Posts by boldwalker12

Carl Fisher7 said:Nah, I already figured some mods just do whatever they feel like at the time.

Wait, so you're saying they just punish people whenever they feel like it for replying to a highlighted post?
I wouldn't call it that. You knew you were gonna catch a strike because you were straight-up breaking the rules. It was a conscious choice.

Carl Fisher7 said:Yeah, I’m totally with you on that. The issue only becomes glaringly obvious when someone decides to strip away the fluff and just lay out the brutal truth. It’s never a problem when the core reality is wrapped up in some "polite, socially acceptable" little package, right?

Look, I’ve gotta say it: asking stuff like "how many times a week are you sleeping with your husband" or "does he actually get you wet" isn't getting to the heart of the matter. It's just cheapening the whole conversation. This thread actually produced some incredibly high-quality posts, but you’re turning it into a total troll fest. If you haven't noticed, the woman you're grilling here clearly wasn't impressed by your "logic." ZouD isn't LJES.

That’s just something you made up in your head because I never said—let alone hinted at—anything even remotely like that. Honestly, pretty much everyone who was reading or posting back then absolutely tore RC's views to shreds. It wasn't just me, either. Seriously, if you're going to come at me, find a better example than that.

Look, the example itself is solid, regardless of how RC's writing style is—which, let's be real, I'm not even going to get into with you because that's not what we're doing here. Like I told you in my previous post, that's exactly what's going on.

Look, I’ll be the first to admit that I definitely cross the line every once in a while. And honestly? Every time I do, I take the hit, accept the penalty, and move on without making a scene about my lost karma. No big deal. But what happened today? That was straight-up garbage moderation. You aren't just policing the rules; you're actively killing the entire thread. And to top it all off, you’re basically calling me a psychopath? Give me a break. I’ve actually reached out to several people on Reddit to get some honest feedback on my writing style, and their takes are nothing like your ridiculous assessment. And by the way, they were all women.

Look, given what I already laid out above, I’m not exactly surprised. But let's get one thing straight: just because a certain group of women is backing you up doesn't mean you aren't being insulting or dragging the quality of this entire discussion through the mud. At the end of the day, it's our job as moderators to judge whether things have gone too far, not the job of whatever women happen to be impressed by your habit of attacking impotent husbands. Besides, we're getting plenty of feedback from women who find your posts totally obnoxious, so there's really no point in even debating this anymore.

Look, you still haven't even bothered to apologize to one of them, despite the fact that you clearly told a blatant lie. And honestly? You’re just completely dodging the whole topic.

You think I’m just going to roll over and apologize on command? Please. steelskipper132 claimed she was doing just fine simply because he asked for a photo. If he was out there spinning lies, then I guess I’m lying too—it definitely wasn't intentional, and honestly, that's all I have to say about it.

By the way, I actually went ahead and started that psychology thread like everyone told me to. I made sure to keep the presentation polished and professional, but honestly? It’s the exact same core message as before.

Man, you really went and spat in the face of the ZouD moderation team, didn't you? You know damn well the rules say we don't go dragging the mods into specific threads, and then you go ahead and bring up Debt again. I actually flagged the supermod about it.

I wouldn't go so far as to say you've explicitly labeled those exact women you're supposedly trying to "help" as frustrated housewives:

Carl Fisher7 said:Personally, I've always appreciated that marriages—as this whole institution meant to execute sexual passion and general intimacy—have historically been a breeding ground for frustrated housewives (and I mean that in the most complimentary way possible 😉) during their absolute prime. We're talking about women who are burning up with desire at the very age they're most desirable, possessing peak libido, and when they don't just enjoy, but actually deeply value a man who shows genuine interest in them.

This whole debate dragged on for four straight years until you basically dragged it through the mud with your weird fantasies and insults. The thread isn't necessarily dead forever, but let's be real: you won't be allowed to post like this if it ever reopens, whether it's this topic or anything else. Take that vulgar, insult-heavy, self-indulgent attitude somewhere else; ZouD is a high-quality platform that actually maintains a certain standard.

If you’re talking about the "to be a mistress" thread, you should honestly just thank yourself that it got locked.

Here is another gem from your posts over there:

Carl Fisher7 said:🤮

I'm actually looking forward to seeing someone else bang her. It almost certainly won't just be you.

You basically go on an aggressive tear against pretty much every guy you decide isn't "performing" well enough for his wife, acting like you're some kind of ultimate lover who could do a better job than them. You turn every discussion into this disgusting battlefield where you just live for the thrill of picking on people on Reddit.

The only reason you get away with this crap is because you don't give a damn about the rules—they mean nothing to you. All you care about is having a target to vent your frustrations on, whatever your weird motives might be.

