Posts by neonfox12

Dear Supermoderator the edge, I was wondering if I could get your take on how things are currently playing out? Is there any chance we could work together to get everything back to a state of normalcy?

Anthony Jackson2 said:Since you’ve clearly earned your PhD in strawman arguments, I’m sure you’re absolutely right. 👍

Seriously, how much longer are you going to keep playing these games? This isn't some casual playground chat where you can just troll for fun.

Can you give me even one legitimate reason why I'm being targeted here? Is there a general reason why people are trying to push me off the football boards? What is the actual issue? Have I lied about anything? Have I insulted anyone? Why has this entire group been obsessing over this specific topic for a week straight without actually making sense?

Honestly, I feel like I'm shouting into a void...

Look, this quota-driven post is a textbook example of how people twist words in football just to suit their own narrative. Forgive me if I’m not fully caught up on all the details, but it feels like we’re looking at a classic straw man here. This entire forum is constantly flooded with posts just like this one. Honestly, how are you even supposed to respond to something like this? Is this just blatant trolling? Or have I spent two years being an active member of this community without actually learning what trolling looks like?

Adam Williams2 said:neonfox12, I don't really get why you're taking issue with the moderation on the football board when that oversight is simply a byproduct of our own behavior as users—yet you refuse to address the actual root cause.

Think of us as the Titanic, with the moderators and everyone else acting as the tip of the iceberg. Why does the Titanic—in this case, us—keep sinking over and over again? It’s because we refuse to acknowledge the massive, hidden part of the iceberg beneath the surface...

And since you've already made peace with the fact that Dinamo is exactly what it is—but you still claim ownership of the club, which is why you won't lift a finger to change anything and instead choose to argue about cheap beer and minor tactics—I don't know why you're complaining now. Just apply that same standard to the forum itself.😉 ☕

Anthony Jackson2 said:What exactly is the point of this thread? Is this really necessary just because you felt insulted or called out in someone else's post? I’m trying to figure out if this is actually a moderation issue that needs addressing, or if it’s just a personal grievance you're dealing with on your own.

Look, if you find yourself unable to participate in the football discussion forums—whether that’s because you don't vibe with how people communicate, you’re clashing with the moderation team, or there’s some other personal grievance—that is entirely on you. At the end of the day, it's like they say: a one-size-fits-all toilet seat doesn't actually fit everyone.

I honestly don't even know where to start with this one. It’s just... wow. There aren't really any words left in my vocabulary to describe the sheer absurdity of what we're witnessing right now. It feels like watching a slow-motion train wreck where you know exactly when the impact is coming, but you're still paralyzed by how messy it all looks. 👋

I honestly can't wrap my head around how you choose to communicate. It’s wild, really. But hey, I suppose that says more about your own character than anything else.

I’ve already laid out exactly why I started this thread—do I really need to draw you a map?

Can someone please explain why I am being constantly sidelined in these discussions? It feels like people are systematically misinterpreting my points—and frankly, I suspect it’s being done intentionally. I am being relentlessly targeted with insults and branded as nothing more than a mouthpiece for Jerry Maguire. It’s getting personal, and the disrespect is becoming hard to stomach. To make matters worse, whenever I report these posts, the moderators step in with warnings to everyone else, essentially telling them to stay quiet so they don't face suspension, all while implying that *I* am the one causing the friction. It’s incredibly frustrating. Am I out here scrutinizing their every word? No. Yet, I am being relentlessly trolled, and it seems like there is absolutely nothing being done to put an end to it.

Honestly, what really gets under my skin is how this keeps happening over and over again. To the moderators: I feel like I'm being met with nothing but negativity here. Honestly, I just want to get to the bottom of this and understand where the friction is coming from. But what happens when I try? You just come back and double down on the argument. It’s like trying to put out a fire by throwing gasoline on it. So, I have to ask: who is really the problem here? Is it the person actually trying to dig into the issue and find common ground, or is it the one dodging the conversation and refusing to smooth things over?
No matter what I say, I always get hit with the exact same response—it’s either you’re one of Jerry Maguire’s loyalists or you’re just plain clueless. Seriously, what on earth is that supposed to mean?

William Bennett53 said:Oh, here we go again... Look, if you genuinely feel like someone is provoking you, just hit the report button. If you’re asking for an opinion on why your post was flagged as trolling and someone gives you an answer, calling that response a "threat"—especially when the person replying isn't even a moderator for this forum—is actually what makes you the troll.

I certainly did. My entire history regarding my appeals against penalties is right there for anyone to see. I've filed reports on subsequent posts as well.

