Posts by urbanwalker72

Keith Gonzalez said:No, discussing this would be considered off-topic. Just enough. Let’s talk about astrology, but let’s do it by actually roasting one another. I mean, literally. Not everyone will be up for it, obviously, but those who want to join in should probably adopt a different tone than what we've seen so far—otherwise, you're just going to keep seeing your posts get nuked by the mods. 🙂

While I certainly respect the sense of solidarity among moderators—given they often take on the thankless tasks that everyone else avoids—this level of blatant partiality has become quite excessive.

First off, I am certainly not having a one-sided debate here. Everyone is discussing this exact same topic. It seems to me that my posts are being removed under the pretense that astrology is off-topic, yet all the other discussions regarding astrology remain untouched.

Is there any reason why someone wouldn't be allowed to just jump into a conversation and ask, "What are your thoughts on homeopathy?"

What can I possibly achieve here?

Simply stating that "we were just joking around with each other" does not constitute a valid justification for deleting my posts.

Perhaps the federal government should simply hand the reins over to the astrologers. If someone decides to betray a confidence or compromise another person's story, the responsibility lies solely with them.

I find myself quite surprised by the conclusion you have reached. 😕

Following pseudoscience can pose genuine risks to one's physical well-being, regardless of how convincing or authoritative the rhetoric might seem.

A while back, drago Plečko utilized herbal infusions rooted in ancient Indian medicinal traditions—a legacy of ancestral wisdom where the recipes are so timeless they were essentially written in the stars.

After consuming a medicinal tea, a child suffered severe lead poisoning. To be clear, both the child and their parents had given full consent to the treatment. While there have been other cases of lead poisoning involving this product, the consequences weren't nearly as devastating as what happened here. If you want to find the truly bizarre part of this story, the same lead-laced tea actually poisoned drago Plečko himself. He is the one distributing these teas, which means he clearly believes in the efficacy of his own product. In the end, everyone just looked the other way and let the whole thing slide.

Based on your reasoning, am I to understand that no one here carries any responsibility for answering?

My posts keep getting flagged and removed because of entries like this. I honestly can't help but wonder: what exactly would prevent people from reading this?

Keith Gonzalez said:The subject itself isn't just "astrology," even if that's all anyone is talking about. Therefore, the solution is either to split the thread or to start discussing other topics.
To reiterate—posts were removed because they didn't contribute to the discussion, regardless of who wrote them. Any inadequate post gets deleted without exception; no one receives special treatment.

Astrology isn't illegal (nor should it be 🤷), and I personally view it as harmless entertainment. I haven't read this thread since yesterday, so I am unaware of what has been posted in the meantime.

When you claim that "no one is privileged," you are essentially insulting the intelligence of any objective reader following this topic.

Furthermore, you are asserting that discussing astrology within a thread titled "what is pseudoscience?" constitutes off-topic chatter.

Moreover, the moderator has concluded the debate regarding astrology by deciding that ASTROLOGY IS NOT PSEUDOSCIENCE, and has threatened to delete any future mentions of astrology in this specific thread.

What is an objective reader supposed to take away from that? 🤷

Astrology remains legal provided it avoids offering advice in the realms of medicine or law; otherwise, it falls under the jurisdiction of the criminal law on quackery. Unfortunately, it frequently offers such guidance, particularly regarding health matters.

There are certainly greater transgressions than simply disregarding the law. For instance, during his presidency, Ronald Reagan would consult with an astrologer when making significant decisions for the USA.

bluemason3 said:urbanwalker72: just the same old story in a different wrapper
One finds themselves bombarded by a deluge of questions—perhaps twenty per post—that are practically impossible to answer, which is clearly not intended to seek truth but rather to undermine credibility.
Such an aggressive posture disrupts the peace of our discussion, and frankly, it borders on trolling.

Could you please explain why your recent post, in which you attempt to discredit the actual age of astrology, is treated differently than my own contributions?

