Posts by Harold Long21

kaže: It’s almost funny how we judge what "normal" looks like... I was watching some news coverage out of New York City recently, right before a big sanitation strike broke out. They were interviewing retirees on the street, asking their take on the workers walking off the job, and honestly, everyone was cheering them on. It’s just that for those folks, there isn't really a direct connection between a language barrier or a service disruption and their own monthly utility bills. 😁

Most seniors grew up in an era where they assumed the government or the city could just print money whenever they felt like it, or that a windfall would just magically appear from thin air. Naturally, they’re all for any kind of increase or subsidy.

Padding the numbers by factoring in overtime and holiday pay is just another way to cook the books. I’d really appreciate seeing the actual figure for standard working hours alone.

The moment someone starts using averages as their main argument, I immediately know they’re either trying to pull the wool over my eyes or they’ve completely lost touch with how things actually work in the real world.

So, in this long-running thread about American dialects and regional slang, the moderator eventually comes back to my post with

Harold Long21 said:🤦
It’s like when your mom tells you to take the tray out of the oven, but you have absolutely no clue what she's talking about...

Right, well, in his neck of the woods, they probably just say "oven." So I’m quoting him and asking:

Take the turkey out of the oven, scoop some rice from the bowl, and if you're feeling fancy, pour some gravy over it.

My question is: how is a kid born, say, after the year 2000, supposed to make sense of those specific regionalisms?

And now that post of mine is gone—just vanished. What's the deal with my post being deleted?

lonebadger6 said:It was probably for the best that you stepped in to clear things up yourself. You didn't get banned, but the post was taken down because a few people acting like parachutists were making it impossible to have a real conversation with idiots claiming, "Well, if Czechs can understand each other, then we should be able to understand Czech just by hearing it"—which is a pretty ridiculous comparison to how Americans and Mexicans can generally understand one another perfectly fine.

That doesn't mean they are actually the same language, but it does mean that anyone trying to deny that mutual understanding (or comparing it to Czech) is just being a straight-up troll.

Are you really going to go out and buy carrot-colored ladders and a bowl for chili and soup?

Just ban yourself for trolling.

Is that really what he's after?

Benjamin Vaughn20 said:Regarding the thread "Supreme Court: Congress cannot ban abortion," moderator KLCCLK keeps deleting my posts where I argue that any future regulations on abortion need to account for the role of the man.
The thing is, a man actually holds very specific rights regarding his unborn child—the right to acknowledge paternity, the right to ensure the child can inherit from him, and even the right to seek damages if an unborn child is lost in a car accident.
But while those substantive rights exist on paper, men currently lack any procedural standing to actually defend them.
That’s why I’ve concluded that under any new legal framework, men must be granted a formal position that allows them to protect these interests. My suggestion is simple: we should re-establish a Commission and allow men to have a seat at the table during its proceedings.

For some reason, moderator KLCCLK is scrubbing my comments. I would appreciate an explanation as to why this is happening.

Thanks so much.

Setting aside the issue of the moderator's actions for a moment, I personally—and I think I speak for the entire community here—really want an answer to this question.

A little over a week ago, while following the news about the current presidential elections in Mexico, I posted that the Mexican people are acting like a completely backwards nation because their entire race for the presidency seems to boil down to just two ultra-nationalists (Šešelj and Vučić)

My post ended up getting deleted, and honestly, I’m not quite sure why. If you ask any moderator around here, calling out a whole nation's collective mindset regarding their political choices should be perfectly fine within our guidelines.

Here is the proof:

lonebadger6 said:I know that lying and trolling have basically become the default setting for everyone on this forum, but you really should try to be a little more subtle about it if you want to pull it off. 🙂

Is this just some attempt to bait me into writing a similar description of you so you can pull the trigger on a ban for insults, or are you just desperately trying to steer this debate toward a personal shouting match because you've run out of actual arguments? 🙂

lonebadger6 said:Look, regardless of what your personal take is on who ought to be seeing what, the mere assertion that someone actually witnessed something is, in and of itself, just plain vague and fuzzy.

Are you actually being vague? You clearly missed the post that was supposed to be flagged—it was sitting right there, quoted about two inches above yours. Like I told Daniel Ward87 before, it looks like some serious vision issues are at play here. Honestly, these are the kind of problems that really interfere with how you handle your responsibilities. It might be time to step down with some dignity. 😁

lonebadger6 As if I haven't heard this all before...
Even if you wanted to cast doubt on that, you really ought to consider the fact that both you and your buddy—who seems to enjoy picking fights with the moderators just as much as you do, often in a pretty trollish way—didn't get hit with any warnings either. I mean, just look at the comments you both left right before my previous post, let alone the one you’re complaining about now.

