- What does it even matter how it's phrased if there isn't a single shred of substance beneath the surface? It’s just empty packaging around a hollow core. To me, the actual message is what counts—or to put it more bluntly, is there actually anything intelligent being said here? - You really ought to just ignore those kinds of pedants, much like you would any internet troll.
@bohemia, @napoleon: Honestly, you could take this crowd to any other forum on the web, provided it actually follows decent moderation standards, and they wouldn't last ten days before getting hit with permanent bans for being nothing more than trolls and provocateurs. What makes this particular forum so fascinating from an editorial standpoint is how the banned users can seemingly clone themselves endlessly, coupled with the fact that once a moderator actually steps up to enforce global standards and restore order, people immediately start interfering with their job just to shield the trolls. 😵 The old, wise rule of any decent forum remains the same: read, and then read again, and then read some more; if you truly have something meaningful to add to a discussion, don't bother showing up with a single emoji or some snarky, trollish sentence, but rather contribute a thoughtful post that actually offers a perspective worth sharing. Forums aren't chat rooms, after all. If anyone is looking for that kind of mindless chatter, there are plenty of instant messaging communities and apps out there designed specifically for that purpose... It really is quite astonishing, isn't it, just how much—and what kind of behavior—this forum chooses to tolerate...
Yeah, it would certainly be quite the undertaking to strip every single cross from all the churches. I can't help but wonder how a free world, one rooted in Western perspectives, would react to something like that—even including those in the East. I just wonder...
mistycyclist5 said:It’s a real shame... even though we didn't exactly see eye to eye on politics, driftingdriver was a solid guy because he didn't give a damn whether you were left-wing or right-wing; he just went after most the people who actually deserved it.
I appreciate the compliment, really, but labeling me a crusader is both grotesque and, above all else, tragicomic. 😂So, in an act of protest, I’ve updated my avatar and gone full uniform.
Now you can finally breathe easy and celebrate. I’m officially stepping down from my role as moderator. Honestly, I’m looking forward to no longer having to deal with those self-proclaimed warriors for free speech who are actually just narrow-minded zealots, busy deciding exactly who is allowed to think what and how. 🍿
- It’s truly the only thing that exists without end or change. If we follow that logic, then everything else—those things whose existence is tethered to specific moments in time or certain patches of space—can't really be considered real, can they?
- Due to some fundamental disagreements with the site admins, I’m stepping down from my role moderating the politics section. - I truly hope the administration manages to find someone more suitable to step in and carry on the work there. - My main goal was always to execute a specific vision—specifically, getting as many forum members as possible to engage with that PDF. - Looking back, I feel like I largely succeeded in that endeavor. - However, these friction points with management have left me with no choice but to personally opt out of moderating political discussions. - I’ve always preferred following my own compass; otherwise, I’d just be a mindless errand boy carrying out everyone else's agenda. - I want to offer a public apology to anyone I might have offended during my tenure—if you felt wronged by my actions, please know it wasn't intentional. When you're working this hard, the margin for error tends to widen, doesn't it? - This decision is final. May God bless you all.
Tyler Grant76 said:You’re just, honestly, being dense. Based on how you're interpreting this, I guess I won't be getting any credit for this post because I was a) pretty much baited by your nonsensical posts and b) I could very clearly argue to anyone here that you're struggling to grasp what you read, to understand yourself, or even to understand how this forum works. I don't even need to lay out all my points; I'll just ask the people reading this thread to take a look at your claims. Almost every single one of them supports 👎
Setting aside bias for a second, but seriously, who would want any random PDF here to be moderated by someone as clueless as you? Huh? 😢
- Thanks for the compliments; yes, I suppose I am "slow" when it comes to such blatant disrespect. - Being "blatantly provoked" is really just a reflection of weakness and a lack of actual arguments; it's called being infantile. - I would actually love for you to try and convince me with real arguments that I have trouble understanding what I read—in fact, I'm practically looking forward to an articulated attempt to persuade me of my own insignificance, my inability to understand myself, or my misunderstanding of this forum. - You can either provide arguments first, making them unnecessary later, or you can skip them entirely; why not just decide which way you want to play? - And yes, if you can't prove to an inferior fool that they are indeed foolish through your own supposed superiority, everything else just descends into slander and insults. Anything else is just lamentation, demagoguery, and cheap provocation.
Sarah Wilson95 said:🤣 So, I correctly concluded a few days ago—right at the start of this whole mess—that you simply don't grasp certain things, yet you remain stubborn and continue throwing around terms like "discretionary right" and "I have my reasons."
