Something rather peculiar has happened, actually. It appears I have indeed started my period, and it’s continuing as expected, yet the flow is significantly lighter than usual—and remarkably, there hasn't been any cramping at all. 😕 Everything arrived right on schedule, which is fine, I suppose, but I am quite at a loss. In all my life, I have never experienced a cycle that didn't involve a desperate, heavy-duty reliance on painkillers to get through the day. Has anyone else encountered this shift, and does anyone happen to have any insight into what might be causing it? 🤷
I am fairly certain that years of popping painkillers have absolutely wreaked havoc on my stomach; I’ve become sensitive to just about everything these days. On top of that, my ovulation has started becoming significantly more painful, so I'm starting to think I have no other choice but to switch to the pill.
If you aren't contributing to these types of discussions, the forum inevitably loses its substance—it just gets stripped of everything meaningful. We lose the new threads, the classic ones, and even the mindless nonsense that keeps things lively.
Fine. So, you end up with fewer posts. But honestly, what’s the actual issue there, and why does everyone seem so concerned about it?
We are looking at tragedies of truly epic proportions here.
The forum is undergoing a massive cleanup. And if you tend to hang out mostly in the chat threads, there is a massive chance your posts will simply vanish right as those specific subforums get moved over to the trash bin during the purge.
Well, look, Ash, you were the one who cited the post and pointed out why it was incorrect, so I didn't see any reason to delete either your comment or hers. I wanted readers to actually see the discrepancy—to understand exactly what was wrong and what the truth is. It feels quite silly to me to just scrub away your post, especially since it contained a fair amount of high-quality information. Let’s not pretend the weight of the entire world rests solely on our shoulders here; the responsibility also lies with the reader. Besides, Hazelnut isn't some specialized gynecological clinic or a social services agency. Or do you all simply have little faith in the intelligence of our audience? We have two choices when it comes to handling mindless questions: we can start banning people for them, or we can respond like adults without assuming everyone is a troll (and let's be honest, there really are people out there who ask genuinely foolish things), or we can descend into trolling ourselves. I’d suggest keeping the conversation at a civilized level; it really isn't that much of an effort.
First off, why on earth should we extend any measure of trust to the intelligence of the people browsing this thread? Secondly, let's be honest: you deliberately cooked up a pile of nonsense with the express purpose of spreading misinformation. And I’m not talking about a simple factual error—like that ridiculous claim that LGG treats E. coli, which was promptly debunked here, or your previous post regarding skin issues. Calling it "irony" doesn't make it any less deceptive. Trolling isn't just about being right or wrong; it’s about intent. And your intent is crystal clear. This isn't merely about the accuracy of the information posted—which, frankly, we can't always control, leaving it to the rest of us to correct when things go sideways—it's about your blatant desire to belittle someone you've deemed an idiot. That is all there is to it. Well, I suppose my turn to be incredibly annoying will come eventually.
Hold on a second—do you honestly believe someone asking whether they should still use a condom after their period is going to take your rant about crusty bits seriously? This whole post is essentially a textbook case of bad intentions. If my mother had written this, or if the site administrator himself had posted it, it would have been flagged immediately. There is a clear, deliberate attempt here to churn out a mountain of mindless nonsense and spread misinformation to someone who clearly lacks even the most rudimentary understanding of biology or basic life skills. I realize the post practically begs for these kinds of responses, but you always have the option to choose not to be one of them. Telling someone to "drink some tea, but maybe see a doctor first" is worlds apart from what you're doing here. It’s the same deal with Byron: trust me, I know you're aware of this, and dustyranger64 and I have already gone over this exact point with you multiple times. Just... please, don't write stuff like this. If you truly can't help yourself, then well, I suppose there's nothing more I can say to you.
Linda Price5 said:So, I’ve come to a rather pragmatic conclusion: the next time I feel the urge to take someone down a peg, I should simply provide them with incorrect information instead of relying on blatant irony. Apparently, that’s the secret to avoiding a penalty. Thanks for the tip.
