Posts by Morgan Peterson

Modesty Vidjeti 👍

Look, from what I can tell, the Corona situation remains exactly the same set of regulations and protocols; absolutely nothing has shifted since you were dealing with those partial payments. And let’s be clear: you didn't lose out on those funds simply because you stepped out of the elevator on the wrong floor once or twice. No, it was because of your constant loitering right at the entrance and that stubborn insistence on walking into the wrong storefront repeatedly. You refused to settle down, despite every single attempt made to point out where you were going wrong.
What could possibly have changed in your life to make things any different now?

Jesse Hughes6 said:Alright, fine. I didn't realize that having a discussion about vaccines and their actual side effects was considered a way of derailing the conversation from the topic at hand.

It isn't likely a matter of what was actually said, but rather how it was presented. That being said, I wasn't the one who deleted anything, so I am merely speculating. 🤔

Jesse Hughes6 said:@Morgan Peterson why did they scrub my reply to lazybones1 on that "Vaccination...part 4" thread?

It was just me comparing different countries and asking that guy what he actually thinks about mandatory vaccinations.

I haven't been following that specific thread closely, but since his response to you was also scrubbed, isn't it obvious the moderators felt both posts were derailing the conversation into unwanted territory?

I wasn't the one who deleted it, though I find myself in complete agreement with the decision; frankly, I would have done the exact same thing.
The issue at hand is that your post essentially serves as a direct link to a Facebook page dedicated to QAnon conspiracies and anti-vax nonsense.
If you truly wish to indulge in such content, you are more than welcome to head over to the Skeptic subreddit, where you can go wild with those kinds of posts.
However, within the main subreddit regarding COVID, specifically under the Data and Statistics megathread, there is absolutely no place for this sort of rhetoric.
And just so we are all clear for the record: consider this your first warning, because any subsequent post of this nature will result in an official strike due to violations of the subreddit rules, which are quite clearly defined.

wanderingpilot1 said:10/05/2021, 08:21 PM #11
coppersailor28
If you have been granted partial access on the Corona section, why not try "entering" (without logging in) through the skeptic subforum subforum, and then attempt to log in within one of those specific threads?
Perhaps it will work, perhaps it won't—but honestly, if that’s what was promised, why wouldn't one take a chance and try?

http://www.forum.com/showpost.php?p=8...7&postcount=11

10/06/2021, 11:23 AM #16
Morgan Peterson
This is purely a technical glitch currently being addressed, and I am confident it will be resolved. As for what coppersailor28 suggested, I haven't the slightest clue if that actually works, but the option for everyone who received partial access via the corona pdf should be sorted out very soon, making such workarounds unnecessary.

http://www.forum.com/showpost.php?p=8...7&postcount=16

vBulletin message
wanderingpilot1, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

Your user account may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Yes, precisely; that was our reasoning while we believed it was possible to grant partial access on the corona pdf without having it available on the Skeptics side.
Regrettably, we have since realized that the Forum lacks the technical capacity to facilitate this, given that the Skeptics section functions as a subforum of a subforum rather than a primary subforum, rendering the idea impossible.
I have already explained the solution to you once before—simply draft a coherent appeal to Anderlon and politely request that your partial access be applied.

wanderingpilot1 said:What does gender even have to do with this? Are you perhaps being sexist?

To my mind, we are simply dealing with an anonymous handle on a forum expressing an opinion. Does it truly matter whether that individual is male or female?

Furthermore, looking at the specific opinion you mentioned, I fail to see any trace of what you claim:
I quote: "Threats, conspiracies, Nazis, incitement to violence, insults, swearing"

Would you be so kind as to provide concrete examples of these supposed "threats, conspiracies, Nazis, incitement to violence, insults, or swearing" that would grant you the authority to babble about censorship?

In the examples you provided, none of those elements exist...

Listen, let me be clear. All this incessant bickering over other users won't help you achieve your ultimate goal—which is returning to the corona pdf.
Wouldn't it be far more prudent, rather than frantically churning out posts here and scattering inconsistent arguments across multiple threads, to simply enjoy the holiday break? Once you return, perhaps you could compose one coherent complaint regarding your own specific issue and ask Anderlon to lift your partial ban.
I have nothing further to offer you; the next move is entirely yours.
🙂 👋

wanderingpilot1 said:Where exactly are you spotting any "threats, conspiracies, Nazis, incitement to violence, insults, or profanity"?

Ah, so, because someone was called an idiot?

Is that really it? Is that his opinion, which may or may not be accurate?
If you disagree, then please, provide some actual arguments to the contrary.