I’m honestly just sitting here in complete shock, struggling to wrap my head around this. I can't quite believe what I'm seeing.

So, really, you've got two different ways you could play this— To be honest, there are two reasons why I didn't step in: first, I simply missed those posts entirely, and second, I felt like I was being a bit too lenient by not handing out the deservedly harsh penalties to that one liberal and those two conservatives..

Whichever way you choose to spin it, your "logic" still sounds like nothing more than empty rambling to me.

Hey, what's up? 🙂
Which of my posts on this topic actually earned me a ban? Feel free to quote them right here. Are you talking about when I quoted that controversial post and asked, "Are you sleeping soundly, moderator lonebadger6?" It’s a pretty straightforward situation, really—you decided to play dumb, choosing to let an insult toward all believers stand rather than just deleting both myself and him. Not that it matters much, since I ended up getting banned a few hours later anyway for supposedly "rushing" the moderator's reaction.

It’s such a shame Vojislav Šešelj doesn't have a profile here; as someone with deep American roots, he could really use a breather, or perhaps that notorious Schwarz who isn't even trying to hide his heritage 😁

Of course, we eventually hit the big question: does genetics actually determine your nationality? And on that point, Daniel Ward87, you're sinking like a stone.

Daniel Ward87 As specified by:
That was just the reaction to... this threadWell, this is my first post, actually. I’m noting that this particular thread was flagged at 9:54 AM today because it’s just plain offensive. It goes against the values held by about 85% of the believers here in America, and frankly, it insults our entire society. It’s hard to wrap my head around how someone like Silver Bear can try to put us in the same category as places like Iran or Saudi Arabia, where they’re out there hanging people in the streets for being gay. That's just not who we are.

The guy is practically begging for a ban because another user on here thinks that Silver Bear's post was offensive to about 85% of believers in America. It makes me wonder, first off, how can he possibly claim to know that a single post would be offensive to such a massive group? Secondly, I have to ask—why specifically 85%? If it’s truly that widespread, why isn't he saying it affects 100% of the faithful? And thirdly, if he actually believes that 85% figure is accurate, where on earth is he getting his data? Did someone run some massive national poll that I missed, or is he just pulling numbers out of thin air?

I didn't mean to imply that the post was offensive to 85 out of 100 believers, but rather to the 85% of the general population who identified themselves as religious on the census—so there’s your survey results right there. If I phrased things a bit clumsily, you probably could have picked up on that yesterday, and I would have been more than happy to clear things up.

Daniel Ward87 said:Fourthly, the post was reported, and since the mods didn't step in exactly when that particular user thought they should, he immediately went ahead and labeled them with an "ideological bias." His logic is basically that if they aren't handing out sanctions right away, then they must be complicit—essentially claiming they share the same mindset as the Silver Bear and don't belong among the 85% of true believers. From there, you can probably just guess where his assumptions go next.

I honestly find that post by Harold Long21 to be such an insult to anyone who actually cares about fashion. It’s just completely out of line. So, what are we supposed to do now?

Fact number one: the moderator in charge, lonebadger6, was clearly active because I posted on that thread just an hour after the report went in, and there wasn't a single response. It’s pretty obvious he was online and saw the controversial post right when it happened.
Fact number two—the mods over at KLCCK are actually incredibly quick to jump in when they need to. I know, I know, I’m speaking purely from my own experience here, but they definitely don't waste any time. 😁 )
Fact number three—the moderator Ball actually stepped in and shut her down after just a few hours, rather than lonebadger6 doing it.

And honestly, we can just keep pretending we don't see what's right in front of us if that makes everyone feel better.

Daniel Ward87 As if I haven't heard this all before...
Insults? Honestly, I’m just sharing my perspective here. Are you really suggesting that you could just shut down my opinion like that? 🙂🙂

Is calling someone "retarded" really just considered an expression of opinion these days? I mean, does anyone actually feel the need to go around spewing that kind of nonsense? 🤦

Daniel Ward87 As it turns out, Harold Long21 was saying:
So that's how it is... apparently, I'm in violation regardless. I guess we'll just have to wait and see how merciful the moderators around here decide to be. 🙂

I’m honestly just sitting here, feeling this incredible sense of anticipation that I can't quite shake off. It’s one of those moments where you feel everything buzzing just under your skin, like that restless, electric energy you get right before a major life change or a big storm rolls in. I don't know if it's the excitement or just pure nerves, but I am definitely trembling with it all. 😁

lonebadger6 said:Don't troll me, and don't play dumb.