Now, that was actually your point, not mine. But, if we’re going to stop dancing around the issue and finally call a spade a spade—if we want to strip away all the nuance and look at this in strictly black and white:
I find myself increasingly preoccupied by the ongoing Domestos-debate, which seems to have spiraled into a rather peculiar sort of social phenomenon. It’s one of those matters that, upon first glance, appears trivial—almost pedantic—yet it possesses a strange, gravitational pull that drags everyone into its orbit. I often wonder if we aren't all just projecting our own minor anxieties onto these seemingly inconsequential disagreements. It reminds me somewhat of those intense, late-night discussions one might encounter on a specialized Forum, where the discourse becomes so dense and layered that the original point is lost entirely under the weight of intellectual posturing. One tries to maintain a sense of decorum, of course, but there is a certain frantic energy to it all that is difficult to ignore. I suppose I am being a bit dramatic; perhaps I should simply take the benefit of the doubt when it comes to others' intentions, rather than dissecting every nuance. Still, there is something undeniably fascinating about how much mental energy we can expend on things that ultimately don't move the needle of our daily lives. kaže: Yes, that sounds exactly like E. coli, just as it’s been noted. There is actually a dedicated women's health topic over on the Forum if you want to do a little digging through the threads there. My best advice? For the next week or so, really lean into probiotics—load up on yogurt with LGG. It genuinely helps in restoring that natural pH balance within the mucosal lining. Now, if things are feeling particularly unpleasant, you can always head over to a local CVS or Walgreens and pick up some Canesten cream and suppositories over the counter without needing a prescription. You just use the suppositories internally and apply the cream to the external area. 🙂 Of course, seeing a gynecologist is the smarter move in the long run, but if you’re in the middle of a total crisis and need relief right this second, just go ahead and grab it. 🙂
Linda Price5 said:No, that isn't quite right. During menstruation, the body essentially creates a sort of protective layer—almost like a biological scab—that prevents sperm from performing its intended function. This layer also serves as a barrier, shielding the tissue from bacteria and viruses that cause STIs. According to this theory, if a woman uses a tampon soaked in chamomile after her period, the oil molecules can penetrate that "scab," breaking it down and separating it from the mucous membrane. Consequently, proponents suggest using these types of tampons for women who are actively trying to conceive.
Between these two posts, there is a clear distinction that either a fool—or someone playing the part of one far too convincingly—simply fails to see. While I must admit I generally find your trolling quite entertaining, I’m honestly at a loss as to why you, specifically as a former moderator, are working so incredibly hard to make such a pedantic point.
So, she shared something that wasn't entirely accurate, you corrected her, and now everyone has the right facts. Honestly, what is there to penalize her for? Is it because she was misinformed? It seems to me we’re all just refusing to see the nuance here. We're failing to distinguish between someone intentionally spreading disinformation and someone who—quite frankly—just doesn't know any better. Why on earth should we resort to trolling someone who is clearly acting in good faith, simply posting something half-accurate without a single ounce of malice? It's a bit much, isn't it? Look, I am fully aware that you can’t just scrub away an E. coli infection with a quick cleaning session. It isn't that simple. And honestly, what's the point of even listening to dustyranger64 or Dell on this? What could they possibly know about Pap smears, yeast infections, or dealing with an E. coli issue down there? Should we just kick them out of the conversation because they're completely clueless? Please. They haven't got a single clue what they're talking about.
It feels like we’re all just spinning our wheels here, making mountains out of molehills over things that are perfectly obvious. Honestly, we're just playing pretend at this point. But when you really step back and look at the big picture, you have to ask yourself: how much weight do your complaints and grievances actually carry? In the eyes of the regular users, the mods, and the admins, are they even being taken seriously?
Now, I’ll be the first to admit that I am by no means a medical professional—nor is anyone else I know in this circle, for that matter—and quite frankly, I haven't the foggiest clue what an antifungal actually is. We can't exactly go around handing out penalties for misinformation when it’s clearly just born from genuine confusion; instead, I’m placing my faith in those seasoned members of the Forum who recognize when a fact is off base, trusting them to step in and set the record straight on the Domestos-debate.
Eric Newman75 said:Jason Morgan, how on earth can you troll a thread about a possible pregnancy when those topics aren't even allowed here? You’re right to lock them down and just tell the OP to see a doctor. I’m not kidding, I’m genuinely asking, because I find myself tempted to write something like, "Oh sure, the most famous gynecologists in the world all hang out on the Forum," whenever I see this kind of thing. It's pure provocation, really. But I just can't help myself. 😬
Pregnancy threads are strictly prohibited on the Forum 😬
But someone is always going to open one anyway. The subreddits can get pretty busy, and if a moderator doesn't catch it immediately, you end up with a thread that already has five, ten, or fifteen replies—mostly consisting of people making those snarky jokes about how the world's top specialists are all active users here.
That’s the crux of it. A comment like that shouldn't be penalized when the thread itself is titled something ridiculous like, "Am I pregnant? I sat on the edge of my bed and now I'm panicking, help!"—it’s nonsense and has no business being on the site. However, if you leave a similar comment on a thread regarding sexual education basics where there's a legitimate, specific question about, say, condoms or a yeast infection—well, that’s an entirely different matter altogether.
Nicholas King said:Wait, weren't you just lecturing me for advocating for something similar? 😁
Look, I am certain you recognize—as do those who actually bother to read closely—the distinct difference between my approach of "not treating every single thread with equal weight during moderation" and your own. Honestly, there's no point in dwelling on it further. 😍
Nicholas King said:First off, let me clarify: any supposed trolling on my part is at least intended to be entertaining, witty, or even just lighthearted. I have never once written a "look at me, I'm rubbing elbows with the VIPs" kind of post.
