Posts by Kenneth Peterson5

If you had just posted this (post #26), Scott Nguyen2, right after Black-white got his permanent ban, then it would actually carry some weight—but the way things are now, you’re basically just shouting into the void.
Plus, you’re out here complaining about systematic religious discrimination, yet you want to kick atheists out of the Religion sub-forum? It honestly makes me wonder if you even realize you're literally asking for the same kind of discrimination you hate—you're totally tripping over your own feet here.

I don't even know what else to tell you, other than it's a shame that your good intentions—I'm assuming they *are* good intentions—probably won't be taken the way you think they will.

Later,

Kate Phillips40 said:I’ve been thinking about this whole situation for a while now, and I’ve realized that acting this way won't get us anywhere. I agree with most of you, but I truly believe we can fix everything just by staying active and participating here on Reddit, rather than leaving or trying to hide behind burner accounts. If I decided to boycott or stay silent, or if I put someone like Kate Phillips40 in "quarantine" while secretly posting under a fake name, I'd just be lying to myself. I’d much rather stand my ground using my one real username—even if people criticize me because they don't quite get 😁—because that feels more honest. It's better than pretending I stopped posting when I actually haven't. 🤷
Sure, there are moments of injustice and plenty of issues, but I think we can clear them up the same way they started: through conversation.
In this thread, Dervish criticized how Nicole James handles things, and others have pointed fingers at rowdyhawk10. Honestly, if the moderators are willing, it would be great if they stepped up here so we can clear the air. It looks like rowdyhawk10 is already open to making compromises, and I’m sure Nicole James will show up soon too. Plus, we have private messages, so if the mods messed up, let's just handle it privately.
I really miss Scott Nguyen2 and Dervish because your posts are what make this community what it is. Come back, everyone. Don't let anyone push you to the point where you give up after all this time.

I'm with Kenneth Peterson5 on this:

"Fix what you can and move on."

Since you mentioned it, Kenneth Peterson5, I just want to clarify one thing you said regarding the Quran, specifically when you noted:

"As far as I know, there's only one Quran containing the thoughts and advice of the Prophet Muhammad..."

Actually, the Quran doesn't contain Muhammad's personal thoughts or advice; it contains the direct words of God, which Muhammad was commanded to deliver to all of humanity.
Just a small correction, but it matters. 👍

I also hope Nicole James and rowdyhawk10 show some good faith here so we can find a positive way forward.

Come back, we miss you guys!

Peace and all the best. 👍

My bad, everyone.
I was honestly just trying to bait some of the folks on Reddit—you know, the ones who swore they were done posting—into correcting my "wrong" info just so I could mess with them. If they corrected me, they'd be back on the site anyway, right? It was a plan.
Well, mission failed. Totally flopped.

BUT,

I actually wanted to share some good news with you all.
After doing some deep diving, crunching the numbers, and analyzing all the data points, I've finally reached a definitive conclusion:

Reddit is a place for fun!!! 😲

(So, yeah, I guess that means we're still good to go, right? 🤣)

Look, please don't be lazy—just read through my signature a couple of times. If you actually wrap your heads around it (which I’m pretty sure you can), maybe ask yourselves why we’re still obsessing over every ugly thing that was said or done when there's so much beauty out there in the world?

I believe in God, but I don't claim any specific religion. That said, reading through different faiths, I've always been drawn to Islam. As far as I can tell, there’s just one Quran containing the thoughts and guidance of the Prophet Muhammad—who, from what I’ve gathered, was an incredibly humble and righteous man. His message is straightforward and easy to grasp, so I honestly don't get why you guys are constantly bickering or acting like you know better than what's actually written in the Quran. All you're doing is dragging down the image of Islam and all of you Muslims as a whole.
Instead of—all of you, collectively—showing off the wisdom within the Quran and proving how Islam is a single, universal path meant for everyone.

I get that back in the day, certain primitive groups might have interpreted the Quran differently, but in this day and age, at our current level of civilization, that shouldn't even be an issue anymore.

Sorry if I'm being blunt here, but hey, that’s just the take of someone who isn't part of a religion and is just watching from the sidelines.