It wasn't about stubbornly labeling it a threat. Rather, I first asked him directly if he was making a threat, and then I pointed out that, given his tone, that was the only way I could interpret his message. My intention was to invite him to soften his rhetoric so we could actually focus on discussing the substance of the issues I'm facing.

Anyway, I'm dropping it. I'd prefer for everyone to just lay their cards on the table so I can address them directly. I truly hope that once we're done, we can view this as nothing more than a misunderstanding that spiraled in the wrong direction, and get back to discussing things on the forum like adults.

Eric Fox7 said:And one more thing.
The first two posts are complete opposites of each other.

You call for official institutions, only to conclude in your next post that laws aren't actually being enforced—meaning the very agencies you're relying on aren't doing their jobs.😵

How would you even label this behavior? Is it provocation, trolling, sheer ignorance, or just plain nonsense???

I'm quoting this third part:

I wouldn't say a word unless you people gave us concrete solutions on how to handle the situation with Real Madrid's management.

If you look back at at least a hundred posts across all our discussions, there have always been suggestions on what needs to happen. One obvious solution is to trigger the elections that they are legally required to hold.

Go ahead and read through them before you come back here asking questions.

EOD

Thanks. Was that difficult for you?

I advocated for using the institutions because I believe we need to keep "spamming" them. Besides, it's the job of those agencies to act, not ours. In my second post, I was simply stating a sad reality. However, that doesn't mean fans should be out there trying to do the work of government agencies.

I’d define your approach as a fundamental misunderstanding of my point.

You missed the essence of what I was saying: how do we resolve the crisis with Real Madrid's board, which ignores the law and stays in power illegally by leveraging certain institutions? Even the local news outlets already know that elections need to be called and the law upheld. But the real question remains: how do we actually force those elections to happen??

Eric Fox7 said:Look, I don't have much to say regarding how this subforum is moderated since I'm not part of the mod team myself.

I was simply addressing your specific question about what makes your posts an issue, and that’s really all I have to offer.

But you aren't. And that is precisely the crux of the matter. You've pointed out certain posts and claimed they are problematic, yet you haven't actually explained *why*. Please, walk me through your reasoning—tell me why those specific posts cross the line. I'd much rather read your actual perspective than spend my time trying to guess what you're thinking.

@klodovik If you have evidence, please go ahead and link those posts. Otherwise, your argument doesn't really add anything to the conversation; if anything, it just muddies the waters. Thanks.

William Bennett53 said:neonfox12, we aren't going to handle things this way here. If you honestly believe someone is breaking the rules, just hit the report button. Just because you don't like what a moderator has to say doesn't mean you're being threatened. Let's just move forward with a bit more caution.

William, how on earth am I supposed to interpret his message? What kind of vibe is he actually trying to send here?
"Fortunately for you, I'm not a moderator over at Football, otherwise, someone using such provocative rhetoric would have been kicked out after their first three posts."?

Let me say this again: I am here to reach an understanding and to get some clarity on why I feel like I'm being singled out. Am I lying? Have I actually insulted anyone? Am I flipping my stance back and forth like a pendulum? What exactly is my crime here?

Eric Fox7 said:I’m not threatening you; I’m just saying you’re lucky the moderators over there are pretty lenient.
Otherwise, you’d probably be facing a partial ban by now.

But hey, that’s not my call—I’ll leave it to the rest of the mod team to weigh in.

Actually, yes, you are threatening me. You're implying I've violated some unwritten rule because I haven't read every single thread—which, apparently, is a cardinal sin on this platform.

In my view, being labeled a "troll" or accused of bad faith communication doesn't automatically make it true just because the majority happens to disagree with me. Especially after only three posts, as you claim...

As far as I understand the rules, a single moderator doesn't have the authority to hand out a partial ban on their own whim.

So, honestly, it feels like you just jumped in here to derail the conversation. How else am I supposed to interpret your sudden intrusion, especially when you retreat so quickly without even addressing the questions I put to you?
Feel free to stick around if you like, but my goal isn't to pick fights or stir the pot. My goal is to address the current state of things—which, frankly, consists of constant insinuations, instigation, and, if I may be so bold, outright insults.

Eric Fox7 said:Maybe the issue lies in posts like these:

So what’s the alternative strategy here? It certainly isn't just being positive and cheering for something that used to be called Real Madrid or the US National Team.

To put it bluntly, you're trying to lecture people who have been fighting against the system (Jerry Maguire) for years, even though you haven't personally stepped foot in the stadium, let alone endured what they have.

You've already been told several times that you're circling back to topics that have been hashed out at least fifty times before, yet you refuse to let it go, instead piling on one baseless claim after another.

