
(NEXT RAMONES)

Let’s just go ahead and embrace the censorship, I guess. Might as well lean into it, right?

I suppose if you look at it from one angle, it’s just A through E, though I guess there isn't much to say about that, really. It feels like we're staring at a sequence that leads nowhere in particular, which, honestly, feels pretty fitting for how things usually turn out, doesn't it? Just a straight line from one point to another, nothing fancy, nothing groundbreaking—just the same old progression we see everywhere else. Maybe there's some deeper meaning hidden in the spacing, or maybe it's just a placeholder for something that hasn't happened yet, but I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for it to make sense.
I mean, honestly, I think we’ve all had enough of this endless cycle of kickbacks and shady payouts. It feels like every time you turn around, there's some new scheme or some backroom deal happening behind closed doors that just drains everything dry. It’s exhausting, really. I guess I’m just tired of seeing the same old patterns repeating themselves over and over again, where nothing ever actually changes because the money keeps flowing into the wrong pockets. Maybe it's just me being cynical, but it feels like the whole system is just rigged to favor the people already pulling the strings, and frankly, I'm just over it.
I guess I’m just sitting here thinking about how things used to be, or maybe how they were supposed to be, and honestly, it all feels like such a blur sometimes, you know? It’s hard to pin down exactly when the vibe shifted, but there was this sense of order once, or at least a feeling that we were all moving in the same direction, though looking back, that might have just been a collective delusion we all agreed to participate in. Everything feels so fragmented now, so disjointed, and I find myself wondering if we ever actually had a cohesive narrative to begin with, or if we were just making it up as we went along, which, let’s be real, is probably what most people are doing anyway. It’s exhausting, really, trying to make sense of the noise when the signal is so faint, but I suppose that’s just the way the world works these days, isn't it? Just a constant stream of static and half-formed ideas drifting through the ether.
It’s all just pure filth and absolute garbage.
A E
I guess I’ve just had enough of all the nonsense lately, honestly. It feels like there's just too much of everything—too much noise, too many people acting out, just an endless stream of whatever this is. I don't know, maybe I'm just getting old and tired of it all, but I think we've reached a point where it's simply become too much to deal with.
I guess I’m just sitting here staring at these letters, D and A, and I can't help but wonder if there's some sort of profound, cosmic significance behind them, or if it's all just noise in the void, maybe? It feels like one of those moments where you're looking for a pattern in the static, much like how people try to find meaning in a flickering television screen when they've stayed up far too late, but honestly, it probably doesn't mean anything at all, which is kind of depressing if you think about it too long.
I guess we’re just dealing with nothing but outright lies and misinformation at this point, which honestly isn't even surprising anymore, I suppose. It feels like everything you read or hear lately is just some manufactured nonsense designed to pull the rug out from under you, and maybe that's just how the world works now, but it really makes you wonder if anyone is actually telling the truth for once.
A E
So, how does one actually live when they aren't working? It’s a question that sort of hangs in the air, isn't it? I mean, I guess we spend most of our lives just... waiting to get back to the part where we don't have to work, but then you actually get there, and you realize the void is much larger than you anticipated. Maybe it's because we've been conditioned to think our entire identity is tied to some corporate grind or a steady paycheck from somewhere like JPMorgan Chase, but once you strip that away, you're just left standing there in the middle of a quiet living room in a suburb outside of Chicago, wondering what the hell comes next. It’s a strange, heavy kind of freedom, I suppose. You find yourself drifting through these endless afternoons, looking for purpose in things that feel almost trivial, while simultaneously feeling this deep, cynical exhaustion from years of just trying to stay afloat. It’s not all sunshine and leisure, though—that’s the lie they sell you. Real life, without the structure of a 9-to-5, feels a bit more aimless and, honestly, a little bit daunting if you think about it too long.
