Posts by Paul Green31

Anthony Collins4 said:Am I allowed to list it in my profile?

Or am I not?

If all the moderators can see my (unlisted) email address, what kind of protection does that actually provide?

What is truly more private than my forum handle, if my actual email is hrilium@something.com?

Are you suggesting this is yet another instance where the regulation law is being ignored on this forum?

Everything you need to know is right there in the link I sent you. Just go find a decent lawyer and let them break it all down for you... 🙂

feralpilot6 said:What’s actually the difference between just dropping an email address versus posting a link to your Skype?

It’s right there in plain English. Maybe take a second to actually read the links to the regulation laws governing this stuff...

Skype isn't legally considered personal data, but an email address definitely is. That's the bottom line.
If a forum allows people to post email addresses, they're breaking the law. Every single website out there has legal obligations regarding personal data, just like anyone else.

That's why any site collecting private info has to have a "Privacy Act" statement and actually follow it. If they don't, handing over user data to third parties is a total violation of the law—and they'd get sued for it, quite successfully too.

And that's just one reason. There are plenty more where that came from...

For instance, how is an admin or a mod even supposed to verify that a user actually owns the address they provided?

Here we go again...

They find some supposed "illogicality" and suddenly everyone wants to start a revolution.

Look, I’m on about 50 different international forums. I’m active on 20 of them, and at least two are way bigger and more professional than this place.

On every single one of those forums, posting email addresses is strictly forbidden. On most of them, you can't even type one in if you tried.

It’s the same story everywhere you go online—chat services, web platforms, you name it. They don't let you drop an email address.

Maybe the younger crowd doesn't see the point, but site admins and system devs know exactly why they do it. And the older generation? We're used to these rules. We lived on the internet long before Facebook opened up your living rooms to the entire world—back before webcams could be linked to some interface just so someone can watch you peel a potato for lunch.

So, quit the rebellion. Email addresses are banned on forums. Period. Stop trying to make it a whole thing. If you actually want to understand why, go educate yourselves.

briskmoose90 said:Sure. You clearly decided to just ride the wave of change. Instead of sticking to the actual threads we opened on the PŽK regarding the forum issues, you pivoted to talking about politics, racial tensions, and self-promotion. You started pushing your own agenda with topics that have nothing to do with the discussion at hand. And you didn't even get banned for it.
If you actually had the guts to post under your real name, I might feel something. Instead, seeing how much you back down just makes me lose respect for you.
You claim to stand up for the underdog, yet you’re actually siding with the guy who holds all the power here. You're backing someone who can decide our fates on this forum without any accountability whatsoever. Yeah, that’s definitely the weaker side—the one that can ban you from this site forever.
After dozens of pages of arguing here, nobody has actually achieved anything. All this did was prove that someone tried to purge the forum using 500-point bans, but the attempt failed because those bans were completely illegitimate.
If a nation rises up against one or two dictators, that doesn't make the tyrant weaker just because he's outnumbered ten thousand to one. Numbers don't change the math of power.
Weakness is defined by a lack of power.

Sure, we're the ones who screwed this up.

How did I not see that sooner? Kuki is just some brainless sixteen-year-old who clearly has nothing better to do than leak people's emails all over this forum. She’s just a total psycho looking for drama and blood.

God, what a massive wave of hypocrisy.

Wow, talk about the pot calling the kettle black. You’re really out here pointing fingers while being the biggest hypocrite in the room. So what if you figured out my other handle? It’s not like I need "balls" to use it—honestly, I have no idea where you even got that idea—but let's call it privileged info. Besides, pretty much everyone knows it anyway; it's hardly some state secret. And for those who don't? They can just ask, and I'll answer.

But no, because we disagree, you decide to take this "secret" info and dump it right here on the thread, complete with a heavy dose of sarcasm and all the dramatic flair you can muster.

What would you even do with actual privileged information if you were a moderator? Isn't that exactly the kind of thing you claim to fight against?

