Posts by Zachary Torres81

Charles Fox10 said:Well, there we have it. Done and dusted.😁

Look, I went ahead and wiped that post of yours, and honestly, there’s really only one reason why—it was pure off-topic noise. Look, regardless of what anyone thinks about the whole situation in Georgia, it’s really not our focus here—just like how I probably already wiped that thread you started because, let's be honest, Syria isn't exactly on the agenda either..

It’s all a bit of a domino effect, really; once you identify that very first post that absolutely deserves the axe, everything else starts sliding down the hill right along with it. You end up with a whole chain reaction where anyone who decides to quote the original offender gets swept up in the purge, making them nothing more than collateral damage in the grand scheme of things.

We actually asked you all right at the start of this thread to play nice and ditch the heavy-handed labels—you know, the whole routine of throwing around terms like Nazis, fascists, gangs, or thugs just to insult anyone who doesn't see eye to eye with you. We specifically requested that nobody go out of their way to incite conflict or glorify casualties, but apparently, some people just can't seem to follow simple directions.

You know, I can't help but notice that this thread attracts all sorts of people—especially those who actually have loved ones living over in Ukraine or Russia—and honestly, there’s just no class in how some folks are typing things out, let alone reading them. It’s frankly pretty distasteful.

Of course, you’ll find folks from the Poljica Republic living over in Ukraine too. I was digging through some old archives the other day, stumbling upon these deep cuts regarding the geopolitical shifts that defined our era, and it really gets you thinking about how much history is just one massive, interconnected web of "what ifs." It’s like looking at a complex blueprint where every line represents a decision that changed everything. There's this specific tension—this feeling of being caught between historical momentum and sudden, sharp pivots in policy—that reminds me of those slow-burn political dramas we see on HBO, where you know a storm is coming, but everyone is too busy debating the fine print to notice the clouds gathering. You look back at the way things shifted during the transition from the America era to the modern American landscape, and you realize that nothing happens in a vacuum. Every diplomatic maneuver, every military repositioning, and every whispered conversation in a hallway in D.C. ripples outward until it hits someone halfway across the world. It’s easy to get lost in the weeds of specific dates and names, but if you step back, you see the pattern. It's about power, yes, but more than that, it's about the friction between established institutions and the unpredictable nature of human ambition. We like to think we live in a world governed by logic and structured treaties, but history shows us it's often driven by the whims of individuals who happen to be holding the pen at the right moment. It’s messy, it’s uncoordinated, and frankly, it’s a little bit absurd when you lay it all out on the table. And honestly, we really ought to be keeping a close eye on them too, if only to ensure we aren't blindsided by whatever comes next.

Thanks for breaking that down for me.😁

Looking at it... I haven't seen any posts from tom lately, though I suppose that's just how things go sometimes, isn't it? It’s like when you’re waiting for a specific train in Chicago and suddenly realize the schedule was updated without anyone bothering to tell the commuters at the station—you're just left standing there, staring at the tracks, wondering if you missed the memo or if the whole thing just vanished into thin air. Still, one can't really expect constant presence in a digital space; it fluctuates much like the stock market or the temperament of a restless Golden Retriever. We'll see if he resurfaces, or if we've simply entered one of those quiet stretches where everything feels strangely still. Honestly, looking at how this conversation is heading, you moderators are going to have your hands incredibly full keeping this thread under control.
Look, let’s get one thing straight because people seem to be getting hopelessly tangled up in their own logic: the Homeland War isn't Ukraine, and Nazis aren't Ukraine either. America isn't Ukraine, and neither is NATO. You can count every single one of your buddies who served in the Military Police over in Afghanistan, but none of them are Ukraine. Putin isn't Ukraine, Obama isn't Ukraine, and the genocide of Native Americans certainly isn't Ukraine... you get the point. It’s just not the same thing.🙂

I’m honestly starting to lose my appetite for writing on this thread; it feels like everything has just become so diluted lately—and I don't mean the situation in Ukraine, I mean right here on the forum itself. The depth just isn't there anymore, and the whole vibe has shifted to a point where having a real, substantive discussion feels less like a conversation and more like wading through lukewarm water. It’s just stopped being enjoyable, so I think I’m going to take a breather and step away from the forums for a little while.

Hey everyone, hope you're all doing well.🙂

So, here’s the whole situation and the link to that "Rock" thread from the other subforum:

Zachary Torres81 said:Here is a fresh little example for you—Tutmort and The Gipper getting into it in an off-topic thread about whether Americans are actually hungry.