Man, what is wrong with you?😕
Meanwhile, "another victim" of your big-heartedness has fallen, over in that thread about who hears the church bells.
You somehow "glossed over" the posts from a cloned provocateur who was (to me, if I may say so?) telling me to move away if I didn't like the sound of the bells, yet you went ahead and decided to ban someone else just because she wrote this:
Why such a nervous reaction from you? Is it really THAT hard to comprehend that someone can (and is allowed to?) ask a question sincerely? That they live somewhere else and they ASK—you know, they type letters and they ASK...
What danger is there in one thing versus the other? No, seriously.
Was I being rude on that thread, or did I direct an insult at anyone? Or is it truly necessary to leave this forum forever while you force your views on anyone who might actually allow them?
Since you clearly grasp the things that elude me, why don't you go ahead and explain them? After all, surely a superior mind would have its own unique way of making things clear to those of us left in the dust, wouldn't it? What does it actually mean to overstep? To abuse one's authority? I’m asking you to take a look at the Reddit discussion policy, and once you've finished reading through it, perhaps you could point out exactly where I supposedly crossed the line.
Sarah Wilson95 said:🤣 So, I correctly concluded a few days ago—right at the start of this whole mess—that you simply don't grasp certain things, yet you remain stubborn and continue throwing around terms like "discretionary right" and "I have my reasons."
Man, what is wrong with you?😕
Meanwhile, "another victim" of your big-heartedness has fallen, over in that thread about who hears the church bells.
You somehow "glossed over" the posts from a cloned provocateur who was (to me, if I may say so?) telling me to move away if I didn't like the sound of the bells, yet you went ahead and decided to ban someone else just because she wrote this:
Why such a nervous reaction from you? Is it really THAT hard to comprehend that someone can (and is allowed to?) ask a question sincerely? That they live somewhere else and they ASK—you know, they type letters and they ASK...
What danger is there in one thing versus the other? No, seriously.
Was I being rude on that thread, or did I direct an insult at anyone? Or is it truly necessary to leave this forum forever while you force your views on anyone who might actually allow them?
So, this exemplary regular on Reddit says: "We’ll be lucky if we don't end up behind bars just for attending Mass." 😬 "You live in a fanatic state," and other nonsense like that. Just your typical troll. Honestly, I don't see anything controversial about enforcing penalties for trolling. Regarding that link you mentioned—it’s just an opinion. If you all truly claim to be champions of democracy, shouldn't you be willing to respect the views of those who see things differently? Or is that part of the democratic spirit we're supposed to uphold? Did it ever occur to you that her post actually made it pretty clear? She was saying that if someone can't stand the sound of church bells, they should just move further away from the CHURCH, not demand changes from the STATE. If you choose to read into that and interpret it however you want to suit your own narrative, well, that's entirely on you. And yes, I suppose I have a broad soul—the kind of soul that can only truly be understood by others who possess that same breadth. Most people simply lack the capacity to grasp it; they can't comprehend someone who chooses to respect every perspective and refuses to follow a script. I don't subscribe to any pre-packaged ideology or party line; instead, I prefer to weigh every problem against my own conscience, acting as my own sole judge.
- Honestly, I’m down to discuss just about anything, provided there’s actually some point to the conversation. - The whole issue here was centered on the idea of BANNING THE CROSS. - In the US, debating whether we should ban the cross is just pure futility; why even waste breath on something that isn't even a possibility? (That’s why I pointed out that 90% of the population being Christian makes this specific topic completely pointless.) - The thread starter only brought up banning the cross because they were triggered by a debate over banning the red star symbol; after being provoked by people with opposing views, they lashed out by opening a thread titled "Let's ban the cross." - Politics isn't philosophy, so it shouldn't be used as a playground for debating abstract meanings and nonsense. If they wanted that kind of deep dive, they could have started a thread under religion or philosophy instead. - What is the utility of discussing a ban on the cross when it is quite literally impossible to ban the cross in the US? - So, the topic is closed because it was nothing more than a vengeful, trolling thread built on total nonsense. Those are my two reasons.
Tyler Grant76 said:👍 I guess, if you want to moderate properly, you really need to understand what a forum actually is.