I feel bad about the Black & White situation; I’m still sticking to my guns that he was treated unfairly.
I feel bad about the massive crackdown on the Religion sub-forum, but that's just how these forums work, just like politics. I can't even imagine how things would be if the situation were different.
It's a shame there's such a lack of motivation to post on the Muslim.com forum lately...
It's a bummer that you all teamed up to be negative instead of coming together for something positive.

Change what you can, and let's just move on.

Bottom line:
It feels like you’re all forgetting why you’re even here, because this is a Reddit thread—it’s supposed to be a place for fun.

Hey Tyler Scott3, Black & White, boldgull19, and Scott Nguyen2,

First off, sending big love to all of you—please, seriously, just honor your word and get back to posting here on this Reddit.
Why?
Because by walking away from a space where the minority is being labeled "bad," you’re basically telling the rest of us—the majority—that you just don't care about them.
By ditching an environment where a minority is viewed as "bad," you aren't accepting them for what they are—and let's face it, being different is hard. If you label a minority "bad," you're essentially calling them "sick," and by leaving, you're stripping away the "healthy" presence they need to balance things out. That just makes the minority even more unstable, which eventually ends up threatening the "healthy" majority even harder.

Look, I totally get why you're all revolting. There’s been a string of injustices, mostly coming from that moderator rowdyhawk10—which really hit a breaking point when he banned Black & White. But honestly, wasn't it enough to just tell that moderator you're done talking to him because, frankly, he isn't worth your time? At least, that's how I handled it.

You guys are all incredibly smart, fair, and good people—at least, that's how I've seen you, especially after spending so much time deep-diving into everything happening on the Religion subreddit over the last year. It just doesn't make sense to me why you can't accept that it's impossible for a single admin to see through all the insincerity and hypocrisy dripping from someone who seems so damn polite, articulate, and seemingly understanding (and no, I'm not talking about Nicole James here). Are you really arguing that an admin—or the owner, if you're naive enough to think Tyler Scott3 is the boss—has to spend six months in constant contact with someone, become a scholar of the Quran, and obsessively track every single thread on the Religion sub just to know who they really are?
How on earth can you expect that from any admin (or even the owner)? Like, seriously? These people have their hands full managing the whole site, and when you add the fact that they have actual, real-life, non-virtual problems to deal with in the real world—???—do you even hear yourselves?

So, my friends, please, take back what you said. You aren't achieving anything by leaving except depriving yourselves of the comfort of being here—which still exists, despite those moderators, especially that one guy who thinks he "knows better than everyone" and is "always right," whom nobody talks to anymore anyway. Plus, you're robbing plenty of other users, myself included, of the joy of reading your posts and chatting with you.

Just chill out, think about it, listen to your heart, and FORGIVE that pathetic rowdyhawk10 and Nicole James—at least enough so that their presence doesn't bother you so much that you feel the need to abandon yourselves and the rest of us users who actually respect you.

Peace be upon you 🙂

hollowtrucker77 said:Real power? It’s sitting right here in the hands of us forum dwellers—that’s where the actual influence lies.
The mods are basically just trying to keep everything from spiraling completely out of control—you know, keeping things within some kind of boundaries so the whole place doesn't turn into a total circus.

Look, it’s really not that simple—if you want the real story, just check out that post down below from kuc kuc. It lays everything out, especially since she was going back and forth in those messages with that forum regular shamantrixx.

Knock knock—anyone home? said:The bottom line is this:
Look, let's be real—the whole vibe of a forum, the actual quality of the discussions we have here, it all boils down to one thing: how the mods run the show. It’s everything. If the moderation is trash, the whole place goes south fast.

Look, it’s pretty damn obvious—if we actually want this place to stop going downhill and start feeling like a decent community again, we need to fix the moderation. It all comes down to that. If the people running the show actually stepped up their game, the whole vibe would shift. Simple as that.

Look, if you want to actually run a decent community without everything turning into a total dumpster fire, you gotta realize that quality moderation boils down to a few basic things:

Fairness and impartiality—yeah, right. As if that even exists in this crazy world.
Look, let’s get one thing straight—impartiality is the only way you actually guarantee fairness around here. A moderator might have their favorite regulars, sure, but that’s fine when they're just hanging out as part of the community—it shouldn't mean a damn thing once they put on the mod hat. Whether someone likes them, hates them, agrees with their takes, or wants to start a fight over a hot take... none of that should even enter the equation when it comes to making official calls. Decisions need to be based on the rules, not on who's playing nice or who's being a jerk. Period.