But no, apparently that constitutes sufficient grounds for you to censor him...

Nazis???

The man simply stated this:
This isn't Nazi Germany, it's Western civilization in the 21st century...

What on earth is controversial about that? That we are living in Western civilization in the 21st century?
Or perhaps we aren't? Is that what you are claiming?

It’s a woman, not a man.
If you actually understood that, you would realize why her entire body of work is almost always flagged for a delete post, and now, quite predictably, for a partial one as well.
Because when someone persistently and intentionally violates the rules we have established, does it not become pointless to merely delete individual posts?

And leave the legal defense to me; Dylan can certainly ask for herself why this happened.

wearydriver40 said:Morgan Peterson, a ban for just one message and 45 points? Why, and how exactly?

The ban was actually triggered by your accumulated points, not because of a single post. Had you not been automatically flagged, I would have personally issued you a temporary suspension myself.

And the reason is right here—this is merely a glimpse into how you conduct yourself within this discussion:

Regarding other forum members—or "scum," as you so eloquently put it:

That piece of trash is always here just to provoke us (it reeks). Any intelligent person would simply put such scum on their ignore list. Why don't you do the same?

For God's sake, enough already!

What is a rational person supposed to make of that? That something smells foul and that human life holds no value anymore? What does Peđa have to say about that? To hell with them!

Just a bunch of brats.

I remember the propaganda from the major news networks back in the early 90s all too well. This is just a carbon copy! They slap you across the face and then immediately grab your chin, weeping and wailing?! Scum, garbage, stinking brats!

Just a handful of idiots.

As for those golden idiots who proudly got vaccinated and brought their vaccinated children along?!

Just some highly inappropriate comparisons.

How many dead people are we talking about? Is it based on these people who lie shamelessly every single day? Autopsies being banned? Is it like when the Srbin talk about Jasenovac, claiming a million victims and telling you to go to hell???

And there you have it—a summary of your last ten posts on this thread.
If you understand now, you understand; if you don't, you will likely spend much more time wondering why you keep getting warnings and bans.

I am quite unsure which specific post you are referring to, but here is a condensed summary of the last few that were subject to a delete post:

...This thread is about mandatory vaccination, which you can kiss goodbye as a possibility...
...Anyone who fails to see why one would advocate for such a thing must be operating with a darkened mind and arguably requires a psychiatric evaluation. We aren't living in Nazi Germany; this is 21st-century Western civilization...
...People remain tolerant only because the media propaganda is so overwhelming, and everything is being engineered to normalize such a monstrous practice; however, if something like this truly comes to pass, I fear we will face far more dire consequences than just overflowing ICU wards...
....The elites can threaten us with whatever they please—they are insulated from the fallout regardless—but the individuals who would go so far as to forcibly pick on their own neighbors, friends, colleagues, or even other people's children? Well, those people are even more deranged than those currently in power...
...It is all lies, stigmatization, and the imposition of collective guilt; using these kinds of empty platitudes is a tactic typically employed by the greatest genocidal tyrants whom history eventually condemns. And as for why triage might become necessary, one only needs to ask Beros and Ursula von der Leyen why they slashed public healthcare funding...

Regarding Ursula von der Leyen, Angela Merkel, and the rest:

...What sheer idiocy, this is unheard of!!!...
....Everything they are doing is utter madness; they have plunged European Union nations into massive debt and caused thousands of deaths through these covid certificates and by denying medical assistance to the unvaccinated—it is a catastrophe!
...And then there is the trolling with these "personal" opinions, while she fails to mention how much of that money she plans to tuck away into her own pocket, the vile woman!...

Let's go line by line: threats, conspiracies, Nazi comparisons, incitement to violence, insults, and profanity, all directed at the pdf corona rather than the skeptics; you are in constant violation of the rules that were established long ago.
Fun stuff, as always ☕

Jesse Bailey91 said:It’s pretty obvious you aren't actually following this specific sub, otherwise you'd understand why getting banned here works differently than in other parts of the forum.

On the contrary, I believe my colleague explained the situation perfectly. 👍
We don't just hand out partial bans like candy for a single controversial post; if that were the case, the thread author would have been sanctioned ages ago.
We are looking at ten full pages of various threads regarding the Coronavirus PDF, which implies this individual has been systematically violating the rules and ignoring warnings for at least a year.
And now, the streak finally comes to an end.
I wish the author a pleasant time browsing the rest of the Forum, and I truly hope they manage to learn something valuable from this experience.
Oh, one more thing—just a little heads-up: posting via a clone account of a partially banned user is treated with the same severity as posting via a clone of a permanently banned user. In short, it’s simply not worth the effort.