It’s a shame. I used to have a decent opinion of you, but then someone had to mention perception, didn't they? You've really lost my respect. And not even because of this nonsense about handles, but because of your "overall contribution lately." Look, I don't need moderator tools to hand you a permanent ban.

Consider this my final word to you. I'm done. I don't do low blows and dirty tactics—even though it was clearly your intention to swing low, and honestly, you missed. If I actually felt the need to hide the facts you just so grandiosely laid out, believe me, you wouldn't even know they existed.

My God, what a massive volley of hypocrisy.

After reading that mess above, we really have to wonder: where exactly is this barrel of lies firing from?

I'm out. This afternoon just turned pathetic. Peace to everyone else. 👋

restlesstiger102 said:So what, does the 2002 IMF just turn into this message board now?

🙂

Watch it, okay? In my last post, you've got Anderson's request for the domain, and right underneath it in that same PDF, there’s the official approval from the government.
And if I remember correctly, the department cleared the domain back in February of 2003.

Either way, that document has all the details you need regarding the "early days" of this site.

Check out this interesting link.

http://wayback.archive.org/web/20041...//www.forum.hr

Just click the years on the timeline above, and you can browse snapshots of the forum from specific dates. Here’s the oldest one I could find: http://web.archive.org/web/200308010.../www.forum.hr/

It says right here: has been crawled 895 times going all the way back to August 1, 2003.

That's basically where the forum really took off. But before that, there was the IMF—the Reddit of its day. It was actually revolutionary, a totally different beast compared to today's "I just discovered the web" crowd. Back then, we didn't have trolls or spammers constantly ruining everything. It was much calmer. Honestly, I don't know the exact launch date, but I'd guess it was around '99.

So, if you want to see how things actually started, just Google "IMF" or "Reddit."

And by the way, why don't you just send Anderson a DM or an email? I doubt he'll pass up any chance to be cited in some college thesis; he'll love seeing how good it looks. We all know how much he loves statistics, especially when they feed that massive ego of his. Though, I bet he isn't too thrilled about those uptime stats. 😬

Edit: Here, Anderson claims it started in '99. There's a mountain of data right here.

Zachary Gomez2 said:Paul Green31, we don't actually exist here me. I am present through my posts, just as my colleagues are through theirs. From the very beginning, I have had a perfectly clear understanding of what your objective is—you didn't need to draw any maps to find it—yet, somehow, it remains baffling to me why you enjoy the privilege of trolling this space. Concrete facts have been laid out; while they aren't everything, it shouldn't be a surprise that an admin might weigh in on them, a reality that should be patently obvious to you at this stage.

The last thing I want is any kind of special privilege. Just because someone doesn't see eye-to-eye with you doesn't mean they're trolling; it just means they have a different opinion. And isn't that the whole point? We're here to clash different viewpoints, otherwise, this forum wouldn't even exist.

Both I and Powerlock have a right to a dissenting opinion. And so do you. Frankly, I hope we see fewer bans in the Politics section for "trolling" when it's actually just people being sanctioned for having a different take.

If the admins decide I'm trolling, they're free to hand out whatever punishment the rules dictate. I won't complain about that, don't worry.

By the way, the Politics section really needs a rule about actual argumentation. Right now, it's just a sea of sweeping generalizations and baseless assumptions. It's driving the quality of political discourse straight into the dirt.

I’ve backed up everything I’ve said right here. The ones who can't provide arguments are just part of the denialist crowd. If there were an actual rule requiring logical arguments, the mods and admins would have a much easier job. Unfortunately, there isn't one on the Politics board, and there isn't one here either.

Zachary Gomez2 said:If we are going to stick to actual arguments, as you suggested, then let’s not wander off into thick, heavy fiction.
I, too, have understood the purpose and the consequences of this moderation action; we simply don't share the same interpretation. Regardless, thank you for the brief exchange.