You’ve gotta be able to actually nail down what the hell the TOPIC even is first—I mean, let's be real, if you can't figure out WHAT the subject matter is, there's no way you're ever gonna get ahead of the spam or actually punish it. It's common sense, really.

Look, let’s talk about something most people are too damn proud to touch: actually being able to take a hit, realize you messed up, and then—this is the kicker—actually fixing it. We're talking about being open to criticism, having some actual insight, and having the guts to own your mistakes. Most folks out there? They just double down. They dig their heels in until they're buried. But if you want to actually get anywhere in this life without losing your mind, you've gotta be willing to admit when you've tripped over your own feet. It's about being self-aware enough to see the error, smart enough to understand why it happened, and humble enough to set things right. It sounds simple, right? It isn't. It's hard as hell. But it's the only way to grow.

Look, let’s get one thing straight—moderators shouldn't be out here spamming threads. It’s basic stuff, really. If you're running the show, you've gotta have some level of decorum, right? You can't just go flooding the boards with junk like anyone else. Just a thought.

Look, let's get one thing straight—a moderator actually needs to have a backbone. You can't just be some mindless drone following a script; you’ve gotta have your own damn opinions and a real point of view. If you're just sitting there acting like a programmable bot without any actual convictions, then what's even the point? A real mod should stand for something.

Knock knock—anyone home? said:

I don't even know where to start with this mess—honestly, just looking at the sheer chaos of it all makes me want to grab a drink and stare at a wall for three hours. It’s like everyone just collectively decided to lose their minds at once, you know? There’s no logic left, just a bunch of people shouting into the void while expecting someone to actually listen. I’ve been around long enough to see these cycles happen over and over, and frankly, it’s getting exhausting. You see the same patterns, the same predictable mistakes, and yet here we are again. It’s almost funny if it wasn't so damn frustrating—just one big, disorganized circus where nobody seems to have a clue what they're doing. Anyway, that's just my two cents, though I'm sure half of you will disagree anyway. kaže:
Look, I’m gonna be blunt here—your whole basic premise is just completely, utterly insane. Like, seriously, there isn't a single ounce of logic to be found in what you're saying. It's total nonsense.

Look, let’s be real here—the quality of a forum depends entirely on the caliber of the people hanging out in it... it’s got absolutely nothing to do with how much "moderation" goes on. You can have all the rules in the world, but if the crowd is trash, the whole place is trash. Period.
So, you’ve got like 150 idiots on a forum who barely have a 350-word vocabulary between them—seriously, it's painful—and you're honestly asking me how on earth a moderator is supposed to actually improve the quality of the conversation? It's a joke.

Look, if you’ve actually got 150 people on a forum who are sane, relatively smart, and can actually hold a decent conversation... then honestly? You don't even need a moderator. It's a non-issue.

Look, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again... nothing in this life is ever strictly black and white—and honestly, that goes for internet forums too. In my experience? It’s always the same breakdown. You’ve got maybe 20 total idiots running around, then about 20 people who actually have a brain and can hold a decent conversation, and then you're left with a massive crowd of maybe 110 average Joes—stretching all the way from "not exactly a genius" to just plain mediocre. That's the reality of it.

Look, you're missing the point—the mathematical odds that a moderator falls into any one of those categories are exactly the same as how much those groups actually make up the total forum population. It's basic math, really.

Look, it’s a simple equation—the quality of a forum lives or dies based on the people hanging out in it. But here's the real kicker, the part everyone ignores: which of those users actually stick around depends entirely on what kind of breed the moderator is. It all comes down to that.

Look, you’re gonna have to agree with me on this one—every single idiot out there walks around thinking they’re the smartest person in the room, while they look at anyone actually using their brain and just write them off as clueless. It’s everywhere. Honestly, it's exhausting.

So, basically, the mod is just gonna treat whatever group he’s representing as if they’re some kind of geniuses—regardless of whether they actually have a single functioning brain cell between them. It’s all just optics at this point.