When you really look at the big picture, driftingdriver, I guess the only real issue is that you aren't actually fulfilling your duties as a mod. Instead of managing the topics you can't handle, you just... delete them. 🤷 Those people claiming they were "provoked" are actually the ones breaking the Reddit rules. Even if his topics seem provocative, Constantinopol isn't doing anything wrong. Could someone please explain the "provocative" nature of Constantinopolov's topic one more time? I'm a bit lost. 🙂 I’m asking the other mods, admins, or whoever is listening—please, can you comment on this decision not to sanction such blatant insults? And, if they’re up for it, maybe explain why someone who refuses to issue a warning for gross disrespect is still holding down a moderator position. 🤷
This is just trolling without any actual arguments to back it up.
I don't really get why everyone is so shocked. 🤷 I’d love for someone to give me a coherent explanation of how the cross, the McDonald's logo, and the five-pointed star are actually different. Why shouldn't people discuss the symbolism of the cross? Are we going to pull out every dictionary of symbols from bookstores and libraries? Why couldn't someone view the cross as a symbol of evil? There are arguments for that, and there are arguments against it. And then those points come up in discussions. For instance, on Reddit. They aren't being suppressed just because "90% of Americans are Catholic." : catholic :
Constantinopol posted the topic in the wrong subforum, but formally speaking, he didn't break any forum rules. Of course, moderators have the discretionary power to remove a user. But, given the sheer amount of trolling and "provocative" 😁 😁 topics that haven't been sanctioned, Constantinopol is being totally benign here. Even if his premises might be a bit silly, that doesn't justify the insults being thrown at him, nor does it justify a ban.
Deleting topics or individual posts is just one of those standard moderation tools available to the mods when they need to clean things up around here.
I don't really get why everyone is so shocked. 🤷 I’d love for someone to give me a coherent explanation of how the cross, the McDonald's logo, and the five-pointed star are actually different. Why shouldn't people discuss the symbolism of the cross? Are we going to pull out every dictionary of symbols from bookstores and libraries? Why couldn't someone view the cross as a symbol of evil? There are arguments for that, and there are arguments against it. And then those points come up in discussions. For instance, on Reddit. They aren't being suppressed just because "90% of Americans are Catholic." : catholic :
Constantinopol posted the topic in the wrong subforum, but formally speaking, he didn't break any forum rules. Of course, moderators have the discretionary power to remove a user. But, given the sheer amount of trolling and "provocative" 😁 😁 topics that haven't been sanctioned, Constantinopol is being totally benign here. Even if his premises might be a bit silly, that doesn't justify the insults being thrown at him, nor does it justify a ban.
It’s true that those who get provoked end up breaking the Reddit rules, but they were already being targeted far too heavily across various other topics and replies following that banned user, making any further punishment feel completely unnecessary. There was always a choice: you could either rain down a mountain of warnings and bans based on accumulated points, or simply deal with the root cause by banning the instigator once and for all. Of course, deleting the thread is the standard move, since it isn't ideal to let something like that remain accessible for anyone to read.
I don't really get why everyone is so shocked. 🤷 I’d love for someone to give me a coherent explanation of how the cross, the McDonald's logo, and the five-pointed star are actually different. Why shouldn't people discuss the symbolism of the cross? Are we going to pull out every dictionary of symbols from bookstores and libraries? Why couldn't someone view the cross as a symbol of evil? There are arguments for that, and there are arguments against it. And then those points come up in discussions. For instance, on Reddit. They aren't being suppressed just because "90% of Americans are Catholic." : catholic :
Constantinopol posted the topic in the wrong subforum, but formally speaking, he didn't break any forum rules. Of course, moderators have the discretionary power to remove a user. But, given the sheer amount of trolling and "provocative" 😁 😁 topics that haven't been sanctioned, Constantinopol is being totally benign here. Even if his premises might be a bit silly, that doesn't justify the insults being thrown at him, nor does it justify a ban.
As I’ve already explained, this wasn't actually about banning the cross. If you're genuinely curious about why Constantin is partially banned, or if you want to understand the reasoning behind the discussion policy on the Politics sub, feel free to go dig through his profile. Just take a look at all the topics he's started under Politics or browse through his general post history; you'll find more than enough material there to read if you're looking for answers.
I don't really get why everyone is so shocked. 🤷 I’d love for someone to give me a coherent explanation of how the cross, the McDonald's logo, and the five-pointed star are actually different. Why shouldn't people discuss the symbolism of the cross? Are we going to pull out every dictionary of symbols from bookstores and libraries? Why couldn't someone view the cross as a symbol of evil? There are arguments for that, and there are arguments against it. And then those points come up in discussions. For instance, on Reddit. They aren't being suppressed just because "90% of Americans are Catholic." : catholic :
Constantinopol posted the topic in the wrong subforum, but formally speaking, he didn't break any forum rules. Of course, moderators have the discretionary power to remove a user. But, given the sheer amount of trolling and "provocative" 😁 😁 topics that haven't been sanctioned, Constantinopol is being totally benign here. Even if his premises might be a bit silly, that doesn't justify the insults being thrown at him, nor does it justify a ban.