So, yeah, the explanation isn't invalid. That thread was locked because you turned it into a revolting ego trip and a way to trash other guys—in this case, radical change, and today, as we saw with Debt and the rest, getting even closer to that.

It’s honestly wild that after all that, you still have the nerve to complain. You get way too much leeway, which is exactly why we have to step in.

Carl Fisher7 said:I find it absolutely disgusting how he and all other guys like him consciously do this to their wives.

The whole point here isn't to dissect Debt or any other user on this Reddit. By playing moderator, you're basically making sure the OP doesn't get a single real answer. I made my intentions crystal clear right from the jump in my opening post.

It’s blindingly obvious you’re just trying to shut me down—anyone with half a brain can see that. And on top of that, you're insulting my intelligence.

If you actually wanted to "shut me down," you would've been banned the second you stepped on someone else. You haven't met a single person you haven't provoked or picked a fight with, and honestly, you just seem to get a kick out of obsessing over impotence issues.
Your fake-ass concern for the OP isn't fooling anyone. Certainly not the moderators.

I've had enough.

Everything's been said. As far as I'm concerned, this thread is dead.

Carl Fisher7 said:Look, I wasn't attacking anyone, I was just explaining things. I even started a whole new thread where I didn't insult a single soul, and what happens? It gets nuked immediately. Why? Seriously, who exactly did I offend by just starting a discussion?

Oh, please. After you launched that disgusting ad hominem attack against Debt—and I already pointed out exactly why your post was so repulsive—you think you can just pivot and start a "general discussion" on the topic? 😁
As if.
Keep trying to play it that way and you're looking at a cooling-off period. You aren't going to get away with throwing ad hominem jabs and spitting on people on this Reddit.

Carl Fisher7 said:Look, I wasn’t trolling, and I definitely wasn't insulting or belittling anyone else on this Reddit. I was just addressing the actual question asked in the OP, which goes like this...

Honestly, I'm surprised you didn't get a warning or an instant ban for that one:

Carl Fisher7 said:Why don't you just pop a blue pill and finally give your frustrated wife the night she clearly thinks she deserves?

You really overstepped there. And judging by how much you seem to enjoy playing "gotcha" with people's words while ignoring the rules, it looks like a warning wouldn't even phase you. You just want to dissect everyone here. It's not happening.

Your moderation style is frankly laughable, pathetic, and almost tragicomic to anyone with half a brain.

In the hopes that I might actually encounter some common sense eventually, sincerely, Carl Fisher7.

Message received. But let me make one thing clear: this isn't your first time stirring the pot in this thread. You've got this habit of being combative and nitpicking posts down to the atomic level just to provoke or insult someone. I already gave you a heads-up, but hey, do what you want.

I'm not going to turn this into a massive drama fest like you usually do. I'm done.

Just log out already.

Actually, no:

On this Forum, it's strictly against the rules to:

use sockpuppet accounts while any of your other user profiles are currently banned from the Forum or try to juggle multiple accounts just to mess with people (like jumping into the same thread with different handles, or basically playing both sides of an argument to back yourself up...)

Here's the link to our general forum rules.

Honestly, given that the OP is such a massive troll, she’s somehow managed to stick around this long, mostly because there was actually something worth debating for a while.

Look, you're just chasing fantasies on the Green Party forums again, and honestly, it’s not like this is your first rodeo. It’s never going to fly. Period.

Oh, come on. You’re totally trolling.

Wait, where on earth are you getting the idea that we aren't handing out bans? I honestly don't get why you’d think that, especially since I have a direct line to his moderation logs—specifically the ones regarding this thread.
He isn't getting any special treatment just because he's posting here; we're hitting him with sanctions like clockwork. So, what's the actual issue? Why all the massive drama? What exactly is bothering you guys?

lonebadger6 said:This is exactly why an idea that seems clever on the surface ends up falling completely flat in practice...

Look, what darkhawk said about playing favorites isn't really the issue... the real point is that a whole mob of forum users is going to start losing their minds the second this "defender of the community" aligns himself with the moderators on a few calls without any bias, simply because they happen to be right, which—in a massive number of cases and actually in the vast majority of them—they are...

Well, there’s the real issue right there. We’ve reached a point where users don't even have a say anymore unless they're voting on their own damn selves... There aren't even any threads left to actually discuss how the admins are running things, which just feeds into this growing feeling that we're heading back to those days when the mods used to just crack the whip on everyone...