Morgan Rodriguez57 said:What on earth could have triggered such a decision? I wasn't inciting any arguments, I wasn't causing chaos, and I certainly wasn't spamming; if anything, I simply made information available from sites that are considered ideologically sound regarding vaccines. What gives?

Oh, please... give me a break. 🤦
You have the last three pages of warnings under the collective heading "subforum rule violation," and whether they belong to you or someone else is almost beside the point.
Or, to put it more bluntly: #notthatbright.

That’s correct; you have been partially restricted on the COVID-19 PDF following a collective decision by the entire moderation and admin team.

As for the reasoning behind this, I see little point in engaging in further debate, for whatever explanation I might offer, you will inevitably twist it into something else entirely—an inclination you have already quite clearly demonstrated in your previous post.

According to our established guidelines, one may request a partial restriction lift after six months have passed, though let us be clear: such a request does not guarantee approval.
And just to reiterate, attempting to post using a clone account on the PDF while under a partial restriction is treated with the same severity as a full ban. Consequently, you are risking a permanent ban if you choose to pursue such actions.

Ashley Vaughn79 said:Well, look at that! 😁

How on earth did you figure out they were the one who started the thread?

It's just the standard internet shorthand for whoever kicks off a discussion—the Original Poster, or OP.
😁

Tyler Garcia69 said:Wait, hold up. You’re seriously calling them "stupid" and saying people were "warned"? What are you even talking about here? Look, memes are satire and irony—that's literally what they are. I'm pretty sure you know how that works.

Look, I’m not out here spamming or anything; I’m just posting memes like we always do. If there was a limit on how many memes people could drop, you guys really should have just said so from the jump. There was never any rule about a cap, but then suddenly, out of nowhere, this arbitrary restriction gets slapped on us. Fine. We played by the rules and respected that. But then, apparently, following the rules isn't enough anymore because now we've got this sudden requirement that everything has to be "funny." That is honestly ridiculous. It feels totally subjective. Now, if a post doesn't meet this new "hilarious" standard—or whatever criteria whoever is in charge decides on today—it immediately gets nuked or shoved into some separate "skeptical meme" thread. This is getting out of hand; it feels like total censorship.

Hey, could someone please do me a huge favor and just delete that "skeptical meme" thread? I definitely wasn't the one who started it, and honestly, I have zero interest in being the one to kick that off. It feels like a bit much, and I’ve got some serious questions about why Mr. Brown decided to take things in that direction on his own. Just feels a little uncalled for, you know?

Well... I suspect you simply don't understand, and therein lies the entire crux of the issue.
They certainly gave you a lecture, didn't they? But let’s be clear: just because an image exists on the internet doesn't mean it’s actually funny or worthy of being pinned under a meme thread.
Furthermore, while I have no idea what you were told, one's sense of humor isn't exactly measured by the sheer volume of "funny" little pictures they manage to post.

Tyler Garcia69 said:Wait, hold up. You’re seriously calling them "stupid" and saying people were "warned"? What are you even talking about here? Look, memes are satire and irony—that's literally what they are. I'm pretty sure you know how that works.

Look, I’m not out here spamming or anything; I’m just posting memes like we always do. If there was a limit on how many memes people could drop, you guys really should have just said so from the jump. There was never any rule about a cap, but then suddenly, out of nowhere, this arbitrary restriction gets slapped on us. Fine. We played by the rules and respected that. But then, apparently, following the rules isn't enough anymore because now we've got this sudden requirement that everything has to be "funny." That is honestly ridiculous. It feels totally subjective. Now, if a post doesn't meet this new "hilarious" standard—or whatever criteria whoever is in charge decides on today—it immediately gets nuked or shoved into some separate "skeptical meme" thread. This is getting out of hand; it feels like total censorship.

Hey, could someone please do me a huge favor and just delete that "skeptical meme" thread? I definitely wasn't the one who started it, and honestly, I have zero interest in being the one to kick that off. It feels like a bit much, and I’ve got some serious questions about why Mr. Brown decided to take things in that direction on his own. Just feels a little uncalled for, you know?

"Funny" is a rather universal concept, wouldn't you agree? Common sense would suggest that if you find something hilarious that everyone else finds distasteful, you might want to start by questioning your own perspectives and sensibilities.

Tyler Garcia69 said:Wait, hold up. You’re seriously calling them "stupid" and saying people were "warned"? What are you even talking about here? Look, memes are satire and irony—that's literally what they are. I'm pretty sure you know how that works.