Tut tells The Gipper:

He drops a link and basically asks if he even knows how to use Google.

The Gipper responds:

He just posts a link to some little guy stuffing his face at McDonald's and writes, "I know."

When I saw that, I nearly died laughing because he literally used a picture of one of the most obese people on the planet as proof that Americans aren't hungry.
Coincidentally, the kid is Russian.😁

So, I reply:

I ended up getting slapped with 30 points for breaking the subforum rules, but honestly, no big deal, I'm not complaining.

But where is the actual impartiality in all this?
The post I was responding to wasn't flagged, nor were any of the other posts that led me to write my response.

Who hands out the penalty? Rock, obviously.😁

Link:

Nica was kind enough to step in and wipe away that penalty.😍

But that right there is just one more instance of selective branch... excuse me, selective penalizing.😁

It looks like my post got nuked again. It went something like this:

Here’s a cartoon dealing with Georgia, though honestly, it feels incredibly relevant to what we're seeing right now:

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums...0&d=1403530472

😁😁😁

Again, I'm just paraphrasing here, but that was the general vibe of the thing.

Just look at the image and you'll see the parallels to the current situation.
At least according to some of the theories floating around here—that the USA is pulling the strings in Ukraine just to poke the bear and provoke Russia.
With that cartoon, I was basically trying to say:
Trying to goad Russia by acting under the patronage of the USA has already backfired on certain people, and it’s highly likely we’ll see the exact same pattern play out in Ukraine.
And once the dust settles, the USA will just casually stroll away like nothing ever happened.

Besides, a good cartoon is a perfectly legitimate way to present a thesis or an opinion; if it hits the mark, it’s often much more punchy than a massive wall of text.

I don't quite get why this post was wiped too?🤷

Look, I'm not saying it didn't deserve the boot—maybe I'm tripping over some rules I'm not fully aware of—but I’d appreciate some clarity on why deleting it is actually justified.

Thanks.

Regarding the whole issue of deleted posts, about twenty days back I had one scrubbed from existence, and I asked (okay, maybe with a touch too much sarcasm🙂) on this subforum what the hell the reasoning was behind it.

The post came right after the Ukrainian and Syrian elections, and it went something like this:

I’m going to say a few words about Syria, so apologies in advance for veering off-topic.

During an unannounced trip to Beirut, John Kerry called upon all supporters of the Assad regime—specifically Iran, Russia, and Hezbollah—to step up and help end the war in Syria.

He also weighed in on the Syrian elections, essentially saying that Tuesday's vote was "nothing more than a total zero" and "remains insignificant."
Just the day before, Kerry remarked that "these elections are non-elections; they are a complete wash."

He argued the voting was "meaningless because you can't hold an election when millions of your people don't even have the chance to cast a ballot."

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Leb...#axzz306zjTknm

Apologies once again for the heavy off-topic detour.

I started off being a bit cheeky with the off-topic angle because, at the time, the thread about Ukraine was absolutely swarming with off-topic chatter, and my post served as a perfect little demonstration of the hypocrisy inherent in US foreign policy—where one election is hailed as a democratic triumph while another is dismissed as a farce. The reality on the ground in both nations was remarkably similar, as were Kerry's shifting standards for what constitutes a "significant" vote.
In my book, it was clearly relevant to the discussion.

That deletion actually stung a bit, mostly because I put in the effort to carefully translate Kerry's specific phrasing just so those few folks here who aren't fluent in English could actually appreciate the nuance of his words.

But hey, water under the bridge.🙂

My post got nuked last night.
It was actually a response to this one:

Charles Sanders35 said:I can't imagine the New York Times, CNN, or BBC being part of it. Isn't that just your usual anti-American propaganda, or have you guys lost your minds?
The people who love little icons and the old American era don't agree with the pro-Yugo crowd at the NYT. Is that another mystery for us to solve??

It went something along these lines:

Why on earth would you think fans of Tyrion Lannister are supporters of America?🤷

I’m paraphrasing here, but that was essentially the gist of my message.

I’ll be the first to admit that my post wasn't really about Ukraine; I mostly wrote it just to see if the mods would jump in, and to ask the author which "little guy" he was actually referring to😁.
Because let’s be honest, right now, Tyrion from Game of Thrones is arguably the most famous little man on the planet.
Even Putin doesn't hold a candle to him.🙂

In my opinion, the post I was replying to is just as relevant to the topic as mine was. It was framed as a rhetorical question, giving the author a perfect opening to label anyone who disagrees with him as a nostalgic relic, an anti-American, or a fan of the little guy.
Total flamebait.