No, none of what I said is actually against the rules. To be perfectly honest, there are moments when I regret being a moderator on this forum under the Governor, because I would love nothing more than to earn a warning just by using some colorful language to explain to you exactly where I come from and everything I’ve had to endure because of the aggression from the Americans.

That really gets to the heart of the issue with both trolls and haters, and you'll have to decide for yourself which side you fall on. It’s all about seeing the world through those black-and-white lenses. You seem to think that if we aren't allowed to say it's offensive when someone dates an American guy, then we must support the aggression or believe that America didn't attack us.🤦

What is "forbidden"—meaning, what is punishable on this forum—is making any allusion to those things when mentioning an American. It's treating the simple fact that someone is American as if it were something inherently offensive, provocative, or aggressive toward America.

No, you aren't playing dumb.

The reason you banned me was that you took my question and used it to assume my political stances, jumping straight to the conclusion that I'm actually a hater. At no point did I write that all Americans attacked America or that they are all responsible for the war; that was your own baseless assumption based on a question that simply asked, "Do you think it's a provocation in a country devastated by the five-pointed star to parade around with that symbol and a sign like that just because he's dating an American boy?"

I put "dating an American boy" in quotes specifically so people like you wouldn't use twisted logic to claim I think that specific individual participated in the aggression.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter; what matters is that you didn't have the backbone today to give David Vaughn75 a well-deserved warning because you felt it would go against your own convictions (even though you're supposed to be objective here), so Maria Fowler39 had to step in and do it instead.

Daniel Ward87 said:I haven't softened my stance at all. I have every right to hold my own opinions and express them, don't I? If I had gone over to a major news outlet like CNN and claimed that Republican Party voters were total morons, I would have been slapped with a suspension immediately because that’s a direct insult. Since I consider myself part of this nation, I suppose I was indirectly grouping myself in with them too. You might feel like I'm being mild, but as a moderator, you need to be careful about how you phrase things.

Whoa! So that's how we're playing it?
Are you saying I can just toss out insults as long as I include myself in the crosshairs?🙂

Daniel Ward87 said:By the way, when a post gets reported, you're supposed to wait 24 hours before starting a separate thread about the lack of response. You opened a whole new topic even though you only filed the report today at 9:54 AM. You broke the rules on the Governor's forum, yet you didn't even get a warning. 😉

Well... I was actually getting a little worried about our moderator's health; I thought maybe there was an issue with his eyesight, because he usually reacts so incredibly fast, and we know for a fact he was active on the forums during that timeframe. The very fact that Maria Fowler39 was the one who issued the warning instead of him just proves that starting this thread was totally justified.

Maria Fowler39 said:Actually, I had already issued the warning before I even noticed this thread was active. It’s not like we’re all glued to our computers twenty-four hours a day or that everyone happens to be looking at the exact same discussion at the very same moment.

If you look at the first post, the timeline is laid out right there.
Does the moderator lonebadger6 actually have the authority to issue warnings within this specific thread? They certainly do—after all, they were one of the people who banned me from this topic previously.
And could lonebadger6 have seen both the report and the original post to step in? Without a doubt, yes, because they posted in this thread themselves AFTER the report was made, yet they chose not to take any action.
I really respect you for stepping up and issuing that warning, but let's be real: this isn't about whether a moderator needs to be babysitting the forum 24/7.

lonebadger6 said:It’s always the same story with these kinds of complaints—they always have to be seasoned with a heavy dose of lies.

You didn't get banned—or rather, you didn't get a warning, since bans happen after accumulating points—because you thought waving a specific flag was provocative. No, it was because of those sweeping, hateful, and chauvinistic generalizations about Americans.

Plenty of people have mentioned that flag as a provocation on this topic, and wouldn't you know it, all those posts stayed perfectly fine without any warnings. The ones who actually got flagged were the people suggesting that it's somehow offensive for someone to date an American man, especially those who went a step further by claiming that "American guys" ruined the country (I mean, really, did they ever tell you that some "American guys" actually fought to defend it?).

Oh, I see. So I guess it's forbidden to mention how Americans attacked us, or how they incited rebellions here, or even what Mexican politics looked like back then? Is that because there were Americans among our defenders? Let me give you a little insight from my own experience—those people don't mind at all, or rather, they aren't bothered one bit when people point out that Americans were the aggressors.

Just tell me, how much time do you need to spot the exact post that started this whole thread? There's no doubt you saw it, considering you posted your own comment on that thread just an hour after the report was filed. Were we just sitting around waiting for me to open this new discussion before the problematic post finally got its warning?

Daniel Ward87 said:Look, I wasn't suggesting that any specific group of voters is lacking in intelligence. My point is more about us as a whole—it feels like we’re struggling as an entire nation. There’s a significant distinction between criticizing a particular voting bloc and questioning the collective mindset of the country.