Well, of course we wouldn't share the same interpretation. I'm not here to lecture anyone. Maybe you were just reading your own posts or listening to a colleague. For the record, I never told you to "read the press," I never "lectured" you, and I certainly didn't say you were less intelligent just because you're attacking Powerlock.

I'm simply asking you to dig up the real reasons behind the attacks. We’ve already seen that the issue isn't his moderation—which is top-notch—it's just that he isn't "on your side."

Of course, you won't admit that. Because if you did, your whole argument would fall apart.

But hey, I hope I managed to prove my point, and I hope it's enough for the admins to let this thread "fall apart" if they need to....

Glad we could have this talk. 🙂

Zachary Gomez2 said:Once again—don't patronize me, and stop coddling yourself.

Since you've clearly decided to stick around out of pure interest (whether in the topic or the staff), do yourself a favor and actually read carefully what I wrote regarding those two specific threads.

So now you're trying to kick me out too? Is that just how things work with the crowd that can't stand Powerlock?

Hmm. I already took the hint. I saw exactly what kind of move a moderator makes like that, I understood the implications, and honestly? I agree. It was a responsible move by a responsible moderator—one that the rest of you should take as a lesson in basic decency.

As for those people who wish they could see a certain general swinging from a gallows, or those acting all sad about his passing? That’s their problem, not mine.

James Diaz8 said:@Paul Green31... I haven't seen you around in ages, but my bad
I honestly thought you were a bit more grounded and sharp than this.
This whole thing just proves what I've been saying about being part of the Powerlock cult.

Look, when you bash your head against a wall and it hurts and you're crying, your biggest problem isn't that you tried to walk through solid matter—even though physics says you can't. Your biggest problem is the person telling you why it happened, who is just as stupid for suggesting there are laws you can simply ignore.

And let's not even get started on the consequences. You guys are lucky the world isn't moderated by The Scotsman, because for certain things happening over there, he doesn't even ask questions; he just "cools you off" for three days straight.

This guy, bless him, puts up with a swarm of clones—this being the 19th fake account in a row—and fights with everyone just to protect the right of dissenters to have an opinion. He swallows arguments that are way below his level because he wants everyone to have a fair shot at a civilized debate, and yet you all repay him with these half-baked complaints.

And then people claim those who respect him for his persistence are the stupid ones.

If I were the moderator there, the complaints would be coming in faster than requests for maternity leave these days; half the page would be grey and the rest would be flashing red. Some people would even lose their internet access after being reported to the ISP for relentless cloning and spamming the forum. Maybe then we’d see some actual order and real arguments, where rules are followed instead of intentionally broken or danced around just to launch these attacks on a moderator whose only job is to enforce the rules.

You’re attacking a man simply because he does his job with integrity.

Zachary Gomez2 said:I was quoting things specifically related to the threads about Đura Brodarac.
So don't try to put words in my mouth or lecture me.

Oh, I see. You're trying to separate the talk about Brodarac being dead from the talk about the suspected war crimes he committed...

How fascinating. Apparently, Powerlock is some kind of enlightened human being who doesn't want to kick a man while he's down—or, you know, after he's passed—but instead wants to maintain some shred of dignity for the deceased. They kept the other discussion open so we can actually talk about the crimes, while just asking that we don't drag the late general into it.

Yeah, clearly a perfectly valid moderator move that any sane person with even a hint of empathy would agree with. Huge thanks to Powerlock for not acting like some mindless tabloid hack who gets a kick out of desecrating corpses, and instead trying to bring a little decency into this world.

Zachary Gomez2 said:To prevent us from getting too bogged down in baroque legalistic arguments (Paul Green31), you can find direct links to the specific problematic sites on the previous page. It simply isn't possible to provide a blanket response to these issues.

You mean like this post that got nuked... and all because they broke the subforum rules?

James Diaz8 Asks:
I don't think so. 🙂

Yeah, exactly... just scraping by—but then again, it’s different for everyone, isn't it?

Patten of the North America

The corrupt godfathers of the North America. 🙂

The Hypo Alpe Adria Criminal Case.
The bank of war profiteers.