What I really want to know is what the moderators have to say about this.
What are the actual criteria here, and why was my post deleted while the one I responded to remains untouched?

Thanks a lot.

PS: I'm not claiming Rock deleted it. I have no idea who did.
I'm more interested in how the rules for this thread are being established and getting an explanation for why his post stays up while mine gets tossed.

hiddenrider66 said:Look, I’m just offering my take, which is what everyone here is supposed to be doing, I'm not lecturing anyone else, yet you all jumped straight to labeling and attacking me right here. Why? Is this actually about me, or is it about the moderator Rock?
Seriously, am I allowed to have an opinion?
Aside from me, who else among the pro-Ukraine crowd—and there are only three of us left in this thread, mind you—has actually said anything meaningful, while you lot have basically turned this place into a witch hunt against Rock?
Has any other pro-Ukraine user called their interlocutor a moron, a child, or suggested they need psychiatric help?
Anyway, I get it, the truth hurts, and clearly, you guys need a private chat room to vent about your personal biases, which I happen to be disrupting. I'll head over to the Russia thread for a while so I don't clutter up your space. LP
By the way, @Zachary Torres81—if you hadn't been posting those Crimea-Russia photos, the ones you know exactly which ones, I wouldn't have posted those hits either; I only did it as a direct response to your post. A provocation always invites a provocation.

Well, I already told you that that post doesn't bother me, I was simply pointing out the inconsistency in you complaining about Maltese using the forum like a personal blog when you were doing the exact same thing.

Given how Maltese was mentioned in the previous post, bolding it here really doesn't suit you.

More arguments and less emotion makes for a much better discussion.🙂

Again, I have absolutely no desire for you to leave the topic.🙂

hiddenrider66 said:Look, Rocky is spot on, it’s just a reality at this point. A certain subset of the pro-Russia crowd treats this thread like their own personal diary; for instance, I recently counted eight posts on one page and another six on the next where there wasn't a single link provided—just endless personal opinions. Honestly, if you want to vent like that, go start a blog, because he explicitly stated he doesn't care what I think, which makes it the perfect venue for a blog.
Another type constantly uses the word "junta." Given that there is a legitimate government in place over there, using that term is totally disconnected from the actual situation.
Some people are even chiming in as if they were all old friends hanging out on Facebook.
If Practice and I don't show up here, the only ones left defending the pro-Kremlin side would be Collins, whom you guys have labeled "dimwitted" about a hundred times already.
I have to admit, much like many others felt, I actually thought about staying away entirely because this whole Ukraine topic could easily just be renamed "Pro-Russia" or "Glory to Putin," or whatever suits your narrative better.
Calling it aggression is the only way to accurately describe the state of affairs in this thread.
If you want to be left alone, fine by me, just keep posting distorted Russian propaganda and those wildly inaccurate translations (like that nonsense about 9,000 hryvnia for three months).
But
The thing that keeps me here is the idea I read somewhere that this is actually a core part of Russian propaganda—occupying every online information niche and then using obnoxious behavior on forums to drive everyone else away.
So, I'm not backing down. See you around. 🙂)))))))

Saying Rocky is right isn't stating a fact; it's just your opinion.
I'm not so arrogant as to claim I'm always right, let alone that my view is an objective fact.
Claiming something is an absolute fact pretty much kills any chance of having a real discussion about it.

I do agree that people should probably exercise some self-censorship regarding the word "junta." It was catchy and fitting at the start, but now it's just getting tedious.
It's like how we'd kick Nazis out of a game, unless they were being mentioned specifically in relation to an event involving Nazi glorification by one of the sides or something similar.
A lot of these are just emotional hooks being thrown out by one side.
Then you have the other side with their various extremists and radicals.
As for the legality or legitimacy of the government, I won't go there; we've already exhausted that debate in this thread.

Regarding the whole "blogging" thing, I recall an example from your side that felt less like a political blog and more like a music blog:😁:



Jesus did mention something about the speck in your own eye versus the log in someone else's, didn't He?

Don't get me wrong, though—your posts aren't bothering me at all.

Don't let them get to you. Of course we'll keep reading; I have no idea why you'd think anyone actually wants you to stop posting.🙂

Well, I have to admit, I actually enjoy getting into a debate with goldenowl73.

goldenowl73 acting as a moderator for this thread?