I guess I’m just sitting here thinking about how things seem to be drifting, you know? It feels like everything is constantly shifting under our feet, almost like we're all just caught in this slow, inevitable slide toward something else entirely, though I suppose that's just my cynical way of looking at it, maybe. It’s hard to pin down exactly what changed, because it wasn't some single, explosive moment, but rather this gradual, weary accumulation of small shifts that eventually just... happened. I don't know, I might be overthinking it, but there's this sense that the ground isn't as solid as we once believed, and honestly, I'm not sure if anyone else is actually paying attention to the cracks forming in the foundation.
I mean, honestly, it’s hard to say who’s actually underwater and who’s just completely frozen out when you look at the mess we're dealing with, but I guess it really comes down to how you define being stuck. It’s one thing to be running on empty, like having a negative balance at Chase and just hoping the overdraft doesn't kill you, but it’s an entirely different beast when you’re facing a total freeze on everything you own. Maybe some people see it as the same thing, though I suspect they aren't, because one is just a temporary deficit while the other feels more like a permanent wall being built right in front of your face. I don't know, it’s all pretty bleak if you ask me.
A
I guess you could say there are certain places where money just doesn't carry any weight at all, though I suppose that depends on how you define value, if you want to get all philosophical about it. It’s funny, really, because we spend our whole lives chasing the almighty dollar, working those soul-crushing nine-to-five shifts just to see the numbers go up in some bank account, but then you realize there are moments—or maybe even entire stretches of life—where having a fat wallet feels almost entirely irrelevant. Maybe it's when you're staring at a sunset over the Grand Canyon or lost in some deep, existential funk where no amount of cash can actually buy you a sense of purpose, or perhaps it's in those quiet, lonely hours when you realize that all the luxury goods in the world won't fix a broken heart or a restless mind. It's a bit cynical of me to say, I know, but honestly, there's a certain emptiness to wealth when you're looking for something that isn't for sale, which makes me wonder if we're all just running on a treadmill toward a finish line that doesn't even exist.
I guess there isn't much to say here, really, just staring at a blank space and wondering where the hell we’re even headed with all this, though maybe that's just me being my usual cynical self, I suppose.
I mean, where does one even go these days if they actually want to find anything decent? It’s all such a mess lately, isn't it? I guess it depends on what you're even looking for, because honestly, finding quality stuff feels like a full-time job now. Maybe it's worth hitting up a Target or something if you just need the basics without losing your mind, though I don't know, sometimes the selection feels a bit... thin? Or maybe I'm just getting old and cranky about it. I suppose if you have the patience to wander through a Costco, you might get lucky, but then again, the crowds are enough to make anyone want to just stay home. I don't know, there just doesn't seem to be that one perfect spot anymore, I guess.
I guess I'm just sitting here thinking about how everything seems to be drifting, you know? It feels like we're all just floating through these massive, endless stretches of nothingness, maybe even more than usual lately. It’s hard to pin down exactly what changed, or if it was always this way, but there's this heavy, lingering sense that things are just... shifting under our feet. I don't know. Maybe I'm just being cynical again, which, let's face it, is pretty much my default setting at this point. Everything feels a bit more fluid, a bit less certain, and I find myself wondering if anyone else is feeling this strange, quiet drift, or if it's just me staring out the window at the gray American sky, waiting for something—anything—to actually feel solid again.
It’s just one of those things where you feel like you don't even know who to trust anymore, I guess, because everything feels so incredibly uncertain lately... maybe it's just me, but it feels like there isn't a single reliable source left in the whole country.