I’ll just point to one recent example, like Ombie’s card protest... To me, and I’m sure many others would agree—even if we aren't supposed to say it here—it is absolutely insane that someone gets flagged on this forum for a post like that. There's no softer way to put it, though I could certainly go harder if I wanted to... And honestly, it doesn't even matter if the mods try to spin some philosophical justification for their reasoning, only for William Bennett53 or someone else to swoop in and shut it down with a "we already told you, end of story," leaving everyone else, including Ombie, to just sit there and stay quiet. It’s easy to play philosopher... The real issue is that it’s completely irrational for you to want a forum where comments like that actually result in a penalty. I don't think that's actually your goal, but it feels like moderator decisions are far too often left unquestioned, with everyone just covering for each other even when it isn't justified. That shouldn't be how it works, because you aren't—or at least shouldn't be—an "inner circle" positioned against the rest of the community...

No matter how many idiotic card protests pop up, or how exhausting it is to constantly explain that you can't just tell someone they're an idiot under the guise of "just being honest"... it seems like we're seeing more and more instances where totally random bystanders, who don't know anyone on this forum or any of the mods, end up thinking we actually allow people to harass users just because a moderator doesn't personally like them...

And just like that—the debate is over. It’s finished... which is basically just a slap in the face to everyone on this forum. 😉 It’s easy enough to cook up a justification for anything you feel like doing... the real issue is when that excuse is a total slap in the face to common sense, only for the mods to swoop in and shut everything down, acting like they've handed down some divine truth and there's nothing left to say...

Look, even though I’m right there with Sophia Thomas7 thinking a concrete proposal wouldn't actually fly, I still feel like darkhawk is heading in the right direction by suggesting that something needs to be done...

Sure, you don't have to. It's a private forum, your rules, blah blah blah... I get it. But the real question is whether you actually want a community where one big boss can just stomp all over the little guys... I'm not saying that's exactly how things feel on Reddit right now, but it certainly feels like we're heading down that path again. Better to nip it in the bud before...

If you want a fresh look at this second type of nonsense, just look at Guud and the mountain of warnings everyone else gets because of him. Sure, they hand out five different bans like "trolling is forbidden" or "we told you to stop engaging with him," which is all well and good... but the obvious troll and liar is still right there on the thread. The mods clearly know exactly what he is, and the rules explicitly forbid his behavior, yet he stays put... Is he some kind of bait for disciplinary actions? It’s completely absurd, though God forbid you actually point that out. If anyone dares to speak up, they immediately get shut down with some "we already said we aren't talking about Guud anymore" line. Meanwhile, a whole crowd of other users would have been slapped with a suspension ages ago if they acted half as bad. The only takeaway for anyone with half a brain in the case of Guud is that trolling is now officially sanctioned on this forum... as long as you aren't the one doing it, of course...

Since this whole drama has been dragging on for weeks now, let me weigh in.
To those of you whining about your supposed "freedom of speech" being threatened regarding this specific user: it's not in your interest to keep this thread alive, and you honestly couldn't care less whether the topic remains constructive or if it outgrew Guud a long time ago.
The people who actually give a damn about the topic participate in it, they contribute, and they don't obsess over that one guy.

We don't hand out bans just for lying. Honestly, some of you would have earned a permanent ban long ago otherwise.

So, since your goal isn't actually keeping the discussion going, but rather constantly nagging us because we won't let you mess with this guy, I've come to a conclusion: you guys aren't complaining about moderation, you're just looking for an excuse to troll him. You want to play these boundary-less games like, "wow you're so stupid, oh my god how dumb can you be, you lied on that other thread, you were mocking us, oh man you're such an idiot."
Because heaven forbid a constructive thread on ŽuD stays useful to everyone during a crisis; no, we have to perform these little circus acts just so a few loud, stubborn forum members can have their fun at someone else's expense, because apparently, that's their version of a hobby.

Anyway, that's my two cents on this Guud situation you're all so desperate to push.

nimbletinker10 said:@Guud, honestly, I have no idea why you constantly get away with lying. Especially when the mods just let it slide.

We still don't have a specific penalty for being shamelessly dishonest. If we did, half the people here would be grayed out by now.
So, maybe skip the accusations of lying—it’s not going to fly on Zapatistas.
Same goes for trying to pick fights.
The whole point of this place is to actually discuss things, not to go at each other's throats or take weird pleasure in dragging others down.

If you keep dragging my name through the mud in different threads like you have lately, I’m expecting the moderators to step in.

And they will. But that goes both ways. You can't just label people "trolls" or start beefing with them just because you think they're lying. Period. Drop it.

Hmm, but you could apply that exact same logic to yourself. Every opinion is just that—an opinion. Your take could be totally wrong; anyone can mess up their assessment. It's just that your phrasing doesn't really reflect that.

