Simba banned him, but man, that little song he sang was hitting hard behind the scenes. Simba stepped up like some kind of supermod from the Politics section. And because of that, people are always going to see him as just a Politics mod. Another thing—supermods don't actually have the mandate to carry more weight than regular mods. Their whole function is fundamentally different from the start. That changes how everyone on the forum perceives them. Basically, they’re just mods who happen to be able to moderate the entire site. That is completely wrong, though. Supermods should be given way more authority and actual clout.
You just don't get it. An Admin should never come from that specific sub-section. They need to be neutral, standing on the sidelines. And they should have your sign hovering right above them that says: I agree! Signed, Bell
And this thing about Anderlon? He’s got his own stronghold too. It’s happened a few times now where Anderlon shows up and just tears through the mods and admins. So, really, your job is to prove that Anderlon is essentially speaking for every single mod. Anyway, there’s this concept in business management called mission and vision. The rule of thumb is that a CEO is considered successful if the lowest-ranking manager in the hierarchy is telling employees the exact same mission and vision the CEO laid out. You've got a tough job ahead of you. Honestly, the worst-case scenario for you is if they call in Anderlon and he makes a move, because at that point, you basically cease to exist.
Jerry Garcia said:1) There definitely were mods like that. Not anymore, though. Now there are just a few desperately clinging to their positions, popping up for maybe 15 days at a time hoping everyone forgets they haven't done much. But an example of someone being gone for a full year? That simply hasn't happened. 😉
2) It's true we have subforums where one mod carries the load and the others are barely active. That’s their internal agreement. As long as the subforum stays functional, it isn't a massive issue, even if I personally wish things worked differently.
3) I think Mark Twain was a mod for less than a year, but I might be wrong.
@ Rachel Sanchez11: I could spend all day, every single day, sitting on this thread resolving complaints, but it would be a total waste of time. The end result would just be people claiming I'm wrong and telling me to go talk to the higher-ups like the CEO or some government official. They'd say I'm on a payroll, or planted by a secret agency, or just biased. It wouldn't do any good. The other consequence would be that people would start complaining significantly more...😉 Look, when there's a legitimate complaint, it reaches me. When a user was unfairly banned once, I had nine different MODERATORS reaching out to me at 9 PM begging me to look into it. People watch what happens here. And, believe it or not, the moderators actually trust me—I don't know what 🤷 is in their heads. 95% of the complaints are completely baseless and simply don't warrant a deeper look...
I wasn't talking about you. An admin shouldn't be responsible for this, because at the end of the day, Politics is just one tiny section out of maybe 30 or 50 total. Having the head admin deal with these issues would be like asking the CEO of General Motors to personally fix a brake fluid issue on an Opel.
Having an Admin/supermod specifically for Politics would give the mods some real weight. You’d still be getting hit with the same appeals you get now, but the endless, toxic arguments would actually stop there. And I clearly remember the details of when one guy in the Politics section got a permanent ban. Get this: his name was Anderlon, and he was reinstated. Later on, he even got promoted. Now, give me Mark Twain or Jeremy Diaz or driftingdriver who actually has authority over that guy. He's deserved a permanent ban a hundred times over by now
One Admin with direct backing from the head admin—someone who holds the line for the mods and can step in to permanently remove someone—would bring actual order to this place. The mods could still do their jobs, bicker with users, explain their decisions, and defend their moderation, but those marathon debates would end instantly the moment someone hits the "stop" button. No more endless chatter, no more chasing ghosts. Every subsequent post would just be a ban with a reason: "Clone of a permanently banned user..."
And now some guy is going to tell me that all the high-quality debaters will die off. Well, I'll say this: plenty of people from that generation want a normal internet experience, but when they see the state of the Politics section, they just don't feel like writing, and that's how both Politics and the forum lose. Who are we losing them to? We're losing them to the people who have been polluting Politics for years and make every single discussion look exactly the same. Go read some threads over there; they're all identical...
Edit: By the way, Phoenix was banned 500 times until one night a certain lady finally had enough and snapped. It wasn't until she made the call that the arguing actually stopped.