And they’ll be the ones calling the shots during moderation.

So, basically—and this is the kicker—what you’re calling the "gold standard" for a decent debate actually just depends entirely on how much power the moderator decides to flex..

knock knock anyone home said:

shamantrixx said:If you kick the idiots to the curb, you get an environment where people can actually talk sense, whereas if you just let them linger, the whole discussion turns into nothing but a massive pissing contest.

Yeah, sure, but what happens when the moderator is the one who misjudges who the actual idiot is?

knock knock anyone home said:

shamantrixx said:If likes or agreeing with someone aren't the metric, like you're implying, then what on earth IS the metric??

Whether or not someone agrees with HIS OPINION—you know, whether they're in the same club, share the same faith, belong to the same political party, or are just buddies from high school—that shouldn't have anything to do with the decision-making process.

But look, since it seems like some of you are struggling to wrap your heads around this, let me paint you a little picture:

Dave (the class president): The greatest soccer player ever is Ronaldinho!
Mike: Oh, totally! Ronaldinho rules!
Steve: No way, Beckham is way better.
Mike: Beckham? You're a complete moron!
Steve: And you don't know anything!
Dave: (slams his hand on the desk toward Steve) You told Mike he didn't know anything, so you insulted him.
Steve: But he called me a moron first!
Dave: Yeah, but Mike says Ronaldinho is the best, and that means Mike is right, because I also think Ronaldinho is the best.

Anyway, I hope you at least got a kick out of reading that little transcript.

Thanks for listening.

hollowtrucker77 said:Look, there are mistakes being made on both sides—let's be real, everyone involved is just human, and humans mess things up while they're trying to get stuff done.
It’s always way easier to whine, bitch, and moan about everything, but the second you ask for actual, concrete solutions? Instant silence. Usually, it turns out those loudest voices just want everything their way, regardless of whether their stance even makes sense anymore.
I'm not just talking to hear myself talk here.
We've tried getting straight answers a bunch of times already, and we haven't gotten a single one.
So, until someone actually steps up with some meaningful, constructive ideas...

Alright, here’s a constructive proposal for ya.

I’m suggesting that every three months, we rotate moderators on each sub-forum through a vote involving both users and mods. And who gets to vote on a specific sub-forum? Here's the deal:

Any user registered on that sub-forum who has started at least one thread that hit at least 20 replies and over 2,000 views.
(And if anyone’s wondering why people with 500 or even 1,000 posts can't vote if they haven't started a thread on that specific sub-forum—it's simple. They haven't shown they actually care or have the ability to kick off an interesting discussion, which would actually add value to the boards they're trying to influence.)

If at least 30% of the eligible voters aren't happy with how the current mod is doing, then that mod is out.
The users who voted against the current mod can suggest replacements, and we hold a poll to pick the new one. Everyone on that board who has started at least one thread with at least 15 participants and 1,000 views gets to vote in that poll.

Then, we run the whole process again in three months.

That’s how you actually improve the quality of moderation (and the boards themselves)—by having people step up to help out rather than just acting like little bosses.

Edward Flores4 said:But what exactly is being "saved" here? Is it this deep attachment to culture, customs, and religious beliefs? It’s the same kind of stuff the Dalai Lama critiques when he looks at things through the lens of marriage... that same intense grip on identity, on owning a sense of individuality and uniqueness... the culture, the language, the traditions, the spouse, the kids...

Total bullshit!!

If he truly wanted to save people, he would tell them that nobody can strip away what they carry inside themselves—a flag in the street could just as easily be Chinese or Polish... an official language could be Bantu for all we care... none of that is worth getting thrown in prison or beaten over. Nobody in America feels more American than they did back during the era of strict federal oversight... and the same logic applies to Tibetans.

But playing the political strategist from the safety of asylum—basically waving someone else's authority around just to preserve a "people" who view him as a sort of demigod—all while protecting his own status as a supreme monarch and a national saint... well, that's worth something, sure, but only in terms of pure ego.

He can talk about non-violence all he wants once he's actually put his own skin in the game. Until then... look, being non-violent is really only a choice when you actually possess the strength to be violent but choose not to. If you don't have any power at all, you aren't being "non-violent"—you're just stuck. It's not the same thing. Just like peace is the foundation of any meaningful action, strength is the foundation of true non-violence.