Or more pointedly—why hasn't it been removed?

If I had authored that exact same post under my own username, would it have been deleted?

Kimberly White63 said:For those who might be lost—we are discussing the concept of "what is pseudoscience." The last few pages have been completely overwhelmed by posts similar to the one above.

Is this an objective assessment, or merely your own subjective perspective?

Isn't it more likely that my contributions simply grate on your nerves and fail to meet your personal preferences?

Keith Gonzalez said:They simply don't fit the scope of this discussion.

As I have previously noted, moderator judgments are subject only to those positioned "above" them in the hierarchy.

And yes, there are certainly professionals present, but they aren't the moderators managing the specific PDF document where this topic resides. 😉

It is fundamentally inappropriate to discredit someone who is essentially selling smoke and mirrors. 🤷

Is, for instance, the debate between Vinković and Paar considered inappropriate? Or perhaps Vinković's decision to call out a school principal who squandered $100 on magical trinkets? $0.00

That would undoubtedly make certain individuals feel quite uncomfortable.

However, one must consider the fact that some 'alternative' activities are actually violations of the law, yet no one is held accountable. That is to say nothing of the practices that are unethical or physically hazardous to one's health...

Now we arrive at the core question: which carries more weight? Maintaining politeness during a debate, or addressing the aforementioned issues?

If there is an unwritten rule that prevents us from putting proponents of alternative methods in awkward positions, please just say so. I was clearly unaware of such a regulation. 🤷

an example of your line of reasoning (by the way, I haven't edited anything as a moderator on this thread, and personally, I am neither for nor against the direction of this debate):
urbanwalker72: how do the stars affect people
response: they don't; it is simply a matter of matching cycles.

Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that some of my posts were removed legitimately—even though they were not. For the purpose of this discussion:

Let us refine this and extract the core essence. There were many questions and answers. Let us analyze those specific points I insisted upon, which were deleted:

urbanwalker72: do the stars influence people, and can a horoscope be made for animals?

Person A: yes
Person B: no
Person C: both yes and no

Persons A, B, and C are all astrologers.

I am merely seeking clarification on who is correct, because we are facing a logical contradiction... it is impossible for everyone to be right simultaneously.

This is vital to the continued flow of our conversation. According to fundamental logic (and even under the law), this is referred to as a 'preliminary question.'

Are you suggesting that WHAT is listed here is grounds for deletion?

urbanwalker72: nobody has explained the direct influence of the stars to me
response: there isn't one; it is just synchronicity.

Slow down. That specific answer is not the point.

The point lies in the COMPLETELY CONTRADICTORY "YES" AND "NO" RESPONSES.

Do I not have the right to ask which of the provided answers is accurate?

it follows a bombardment of clusters of questions (about twenty per post) that would be difficult to answer, which clearly isn't the goal, but rather an attempt at discredit.

Are questions regarding whether one thing affects another, accompanied by "YES" or "NO" answers, difficult to answer?

Is discrediting someone who is clearly lying and being evasive prohibited?

What is the purpose of a discussion then? Is everyone required to agree?

edit: I forgot about the persistent calling out of interlocutors due to differing views. This must be a new forum rule where any arguments from opponents are automatically discarded if there is disagreement, rendering my additional arguments unnecessary. 😁

If you and I were watching an NFL game and I asked if a player is allowed to use his hands, and I received a "YES" from one person and a "NO" from another.

Do I have no right to ask who is correct? Are such questions supposed to be deleted?

While astrology may have various sub-disciplines, the very foundations upon which it rests cannot be CONTRADICTORY.

Such an aggressive approach disrupts the flow of the discussion, which is essentially trolling.

Is aggressively pursuing basic logic considered trolling?

Yes, I am able to see the deleted posts.

In your estimation, what specific reason would lead you to believe my deleted posts merited such removal?

None of the moderators handling that PDF hold a definitive pro or contra stance on this issue.
There is a distinct difference between expressing an opinion regarding a subject and personally attacking a fellow participant. You are certainly not the only individual whose contributions have been removed.