Fair enough. I'm far from perfect. That’s exactly why I hopped over to the other thread to offer a compromise; I get that this debate matters to you guys, and I’m willing to move posts back where they belong.
But there’s a massive difference between making a suggestion, offering a compromise, and issuing a demand—like, "you have to do this because I told you so," regardless of whether you're a mod or not. It doesn't work like that. We're polishing the PDF here while respecting your input, but at the end of the day, the final call on who's breaking the rules is ours.

nimbletinker10, I am officially done with you. I’m not even going to waste my breath responding to your mental gymnastics. You were the one who started this whole mess by making those disgusting insinuations about someone’s kid—that kind of trash doesn't fly here, not even in a private DM. Honestly, the way you’ve been twisting things lately shows exactly what kind of user you've become on this ZOO. We were way too soft on you.

And don't you dare try to lecture me. You clearly can't even keep track of who said what, and frankly, I don't care if I agree with the other lady or not; you're just consistently confused. Just look at your own history of posting mindless quotes that serve no purpose other than to muddy the waters and derail the conversation.

From here on out, expect an immediate ban if this pattern of dodging facts, attacking people, and disrupting the thread continues.

nimbletinker10 said:To person who made those comments was being absolutely revolting, and frankly, that child probably was too. Just plain dirty. You can't claim an action is perfectly fine while describing it like it's some scene out of a horror movie.

From what I’ve discussed with people on this thread, I don't think anyone else even considered that angle.
It actually shocks me to see the direction some of these thoughts are heading. Honestly, I'm appalled.
The truly revolting part is thinking that by doing this to a child, you're doing something "dirty"—at that point, the child isn't even the main issue.

No one in this discussion complained about anything being offensive regarding the matter. In fact, an expert—I can't recall the username since everything was wiped—actually commented positively on it. But apparently, we have an administration here that is obsessed with policing everything through a lens of extreme puritanism. 😕

@Scott Miller4, look, the whole point of this debate is whether a child sleeps in the parents' bed or not; that is literally what the opening post that the moderators used to start this thread is about.
Why on earth would you open a thread on your own initiative and then turn around and declare the subsequent posts "off-topic" when they are addressing the exact same subject as the intro?

If you want to host this on the General Discussion board, talk to the current moderators. If they agree, I can move the posts over to General Discussion myself.
This doesn't belong in the Debate section. But you already knew that.

If that's the case, then this entire thread is off-topic. Just look at the introductory post you yourselves selected. I wasn't sure where the boundaries were, and I won't tolerate being told how to participate. Besides, moving posts around isn't exactly a constructive way to communicate.

There's some mention of a coordinated attack against the Debate section. 😕
That part is a complete mystery to me.
I haven't posted in that section for years, let alone had any kind of underlying vendetta with anyone. Most of the users in this thread were strangers to me until a few days ago.

But what are we actually talking about here?
Even after the deletions and the warnings, people kept posting about children, and those posts are still sitting there right now.

Look, I’m just laying it out for you here—this whole trolling routine you’ve been pulling lately, both on the forums and in those PDFs, is getting pretty obvious. It’s all right there in black and white. Just so we're clear: it isn't going to fly with me. Consider this your heads-up.

So, you’re out here throwing these disgusting insinuations my way about me and my coworker without even a shred of hesitation, all because the setting we were in wasn't exactly "professional." And then—get this—you have the nerve to play the innocent bystander like you’re just confused by the whole thing. Real classy.

Here's another little slice of this mess for you guys:

I mean, honestly, the direction these thoughts are heading right now is actually blowing my mind. It’s kind of wild if you think about it. Seriously, I'm just sitting here completely stunned by where this is all going.
It’s honestly pathetic when you run into people who think they're being some kind of moral crusader by acting like a kid is doing something "dirty" or wrong. Like, give me a break. If you're actually that triggered by a child just existing, then let's be real—the kid isn't even the issue here. The actual problem is whatever messed up mindset is going on inside your own head.

Honestly, nobody on this thread has even breathed a word about anything tasting gross because of it. I actually heard from some expert onsite—I can’t for the life of me remember their handle, and now the whole thing has been scrubbed from the board anyway—but yeah, that was the word. Honestly, I’m feeling pretty stoked about this. Total win. She voiced her opinion, but hey, at least we’ve got an administration that goes out of its way to make sure nothing but pure, unadulterated Puritan values make it through the door. 😕

Give me a break.
Look, if we’re going to claim that something is "off" or totally out of line—like bringing up a kid masturbating in the middle of a serious thread about sleeping arrangements with your spouse—then we’re basically just preaching Puritanism at this point. It’s a massive reach.