Also, it's easy to make a decision that makes everyone happy. But the decisions that nobody likes—not even you—are the ones made by the brave or those who have actually outgrown the nonsense. And the worst decision of all is no decision at all! Politics stays messy and is allowed to rot. Just read the sentence right above this one.
hollowtrucker77 said:lol, wiredsailor10, thanks though, I honestly doubt that my arrival would change even a single shred of how people perceive the moderation of Politics here let’s do this just for kicks—list the Politics mods and drop your grievances 🙂 at least from my perspective as a PZK moderator, I've kept an eye on them if Jesus himself showed up, the only difference would be that they'd probably nail him to the floor with an electric nail gun this time around
Rachel Sanchez11, I can only sign my name to what you wrote here
🤣 When driftingdriver shows up and starts showing off his scars... And tells you to put your finger in...
I’m not going to try to be all serious here, because someone will probably just call me a loudmouth again without any basis for it... But look, hollowtrucker77 is right—the final say ends with the Admin. Whether people want Anderlon to jump in and declare that the Admin is absolutely correct is a completely different conversation altogether. But Sash, you keep pushing this same thesis where forum members point fingers at the mods without ever taking a good, hard look in the mirror themselves. I guess what I'm wondering is, does that standard apply to everyone? Does it apply to the users, the mods, and the Admins alike? I mean, shouldn't self-reflection be a basic rule of civilization, regardless of what your job title is? And there’s something else you guys skipped over. Smartica mentioned how the forum is basically a reflection of its users. If I had to say one thing about it, it's this: the whole point of a mod is to make sure their sub-forum stays a decent place for discussion. But that doesn't mean everything has to be curated strictly according to their specific worldview. Finding that balance is incredibly difficult...
Once upon a time, we were having a debate about Politics. Back then, I suggested that we need to push back against the extremes on both the left and the right. And Jack Jones10 shot me down, saying that even if you sweep the living room clean, those extremists will just jump back in through the bedroom window and wait for you to get tired. When it comes to Politics, you need a crew of a few mods who are actually on the same page. But until we clear out the various shades of Phoenix types and their conflicting worldviews, there’s never going to be any peace there. It’s also a tragedy that people can drift in from former American territories and spread anti-American propaganda (which, let's face it, the right-wingers here seem to enjoy). That shouldn't be allowed, because at the end of the day, this is an American forum.
Oh, and one more thing: the Admin or Supermod needs to be present in the complaints thread to actually resolve issues. Because at the end of the day, the Admin is the only one with the power to issue permanent bans in that section. So, yeah... the Admin will have to keep sweeping the living room, while the mods stay busy watching the windows.
hollowtrucker77 said:Rachel Sanchez11, I’m actually on board with about half of what you’re suggesting: using Smart for the supermode. As for the other half, honestly, I’d rather just hit the ban button right now. 😁
Back to the point: isn't it kind of worrying how all the relatively sane people seem to be cloning the Politics moderation team? It really drives home the idea that a mod over in Politics can't actually be a normal person... 😁
off-topic: A ban? How would the Semasi put it back in the day (I've been studying them lately so bear with me, my bad 😁)—can we just have a massive mass prune? 😬
Richard Perez3 said:I knew you didn't like me, but damn, this much?....😬
I honestly think it’s about time you show everyone what you're actually capable of... You're basically the backbone of this whole forum... Just a totally unbiased pro... The political mob is finally hitting a dead end... 😁
Personally, I’m throwing my hat in the ring for Smart to handle Politics, maybe even stepping in as a super mod. Let them "oversee" the regular mods and step in to clean up those messy situations that go way beyond their pay grade...
(I mean, there’s been this suggestion floating around for ages that for Politics, we should probably appoint an Admin alongside the mods just to give things some actual weight.)
I remember starting a thread once about some guy from the Politics section who wandered over to a discussion about the war in Georgia and just started rambling. His opening line was something along the lines of, "Back when we were marching in '45..." I opened the topic and basically asked what on earth Georgia had to do with the Nationalists or the Partisans, and he just went straight for the throat and insulted me (though, honestly, I guess Sasha was just rewarding him for it). What I’m trying to say is that moderation there is pretty much impossible. As long as you have people who are essentially unbannable (and trust me, they exist), the kind of people who drag every single topic back to the late 40s, and those who can't hold a conversation without slipping into nationalism, insults, or constant trolling—well, I don't think a real discussion can ever happen there.