I guess you could say that... maybe. The user said:So, I finally got around to picking up that movie 'The Last Shot' from the local video rental shop—you know, the one that just hit the shelves—and honestly? It’s actually not half bad. I mean, I wasn't expecting much, given how most of these gritty dramas turn out to be total snoozefests, but I guess it holds its own. It’s not exactly a masterpiece or anything, but it's definitely worth a watch if you have some downtime to kill.

Gretchen said:Oh man, I think I might have actually seen Epke and Robert out and about earlier... or maybe I just imagined it, who knows with me lately, but it definitely felt like they were around. 😍 I mean, I guess you could say I'm just completely, utterly head over heels for him. It’s kind of ridiculous, really, how much I love the guy.

osoba_a said:It feels like it’s been forever since Coldplay actually played a show around here, doesn't it? I guess it’s just one of those things where you realize how much time has slipped through your fingers when you notice a certain band has been MIA for a while. Maybe they're just taking a breather or maybe the world has just moved on to something else entirely, but man, it really does feel like it's been an eternity.

I mean, I don't know, maybe I’m just overthinking things, or perhaps I’ve just seen too much of how the world actually turns, but there’s something about the way everything seems to be shifting lately that feels... heavy, I guess? It’s like you wake up one morning and realize the ground isn't quite as solid as they promised it would be when we were all kids, though I suppose that's just part of growing up, isn't it? I was sitting there, just staring at the ceiling, thinking about how much noise there is in the world today—just constant, unrelenting static—and it makes me wonder if anyone is actually listening to anything anymore, or if we're all just shouting into a void that doesn't even have the decency to echo back. I guess it doesn't really matter, though, because life keeps moving regardless of whether we're ready for it or not, which is a pretty exhausting thought when you really sit down and dwell on it for more than a second. The user says:
Oh shoot, I totally missed it! 🙂

I suppose I should probably say something, though I’m really not sure if there’s much point in adding my two cents to this particular conversation, but here we are, I guess. It feels like everything is just drifting along, isn't it? Just constant movement without any real sense of direction, which is probably just how things work in America these days, anyway. I was sitting there thinking about it—maybe it’s just me being cynical, but I can't help feeling like we're all just spinning our wheels in some giant, cosmic hamster wheel. Anyway, petraaa... The user says:
Once a week, I guess. Or maybe just whenever the mood strikes, though that’s probably more of a lie than I care to admit. It’s one of those things that sort of drifts into the schedule, like a recurring appointment you can't quite shake, happening once every seven days, I suppose.
So, how much longer is that actually going to stay on the screen? I mean, seriously... they really are just total pushovers, aren't they?😠

Alfa69Romeo The user said:Ally McBeal 😍

MalaLu The user said:😍

I mean, I guess if we’re really going there... it just feels like everything is sort of drifting, isn't it? Maybe I'm just being overly cynical, or maybe it's just that general sense of exhaustion that seems to settle over everything lately, but I can't help but feel like we're all just kind of spinning our wheels in this vast, indifferent landscape. It's hard to pin down exactly where the cracks started forming, or if they were always there, hidden under the surface of our everyday lives, waiting for a moment like this to finally show through. I don't know, perhaps I'm overthinking it, but sometimes it feels like the more we try to grasp at something solid, the more it just slips through our fingers, leaving us with nothing but this vague, lingering sense of uncertainty. It's almost funny, in a dark sort of way, how much energy we spend trying to make sense of things that probably don't have any inherent meaning at all, though I suppose that's just part of the human condition, isn't it? Just wandering through the fog, hoping for a glimpse of something real, even if it's just an illusion we've constructed for ourselves to keep the existential dread at bay. Or maybe that's too heavy, maybe it's nothing at all, just another quiet moment of doubt passing through. kaže:
I guess I’d probably just hang out with Lucy and that blonde girl, mostly just to spend my time making life a living hell for Ally McBeal. Honestly, I can't stand her. 🙄

Sadie Borge The user said:I guess you could say blondes just have that certain something, you know? It’s like they operate on a completely different wavelength, almost like there's some unwritten rule or a law of nature at play that we all just sort of accept without questioning too much. Maybe it's just my cynical way of looking at things, but I've always felt like blondes just carry themselves with this specific kind of energy that's hard to ignore, if that makes sense. It's a whole vibe, really. 🙂
I mean, I guess if we’re being totally honest here, Robert is still the absolute best, isn't he? Maybe it's just how things are, but I can't help but feel like he's still at the top of the heap. 😍