🙏

Man, that’s actually a rare gem of a thought—honestly, I wish more people would just stop and actually listen to something like that for once.

Kevin Mitchell said:So basically, they look at me like I’m some model citizen of this board, yet I keep getting slapped with warnings I haven't even earned. And then those strikes just pile up—and there's no point trying to argue because the second you open your mouth, they label you a "troublemaker" and shut you down.

Yeah, unfortunately, that's the cold, hard truth.
But if you really sit back and think about it—which, let's be honest, most people don't—it’s just basic human nature playing out.
Like, imagine if we actually knew each other (and trust me, I'm being totally cool with you here) and I told you some random guy at a bar was acting like a total creep. Would you actually believe me? Or would you instinctively side with the stranger, thinking he’s probably fine and I’m just being dramatic or holding some kind of grudge?
Just something to chew on.

It’s the exact same garbage here on the forum.

All of us who occasionally try to call out the glitches, the unfairness, or just the straight-up incompetence of certain moderators—we all get lumped together by the admin team as "provocateurs" or just people trying to mess with their workflow.

Anyway, major props to you for putting this thread together (especially since you linked it so perfectly to the Legal discussion thread).
I really hope you’re one of the lucky ones who gets an actual apology along with having those unfair strikes wiped away—because, believe it or not, that actually happens once in a blue moon.

Later,

Jerry Garcia said:Nah, you all just refuse to admit the moderator is right and you're the ones in the wrong. And anyone who tries to point that out is going to be labeled a criminal by you people...😉

Yeah, honestly? That moderator is totally spot-on when he calls us all psychopaths, and the admins are doing exactly what they should by letting him get away with it.

Jerry Garcia,
It’s all a joke, honestly—the mods can just tweak PDFs whenever they feel like it based on their own "creative vision," and you guys just sit there defending them instead of actually looking at how messed up things are getting.
It feels like keeping the mods happy is way more important than actually listening to the users.

That last speech you gave, sdafkl, about the criminal moderation style over at Adriatic and how they basically ignore everyone by moving us off the exact threads where we were complaining about his management? Yeah, that pretty much proves my point right now.

On the thread host change, I actually got slapped with a penalty for "trolling" because of a post that looked exactly like this:



So, yeah, the post above was nuked and I got hit with 10 penalty points for going off-topic. The moderator’s whole deal is that there’s absolutely nothing offensive in that specific post.

But here’s the thing—if we’re following the logic that the first post isn't offensive, then by that same math, the post below shouldn't be offensive either.



Except, surprise, surprise—that post got me slapped with 45 points. That’s a full-blown penalty for "insulting" someone.

😕

.............

I mean, seriously, how is this even trolling? The post just lays out the blatant double standards these "spirituality" mods are running—and they're doing it right in a thread meant to discuss the moderation itself!

Are you guys in administration actually starting to realize what kind of people you've put in charge of moderating this place?

What my colleague Alex was trying to get at—if I’m actually reading her correctly, which, let's be real, I usually am—was basically: "If this wasn't so depressing, it would actually be hilarious!"
And honestly? I’m right there with her. Most of the time, I'm in total agreement with her on just about everything.

steelridge58 said:What on earth are you even talking about right now? You're taking one little oversight of mine where I missed your PM and had to apologize, and now you're actually trying to weaponize that as some sort of grand argument against me, which, I have to admit, feels pretty low. But hey, if you really want to dig up every single thing we've ever exchanged just to throw it back in my face as payback, then go right ahead—though it makes me wonder just how many other people out there are being just as easily manipulated by you as I was.

mistyfox812 said:One of them was actually offered this:

She turned it down.

If anyone truly believes they have the receipts to prove I'm abusing my mod powers, the offer is still on the table.

Otherwise, let's please just get back on topic.

She had plenty of solid points during that thread over on the Spirituality Forum—you know, the "complaints and grievances" one—and then boom, banned. And you haven't debunked a single thing she said.
I've thrown plenty of good arguments at you too, and you haven't shut any of them down either.

