Posts by Kevin Mitchell

I assume it's because you designed the topic in a way that doesn't allow for any real debate. The only possible responses are going to be "rest in peace" or those endless arguments about Ustaše vs. Partisans.🤷

The main reason atheists jump into these debates is because religion exerts such a massive influence—often a negative one—on their lives. If faith were truly just a private matter, you wouldn't see atheists cluttering up online forums, except perhaps for some masochist who thrives on conflict or a student researching the subject.
I won't get into how religion impacts people on this thread (or any other, really; it's been covered enough)

But it was just a city that drained me dry😢

My issue isn't actually about the parking itself; it's about the sheer unpredictability. When a large van pulls up right on the edge of a crosswalk—even if they are technically in a designated spot—it’s not enough to just tap the brakes. Every single crosswalk feels like a game of Russian roulette. If you hit a pedestrian, we all know the consequences are massive, but nobody is going to stop and ask why your line of sight was blocked by a vehicle in the first place.😠

If I recall correctly from my driver's ed classes, you aren't allowed to park within a certain distance of a crosswalk.
I’m wondering if that rule has been scrapped? Lately, everywhere I look, they seem to be painting parking spots right up against the edge of the crosswalk. Honestly, it makes me incredibly uneasy. I worry someone might step out blindly. Even when I'm cruising at a cautious 20 mph, there isn't enough time to slam on the brakes before hitting a pedestrian stepping out from behind a parked car or a large SUV.
Is this way of marking the streets actually legal?

Nicole James said:I already explained to Angie why that wasn't just some minor oversight—and I’ll say it again. The individual in question churned out several posts in a row that were, to put it mildly... absolutely horrific. On his very last post, I handed him 500 points for "overall impression." It’s not like I missed the sheer lack of backbone in his arguments, or that I was simply choosing to look the other way.

So how am I supposed to get an A if I'm telling someone like that that I feel bad for them?

True, but the Republican Party and the Democratic Party aren't the only players in the game...🤷

It seems everyone who usually claims to be so enlightened suddenly becomes incredibly dense when the topic shifts to the cross... If you're planning on being hypocrites, you might as well just stay quiet...☕

On-topic: I’d like to suggest some improvements to how this forum is moderated. Specifically, we need to actually utilize the report button more effectively—and I mean *actually* read what is being reported. Right now, someone can flag a post multiple times over several days and nothing happens. Then, out of nowhere, a response is issued to a provocateur, and suddenly they’re the ones getting a strike.
Basically, we need more engagement (from both moderators and regular users) regarding reporting problematic posts.

Fun fact!

This:

Come on, stop talking nonsense. You’re either lying or you’re just being dense. There isn't a third option. Just look at the one example I gave in my last post regarding when San Diego took up the cross.

...is an insult.

This:

Man, you really are talking nonsense. If you're intentionally lying and trolling, then you're just a dishonest jerk who's worth nothing. If you aren't trolling, then go educate yourself more about that period. You just look stupid.

...isn't (not even after 3 reports and 2 days)...😕

And that's one of the bans I feel I received unfairly... This proves it.

driftingdriver, any thoughts on this? How does one actually fight back against an unfair penalty... This isn't about forum conduct, seeking advice, or how tough a moderator's life can be...
This is specifically about this: how can I get my unjust penalty overturned? My actions weren't illegal, nor did they violate any forum rules. So, how do I reverse the decision? That’s what we’re discussing here. People are handing out penalties left and right. It's only natural to make mistakes—maybe in 5% of cases. But if you do, at least be consistent with your enforcement; be fair and wipe those errors away just as quickly as you issued them.
It's simple. We aren't calling for a revolution or a total overhaul... We are simply asking that poor judgments be re-evaluated by objective "judges."🙂

driftingdriver said:@bohemia, @Kevin Mitchell: Go find any other forum out there. Honestly, if you went anywhere with decent moderation, you wouldn't last ten days before getting hit with a permanent ban for being trolls and provocateurs. This forum is actually pretty interesting from an editorial standpoint—firstly, because banned users can clone their accounts endlessly, and secondly, because people tend to pick moderators who actually follow standard American community guidelines to keep order, only to then start meddling in their business to protect the trolls. 😵

That’s a lot of words just to insult us. Are you a troll or a provocateur too, just like the rest of us?☕

The old golden rule of any good forum is to read, and read again, and read once more. If you actually have something to contribute to the discussion, make sure it isn't just a single smiley face or one trolling sentence. Post something that adds value and shares a real opinion.

You could have just read my post and explained which specific rules I was breaking. Because you're the one who handed me the penalty card...☕
Once you explain the penalties and say something relevant to the topic (instead of attacking me personally), then you can start preaching... But not before that. Otherwise, by your own logic, you'd be getting a penalty right now for trolling.
Besides, a single sentence can often carry more weight than a whole page of text. But clearly, you don't get that.

Forums aren't chat rooms. If people want to chat, there are plenty of IRC communities and Java applets available whenever they feel like it...
It’s honestly surprising how much—and what kind of things—this forum still tolerates...

Exactly. You, for instance, tolerated people using slurs and insults like "faggot" or telling people to "use Vaseline." Thank God we don't have to deal with you anymore. But you're really just the tip of the iceberg...😉

crimsonhound80 said:Dammit. 😁If the forum rules aren't meant to be a standard, then what's the point of this whole thread? We might as well just trash everything... 🤷

I would honestly love to see the regulars on Reddit suggest some specific disciplinary measures—whether that means issuing warnings, handing out cards, or just implementing outright bans...

I've realized that some people just crave being the center of attention—they won't stop complaining...