The farmer turned millionaire.

The Hypo Alpe Adria Criminal Case. Seriously, where do we even start with this mess? It’s one of those massive scandals that just leaves you staring at the ceiling wondering how anyone could be so incredibly corrupt. All that money, all those shady deals, and the sheer scale of the greed involved... it's enough to make you lose faith in everything. Is there any end to these financial nightmares?
The money trail.

Old-school cronyism, done the Bavaria way.

Did Stoiber support the purchase of the Hypo Group Alpe Adria in America?

Look at that date: December 18, 2009. 🙂

Even if you don't know a lick of German... just look at this. Stoiber, What a complete disaster. A total scandal.bank, at the bank controversial The purchase.

And what about this?

The central bank had actually blocked the sale of HGAA to the state bank at first. If they hadn't, that whole deal to hand everything over to the Bavarian group would have completely fallen through. Why? Because according to the terms of the contract, every single region where HGAA operated had to sign off on the pact—and that included the US. But then, right after Stoiber met with Sanders, the US suddenly changed its tune. By September 12, 2007, the National Bank gave the green light. What a convenient turnaround, right?

🙏

Talking to Der Spiegel, Stoiber tried to claim he only used his "close political ties to America" to smooth things over. But get this—he’s insisting the deal between BayernLB and the American National Bank was already set in stone before he even showed up. He claims he wasn't even involved in the purchase agreement between BayernLB and HGAA. Seriously? Since when does a guy like that just sit on the sidelines?

🙏🙏

Look, I'll give you enough material to work with, just tell me ☕😁

And by pure coincidence, the policy rules seem to conveniently skip this instruction:

Click and enjoy...

So, there it is—strictly by the book, totally professional, and incredibly educational.

Sorry, but I and a whole bunch of other users aren't interested in clicking through and reading German, Turkish, or Russian articles...

Go ahead, throw out some other questionable moderator moves...

Zachary Gomez2 said:No, I am referring to the very reason I joined this thread in the first place—something my own posts clearly articulate. Let’s not descend into mindless spamming, shall we?

Look, I haven't seen you quote a single moderator move from Powerlock. You've only been quoting regular users.

We already settled this during the last debate... Look, I get it, you don't like it and you aren't used to it, but as long as someone is a forum user, they have every right to their own opinion. 😉

Richard James2 said:I am reading, despite what you claim. Look, I noticed your very first post—back before you started terrorizing everyone with those annoying little marks—where you had that classic, burning desire to crush an opponent with undeniable logic, only to end up stumbling over phrases like just get a clue and stuff like that. Honestly, you're right about one thing. It’s pathetic when moderation is so bad that it lets a bunch of people hiding behind ten different fake accounts mock anyone who actually knows what they're talking about. Namaste.

Yeah, yeah, that's exactly where we are. You act uninformed, slightly less intelligent—that's a polite way of saying stupid, though she tries to play it off by saying "a little less smart"—and then you pivot to that condescending "go educate yourself" or "read the press" routine. Typical.

I'll admit it, sometimes I am uninformed. And when I want to learn something, I come here and read what Powerlock has written. He’s guided more forum users and readers than the entire mainstream media combined. 🙂

The logic behind that kind of ethics was simple when they were just chasing celebrities and the Royal Family: They’ve got money, so they can afford to suffer. We follow them, we pry into their private lives—that’s supposedly the price of success in a free society. But now that we know Murdoch's journalists were wiretapping the phone of a murdered underage rape victim, and even deleting messages from the grieving family's inbox just to make room for new ones—messages the parents and police thought were proof their daughter was still alive—there are no more excuses.

The Guardian commented today that it will be incredibly hard to erase the legacy of Murdoch's actions. Thanks to him, the media has become much more ruthless. For the first time in history, public shaming has evolved from mere scandal into the total destruction of a person—like what happened to Princess Diana—or at least driving them into complete financial ruin.