So yeah, this whole thing is just total nonsense.
Talking to you guys, the mods over at the Philosophy Forum, is basically pointless unless you follow the script provided below:

@steelridge58, yeah, sure, whatever you say. 😍

@mistyfox812, nice one, brilliant as always. 👍

Cheers,

(And I'm done with this debate. You guys are exhausting.)

steelridge58 said:The issue here is actually you. You’re the one out there slandering people, throwing insults around, and constantly obstructing everything the Philosophy Forum moderator tries to do just to push some niche agendas that probably only exist in your own head. Honestly, you really ought to take a moment to sit back and reflect on that. Just think about yourself for once.

Look, steelridge58,

How many times in a single day have you gone from being absolutely pissed at me to apologizing and thanking me? It's getting ridiculous.

And as for "obstructing" any PDFs or whatever—just ban me already if it's such a big deal. Problem solved. Simple as that. 🙏

(Yeah, I'll get right on thinking about you... 😁)

Sean Cruz said:Look, I hold that man in high regard, and that is my prerogative. You spoke in the plural earlier, so don't try to backtrack now, though it hardly matters. I have nothing against you personally, but don't go judging me based on scraps of information. It isn't my place to decide whether you remain a moderator here, but don't play God. Get back down to earth; you'll find there are actual people living there.
We don't have to agree on everything, but everyone has the right to an opinion—and the right to support whoever they choose. You're the one who accepted the responsibility of moderating; therefore, you need to be objective, rather than showing favoritism to certain users while trashing others.

Look, this guy is easily one of the sharpest minds on the forum—honestly, if you aren't paying attention to his posts, you're basically missing out on the only real substance around here.

mistyfox812 said:It’s all laid out right here.

Nah, it's just not true.
It’s pretty damn obvious, honestly. Case closed. Right here. .
Look, when the moderators over at the Philosophy Forum have an IQ that barely scrapes 140—which, let’s be honest, isn't exactly rocket science—it stops being just their own little problem. It’s not just about them being clueless or unable to wrap their heads around basic concepts; it becomes a massive headache for everyone else stuck in their orbit. It’s like living next door to someone who can't figure out how a toaster works—eventually, you're the one dealing with the smoke.
Honestly, George walked out on this whole forum because you people are just too mentally stunted to get it.
Honestly, because of how mentally stunted you all are, Percival keeps getting kicked off the Philosophy Forum—even though half the mods and users around here are constantly begging him to come hang out on their own boards.
Honestly, it’s because you guys are all so mentally stunted that I’m actually forced to hang out on this forum with some total shady characters—even if their wisdom is, frankly, nothing short of phenomenal.
Because of your sheer mental incompetence, some user named Sanja got banned from the forum—and honestly, she was just trying to point out the exact same issue for months on end. Most of us thought she was just being dramatic, and yeah, I'll admit it, most of us were totally leaning towards believing those narrow-minded moderators. Typical.

Look, when we're talking about mental limitations here—and I’m sticking to what I said at the jump—I honestly think we’re looking at an IQ north of 140. Anything less? Yeah, that's where the real issues start.

So, look, dear mods—honestly, go ahead and lose it if you want. You can take offense if that’s where you're headed, because clearly, you can see exactly how much I respect you guys.

Quinn:

I guess you could call me a hiker, though that feels way too polite for someone who spends half their life dodging rattlesnakes and sweating through three shirts a day just to stare at some rocks. Honestly, calling myself a "mountain climber" sounds like I’m trying to sell you overpriced gear from REI, but let's just say I spend a lot of time getting lost in the backcountry. It's a lifestyle, I suppose—if your idea of a good time is blisters, questionable trail mix, and wondering why on earth anyone finds peace in being exhausted and dirty. But hey, that's just how I roll. kaže: Look, we gotta stop treating this like some abstract concept—you need to make it personal, Benjamin Long from Denver... it’s not even about the "approach" itself, it's about the guy actually doing the approaching who creates the whole damn problem in the first place. Look, let's get one thing straight—there isn't actually a problem with the Philosophy Forum itself. At all. What we're dealing with here is just you having these massive expectations for what a subforum should be... and honestly? That's on you. The issue isn't the board; the issue is your own expectations. It's you, man. Period.

The problem isn't Benjamin Long—honestly, she isn't even asking for anything. She’s just hoping. Same as me, really.