And they’ve never actually been penalized, have they? 🙂 Whether you call them trolls or not, the reality is that you can spot them a mile away. But fine, point taken.
Nicholas King said:Secondly, you make a fair point: I truly believe that a thread where hundreds of posts yield incredibly valuable insights (and for the hundredth time, I am NOT referring to my own writing—nor am I talking about the Domestos-topic right now) deserves a different set of rules than a thread titled "I texted him 'omg, what would I do without you,' he didn't reply, am I pregnant?". I keep bringing up what football fans call a "referee's intuition"—that gut feeling that determines whether a whole match is worth watching or not.
When someone drops nonsense or starts trolling in a thread about a potential pregnancy, they don't get sanctioned because the thread is destined for the trash bin anyway.
One crucial thing to understand is that the moderators and admins view the moderation process of certain threads differently than the general users of this Forum do; many things are removed or handled before you even get a chance to see them. Not every thread is treated with the same level of scrutiny, certainly not. Furthermore, if you find the way certain mods handle specific topics distasteful, well, there isn't much I can do to help you with that.
Nicholas King said:I’m telling you, I was already in the middle of explaining the whole situation to Sasha. I find myself compelled to address this particular matter, though I suspect my timing might be considered somewhat questionable by some. It is an issue of significant consequence, one that demands our undivided attention if we are to navigate the complexities currently facing us. Honestly, I sometimes wonder if we even realize the gravity of the situation at hand, or if we are all simply drifting along, blissfully unaware of the shifting tides. It is quite a predicament, really. There is a profound, almost structural difference between my little off-topic ramblings and the specific post I just quoted. It’s quite a gap, really.
Ok.
Nicholas King said:Finally, could you please come up with a single convincing reason why I would ever bother fabricating how or what I wrote?
My apologies, that wasn't quite what I intended to convey. I think the concept of "brainwashing" is actually a bit broader than the definition Ash provided.
Nicholas King said:And I am calling on you to show me one of mine. I suppose I should begin by stating that I find myself in a rather peculiar state of affairs regarding this particular matter. It is, quite frankly, a bit much to process all at once, isn't it? One moment you think you have a handle on things—you feel quite certain, even confident—and the next, everything shifts under your feet like loose gravel on a mountain pass. It’s enough to make one pause for reflection, though perhaps I am merely being overly dramatic. Still, there is a certain weight to it that I cannot quite shake off. post: I mean, let’s be perfectly serious for a moment. This isn't just some trivial matter we can brush aside with a shrug or a quick joke over coffee. We really need to look at this with some gravity. I seem to have lost my place—it appears I am currently drifting within a thread where... I suppose I should get started. My post is utterly nonsensical—a pure, blatant demonstration of "because I can" at its most absurd level. Honestly, it’s just complete nonsense.
Are you being serious right now? I mean, are you suggesting that you just completely slack off when things get trivial, or do you truly believe the rules only apply to heavy-hitting topics—as if anything less than a profound debate counts as valid "evidence"?
Nicholas King said:Perhaps it’s because we’re all here on this forum by choice, simply looking to entertain ourselves and one another? Or maybe it's just that during any serious undertaking, a person occasionally needs to catch their breath. Good grief, even at a small-town wedding in rural Texas, the band takes a breather now and then to grab a drink. 🙂
Fair enough, but there is always a line somewhere. And if someone happens to disagree with where that line is drawn, well, that’s just the way it is.
Come on, look at the context here. This isn't even about a discussion regarding expectations.
Oh, please. What was the point, then? You posed this hypothetical scenario even though we just spent ages dissecting the exact same thing via private message?
What you're quoting is completely taken out of context—the context being my attempt to explain why I wanted him to find even a single such post of mine, so I wouldn't have to claim he was making things up (which, by the way, he couldn't do).
Byron, don't troll me or the rest of the mods and users; stop acting like everything is fine. You stir the pot on LJS every once in a while and nobody calls you out. I'm not getting into an argument with you and Sasha.
Nicholas King said:It’s an entirely different matter when, after perhaps ten pages of serious and—dare I say it—actually high-quality debate, a few participants in that discussion take a little breather by dropping some cheeky posts (none of which are low-brow nonsense, mind you, but rather just lighthearted and silly—and I am certainly not referring to my own contributions) before either picking back up or letting the thread die out. Honestly, even inmates get their scheduled yard time; surely one can take a momentary break on an online forum. 🙂
Wait, I completely missed this, but we are clearly talking about a thread regarding expectations. One of our colleagues, who happens to be vacationing at the beach right now, posted a warning about closing the chat and didn't even issue any sanctions for the previous conversation—so why the grievance? 🤔 What kind of prison sentence are we talking about here? 🤷
Nicholas King said:This whole notion of "armored protection," and especially this fabrication regarding my supposed advocacy for tolerating insults directed at anyone (including moderators, naturally), is a blatant falsehood—what on earth are you trying to achieve here? 😢
Please tell me you're joking. 🙂
I have absolutely no intention of digging through and publishing private messages or various other correspondences because quite frankly, I don't have the time, and so I am leaving a (very slim) margin for potential misunderstanding. However, everything I have stated above is something I have said repeatedly, and my position remains unchanged. Especially since you decided to call me out specifically.