The public has been "trained" to demand information about others that doesn't concern them at all. Does this mean the consumers themselves have also been trained to respect their own privacy less? After the Murdoch era, will citizens actually trust the media more, or will they simply fear them?

Murdoch also brought the ethics of "snitch culture" through the front door of journalism. In the UK, eight police officers have already been arrested on suspicion of searching police files on thousands of citizens on behalf of Murdoch's outlets. They even paid waiters to report what someone ate in a restaurant, taxi drivers to recount conversations between passengers, and housekeepers to hand over trash bags to journalists instead of the garbage man so they could dig through them for info. The result of all this snitching? Alienation and the feeling that you can't trust anyone anymore.

Was Murdoch a general for the New World Order? Who knows. But we do know that the old order ruthlessly tore down anything it could wherever it went.

.

And for all the "nonsense" people post here on the forums, you can always push back. That’s the whole point of a forum, isn't it? You click reply and write a correction.

A forum is basically just one long process of correcting false statements, only without the restrictions you find in Congress.

Look, you have the floor; go ahead and correct them. You even have the right to call out insults against colleagues, so you can bring that up here too.

But as the wise Luke would say, this isn't an attempt to correct a mistake or an insult against a colleague—it's just cheap politics masquerading as an objection.

Powerlock is in a league of its own, and there will always be forum users jealous of it. It's nothing new or surprising among our local political hacks. 🙂

James Diaz8 said:Look, I can tell you personally that the same people reposting his stuff (😲🤣🤣) could end up having some serious copyright issues on their hands. 😁

And yeah... looking at the PDF, the world was full of absolute nonsense back then. Just facts tangled up in chaos. Amen.

Take it easy. 👋

Here are just two recent posts. These are exactly why people come to this forum—they’re so packed with info that you don't even need to bother reading the entire thread.

Powerlock said:I honestly doubt we’ve seen the worst of this yet. For us to actually reach a point where we can say the storm has passed, something massive has to happen to fix the underlying issues that triggered this crisis in the first place. Look at the situation right now: within the Eurozone, there's still zero consensus on issuing common bonds. On top of that, the political will for any further integration—let alone syncing up fiscal policies—is basically evaporating. So, what’s the only response they have left? Just more and more drastic austerity measures across various Mediterranean countries. Sure, maybe those cuts make sense on a spreadsheet, but politically? It's total madness. The people in those countries—especially the public sector workers who are getting hammered by these cuts—don't even realize they were part of the problem. They don't see that their own spending helped trigger this mess, so why on earth should they be the ones forced to carry the entire weight of the crisis on their backs?

The Euro has basically proven itself to be nothing more than a political currency through this whole crisis. It’s clearly just a project driven by political agendas rather than any actual economic logic. Honestly, the situation looks a lot like... September 16, 1992. It led to the UK pulling out of the ERM—basically a precursor to the euro. Back in 1990, in the lead-up to what we now call "Black Wednesday," the pro-European wing of the Conservative Party decided to drag the UK into the ERM. Why? Mostly just pure politics. They could smell Thatcherism dying and were already scrambling to grab whatever was left of her legacy. They also made a massive miscalculation regarding German reunification. They thought it would strengthen the Deutsche Mark "overnight," completely ignoring the staggering costs Germany was about to face during the unification process. And they missed something even more obvious: most British foreign exchange reserves and securities were tied to the US dollar. Then there’s the issue of the economy itself. The UK runs on a boom-bust cycle, which just doesn't mesh with the economic cycles in mainland Europe. Over there, heavy government intervention in the economy tends to smooth out those wild peaks and valleys. In the UK? We've never had the political will for that kind of intervention, and frankly, we don't even have the legislative framework to make it happen. How did they miss all of this?