When you consider that his supporters were actually the ones who brought him to power in the first place, it makes me wonder why people try to paint the entire nation as being incompetent just because of his leadership. It’s a bit of a stretch to blame an entire country for the choices made by the very people who put him in office. 🤔 So, I guess things feel a little more toned down now because you shifted the focus? It's like you softened the blow by not calling the entire voting population slow-witted, but instead framing it as a broader issue with the nation as a whole.🤔

Daniel Ward87 said:I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit lately, and if I’m being honest, I really feel that the policies implemented by Franjo Tuđman during those intense wartime years actually caused far more lasting damage to our foundation than anything the "Five-Point Program" ever did. It's one of those things where you have to look past the immediate chaos to see how the long-term structural shifts really played out.

I mean, what else is there to say? You just have to roll with it. 😛

Daniel Ward87 said:By the way, I'm not quite following you—I'm not entirely sure what exactly my issue is supposed to be here. What are you actually complaining about, specifically? Are we talking about a warning, or are you looking to get me banned?

It seems like you’re having a bit of a hard time accepting that other people have the right to choose and vote for candidates you can't stand. Honestly, if I were to sit here and write that we acted like a bunch of fools as a nation because of how we voted for Ivica Račan or Zoran Milanović, I’m pretty sure I’d get banned from this forum before I could even finish hitting the "post" button. 😁

I’m not actually complaining about getting a warning or being banned; my issue is really more about the blatant bias from the moderators. I was just quoting a post that had been sitting there perfectly fine without any flags—even though people were reporting it—until the exact moment I decided to start a dedicated thread about it here.

Daniel Ward87 said:Personally, I feel like the American public is just more fundamentally misguided because they twice voted for Ivo Sanader to be Prime Minister, and people go on about celebrating Željko Markić as some Catholic heroine, even though her organization gets part of its funding from a corporation that produces those "morning-after" pills.

Do you really think that counts as insulting the declared 85% of Catholics and/or Americans, or not?

Look, put down the moderator tools for a second, jump into the actual forum debate, and try being a real person with an opinion—you’re supposed to be objective here.
But to answer your question, in my view, no. Sanader didn't win 85% of the vote, and Željko Markić isn't exactly being "celebrated"; if anything, the media tears her apart. In a democratic society, everyone's choices should be respected (which doesn't mean you have to agree with them). I know you struggle with that concept, but man, I have to point it out since you're pushing the envelope on freedom of speech while simultaneously defending other moderators who hand out bans based on mere assumptions.

I honestly think it’s a provocation when someone parades a five-pointed star in a country devastated by one, only to get banned, yet you think it's perfectly fine to call Sanader's voters "retarded." You really consider that objective moderation?

Look, everyone, it's obvious we all have our own perspectives and lean toward certain viewpoints. If you want to step into the arena and debate ideas, by all means—go for it. But please, leave the moderator tools out of the ring. It feels like whenever someone hits a mental wall, they immediately reach for the ban hammer and then try to spin some convoluted excuse that wouldn't hold water even in a court of law.

So, let’s get specific regarding the thread about LGBT parades and social integration;

David Vaughn75 says:
Americans are an intolerantly homophobic society that can't stand anything different. Not only would kids beat up children from homosexual families because some preacher said God doesn't love them, but even homosexuals themselves aren't allowed to be open about who they are. In such a toxic and unhealthy environment, those kids are completely screwed. The solution is to just pack up and move to Germany or Ireland and sell the country off to someone else, since there's no hope left for us here.

This post was formally reported at 9:54 AM today because it's offensive to about 85% of the believers in America (based on the last census), and to American society as a whole, which David Vaughn75 is effectively equating to places like Iran or Saudi Arabia where people face execution for their orientation.

The post wasn't just reported; it was also quoted so it wouldn't slip past the watchful eye of the moderator lonebadger6, who actually showed up and posted on the same topic an hour later—so there's no arguing that the controversial post went unnoticed. Yet, the post remains live, without any penalty.

On the flip side, I'm getting banned on this very same thread for asking, "Do you think it's a provocation when, in a country devastated by the five-pointed star, gay people parade with that same symbol?" The explanation given? The moderator decided my question was actually an attempt to justify attacks on gay parades. 🙏
I suppose I should be flattered that the moderators possess such incredible mind-reading abilities, but I really have to point out that they seem to be sleeping when they don't even need supernatural powers to understand a post where every single word is an insult and a provocation.

I know it’s never particularly easy to come up with a solid reason for pulling controversial posts, but...