The real issue here—and I’m being dead serious—is the mods. They’re out here acting like absolute tyrants, constantly belittling people and throwing insults around just because they can. It’s the same old story: if you dare to have an opinion that doesn't perfectly align with their little echo chamber, you’re getting hit with a red card or a straight-up ban. It’s pathetic, honestly. They aren't moderating; they're just gatekeeping.
Look, the real issue here is the moderators—but let’s be honest, the problem also lies with a lot of these forum dwellers like you, who just conveniently look the other way whenever things get unfair.

casualtiger2 said:Fair point—I completely missed that.
The answer? I’m still waiting for a response from Normal.
It feels incredibly hypocritical to someone citing American laws while actively breaking them. Witch described the situation perfectly. Honestly, this constant, brutal aggression is grating—it gets under your skin. Even if you don't want it to, seeing stuff like this affects everyone, especially the kids reading this forum. It just sticks in your subconscious.
And what kind of "pedagogy"—or whatever they call prevention these days—involves beating down groups of people (like addicts, for instance) who are essentially dealing with a sickness and struggling to pull themselves out of a hole?
The last thing those people need is a fist to the head.

Honestly, I think I might just steal normall's avatar.
In case you haven't figured it out yet—yeah, I am a hypocrite of biblical proportions.

.................

Just a little something for all the angry people out there to help them snap out of it.

Man, why do you even care, casualtiger2? As long as you're kicking butt and feeling good, that's all that matters. 😁

Listen up, everyone, heads up here:

Look, everything Alexis and I have said—whether it was in those Philosophy PDFs, the Spirituality ones, or the PŽK files—it all came from a good place. We were being real with you, and we still stand by every word we said.

BUT,

If we’re going to have some "peace in the house," we’re gonna have to just overlook our disagreements with certain views of yours... honestly, some of them are so out there we’re actually afraid they might rub off on us. 😁

So, for the sake of "peace in the house," I suggest we all just let go of our fears and dive into some "new adventures" together.

Best,
Kenneth Peterson5

P.S.
We’re even willing to stop being so formal with you guys.🤣

PPS.
Hey, next time you feel the urge to drop a long-winded poem on a topic I brought up, do me a favor and post it over at the little literary nook PDF first, then just drop the link here.
The same goes for Richard Walker79 and everybody else, too.

casualtiger2 said:1. If you could just lay out your reasoning in one single post, that would be great.
2. You can either ask the admins to replace me, or I can gather enough signatures from users who agree with me and I'll step down myself—though we probably need to figure out how many active members we actually have to decide what counts as a "relevant" number.

Fair enough?

PS
Goodnight, everyone.

Fair enough.

In my opinion, John's little cult is a direct threat to the integrity of the family unit.
By having you acting as a moderator for the Spirituality sub on Reddit, the platform is basically sending a message to kids that people like you are role models worthy of respect—which, honestly, totally warps a young person's understanding of what a family actually is.
I truly believe John's sect is dangerous because their whole "spiritual-sexual" lifestyle sends a completely twisted message about morality.
Plus, I’m convinced your "spiritual" leader is nothing more than a deeply disturbed individual, and here’s the proof:

-His first romantic-erotic experience was "like a three-year-old with a two-year-old" under the stairs of some old mansion in Washington, D.C., where he grew up. His first multi-partner erotic encounter happened when he was about six years old, involving two "lovely sisters" who were slightly older than him.-

What kind of "romantic experience" is that? What are we even talking about here? Do you guys realize how much of this is pure idiocy?
Don't you see how this kind of logic pushes a total lie regarding the definition of "pedophilia" and the sexual abuse of minors?
Do you realize that viewing sexual energy this way implies that any child is capable of sexual activity regardless of age?

-"A true tantric fucks both the heart and the spirit of women, making him unforgettable," says the man (your spiritual guru, Aba Aziz) who lives with four women (or is it five now?)—each of whom he's been in a long-term romantic-erotic relationship with for over a decade on average. On top of that, he maintains erotic affairs with about ten students every year. -

Polygamy is illegal in the US, yet your "spiritual" teacher is pushing for its legalization in a way that is incredibly blunt. Way too blunt, if you ask me.