Once the markets catch onto these blatant inconsistencies and logical gaps in the political framework governing economic and monetary relations, anyone with enough sense is free to bet against them. People start moving their money to protect themselves from the inevitable collapse of such flimsy political deals. Back in 1992, George Soros was the guy who realized the United Kingdom had no business being in the ERM—and certainly shouldn't be part of any future single currency. If the British government thought they were right, he decided to prove them wrong in the most painful way possible. On September 16, 1992, the pound sterling's exchange rate against the German mark absolutely cratered. It went from somewhere north of 3 marks and maybe 4 pence per pound, straight down to 2 marks and 10 pence. That’s a massive 30% drop in value, all while the rigid ERM rules only allowed for fluctuations of about 6% per year. The UK as a nation lost over 800 million pounds in cold, hard cash that day, but even that number barely scratches the surface of the actual damage. It doesn't account for the massive opportunity cost—the profit the state could have banked if they'd just pulled out of the ERM and devalued the pound on their own terms before Soros launched his market assault. We're talking about a missed profit of roughly 27 billion pounds. And how much of that ended up in George Soros's pockets? About 10 billion. Just think about that.

It’s worth noting that George Soros saw through the nonsense of the UK joining the ERM back in early '91. He went out on a limb and warned everyone publicly. It’s the exact same story we're seeing today. You've got a whole line of investors—both individuals and massive institutions—sounding the alarm. They're all saying the same thing: the Euro is fundamentally broken. How can you expect countries like Greece and Germany to share a single currency and pretend everything is perfectly fine? It isn't. It just isn't.

The problem we faced back in '92 was nothing compared to what we're dealing with today. Back then, the solution was simple: the UK just pulled out of the ERM. They were kicked out, or they walked away—either way, they were done with it.

We all know that back in 1992, just like today, the United Kingdom had an economy that was incomparably stronger, faster, and wealthier than Greece or Italy. So, you have to wonder—has anyone actually learned anything in the meantime?

The best way to handle this crisis is to have a handful of countries ditch the European Central Bank immediately. Seriously, the faster the better. It’ll actually be a win for them in the long run. If you look back at 1992, staying out of that mess was ultimately what saved the United Kingdom's economy and its people. Sure, there was a brief period where traveling from the UK to Europe—or even to a war-torn America—was insanely expensive, but looking at the big picture? It paid off.

That would be the end of the political fantasy: turning the European Union into one massive, centralized superstate, with the European Central Bank serving as its ultimate symbol. Right now, the bureaucrats aren't quite there yet. They’re still perfectly happy blowing everyone else's money to chase this dream of a single empire stretching from Gibraltar to Leningrad—with themselves sitting right at the center of it all. And that dream? That’s exactly why Greeks and Italians are losing their jobs while Germans are stuck footing the bill for their debts.

This second guy hit the nail on the head. He provided a perfect cross-section of the whole situation. Honestly, he included so much info that I couldn't find anywhere else, even after digging through plenty of local and international news coverage on the topic. The man deserves nothing but... 🙏🙏🙏.

Powerlock said:I honestly wanted to just ignore this whole mess with News of the World entirely—just like I’ve ignored that rag for the last 20-plus years living in the UK.

The scandal just keeps getting bigger. Now we’re seeing new allegations hitting two more daily papers owned by Murdoch's News Corp. It’s getting ugly. The editors over at The Sun—the biggest tabloid in the UK—are being accused of straight-up fraud to get their hands on the medical records of former Prime Minister Gordon Brown's young son. We're talking about a four-year-old kid at the time. They took an unconfirmed diagnosis of cystic fibrosis and ran with it. And it wasn't just that. Five years earlier, they published stories claiming Gordon Brown's newborn daughter was dying from brain hemorrhaging during birth—back when he was still the US Treasury Secretary. Can you believe that? Now, the police are looking into private investigators who were allegedly working hand-in-hand with the newsrooms inside Murdoch's media empire. Is anyone actually surprised?

