Posts by Jamie Williams6

Of course she isn't saying anything. There’s simply nothing left to defend when her track record on this forum is a total blank slate—and honestly, 99% of the other users here would be in the exact same position. It was pretty transparent, too: she asks for the link, realizes exactly who she's dealing with, and then suddenly pulls a disappearing act.

Sugar and the rest of the crew—including the admins—are keeping their mouths shut, too.

Look, Nick,

Since you clearly can't move past whatever is written in red in your signature—given that even after a month you still haven't managed a decent rebuttal—I’m going to pass on discussing politics. I have absolutely no interest in debating anyone who thinks it's acceptable to belittle others or use chauvinistic insults against people based on their gender.

From that specific female user here, to that Katherine from Cleveland who sends people off at 3 PM by calling them idiots and morons, down to bluecyclist64 who insists everyone else is a fascist and acts like some old-fashioned bully.

People like you shouldn't be here; decent folks just don't want anything to do with this kind of behavior...

Will someone finally give me an answer as to why you haven't posted those entries for the filing department? I mean, I don't see how complicated this task is supposed to be; you have all the evidence right there, the questions are perfectly valid, and there isn't even a hint of provocation in them...

Okay Nick, it’s already been four days.

Where did things get stuck? I feel like everything is pretty straightforward at this point...

Alright, I've gone ahead and fixed that; hopefully, everything should be functioning correctly now.

The second link is also working as intended.

Since I haven't received an answer regarding my inquiry about Ban Appeals, I am moving the discussion here. This follows the guidance from the admin and sub-mod, who clarified that the specific appeal thread isn't meant for discussing content issues, but rather for contesting bans that we believe were issued unfairly.

So, I’m opening this thread in the hope that someone will finally address my concerns. When I first brought this up, I was met with total silence, and months upon months have slipped by without a word...

For context, here is my previous post from the Ban Appeals thread:

"To the moderation team, I have a few questions: do you actually receive reports when a user is flagged, and what specific criteria do you use to issue a ban to a forum member? Does a report carry less weight if the person reporting isn't one of your favorites? Furthermore, does a report become invalid if the person being reported happens to be using logical arguments that align with your own political or ideological views—effectively allowing them to get away with insults? Are other users permitted to call someone a "total zero" or similar insults? In the past, people have been banned for much less than blatant verbal abuse, yet this behavior has persisted for days without any action, even though I have submitted multiple reports that have sat unaddressed for well over the standard 48-hour window...

http://www.cnn.com/showpost.php?p=8...postcount=6043

Regardless of how much I might agree with that individual's political stance, or how much I disagree with the person they are attacking, I cannot accept the fact that a member is being brutally insulted and belittled while remaining unpunished. And this isn't an isolated incident. I truly don't understand where the confusion lies, or if the rest of us are now expected to adopt this kind of vocabulary and tell people they are "absolute zeros" too.

If that isn't the case, then please clarify which members have a blank check to insult and disparage others.

To reiterate: I simply do not understand who has the right to call another person a "total zero," and under what circumstances. Is it because they have valid points, or because their opinion happens to mirror the moderators' views? I have reported this specific post at least five times; it is statistically impossible that not a single moderator noticed it.

Additionally, regarding the female user in question, I started a separate thread here: http://www.cnn.com/showthread.php?t=1191025
In that thread, she explicitly claims that women are more intelligent, capable, and resilient than men. I find myself wondering how I would be treated if I were to argue the opposite—that men are stronger, smarter, or better organized, for instance...

Essentially, one post was a direct insult to a fellow member, while the other was outright chauvinism against men.

So, please, enlighten me as to your banning criteria and identify who is granted permission to verbally assault others. I'd like to add those individuals to my ignore list so I can avoid engaging with them and prevent receiving arbitrary bans myself.

☕