So, I keep hearing people whispering about some supposed backstory behind this whole crackdown on the Zand. Honestly, what is even going on? It feels like there’s some deep-seated drama brewing in the background that nobody is being upfront about. 😕
I'm still completely lost on that part. It’s a total mystery to me.
Look, I haven't posted anything on here for years, let alone had some kind of history with anyone else on this board. Honestly, most of you guys hanging out in this thread? I didn't even know you existed until a couple of days ago.

Look, it’s not even about you. There is zero reason to go making a huge scene over nothing.

silverraven14 said:Separation could always be an option—and if it’s truly necessary, we could even look at relocation. To be clear, I’m not disputing the idea of splitting off at all.
I honestly used to believe that being a moderator was actually about something meaningful—you know, having the intuition to spot a high-quality discussion and giving it the space it deserves. After all, if we hadn't carved out that specific room for it, that entire thread about sleep hygiene wouldn't even exist.

So, let me see if I can wrap my head around the immediate benefit here—we’re on a forum dedicated to sex, and someone decides to drop a lecture about how our extracurricular activities might affect a child "sleeping" nearby. Yeah, I'm struggling to find the point too.
People tend to flock to Reddit for one of two reasons: they’re either hunting for some piece of advice they can't find elsewhere, or they just want to vent about their kids.

This isn't actually advice about parenting—it's about sex. And really, you have to weigh whether there are actual long-term consequences here, or if you can just gracefully shrug, say "whatever," and move on with your life.

I have to say, I’m officially lodging a protest against the decision to wipe out such a high-quality, genuinely useful discussion. It’s frustrating to see a thread with actual substance get scrubbed like that—especially when we were finally getting somewhere.

I’m not disputing the fact that, given how this conversation has evolved, it’s probably better to move it to a more appropriate subforum—though I'll leave the link to the right thread right here for anyone interested.
Look, like I said before—this isn't actually about the mulberry bushes; let's be real, this whole thing is about the sex. Even with that part being edited out, the tension is still palpable enough to make you sweat. If the story had taken a different turn—maybe something more suited for a gritty HBO drama—then all this back-and-forth would actually feel worth the effort.

If this were actually about "how your neighbors act up while you're busy hooking up," we wouldn't be over here in the neighborhood drama subforum, would we? 😉
Is there actually a debate to be had about whether you can scream your lungs out in a hotel room just because "you feel like it," or maybe have some loud, intense sex right next to a buddy who’s trying to sleep? I mean, sure—why not? If that's the vibe, go for it.
Kids are a much more sensitive demographic—mostly because you can't exactly shoo them away from a public area by telling them to "go find a hotel room."

If we’re going to play by these rules—where this whole "judgmental" thing is supposedly strictly for two people—then I guess nobody is allowed to mention kids anymore. You couldn't even bring up how someone's behavior, say, a messy affair, impacts their children without breaking the code. By that logic, we might as well move the entire conversation over to Reddit and call it a day.
And he isn't even moving.
Look, that’s exactly why I didn't view the ridge as some kind of "natural habitat"—just like you wouldn't consider a suburban cul-de-sac to be a natural habitat when you're sitting there venting to your wife about how to handle a betrayal, or debating the merits of husbands who only stay in the marriage for the sake of the kids.

Kids get brought up in almost every conversation these days—and honestly, it makes sense. They’re a core part of our community, after all. Besides, the way we adults carry ourselves—the choices we make and the energy we put out—has a massive, direct impact on them. It’s hard to ignore that connection.

Is it really that scandalous to say, "Think about how this affects your kids," when you bring a new hookup home? Honestly, I don’t see what’s so offensive or "disgusting" about pointing out the reality of the situation—like, why can't we just be blunt and say, "Consider the impact on your children if you're hooking up right next to them while they sleep"? If the conversation heads in that direction, fine. Let it. If a new subtopic emerges, let people hear something fresh for once. Maybe someone will actually realize they’re handling things poorly, or maybe someone else will have a moment of clarity—an "Aha! By the time I'm that age, it won't matter, and besides, they're sleeping in a different room in this cramped studio apartment anyway"—and that’ll be that. End of story.

So, they go ahead and purge a whole mountain of solid posts—just to hand out bans because of some personal crusade against the concept of childhood sexuality being "revolting"... unbelievable.
I always suspected that whenever things started getting heated—you know, when the digital pitchforks come out and people start throwing punches—it was just a convenient excuse to say "this topic is too hard to moderate." It’s the classic move: pull the thread, isolate the discussion, and lock it down tight. But honestly? I think we should leave it open. Let it stay right where it is so anyone looking for answers can actually find it. We need these conversations to remain accessible—not just to vent, but so people can actually learn something from the chaos.