-John's sexual record includes ten hours of making love without ejaculating, sometimes involving five to seven women at once. He's even done it twice with nine women at a time. -

Sorry, Gregory, but in plain English, what you described above is just an orgy.

-The name John supposedly comes from the spiritual realm, a name Aba Aziz allegedly received one night during a sort of auditory "vision." -

An auditory vision?
Auditory hallucinations are a textbook symptom of paranoid schizophrenia.
As far as I'm concerned, your spiritual leader is just a charismatic psychotic.

Look, being part of a cult isn't my business, and you can go talk about that in a specific thread, but as a moderator, you represent a genuine threat to American youth for the reasons I've laid out.

The admins have been notified, and frankly, they don't even know who John is, let alone understand what I'm talking about—so, as far as the administration goes, it seems like you don't have an issue with them.
Rest assured, I won't be bothering you with this or anything like it anymore. So, don't worry about any further questioning of your work as a moderator on this sub; you won't be dealing with me again.

Over and out.

casualtiger2 said:Well, look at that sudden shift in tone—though you nailed it, blue really is my color. 😍
No need for the formalities. We usually keep things casual here.

I actually thought you were one of the more informed folks on this board, so it’s a surprise you didn't realize that our great Mod is from way out in rural Comet!
Since this isn't a thread about Comet, or about me or my affiliations, you can check out what I've said here and here.
Feel free to continue the dialogue on those specific threads, whether it's with me or anyone else.
As a moderator (which feels a bit weird to admit), I won't be proselytizing for my spiritual community, but naturally, I'll share my own experiences and the views held by that school—as I've understood them.

Your post actually reminded me of a principle I'd love to see take hold here.
We all come from different backgrounds. Some are Christians, some are TM-ers, some follow Harry Kris, Jehovah's Witnesses, or the Comet Witnesses; then there are Buddhists, atheists, or free spirits like the masters of Ivanov.
In my opinion, as long as someone is engaging with spirituality, there's room for them under this forum's roof—it's vital we develop some tolerance there.
The exception, obviously, is destructive cults. But that brings up the question: "Who decides which group is a destructive cult?" Enki, casualtiger2, or even neighbor Zeke... or should it be sociologists, psychologists, and legal experts? I'm leaning toward the professionals.

That’s why the statement
"...the Comet missionary sect..."
feels like a total zero-percent information level comment to me, and it needs some clarification.
Moving forward, in the appropriate threads we’re going to demand detailed explanations whenever someone claims another person is just talking nonsense, or insists that Sai baba is a predator/God, or that meditation is satanic, or that Jesus is the only true God, or that personalists are inferior to impersonalists and vice versa...
Both sides have the right to present their views, experiences, and info (ideally public and expert-backed), leaving it to the readers to form their own conclusions.
Any kind of slander, planting false ideas, or baseless claims will be deleted.
And it's not about protecting Comet—it's just how I think we should communicate if we want this forum to have any actual weight and seriousness. It shouldn't just be a place where everyone repeats what neighbor Zeke said about someone.
Got it?
PS
And why exactly is my affiliation with Comet "a very important question that affects the entire Spirituality PDF"?

Best,
casualtiger2

PPS
With your style and persistence, you remind me of another user here. Different topics and interests, sure, but the vibe is the same. 😁

Because, if you ask me, it’s basically the biggest embarrassment on all of Reddit right now.

The whole drug thing is bad enough, but having you—a member of the Comet cult and a moderator that kids actually look up to as some kind of authority figure—involved? That’s just beyond the pale. It’s pathetic.

That's why.

casualtiger2 said:Fazlija,
so, you’re suggesting we actually change things up?
bring in some new blood—people who are spiritual, experienced, smart, and actually lead with heart?

PS
Down in my neck of the woods, folks have a rule about this—you only get a seat at the table to criticize if you
a) actually believe you can do better, and
b) are willing to roll up your sleeves and put in the work to make it happen.

Listen, folks,
Looking at your post above, it really brings up a massive question regarding the entire spirituality PDF—specifically how we improve it.

You go on about what they say "back in my hometown..."
So, does that mean you're part of some little missionary sect out there led by Aba Aziz Makaj—aka Francis Miller?

Best regards,
Kenneth Peterson5