Good grief, don't you people ever get tired of this? 😂

You are a textbook example of why things are the way they are.
Look, I’m not trying to cause trouble here. All I want is more objective criteria and fair enforcement—basically, some kind of oversight to make sure the admins don't start acting like local sheriffs. In almost every professional field in the real world, there's some form of internal accountability...
I just want my case reviewed properly so I can receive the penalties I actually deserve. You mentioned yourself that this is a massive undertaking. It’s only logical that mistakes will happen—after all, to err is human. But it is also human to admit when you've made one.

wiredsailor10 said:Is this actually considered an insult?

It’s strange. People posting messages saying anyone who doesn't support Thompson or the GOP—those kinds of comments—that isn't considered an insult, right?

Ridiculous.

No, it's a violation of both the subforum rules and US Law (though it seems there isn't a single rule being followed here).

Calling someone "a liar or an idiot" is an insult...

Look, you have to fight for everything in this life. Justice doesn't just appear; you have to go out and demand it.

crimsonhound80 said:The moderator handed you the ban you rightfully earned. I honestly don't see what part of that is confusing to you... 🤷

How did I ever deserve this...
So, are you suggesting that moderators don't need to follow any rules at all? If they decide they just don't like me, they can slap a ban on this thread for whatever reason—it doesn't even matter why—and then I'm stuck complaining about it for a few days while I wait to cool off...

Look, let me try to ease your mind a bit if you need it. Being a moderator is tough—you have to hand out bans when necessary, believe me, you really do—and dealing with all the low-lifes on these forums is just exhausting... 😁 They're making accusations.

I wish God would let you serve as a moderator for just two months, then you'd see how wonderful it actually is... 😁

Nobody is forcing them to take on moderator roles. I get that it’s a tough job, which explains why mistakes happen. But that isn't an excuse to just overlook those errors...

Only 45 points? That’s an insult...

It’s not even about the strikes. My ban expired, and honestly, I couldn't care less.

But this part right here:

Kevin Mitchell, if you want advice from the admin team, stop trying so hard to stir the pot. 😉 You’ve racked up quite a few strikes by now; you aren't exactly a model user. Various mods have disciplined you, so don't go thinking you're somehow above the rules or the moderators. 😉 I will personally step in to penalize you for any further provocations.

So, they view me as some troublemaker, yet I keep getting hit with strikes I didn't even earn. The strikes just pile up, and I can't even convince them otherwise because they immediately label me a "provocateur."

For instance, I received a strike with the reason: "Violation of sub-forum rules."

http://www.reddit.com/showpost.php?p=1...2&postcount=20

I studied the rules thoroughly and couldn't find a single one I had broken. Then came the explanation for the strike:

- Insulting the North American Republic. Referring to it as the "North American Republic" isn't just a forum violation; it's a violation of the Law of the USA.

I actually posted a question in the "Legal" section asking if I had indeed broken any laws. It looks like I haven't (though I'm still waiting for final confirmation).
Is anyone going to DELETE that strike and APOLOGIZE to me for being banned? Of course not. When they want to hand out a strike, fine—but when it comes to explaining why:

Kevin Mitchell,

The whole point of a ban is that the "punished" individual can't post on the forum during that time. Therefore, this debate you're so stubbornly pushing will have to wait until another time. OK?

So basically, while I'm banned, I'm not allowed to point out an injustice; I can only speak up once the punishment is over.

When I finally managed to convince "His Excellency" to strip 200 points (which were unfairly taken) from me on another thread, they had to hit me with a strike just to "teach me a lesson," moving up from my "minor" 45 points.
Picture this scenario: I say—the Crusaders sacked San Diego. Here are the links. Someone else says—the Cross was always a good thing for Americans. I respond—you're either ignorant or lying (since I provided historical facts and don't even need to mention everyone who was burned at the stake). Is that an insult?
I checked the sub-forum rules they provided. The definition of trolling is: "...If you start responding to a post with 'I can't believe...', 'Are you kidding me...', or something similar, then that's it..." If what I responded to wasn't trolling, then it wasn't anything.

On the flip side, people provoke, spit venom, and start hurling insults out of nowhere, and even when I report them, nothing happens...🤷
Something is rotten in the state of reddit.com.👎

You get hit with a penalty. You ask for an explanation—but half the time, you don't even get one. And when they finally do give you one, it might be completely wrong, yet you're left speechless if you try to point out how ridiculous their "reasoning" actually is.
Is there any actual channel to appeal an unfair penalty while you're stuck in a ban...
Or is it just a case of being guilty until proven innocent? And you can only prove your innocence once you've already been released from prison.🤷👎

If we’re going by those same standards, I demand that over 70% of the warnings issued in response to troll posts be wiped from my record.

Seriously, this is getting ridiculous!😠

I once got flagged because some guy was actually defending a convicted pedophile, claiming ten kids were lying. A CONVICTED PEDOPHILE. So, I told him he was a piece of trash or something to that effect, and I got banned for "insulting" someone.

Then, I get a warning because of some troll who claimed the cross only brought good things to America, even though I provided a link right above her showing how Zadar was destroyed by Crusaders. I told her she was either lying or just stupid, and that was labeled as an insult.

For God's sake, it's absolute chaos here! If a user happens to dislike a moderator, they're allowed to run them through the mud. What kind of crap is this?!?!?!

this is pure hypocrisy!

swiftscout8 said:There is no such thing as a "reasoned debate" regarding the symbolism of the cross. Period. 🙂
A loud minority isn't going to silence a massive majority. We saw enough of that back in America.
And if you don't like how things work here, go live in an agnostic country... oops, turns out those don't exist.

No, they don't exist—what exists are secular states. The US is a secular state. Vatican City is "Catholic."
It's pretty obvious who should pack their bags if they're bothered by discussions regarding the cross (discussions, mind you, not insulting anyone or forbidding belief)...☕