It’s worth it.
Look, let’s get one thing straight—this isn't some attempt at trolling, I'm not trying to be a smart-ass, and I certainly am not throwing trash around just for the sake of it. This isn't an insult, either.
Let’s be honest—navigating life as a couple with kids, or even just planning to have them, involves some incredibly non-trivial hurdles that most people tend to gloss over.

Honestly, she’s less valuable than a broken vending machine in a deserted subway station—just a constant, irritating nuisance that pops up in random threads only to linger there, or worse, somehow manages to get highlighted.

We also have those locked threads hanging around—they stay up simply because there’s still some actual value in keeping them visible.

Look, I’m all for cleaning up the clutter—deleting spam or mindless nonsense is perfectly fine—but this? This isn't garbage.

And I’m certainly not going to fall for that "I’m the moderator, so if I say it’s garbage, then it’s garbage" line of reasoning—to which my response would simply be, "Yeah, sure it is." 😬
I won't. Because that isn't actually an argument.

Especially when you look at everything else floating around in the neighboring threads—none of which have been swept away like literal trash. Now, don't get me wrong; I don't consider any of it "garbage," though there are certainly bits and pieces that contribute nothing to the conversation. But look, this forum isn't some stuffy ivory tower where we only engage in academic debates fueled by peer-reviewed papers and CC lists. Given that there’s plenty of other content out there—content that happily exists (and hey, it's fine if it does)—labeling anything remotely educational as "trash" just completely undermines the credibility of what we're trying to do here.
User trust, much like raising a child, is earned through consistency.
It also requires introspection—a genuine willingness to learn and actually rethink how you operate.

Spot on. And look, part of a moderator's actual job description is cleaning up the off-topic clutter that doesn't belong in the specific sub-forum. I already said—once you guys touch base with the mods over at Reddit and get everything squared away, I’ll happily restore the posts. Is that really such a massive hurdle? Or is it just somehow more "fun" to deal with the headache over on Quora instead?

So, let me see the immediate benefit of mentioning—and pointing out—how your hookups might affect your kid "sleeping" right next to you on a forum dedicated entirely to sex talk. Yeah, I'm still looking.
People come to Reddit for advice when they need it, or to vent about their kids.

The Parenting sub isn't some manual on how to get laid. There are plenty of other subs out there covering both parenting and sex where people can actually share their knowledge.

I object to deleting a discussion that was high-quality and genuinely useful.

Is there really an issue with keeping this thread on Reddit if the mods are cool with it?

Like I said, the topic isn't about pacifiers, it's about sex. As far as the part that got nuked goes, I still think it belongs in the Parenting sub. If the topic evolved further, sure, it could move to Reddit, and then moving it would make sense, obviously.

The whole thing is largely about child masturbation too. I don't have a place to discuss that anywhere except Reddit. Having sex near a kid is borderline, I get it, but combined with posts about child masturbation, it totally fits under the Reddit umbrella if you're insisting the discussion stays up.

I won't. Because that isn't an argument.

My argument is that a massive discussion regarding child masturbation, alongside the whole "hooking up next to the kid" thing, has absolutely no business being in the Parenting sub. Good grief, child masturbation in a Parenting sub?

silverraven14 said:I’m afraid you don't have the full picture.
Based on my best guess as to what you're implying—no, this has nothing to do with my stance that we shouldn't be letting people post things masquerading as expert advice or advertisements without providing a shred of actual credentials.

So, let's skip the assumptions and the patronizing attitude about knowing exactly what my motives are.
The threads are dragging on—they were, they are, and frankly, they're becoming more frequent. You all used to let these kinds of endless discussions slide as if they were perfectly fine; I'm simply pointing out that it's just unnecessary filler.

What I considered to be the topic and my objective is clearly stated right here. Please, don't flatter yourself by thinking you know me.

It’s now crystal clear to everyone that you’re moderating according to your own preferences, so there’s really no need to hide behind some claim of "objectivity." Thanks for the heads-up, I guess. That's that. 👋

I'm pretty sure you are. You've already brought up the favoritism toward that one female user twice now, even though you were given a direct answer. Just because you aren't happy with the response doesn't mean it isn't rude to keep accusing the mods of playing favorites. I don't show favoritism to anyone, not even my colleagues. That's a harsh and baseless accusation. Anyone who tries to dictate how the sub is run is going to get this kind of response from me. If you don't like someone and want to claim they're breaking rules and the mods should step in? Fine. But if a mod explicitly says they aren't breaking rules and you keep pushing the "favoritism" angle, sorry, but that's just being disrespectful. You aren't a moderator; you can offer suggestions, but you can't run the sub your way. I'm not going to hand out warnings just because you told me to. That's not how this works.