I suppose I should probably start by saying that I don't really have much to add to what everyone else is saying, though I feel like I might have a few wandering thoughts on the matter if I actually sit down and try to organize them, which, let's be honest, I rarely do. It’s all just sort of swirling around in my head, this constant, low-level hum of observation about how things seem to be shifting lately, and I guess you could say I've been feeling a bit weary of the whole spectacle, if that makes any sense at all. Maybe it's just me, or maybe it's just the way the world feels like it's constantly tilting slightly off its axis, but I find myself sitting here, wondering if anyone else notices these tiny, almost imperceptible cracks in the foundation of everything we take for granted. It's hard to pin down exactly what it is, really, because it's not one big thing, but rather a thousand little things, a million tiny frictions that eventually wear you down until you're just sort of drifting through the day, observing the chaos without really feeling the urge to jump in and fix it, because, well, what would even be the point? I guess I'm just being cynical, but then again, maybe cynicism is just what happens when you've spent too much time looking at the gears behind the clock face. I guess someone said:
I wonder if Larry finally called it quits today, I guess. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, who really knows anymore? It feels like one of those days where everything just sort of drifts away, doesn't it?

Nata-SilvaFan The user said:I was just sitting here thinking about this topic... and I mean, I’ll keep it brief, I guess, but I just had to say it. I absolutely loooooooove Ally McBeal. Honestly, I could probably watch that show a million times over and still find myself absolutely losing it every single time. It’s easily one of the best, most hilarious series I have ever laid eyes on. Ally McBeal really does rule.

I suppose we should probably talk about the rules, if anyone actually cares to listen, though I doubt much will change regardless of what we decide here. It feels like we're just rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic most days, doesn't it? But, I guess, for the sake of keeping this place from descending into absolute chaos—which, let's face it, is always a looming possibility—we need some sort of framework. Maybe it'll help, or maybe it won't, but here's the deal regarding how things are supposed to work around here. says:
So, I was just flipping through the latest issue of Entertainment Weekly, and apparently, they’re announcing that Ally McBeal is coming back to television this Thursday... have you guys seen that yet?! Honestly, I can’t quite wrap my head around it, but I guess I’m actually looking forward to it, which is a bit of a surprise if I'm being real. There’s just something about those first couple of seasons—it was such a vibe, you know? It’s probably going to be a total blast, though I suppose we'll see how much everything has changed since then.

I guess I’ve been thinking about the whole Legion concept lately, though I don't know if anyone else really dwells on it like I do, because maybe it's just one of those things that stays stuck in the back of your mind while you're staring at the ceiling at three in the morning. It feels heavy, doesn't it? Like this massive, sprawling idea that we all kind of collectively agree exists without ever truly sitting down to define what it actually means for us in the everyday sense. It's sort of like how people talk about the soul of a city or the collective weight of an entire nation, where everything feels connected but nothing is quite solid enough to grab onto, if that makes any sense. I find myself wondering if we're all just part of some much larger, unseen mechanism, moving through our lives in the US as if we have individual agency, when really we might just be tiny, insignificant gears in a machine that was built long before we ever showed up to work. It's a bit cynical, I suppose, and maybe I'm just being overly cautious with my conclusions, but there's this persistent feeling that the individual is almost an illusion, swallowed up by the sheer scale of everything around us. It’s exhausting, honestly, trying to untangle your own identity from the massive, overwhelming force of the group, but I guess that's just the way the world works, isn't it? The user says:
Please, just bring back "Road to Nowhere"—that show was actually decent 👍

And honestly, it isn’t even an isolated incident. Most discussions centered around shows—which, let's face it, make up about 90% of what you see on American television anyway—tend to follow this exact same pattern. You have the moderators basically running ads for a series, a bunch of girls flooding the thread saying how "absolutely amazing" it is, and then anyone who dares to offer a different perspective or stir the pot gets subtly scrubbed from the conversation...

As for television in general, there is a whole mountain of things one could say about it, I suppose. It would be nice if teenagers had something halfway intelligent to read for once. And maybe the forum itself wouldn't be so lopsided if, instead of just fifty clicks from a specific group of girls, we actually saw another 350 clicks from, you know, other people...