- Everything regarding the "Cross..." topic was already explained earlier in this thread, so please, do try to catch up and read it. - It wasn't Constantinopol who started the "Cross" thread; it was Kevin Mitchell. - Look, mods do have that discretionary right to step in—especially after ten pages of people getting flagged for the exact same nonsense, or when someone keeps opening provocative threads that just bait others into getting flagged by constantly picking fights. I actually exercised that right myself, and I have my reasons for doing so.
- You swear by the sanctity of free speech, yet here you are, caught in the paradox of trying to silence someone else's perspective! So, does my colleague actually have the right to express her views? Or does she not? She isn't dictating terms here; she is simply stating her position.
- He finally has the chance to express his "creativity" on other subreddits. We’ll just have to see how much longer the other mods can stomach him. Every possible measure was taken beforehand, wasn't it? He was warned more than a few times. But of course, once you leave him alone, he just gets emboldened and starts that whole trolling dance again. Today, though, enough was enough.
Topic deleted. Sash, I think I finally grasped your point, and honestly, I’m on the same page. But at the same time, I felt like we were handing out way too many warnings to people who were just being constantly poked and prodded. That’s why I decided to just nip the problem in the bud by issuing a permanent ban to the one person who seems to trigger these fights every single time.
- This isn't actually the first time this has happened. Constantinopol has opened plenty of other threads just like this one. In the past, others were handed bans because of him—including some I personally handed out. He always found a way to wiggle out of trouble, didn't he? Well, he’s finally reached his limit, and he won't be able to participate in any more politics here. - I have no issue with whoever wants to hand out bans on this topic, but I refuse to punish people who were simply provoked by a troll. The only reason this thread is still visible is because of this specific complaint. I decided to delete it after the discussion here concluded; otherwise, instead of just this complaint, the entire topic would have been wiped clean. - If any of the supermods or admins wants to issue a ban, go ahead, but if you don't, the entire topic will be deleted by the end of the day.
Joseph Watson3 said:There is something fundamentally broken when it comes to driftingdriver, our politics moderator. A user named Consti was banned just for starting this thread: http://forum.us/showthread.php?t=380956 yet west_HB, who spends the entire time on that topic hurling slurs and acting obsessed with being abusive, hasn't even received a warning, despite those posts being properly reported!
I’ve always felt a sense of dread regarding this PDF Yugoslavia site, so I usually avoid it entirely, but I've just been reminded once again why that is.
It’s because Constantinopol deliberately pushes these provocative topics, constantly trolling and playing dumb while dancing right on the edge of what's allowed, which inevitably leads others to pick fights and rack up warnings on his posts. And honestly, it just keeps happening. There was actually a noticeable uptick after that last topic you reported.
I reached out to the admin to request a permanent ban for him over on the Politics sub. He’s been permanently banned from Politics now.
Punishing other users in that specific topic is essentially pointless. If the topic wasn't designed to be incredibly biased with the sole intention of inciting and provoking people, those reactions wouldn't be happening in the first place.
The issue is that right now, it’s just myself and the Observer systematically moderating the entire PDF Yugoslavia Politics section. Reson@tor, Blaize, and The Edge are currently MIA. Simba-OS steps in from time to time by reading through the PDFs or responding to user reports—sometimes more frequently, sometimes less. Since recently, the Observer has been acting as a moderator for the whole PDF Politics section. So, the two of us are essentially handling the entirety of PDF Politics, which, if you look at the traffic and engagement levels, is basically a forum within a forum. It’s only natural that we can’t provide 24/7 coverage. The admins are fully aware of the situation; if someone actually shows up who is crazy enough to want to moderate Politics 😬 and meets the rigorous standards set by the admins and the owner, we will certainly get some backup. Once that happens, I believe we’ll be able to moderate Yugoslavia better, at least in terms of volume, if not necessarily quality. Moderating Yugoslavia is exhausting work, and I stepped in to fill the gap while the Observer was away, which is no small feat (much like a high-stakes USA vs. Mexico match), so I truly respect the work my colleague the Observer is doing. I hope I’ve managed to clarify what’s happening on the moderation front. All we can do now is remain patient until a new moderator is found and selected, and hope that The Edge and Simba become more active again.