Look, please stop throwing around accusations and assuming you actually know what my end goals are.
There’s been stalling happening—it happened before, and honestly, it’s getting worse. You guys have been letting these kinds of dragging discussions slide as if they’re perfectly fine, but I’m just calling it like I see it: it’s stalling.

I’m not making assumptions here; I’m just drawing conclusions based on what’s right in front of me.
I have no clue what you're talking about, but let me clear something up: just because something looks like "stalling" to you doesn't mean it actually is. Also, give us a break—we aren't omnipotent gods. If we miss something once in a while, well, humans make mistakes, but that isn't a reason to go nuclear and act like this subreddit is some lawless wasteland being protected by a cabal of mods. Lately, the discussions here have been top-tier, and when you turn a single thread into a massive drama just because an off-topic rant—which was mostly just people talking about graphic sexual stuff—got nuked, you're the ones tanking the sub. Acting like we're playing favorites just because someone annoyed you is exactly how you ruin the effort we put into making this a decent place for everyone.

It’s total nitpicking. You could have addressed my actual suggestion for the FAQ, but instead, you chose to pivot to accusations of favoritism and moral policing. That’s just not right.

What I considered the topic and the goal is clearly stated right here. Please don't pretend you know my mind.

I don't know you. I am strictly talking about what you are doing right this second and the reasoning behind it. That's it.

So you moderate based on your own whims? Loud and clear now. No need to dress it up as an attempt at objectivity. Thanks for the heads-up. 👋

"Moderating based on our whims"? What is that even supposed to mean? It’s not like we’re moderating based on the dictates of Jesus or Buddha, and we certainly aren't moderating based on whatever random users demand. Every so often, someone tries to force their agenda or reshape the sub through us, so yeah, we moderate based on our own judgment while trying our best to stay objective. We’re human beings, not robots, but I can guarantee there is zero favoritism going on. There are slip-ups, sure—that happens everywhere—but there is absolutely no intentional protection or playing favorites.

We don't moderate based on whims. Period. That would imply we're banning people just because we don't like them and abusing our power, which is a nasty, heavy accusation to throw around. We don't moderate based on anyone's wishes—including our own. You twist my words so that saying "we won't moderate according to *your* wishes" turns into "oh, so you moderate according to *your* whims"—it’s incredibly rude.

This whole crusade against this sub is totally overblown. It’s actually hilarious that some of the people complaining are the exact same ones who should have been banned ages ago due to their behavior. We’ve tried everything—countless warnings, removals, the whole nine yards—before finally moving to bans. We haven't been "tyrants."
This isn't directed at you; I've already said my piece to you.

Do you want stricter rules? I'm just asking. I don't get why it's such an issue to tell people to stick to the topic and stop derailing threads with endless nonsense. But let me be clear: if you come here specifically to troll or start fights, we are going to tighten the screws. We will enforce the rules strictly, with minimal warnings or none at all. It'll be straight to bans.
But we can't keep going like this. We try to meet you halfway as much as possible, we split up topics, we do everything to make this community a good place, and what do we get back? Accusations that we're playing favorites or that we're "puritans" killing the conversation.

Just because we refuse to let someone bully another user—whether it's a big shot like Guud or anyone else—doesn't mean we're protecting them. We just don't want this sub to turn into a gossip circle. That's all there is to it.

There’s honestly zero point in dragging this out into the next century by constantly attacking other forums. As far as I'm concerned, I’ve said my piece—everything is out in the open and crystal clear now.

If the mods feel the need to weigh in on this whole situation, go right ahead. The moderation team already laid it all out for you and doga, who seems hell-bent on policing every single thread about ŽuD and turning one little duplicate warning about staying away from Guud's story into some massive legal case.

silverraven14 said:The fact that a moderator jumps into a discussion acting like just another user isn't what I'd call a "warning." Moderators have always leaned on the excuse that once they join the fray, they're just regular users—so let's not try to flip the script here.

The only actual moderator warning I saw was when posts were deleted. I highly doubt I missed anything—I don't exactly have a habit of ignoring official notices—so no, I didn't "miss" a warning.

Secondly, the discussion isn't "distasteful," because the conversation stemmed from—how much and when a child becomes aware of sexuality—and that was framed within that specific context.

Just because some people feel uncomfortable doesn't make the topic of sexuality distasteful.

If the posts had actually been read instead of being reflexively wiped out, perhaps the conclusion would have been different.