I don't really post in Politics anymore (or at least, rarely) since my old handle. It’s just two armies dug into trenches there, one on the right and one on the left. And all they know how to do is hurl grenades at each other. The only question is when one of them is going to land right on your head while you're just walking through the middle of it.
Choosing Tyndall and Scotsman for the PDF-politik is a really solid move. I doubt they'll care much about any of the internal power games. Just don't burn them out too fast, or they might crack under the pressure, because they're actually doing a great job over there (for instance, they banned topics about the Nationalists and Partisans because once that stuff starts, it's impossible to control).
You don't need someone from the Politics section. You need an outsider—someone who couldn't care less if someone else is being an Inquisitor, a diletant, or Sarah Wilson95. As long as there are people there who wouldn't last seven days by the book, there's just no peace...
crimsonhound80 said:The moderator handed you a ban that you totally earned, and honestly, I don't get why you're still acting confused about it. 🤷
Look, crimsonhound80, we all know you struggle with making sense sometimes, but man, you’ve completely lost the plot here.. That ban was totally unjustified and just plain stupid. If they actually used those kinds of rules, nobody would be left on this entire site by tomorrow morning..
My advice? Just back off from these arguments because you're starting to look a little pathetic, if you know what I mean.. You're out here playing defense for the mods even though you aren't one anymore... Should we start singing? "Oh, fellow users, have you no mercy?"
Kevin Mitchell, don't bother. You could try starting a thread in psychology, or maybe a jokes section, or even just over in the off-topic boards. You're just wasting your breath and your time....
Higgs boson said:I see you'd make a great moderator; anyone who isn't on "your side" would probably get banned immediately. Honestly, I think it's about time they called you up to join the "dream team."
If you actually bothered to read the thread pinned in the corner, you'd know I have zero interest in being a moderator, let alone actually doing it... And just so we're clear, if you aren't on my side, I wouldn't ban you—I'd just completely relativize everything you say until you didn't matter at all... Besides, you're trying to drag me into an argument when I already said I wasn't going to engage with the PZK crowd. So, look, some other guy on this forum is basically asking me to just leave him alone... Is that possible? 😉
Just leave the OP alone. If I hadn't been playing devil's advocate, this thread wouldn't have even made it to five posts. As for how much I tend to spin things, you can see my track record in my recent posts over on the PZK forum. Look, whenever I feel like saying something, I’m going to say exactly what’s on my mind, the way I want to say it. There hasn't really been much relativizing happening here anyway... Thanks for listening...
Look, I get it, but let's just take this to the off-topic section.. I'm basically the favorite around here, so they're probably just waiting for me to start talking so they can jump in and welcome me back... I'll start a thread over there... Come on, both of you, get over there... 🙂
Anyway, boldhound8, since we’re already on the subject of wandering off track... is there actually a master list of all the usernames somewhere... I was just thinking how I'd love to sit down whenever I have some actual free time, pull out all the most hilarious debates, and compile them into one giant document for posterity...
I know, I know, I'm totally off topic here, so feel free to roast me...
Yeah, we react the exact same way to everything—whether it's buying exam answers, public procurement laws, doctors, or the court system.. We pay where we’re told to, we stick our heads in whoever's ass we need to, we bow down when required, and then we grill whenever we actually get the chance... Because if we dare to be different, suddenly we’re outcasts from society (or this community, or this forum). If we point out a blatant problem, we’re just troublemakers, or worse, traitors to some grand "higher purpose"... And I honestly don't get why some people can't see that someone is actually trying to do something good. Honestly, I refuse to accept the idea that Forum.hr hasn't long since stopped being a group of people just hanging out and chatting, and instead turned into a private economic factor that requires exactly this kind of behavior. But hey, that’s probably a conversation for another thread... Maybe this one:
On that thread, they’re calling anyone who says the site is down "malicious troublemakers," and they're basically gaslighting people who post screenshots as evidence by telling them their own internet is just broken or something... That’s what this is really about—willful blindness and manipulating the stats... If there were any brains in this place, a thread would have been opened regarding moderation, and the admin would be the one to start it. If there were any brains, a thread would have been opened about server downtime and how to fix it, started by the owner. If there were any brains, they wouldn't label people trying to expose irregularities as "rebels without a cause"; they’d at least listen to what they have to say.