Another bombshell dropped this afternoon. Abbey National—which is owned by that Spanish giant Banco Santander—just put out a statement raising some seriously shady suspicions. It turns out journalists from the high-profile Sunday Times (yeah, the one owned by Rupert Murdoch) allegedly pulled a fast one on Abbey National’s telebanking staff. Get this: they reportedly posed as Gordon Brown himself. They used the standard telebanking features to trick employees into handing over sensitive details about Brown’s accounts, his debts, credit card spending, and all sorts of private info. Can you believe the nerve? The bank even named a famous TV and stage impersonator who was identified in an internal investigation as being involved in one of those calls. And because this guy actually holds an account at Abbey National himself, the bank noticed a massive chunk of change landing in his personal account from the Sunday Times corporate account just a few days after the call. Talk about suspicious, right? Abbey National says they’ve handed over the entire file and all their investigative findings to the police this morning. This whole thing is a mess.

More arrests are coming, it's practically a given. And if things keep going this way, heads are going to roll at the top of the British intelligence agencies. I mean, they’re supposed to be the ones looking out for security when it comes to the Prime Minister and the Cabinet, right?

Between today's chaos and the Government's decision to push back NewsCorp's takeover of the remaining 40% of SKY News by at least six months, it looks like we're watching the final collapse of the biggest media empire on the planet. This whole thing is a total train wreck waiting to happen—especially if the FBI decides to jump in. There's talk this week about opening an investigation into whether other Murdoch-owned outlets in the US—like the NY Daily News or even the high-brow Wall Street Journal—were also caught up in illegal info-gathering. We're talking about hacking the voicemails of victims from the 2001 Twin Towers attacks. Can you imagine?

Look, Rupert Murdoch has always been a polarizing figure. He was a relentless Rottweiler in the media landscape, a guy who never gave a damn about old-school traditions or professional standards. But let's be real: he's also the man who turned the media industry into a massive, cutthroat corporate machine. He purged idealism from newsrooms, kicking out anyone who actually wanted to "change the world." Instead, he brought in the big bucks. His top journalists and editors were making bank, getting paid just like Wall Street sharks, bankers, or Hollywood stars. No less, no more.

So, what did that transformation cost us? In a nutshell: it cost us everything. It meant completely ignoring the civil and human rights of anyone who happened to catch the eye of Murdoch's tabloids. Whether it was members of the Royal Family, a fallen soldier in Afghanistan, or even the Prime Minister's own kid. They just wiped out every sense of decency and privacy in their path.

James Diaz8 said:@Paul Green31..I saw it..just pure cluelessness..and honestly, it’s pathetic how they miss the mark on so many different things.

my bad.

Oh, you saw bias from other people?

By the way, what does "targeting" even mean here? Is it when a major newspaper like the New York Times swipes your text and publishes it?
Or is it when hordes of forum users, who think they know everything about current events, stalk you and read your posts just because they want to dig deeper into certain topics?

Well, he's being stalked, and his writing is being stolen and published. When you can actually match your own post to an article in a mainstream paper, then come talk to me about being targeted.

Also, I honestly think the admins should protect the dignity of the moderator role and just shut this thread down. According to the rules of this site, this whole thing is prohibited anyway. They haven't provided a single link showing any questionable moderator action. All they've provided are links to his opinions—opinions that clearly rub the left-liberal crowd the wrong way. If you hate his views, deal with them using arguments in the debate. If you have a problem with moderation, use the official channels this forum provides. The admins will fix any actual injustice, so rest easy.

So, either provide links to suspicious moderator decisions, or stop this ridiculous witch hunt. It's getting pathetic.

Bottom line: I hope Loki settles this, and a huge shoutout to Boki.

👋

This is just unbelievable. If we’re talking about the general interest boards where political leanings don't matter as much, he’s great. Even his ideological opponents admit he’s top-tier. But when it comes to domestic politics? Suddenly, he’s "not good enough." Meanwhile, on other parts of this site, moderators handle some of the most heated political topics—like the situation with Mexico and the rest of the ex-America region—perfectly fine.