The Relationship Forum includes families, and the topic of sex is part of the relationship dynamic; the Parenting Forum is where kids' issues live. Here, children were mentioned specifically in terms of how much it bothers them when parents are being intimate—groping, hooking up, or having sex right in front of them or while they sleep... which is a legitimate concern regarding a couple's sex life and the thought, "Is my kid going to be affected by this?"
In my opinion, this belongs here more than on the Parenting Forum, especially since it's not even the same group of people participating.

Whether "sleeping" is a valid excuse or not—that's what the thread was trying to figure out.

The discussion could have pointed out that a child shouldn't be viewed merely as an object within a relationship context.

But to you, it's "distasteful" simply because you haven't bothered to read it.

Or maybe you just don't care how your child might perceive your sex life and what precautions are sensible. Well, some of us do.
That doesn't make the discussion distasteful just because it doesn't suit your personal tastes.

Honestly, seeing it handled this way feels a bit pathetic. It's no wonder those parents were sending their kids to therapists when discussing a child's awareness is considered "distasteful" by some.
👎

I expected a bit more sensitivity, frankly.

When adults get upset because they realize they're being treated like objects, the mods immediately jump in to shut the topic down.
But our boundaries are taught by our parents... If they don't know what constitutes healthy behavior versus crossing a line, it’s no surprise our own boundaries are a mess when we grow up.

The boundary in question belongs to the sexual couple, not the child; the child is the catalyst for the question. This forum deals with adult relationships, and if thinking "Hey, will this bother my kid?" is considered distasteful, then 👎

Moderation should be less personal. There was no insults here, no violations of the rules—so this thread could have, and really should have, just been moved to a more appropriate sub-forum if it was truly deemed misplaced.

"Distastefulness" is entirely subjective, and childhood sexuality and how it's perceived is a natural topic, whether you like it or not.

Yet, the moderators reflexively dive in—things like victim-blaming go unaddressed, ad hominem attacks go ignored, but this gets nuked because it wasn't even read properly.

There was a time when this forum was a place of tolerance toward people, yet strict about actual insults... Times change, I suppose.

I wasn't expecting the posts to be restored, but I decided to take a chance anyway.

There used to be a revolution brewing, but now the result is just the same old crap in a different package. 👎

I read it. And then I deleted it because this isn't the place for it on the General Discussion forum. The implications about being "threatened" are what's truly gross.

Kids are part of the General Discussion too, and we talk about sex there. On the Relationship forum, we talk about kids. Here, kids were mentioned specifically regarding how much it bothers them when older folks get all handsy or messy right in front of them while they're trying to sleep... which is basically a question about a couple's sex life and the thought, "Is my kid going to be weirded out by this?" In my opinion, it makes more sense for this to be here than on the Relationship forum, especially since we aren't even talking to the same crowd.

Look, let me just say we don't agree with your assessment. Is it a life for two? Or a life for three? It's still not the Relationship forum.

I expected a bit more sensitivity.

The moderation should be less personal. There was no insults here, no rule-breaking, so if someone really felt it belonged elsewhere, it could have—and should have—just been moved to a more appropriate sub-forum.
But no, the mods just jump in impulsively. They ignore the blatant victim-playing from angry dogs, they ignore the ad hominem attacks, and this whole thing is blowing up simply because nobody bothered to actually read the thread.

Since I’m already well aware of the backstory behind this sudden raid on General Discussion—which, by the way, hasn't been this productive in ages—I'll tell you what I told you on the other thread: We aren't going to moderate based on anyone's whims, including yours.

Please stop implying that we're letting people derail things, because that’s just not true. If you have beef with certain users, settle it privately instead of calling out the mods for not running things exactly the way you want them to.

The discussion became distasteful because everyone went totally off-topic and lost all sense of what the actual subject was. Even though you guys were practically begging people not to go down that path, everyone did it anyway. It’s honestly wild that after all that, you’d go as far as to claim the mods didn't read the discussion and start calling for some kind of revolution. It’s just arrogant and creates a pointless uproar. Just because the moderators aren't catering to your every desire doesn't mean it's okay to drag us through the mud like this. So much for "sensitivity."

I wasn't expecting any posts to come back, but I figured I'd take a shot.

I nicely suggested that you work things out with the Relationship forum moderators, but clearly, the goal here isn't actual discussion—it's just stirring the pot because certain people didn't get their way. It's not happening. Nobody is the sheriff of General Discussion, nor will they ever be. That goes for every single user on this site, yourself included.

Look, if the current mods are down for it, we could just open up a dedicated thread over on the General Discussion board. If they give us the green light, I’m more than happy to dig through the archives, grab those posts, and migrate them over there myself.
But let's be real—this particular sub isn't the place for it. Not that anyone here actually needed me to point that out.