And luckily for you, I'm not a moderator over at this forum, because with that kind of provocative rhetoric, you would've been kicked out after the first three posts. :m ig:

It was explained to you quite clearly: you have five old threads about Real Madrid, there's the supporter thread, the national team thread—so go read up and educate yourself.
Instead of coming in here with these "brilliant" questions like, why is there so much spitting and negativity in the 🙂

What exactly is controversial about those quoted posts?

Alright. I'll admit I jumped in a bit hot because of how this thread feels, but why won't you let me get my point across? Instead, you keep dragging me back into it. I have a stance that I intend to hold, especially since no one has actually proven me wrong.

The current way of fighting isn't working; it's proven to be a failure. Now, I don't claim to be some seasoned expert who knows the perfect way to wage a war. But tell me, whose victory is it if we all just give up on supporting the team?

And how would you know that? Why are you lying now? I haven't been to an MLS game since back when a mid-tier team was riding high and then got absolutely crushed 3-0 at Yankee Stadium without putting up any fight. Am I lecturing you? About what, exactly? Did I say we should stop worrying about Jerry Maguire? Or am I just irritated by the constant, baseless bashing? Look, I get it—it’s hard to stomach that our justice system hasn't delivered for years, but for heaven's sake, let's open a separate debate about the club's political side. I'm here to talk football, so that's where I stay.

These issues clearly haven't been discussed properly. Am I giving up, or is everyone else? Because I feel like I'm constantly being pulled back into this, even though I thought we settled this last week when I laid out my position. What exactly is "baseless"?? We shouldn't be arguing like this...

Are you threatening me?

Look, not everyone has the luxury of sitting around reading everything; people have jobs and other responsibilities. I'll read, but like I said in the thread, I've been following Real Madrid actively since 2000. Over the last two years, I've followed less due to time constraints. But I'm not clueless, and I see exactly what you're trying to pin on me...

And how am I supposed to respond to that? Are you saying this thread is supposed to be nothing but a venting session for negativity? What on earth? 😕

I’m not looking to vent this time; I genuinely just want some clarity on where my communication is falling short in this specific thread. I can't help but feel like my words are constantly being misinterpreted, and even worse, people are attributing things to me that I never actually said.

Eric Fox7 said:If you take any other angle when discussing GNK Dinamo Chicago or the US National Team drama, it basically means you are:

1. Uninformed
2. A thief like Jerry Maguire (or would be if he were in his shoes), or simply on Jerry Maguire's payroll
3. As dumb as they come

Claiming that people were thieves or shady in the past, are now, or will be in the future is usually just grasping at straws—something you claim to have mastered.

This post has left me quite perplexed. I am certainly not uninformed, which should be evident from my previous contributions. I’ve stated in countless posts how much I despise figures like Jerry Maguire. So, what's left? Am I just "as dumb as they come"? Am I justified in labeling this post as a direct, gloves-off insult?

I am kindly asking the moderators of this football thread, as well as their leadership, to explain exactly what the issue is here. I want to participate in the football discussions, but not under these circumstances. Furthermore, I believe I have every right to maintain my stance that society as a whole shares the blame for allowing someone like Jerry Maguire to hold power. In my view, he is a symptom of the problem, not the root cause.

On top of that, I'm being accused of lying, so I'd love to know exactly what I supposedly fabricated. If I haven't lied, then is this just blatant trolling on their part?
An example of the accusation:

12-10-2012 said:Everything you wrote above is just repackaging Jerry Maguire's old clichés in your own words, while dragging the Red Sox into it and spinning a string of lies (which I won't list here).
On top of that, you're throwing in that classic, cheap demagoguery about "critical mass and mentalities"...

To way you're putting things really turns my stomach, and from what I can see, it's hitting a nerve with quite a few others here too.

electricharbor30, I’m not saying you overstepped once; I’m saying you’ve been overstepping for quite some time now. If I were running the show here as a moderator, you would have been banned ages ago.

And look, it isn't personal—I don't have anything against you specifically. It’s just your way of expressing yourself. I actually advocated for Eowyn to take on a moderator role for this forum because I truly believed she was the one who could "fix" the culture here. And honestly? I think she has. If every moderator had her level of integrity and skill, someone as insignificant as me wouldn't have even found a place on this board.

Maybe try thinking through the nonsense you post before hitting send, and then perhaps your posts won't keep getting deleted. 🙂

p.s. Just for the record: I'm saying all this even though I personally voted for the very rules currently being enforced on this forum—rules that she helped draft herself.

rustydrifter10 said:If you spot someone breaking the rules on a subreddit, just report them.