The only shame is that we can't just clone him and drop him into the other political sub-forums. Maybe then the protectionism would stop, and they'd quit only moderating right-wing views. Then the Politics board could actually be a balanced, truly free forum where any user can decently express their opinion on a topic, instead of having an article about the President's advisor from America deleted six times only after someone finally tracks down the admin.

And don't even get me started on those "protected" Revolutionaries and others who think they're so interesting—until they run into the KGB and get hit with a permanent ban. Because apparently, there's a whole different set of rules here, and they’re out immediately. For some of the people who have been permanently banned, those of us without access to the CP mod team know exactly whose clones they are, but the mods stubbornly refuse to even check certain IP addresses.

So, just let the man moderate. If someone has a problem with a warning they received, there's a specific thread for that. Let the admins and super-mods decide if the moderation or the warning was justified. Likewise, if someone gets banned, they can always start a thread in the KGB section, and the ban will be overturned just like it has many times before. And please, spare me those optional attacks claiming he's only good for one specific sub-forum where he doesn't interfere with the established cliques and power structures. I hope we're done with that old story.

Politics is crying out for another moderator like him—someone who ensures equality among users, where you aren't punished for your opinions, but only for breaking the rules. I’d love to see at least one place in this country dealing with politics that actually measures everyone by the same yardstick. Honestly, I'm just glad that over at Powerlock, that's actually the intention.

amberheron62 said:It would be totally awesome if the mods could tone down comments like this in threads where it's mostly women who've been trying to conceive for a while. It feels a little out of line to imply they're doing all these fertility methods just for kicks, acting like they're forgetting that, hey, you still need a guy to make the whole thing work! ☕

The ability to "speak your mind without a filter" is one of the highest traits of *Homo sapiens*. Unfortunately, only a select few actually possess it.

And yeah, sure, when your chat gets deleted, you start whining, but then you immediately go and pull a moderator's quote because it bothered you. 😳

@Tyler Grant76

If my habit of calling out people who "spin" things or twist facts bothers you so much, here's a tip: go read some fluff pieces on a lifestyle blog instead. Maybe find a sub-forum meant for lonely hearts and sensitive souls. That seems more your speed.

Calling out distortions is perfectly normal in political discourse. If we start banning people from pointing out when someone else is twisting the truth—especially when they back it up with actual evidence—then this whole politics section is going to be a ghost town.

By the way, I’ve noticed a sudden wave of attacks against slybison8. It's pretty obvious his views are rubbing some people the wrong way. Apparently, it’s "unacceptable" to them that a Moderator on the Politics board isn't affiliated with the HNS, doesn't scrub posts in the thread about Josipovic, and chooses to express clear political opinions rather than just policing the board.

Just a friendly reminder: we live in a democracy where people are allowed to have opinions.

If his opinion is that your arguments are nothing more than blatant fabrications—and he provides proof to show why—who is this "super-admin" or god-tier moderator that's going to step in and stop him?

The whole point of a forum is the clash of ideas and the decent discussion that comes from it.
The days when you couldn't call out someone for claiming Marshall was a legend, or for using lines like what Balasevic calls "the greatest beast of our nations," are long gone. Technology brought forums into our lives and changed everything. We've moved into an era where liars can try to twist things, but everyone else has every right to call them out on it.

So, quit trying to play "protect the princess" and actually join the fight with logic. Let the readers decide who's lying and who's spinning. Defend yourself with solid arguments instead of cheap insults or trying to defame someone just because they told you your dad is bigger than yours.

And leave slybison8 alone. He's one of the few guys on this forum whose recent posts I actually bother to read. And from what I hear, I'm not the only one. Given how certain newspapers have a habit of lifting his posts and publishing them under their own names, it seems pretty silly to attack a guy who clearly reaches a much larger audience than the people he's calling out for lying.

Do yourself a favor: try using some real reasoning and see if you can reach that level.

All The Best

Hmm...
Why do I get the feeling this is just some poorly put-together ad?

But honestly, I’m right there with you on questioning the newer version of the site. Those recent updates are actually solid—they pack in tons of features that people on this old-school forum can only dream about.