There's an old saying back home: a donkey and a man both know more than a man sometimes.
"And I reckon you've gone to the great beyond, old man; I remember when you used to shout, and here we are, finally seeing through your little charade..." T. Bebic
Alright, I get where you're coming from... Look, you guys have your way of grilling, and we have ours... Your setups don't seem to smoke, even if they actually do—it’s like there's no visible plume. Meanwhile, our grills sometimes start smoking even after we've shut them down... I wasn't claiming things work any differently than they do... I'm just saying that, in my opinion, it isn't right, and I'm telling you straight up that I don't agree with it... I already laid out exactly why I disagree a few posts back... And honestly, once I'm done with this post, I intend to fully respect that stance... Without throwing shade at you or anyone else... Later. 🙂
Just to be clear, Mate and Ante are cops in my little scenario here... who are basically writing up a ticket for their own nonsense.. You take the fine because, hey, they’re the ones with the badges... Is it fair? Hell no, it isn't... You could act like a total smartass and just accept it since they hold all the authority, or you could try calling their Chief to file an official complaint... but if the Chief is also in on the scam with them, then you are absolutely screwed... Now, feel free to apply this analogy to this whole thread if you want to start roasting everyone... Later
Just one quick question for hollowtrucker77 and Smartica... When you see someone beating up an old lady in real life, don't you guys just stand there and let the bullies win? Or maybe it's like when one of those "authorities" you love so much—say, a cop—slaps you with a ticket just because you aren't buddies with his partner, Mate, over at the precinct? Like, he hits you with a fine for grilling during the summer, even though he and Mate are out there firing up the BBQ every single day. So you just put out the fire and say, "Whatever, boss." But what about the lady? Later on, you’ll probably act all innocent and go, "Oh my god, what could the two of us have possibly done to her?" I honestly don't get it. Authority isn't about raw power or just bowing down to whoever has a badge; it's something else entirely...
Oh, come on. I guess the moderator just couldn't be bothered to actually move the thread or notify anyone, so they just slapped him with a ban instead—showing everyone who’s boss and shutting the whole thing down. Look, sure, you *can* handle things that way, but it isn't right. That’s literally why this thread exists. Just lift the ban and let the guy talk about chess; honestly, screw this site and its rules. If he wants to debate the defense of Venice, I’d personally build him a dedicated room for it, let alone let him post on a forum. Actually, I'm stepping away from all these debates because this whole situation just proves who actually matters here. This place doesn't need people who can actually write; it just needs smiley-face types whose biggest achievement is picking out emojis. Later..
P.S. Lift the ban!!!!
Just dropping in to say goodbye to these threads. I'm keeping my fingers crossed, but I know you guys won't pull it off.... Maybe I'll start a little blog about this chess player, so you guys always have somewhere to look for justice, especially when it comes to our dear, wonderful admin. Peace 👋
Rachel Sanchez11 said:Jerry Garcia, if you're so eager, feel free to stop me.. You've got the option right there in your control panel... Since I'm not even going to file an official appeal, nobody's even going to notice. And if you really need a reason, I can give you one. Is that really the outcome you want?
P.S. By the way, big boss lady, answer the guy's appeal. Since I already know what your response is going to be, we both know the appeal is basically pointless. And that fact is just sad... Peace. You don't have to force me out. I know when I'm not wanted, and I'll leave on my own. After all, this forum is your playground and your dad is bigger.
Look, I’ve already laid out my position... I can't tell if this guy is actually a new user or just some clone account. But honestly, someone putting in that much effort isn't trying to stir the pot for the sake of it; they clearly just want to have an actual conversation about something. And just so we're clear, getting hit with an unjustified warning hurts people just as much as a ban does. Both are disciplinary actions, and the bottom line is that you did something wrong or messed up. The people who are mature enough to get that will understand after a private message; those who don't? Well, they won't get it even after five warnings and two bans. The way I see it, that warning was way too harsh, and I think the moderator dropped the ball here. Or let me put it this way: if this were my forum and I wanted high-quality contributors, I’d always side with the folks capable of writing a decent paragraph over the spammers and trolls whose biggest contribution is dropping five emojis to show how they feel. 🙂