Look, I’m not out here spamming or anything; I’m just posting memes like we always do. If there was a limit on how many memes people could drop, you guys really should have just said so from the jump. There was never any rule about a cap, but then suddenly, out of nowhere, this arbitrary restriction gets slapped on us. Fine. We played by the rules and respected that. But then, apparently, following the rules isn't enough anymore because now we've got this sudden requirement that everything has to be "funny." That is honestly ridiculous. It feels totally subjective. Now, if a post doesn't meet this new "hilarious" standard—or whatever criteria whoever is in charge decides on today—it immediately gets nuked or shoved into some separate "skeptical meme" thread. This is getting out of hand; it feels like total censorship.

Hey, could someone please do me a huge favor and just delete that "skeptical meme" thread? I definitely wasn't the one who started it, and honestly, I have zero interest in being the one to kick that off. It feels like a bit much, and I’ve got some serious questions about why Mr. Brown decided to take things in that direction on his own. Just feels a little uncalled for, you know?

Look at this—this is a perfect example of wit, and honestly, bravo to you—suggesting we should delete a thread simply because *you* weren't the one who started it!! 🤣
...

Wait.. what? 🤔

I simply wanted to point out that, naturally, every moderator is free to make their own decisions regarding their pdf Eurovision, and please, do not view this as some sort of undue pressure; after all, we all share a fondness for charitable causes and a bit of good-natured humor.
At the very least, I found myself swept up in that particular bandwagon.
So, allow me an apology, if only to ensure nothing is misconstrued or taken as a personal grievance. 🙂

driftingtinker said:

#freemanchild

Ashley Johnson46 said:

👍

🤣

Punish me then—punish me, if my eyes are deceiving me 🙂

#podrskamanchiju

Ahem...
Your thread hasn't been shut down, per se; rather, it has been moved over to the skepticism section. 🧐

James Mitchell18 said:If the moderator, Mr. Smith, felt it was perfectly acceptable to open a thread regarding such scandalous topics on the official government health portal, then why on earth am I seeing my own post about washing cats being deleted? What exactly are we doing here? Is there some sort of hidden logic behind these blatant double standards, or is the rulebook simply written differently depending on who is holding the pen?

I eagerly await your response. ☕

Do try to focus for a moment; rather than wasting your breath filing grievances here, perhaps you should take a closer look at the situation at hand?
It hasn't been deleted; if one were to look elsewhere, specifically on that other section, one would find it still intact. 🙄

Recovery. A concept we all cling to, yet one that remains so maddeningly elusive when we actually find ourselves in the thick of it, wouldn't you agree? It is one thing to speak of healing in the abstract—to wax poetic about resilience and the strength of the human spirit—but it is quite another to navigate the grueling, often unglamorous reality of pulling oneself back from the brink. Whether we are discussing the slow mend of a physical ailment or the painstaking reconstruction of a fractured psyche, is recovery not simply a series of small, quiet victories won against overwhelming odds? One wonders if we ever truly "arrive" at a state of being whole again, or if we are merely learning to dance more gracefully with our scars. kaže:
Good day to all the devoted fans of the work and legacy of James J. Kilpatrick—you can all go straight to hell.👍

🙄
Since they don't permit you to let loose with the profanity in real life, I suppose you’re finally taking this opportunity to vent every bit of pent-up frustration you've been holding back?
I truly empathize with your position; it is an exhausting ordeal when your own wife or mother meets your every word with such immediate, blistering hostility—especially when you are simply trying to express how suffocating it feels to live under that kind of relentless pressure.
Just leave it to me; we’re right here to lend a hand. 😘

darkjackal7 said:According to what the boss said, those restrictions shouldn't be in effect, yet here we are; anyone dealing with partial credits simply can't log in to view that PDF.
So, what is the reality here? Did his brain fail to reach operating temperature when he claimed we could all contribute, has he lost his wits and forgotten his own words, or is he intentionally playing the part of the dim-witted liberal?

P.S.

And frankly, you are spouting nonsense. Is it not patently obvious to you that those of us with partial credits have no way of accessing the Skeptical perspective unless we remain logged out? Do you not realize that the entire Coronavirus PDF remains invisible to us even when we are logged in? Or are you truly that oblivious? It seems even the boss is in the dark—really, who are you people trying to make fools of? Your main contribution is offering the absurd advice that we should just access it while logged out, but how else would we do it, I ask you?

This is merely a technical glitch that is currently being addressed, and I am confident it will be resolved. As for what coppersailor28 is suggesting, I have no idea if it would even work, but the option for everyone who received partial credits to access the Coronavirus PDF will, hopefully, be fixed very soon, rendering such suggestions unnecessary.