Did you actually find instances of personal attacks within my deleted posts, and if so, could you please provide a quote so that we may all examine them?

Furthermore, there are certainly moderators who lean toward the "pro" side. While I cannot say if any are "contra," I possess evidence of certain moderators who passionately defend pro positions on the alternative. Naturally, I cannot disclose the contents of private messages, as doing so would violate our protocols. And I, thank God, always adhere to the rules. 🙂

From what I can see, you aren't facing any particular issues here. No one has suggested that you lack constructiveness. 🤷

I do have an issue. My posts are being deleted without any objective reasoning or established criteria.

Keith Gonzalez said:Generally speaking, a moderator retains the authority to remove posts if they deem them unconstructive, off-topic, responses to deleted content, or similar, without providing further clarification. This policy applies not just to the Alternative section, but to the entire Forum.

Perhaps we could collectively review those removed posts to determine whether their level of constructiveness truly differs from the posts that remain visible?

For instance, have you happened to encounter any of the specific posts that were taken down?

In my ten years of participating in various online communities at regular intervals, I have never encountered any issues with moderators on any platform.

I have never had a single post removed, nor have I ever been banned.

This is a first for me, and the reason behind it seems quite transparent.

It appears the moderator simply takes issue with my perspectives and is therefore misusing his authority. Since I am not insulting anyone or violating any established forum rules, he chooses to delete my posts rather than issue a ban, as that serves as a more efficient way to silence me.

This situation pertains exclusively to the Alternative PDF section. As anyone can attest, I contribute to other sub-forums without any difficulty whatsoever.

Attempting to enforce strict logic and the scientific method within the Alternative PDF is considered grounds for deletion here.

If you visit the thread titled 'what is pseudoscience?', you will see that the moderator yielded to a user who requested that guests from the natural science PDF be excluded from the discussion.

Kimberly White63 said:That serves as an answer; one ought to focus on the subject matter rather than attacking the individual. However, if you find more satisfaction in issuing a penalty than in allowing me to simply delete my own post, I shall yield to your preference.

Please present the deleted posts where I was actually addressing the interlocutor instead of the topic.

Kimberly White63 said:The moderators maintain the ability to review deleted content. Furthermore, this thread includes a clear disclaimer advising users to consult the community guidelines PDF before posting, even providing direct citations from those rules. If these instructions remain unclear to you, there is little more I can do to assist.

I fully grasp why my inquiries regarding the deletion process itself were removed; that seems quite logical to me.

However, it remains a mystery to me why my subsequent attempts to ask questions—questions that simply went unanswered by the community—were also purged.

It appears that neither off-topic commentary nor personal insults have been targeted, yet my contributions have been singled out.

If I have indeed violated the forum policies, why was I not issued a formal warning or a suspension?

What is the reasoning behind the deletions? If my presence here is unwelcome, I will certainly stop posting, but it feels unjust to contribute meaningfully only to have my words erased without any explanation.🤷

To be clear, you have only offered an explanation for the posts concerning moderation matters..What is the justification for the removal of my other posts?

Approximately ten to fifteen of my posts have been removed without any explanation provided through public notice or private correspondence. I am certain that I did not direct any insults toward anyone or engage in similar behavior; rather, I simply revisited a few inquiries that had previously gone unanswered by the community, which I believe falls well within our guidelines.

My question is this: when a user's content is deleted, is there a mechanism available to review the original text to determine if its removal was truly justified under the rules?

If my presence here is considered an issue, please just let me know and I will refrain from contributing further.

However, I find myself in a position where I continue to write, only to have my words erased... Had I known my contributions would be met with such silence, I would not have bothered to post at all.🤷

The situation feels quite peculiar to me, as there was no warning issued nor a suspension imposed—just the sudden deletion of my words.

Could someone perhaps offer some insight into this matter and help me understand what I might have done wrong?