I've been scrolling through way too much content today, so I totally misread what you were getting at. My bad.

Got it. Will do. 🙂

Some updates regarding the forum. 🙂

Please feel free to file a report. 😉

P.S. I’d really appreciate it if we could keep this thread focused—please refrain from cluttering it with off-topic posts. Thanks in advance for understanding.

@rustydrifter10/">@@rustydrifter10... there's just no such thing as that kind of threat. 🙂

Matthew Anderson, stop stalking my threads. 😛

What you’re describing isn't an infringement in any meaningful sense. By framing it that way, you're essentially trivializing my entire point.

The issue isn't simply about deleting posts; it's about how deleting them distorts someone's actual perspective by stripping away their opportunity to explain themselves. We might not have seen a precedent for this exact scenario here yet, but the reality is that the principles of the European Convention on Human Rights are being bypassed on this platform. Ten years ago, we wouldn't have been dealing with this kind of thing in mainstream media, but nowadays, we're constantly bombarded with nothing but denials and damage control. It’s a slow process, but the rule of law is steadily moving forward.

When you dismiss the argument the way you just did, sure, it sounds ridiculous. But once you place these actions within a realistic framework of how power is exercised, the gravity of the situation becomes clear. When you use the term "private," you're implying that the owner can dictate every single rule arbitrarily, which simply isn't true. On a platform like this, constitutional and legal rights must hold weight. Even our own site rules suggest this, but currently, those rules are little more than ink on a page.

My goal here is to make my fellow users aware that if they feel they've been wronged based on the criteria I've mentioned, they are perfectly free to file a formal complaint with the appropriate regulatory agency. Once a report is filed, that agency is legally obligated to take action. And much like a corporation facing a federal audit, Reddit would be required to provide a full justification for its actions. Sometimes, a little extra paperwork is exactly what's needed to motivate people to actually implement change. 🙂

So, ever since I joined this community, there’s been this persistent claim that we are a "private forum." But what does the term "private forum" actually signify in a practical sense?

After doing a bit of light digging, I’ve landed on this definition:

A private forum is one that is restricted to registered members or a specific class of users. Similarly, a private-side website refers to a section of a site that is only accessible to a designated group of users.

Do I need to translate this? Or rather, do I need to be a registered user just to access the bulk of this site?

On the other hand, a public forum is defined as follows:

A public forum is a space that has, through tradition or established practice, been offered for general use by the public for purposes related to free speech.

Honestly, it’s becoming quite grating to hear people insist this is a private forum—it feels like a convenient shield used to hide poorly conceived decisions made by certain staff members.

The reality is that this is a privately owned public forum. Because of that distinction, there are certain standards and rules that should be respected, even if they seem inconvenient to most of the moderation team. To clarify what constitutes a public forum, let's look at this:

What exactly is a medium? A medium is any instrument used to transmit a message from a communicator to a recipient.
(Tom Hanks)

Media systems serve as channels for public information, designed to disseminate news and audiovisual content to inform, educate, and entertain the broadest segments of the population.
(Wikipedia) An online forum is a medium.

And what does the law say regarding media? —> The Law.

I’ll highlight this specific part:

Public information refers to the dissemination of information carried out through various media outlets.

I would kindly ask everyone to refrain from being misleading, because as a public medium, you are liable for damages caused by published information. In legal terms, damage is defined as:

Damage includes the reduction of someone's property or the prevention of its increase (material damage), as well as the infliction of physical or psychological pain or fear (non-material damage).

By misleading people into believing this is a private forum—which would exempt it from being a public medium—you are causing precisely that kind of psychological distress or fear. You are implying that many laws simply don't apply here, which effectively stifles the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 1 of the law linked above.

The provisions of this Law shall be applied and interpreted in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights.

The aspect where you most significantly infringe upon the rights of forum users is when you deny them the right to correction and rebuttal (non-material damage). It has happened far too many times where posts explaining a certain viewpoint are deleted, leaving behind only the snippet where the context is stripped away, making it look completely different. Naturally, that remaining post then gets penalized. Furthermore, this creates an atmosphere of fear, as many people are now afraid to voice their actual opinions for fear of being banned.

I’m writing this response because I’ve noticed a recurring pattern of spreading misinformation, which essentially serves to mislead the less informed users here on Reddit.

I really think it’s time to put an end to this kind of practice.

Sophia Thomas7 said:There’s a logical flaw in your comparison. For the sake of argument, let’s assume partial bans are justified. If they are, there’s a reason—namely, someone caused trouble on the PDF. The mods have a responsibility to review whether a ban should be lifted, but they aren't obligated to just wipe the slate clean.