To be clear, I didn't say you advocate for tolerating insults; rather, I suggested that you do advocate for providing substantial protection to high-quality contributors. My point is that these valuable members are well aware they enjoy a certain level of protection, yet they also understand that they won't—and shouldn't—be permitted to get away with just anything, including trolling or being abusive, even if such things are obvious and haven't been explicitly mentioned. Let's keep in mind that I am referring to my own specific thread, not to general site policy or isolated incidents which I cannot and will not discuss. We certainly value the contributions of intelligent, high-quality members, but we must draw a line somewhere. In their case, those boundaries manifest as a warning that they cannot simply derail a quality discussion to which they themselves have contributed.
I haven't received an answer to my question: how, exactly, does a handful of unserious posts prevent someone from making a serious one?
It doesn't technically prevent them, but don't you think there ought to be a line drawn regarding what constitutes "unserious" posting? Certainly, certain individuals drive specific threads forward and provide excellent content—so why shouldn't they be allowed to engage in a little lighthearted banter within that thread? If they've contributed so much value, why not allow others to enjoy that quality without having to wade through what essentially amounts to an endless, trivial chat? Give me one good reason why not. 🤷
Nicholas King said:I actually brought this up with some of the LJS moderators following that whole discussion about the "Expectations" thread. I didn't get a single coherent answer to my question: how exactly can a few unserious posts ruin a "serious and high-quality discussion"? I am genuinely curious here—in what way does that stop someone else from writing the greatest post in the history of this forum? Furthermore, why would the supposed "gatekeepers of the conversation" spit on the very image they painted and then proceed to wreck the thread with constant joking around?
You were arguing with me, and you did receive a meaningful response; it was just clearly unsatisfying because you’re looking for ironclad protection for a specific clique of people.
Let me reiterate: quality off-topic banter is allowed because it can spark an entirely new, high-quality topic—which is exactly what happened with the Expectations thread. However, the idea that the interlocutors—those self-proclaimed "guardians" of the thread who decided the discussion was exhausted and that there was nothing left to add because they had covered it all—can unilaterally grant themselves the right to dictate how the rest of the topic proceeds? That simply isn't permitted. Furthermore, while we might occasionally show more leniency toward high-quality contributors than we do toward those who are more confrontational (even when those "quality" users post trollish comments that aren't outright insults, but are still trolling), we will never, under any circumstances, tolerate blatant trolling, insults, or the assumption that certain individuals are above the rules just because they are intelligent or provide good content. In fact, it is precisely because they *are* such contributors that they should recognize when we have met them halfway by allowing a bit more off-topic leeway compared to someone who ignores the rules entirely. That is all I told you back then. I am sorry if that is disappointing to hear.
Rebecca Phillips57 said:The problem is, we shouldn't even let people get to the point where they're being terrorized in the first place—but then, the moment those folks actually stand up for themselves, everyone suddenly acts all scandalized and offended.
And honestly, do you really believe we should grant them carte blanche to act however they want, or speak however they please, just because some absolute maniac decided to latch onto them?
Ash and everyone else who’s decided to make such a massive scene over these two—do you actually have any concrete intel on what's happening behind the scenes? I’m talking about seeing actual receipts, deleted posts, private warnings, or some sort of backroom deal between the mods and admins. Or are we all just collectively deciding to jump on the bandwagon and stir up unnecessary drama? Honestly, let's take a moment to be real about it.
No, let’s be clear: not everyone here just posts mindless drivel in the chats. There are people who actually put in a significant amount of effort and time to ensure their contributions to this forum are constructive, so I really don't see the point in even debating that.
On another note, while I have the floor: do you honestly believe the mods and admins are actually trying to protect "sick stalkers"? Or is it possible they simply have no clue what is truly going on—and perhaps we should consider that not every forum member sees the full picture, given how much can happen "behind the scenes"? It seems to me that a fair number of people here are just idling, waiting for some drama to unfold so they can pick a side and start tearing into someone. It’s as if nobody possesses the basic desire to actually ask someone how things really stand before jumping straight into direct attacks and whining; no one wants to uncover the objective reality lying beneath the surface. We ought to give that some thought. 🙂