A real comparison would be someone who actually committed acts of terrorism claiming they’ve repented just so they could be allowed back into America. In this case, we aren't guessing whether someone caused issues on the PDF—we already know they did.

You make a fair point. I was typing in a rush and ended up choosing a pretty flawed analogy for the logic of "there's a possibility someone might act, even if we don't know for sure." That’s why I leaned on such heavy-handed terms. I really missed the mark with the terrorist comparison; please accept my apologies.

But here is the reality: these issues happened five years ago. After that much time, even people who end up in prison get a second chance at redemption. Is this forum really that rigid? 🤔

David Foster80 said:I didn't read it, sorry bear 🕺

That one is on me. 🕺

I might be stepping out of line here, but I simply can't stay silent on this matter. I find the comments made by our fellow forum member briskjackal5 to be incredibly malicious. It feels on par with those who would defend letting undocumented immigrants cross into America even if they posed a potential terrorist threat. Honestly, I’d go so far as to say this is bordering on hate speech. It seems quite possible that this stems from a sense of personal animosity. As the saying goes, a barking dog doesn't hurt the village.

Regarding his specific phrasing: "To ide obratno.
They shouldn't be the ones searching for a 'permanent justification' for anything. Not now, and not ever. A parole hearing is a permanent solution." I think we can apply the following analogy to his logic --> "That works both ways. Judges shouldn't be required to hunt for reasons to grant someone parole. Not now, and not ever. Prison is a permanent solution."

To put it more broadly, you could draw similar parallels with mental health facilities, juvenile detention centers, or other rehabilitation institutions. I am intentionally choosing examples involving individuals considered "worse" than ZMM. I have to say, I am genuinely shocked that after five years, someone hasn't earned a second chance. I could understand if he had already squandered such an opportunity, but from what I gather, he hasn't. Look, it's not like he murdered someone or robbed a bank; he was simply socially maladapted when interacting with others. Does a mistake like that really warrant being cast out from society for more than five years? I am appealing to everyone's sense of reason.

Pardon the intrusion, and best regards to all.

Eric Hernandez said:Please, stop talking nonsense.
He was commenting on the content of your writing, essentially saying your logic didn't hold water. I don't know how you interact with everyone else on this forum, but we've never played those games here, and that isn't an insult. At most, it could be seen as trolling if that’s how you choose to interpret it.
Calling someone a "clueless idiot" is a direct personal attack. We have users named Scumbag and Fatass on this board, so calling someone those names would absolutely be considered an insult.
If you felt Tim's post was an insult, I honestly fear that navigating interpersonal communication in the real world might be a struggle for you.

Regarding the bold text, I can only send one massive 🤦 And once again, you’ve dismissed everything I said as total garbage. 🙄

And after typing all that out, you still haven't had a "lightbulb moment"? What kind of logic allows him to discredit my post like that? Where are his actual arguments to prove me wrong? Where does this style of communication lead? You said it yourself—it leads straight to trolling. Is this really how this thread should be moderated? Through the entire official record?

No, I’m not offended; someone speaking to me like that doesn't have the power to hurt my feelings. However, I feel like I was just met with the same energy, and now I'm the one facing a penalty. Besides, why should the peak of this discussion be someone being condescendingly belittled?

Calling someone a "clueless idiot" is just as much an insult as calling them a moron. I can't even begin to describe how pathetic and misplaced it feels to hand out a 45-point penalty for that, especially when you compare it to the insults that earn people far fewer points. Look, you guys specifically mentioned that you'd be moderating more leniently, yet you're handing out 45 points for a "clueless idiot" comment? In a fair system, if you want to remove someone for that kind of remark, a yellow card would suffice. That’s the standard set by the moderators I actually respect.

Anyway, I have no interest in going back and forth with you; you aren't even capable of addressing my actual point.

Dorian, Pringles, I’d appreciate it if you could ask Nica to provide their take on Tim's moderation style. There’s no sense in dragging this out. Thanks.

Nica, the reason I’m asking for your perspective is that I plan to cite this precedent during future discussions in the soccer thread. I’m coming to you because the lower-level users have proven themselves incapable of anything constructive; they're only interested in pointing fingers. So, please, give me your honest assessment: from your vantage point, was Tim's communication toward my minor contribution appropriate? Am I going to get penalized if I adopt that same arrogant, condescending tone in the soccer thread? Is calling someone a "clueless idiot" truly worse than telling them they "have no brain"?
Thanks in advance.