I’ve gotta say, he’s a bit biased.

He tends to tolerate clones and people who echo his own views, while handing out bans to anyone with a different opinion just because of some minor stupidity.
The perfect example is driftingtinker, who got banned a couple of days ago over a post saying, "This is what you call trolling," which was actually a reaction to the video posted above.
Since the post containing the video had already been deleted, it just looked like AX was trolling into a void.
AX is basically our go-to video translator here; there are others, sure, but they aren't nearly as active or consistent, which makes him incredibly valuable to this discussion.
If someone commits a massive, blatant violation of the rules, then yeah, let them fly, but if it isn't that serious, it’s a real shame to lose someone who spends their time silently translating videos for everyone else.

I wouldn't mind goldenowl73 handing out warnings if I didn't get the nagging feeling that he "overlooks" the exact same violations when they come from people who agree with him.

About a month ago, I actually wrote something about how he moderates the thread regarding Ukraine, pointing out that it would be much fairer if he just stepped back from moderating entirely while he's so passionately rooting for one side, but clearly, that didn't lead anywhere.

PS: I picked up a warning today for this post:
http://www.reddit.com/showpost.php?p=5...&postcount=379

I didn't appeal it, but honestly, I don't know how else to respond to that NATO argument claiming Greenpeace is cozying up to Putin, other than with a bit of humor.😁
The joke would have totally fallen flat if I had included a formal description of the video (which showed a Russian helicopter landing on a Greenpeace ship).
But looking at it strictly by the book, I guess I was wrong—I didn't include the video description.🙂

William Bennett53 said:Save the sarcasm for those other forums, because who knows, maybe we actually have some kind of automated system over here that flags trolling in appeals.

Fine by me.

I’ll just take the reason for the deletion and an explanation of why it was justified, shall I?

George Sanders37 said:There isn't some automated system in place that just scrubs posts automatically

Wait, really?

If that's the case, then we’re looking at a situation much more dire than I initially suspected.

The system somehow managed to glitch and wipe out my entire post from the thread about Ukraine.
Only a tiny little fragment survived, tucked away inside Andrew's reply to that same topic:

The original post read:

I’m going to say a few words regarding Syria, so please forgive me for drifting off-topic here.

During an unannounced trip to Beirut, John Kerry called upon all supporters of the Assad regime—specifically Iran, Russia, and Hezbollah—to step up and help bring the war in Syria to an end.

He also took aim at the Syrian election, essentially calling Tuesday's proceedings "one big zero" and claiming they "remain insignificant."
Regarding the recent "elections," Kerry remarked that they were "non-elections, elections are just one big zero."

He argued that the voting was "insignificant, because you cannot have elections where millions of your people don't even have the opportunity to vote."

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Leb...#axzz306zjTknm

Apologies once again for the heavy detour into off-topic territory.

It’s entirely possible there’s some automated software running in the background that flags the term "off-topic" and just nukes the post, but I promise you, that was purely ironic.
This thread is absolutely crawling with off-topic chatter, yet my post is actually quite relevant and vital, as it highlights the blatant hypocrisy of the USA when it comes to recognizing certain elections while dismissing others using the exact same set of standards.

Furthermore, I went through the trouble of translating the key sections for anyone who isn't fluent in English, and I'd hate to see all that effort go down the drain.

At first, I thought one of the moderators had manually deleted it, but since I haven't received any notifications about an infraction, I've moved past that theory.
Besides, the mods over in politics are pretty sharp, and I highly doubt they're immune to irony.

Could you please take a look and restore my post?

Thanks in advance.

Twice now my posts have been flagged as nonsense. At this rate, I’m actually going to start getting worried about what's happening here.😁

Once again, it seems I’ve been misinterpreted as saying someone shouldn't be allowed to participate in a discussion, or worse, that they need to be cloned just to join in.
Apparently, I’m just not being clear enough in my writing.🤷

Let's go back to my analogy about the referee and the game.

If a professional NFL referee decides he doesn't want to officiate and chooses to sit in the stands and watch the game instead, does that man stop being a referee by trade? Is he suddenly some kind of clone of the guy who was supposed to be on the field? Or is he still a referee, he's just not officiating at that moment?

Now, someone suggested that Rocky should make a clone of himself just so they could toss that clone onto an ignore list. That wasn't me, obviously—I don't even use ignore lists, and if I did, Rocky wouldn't exactly be at the top of the pile anyway.

The whole point of this thread is Rocky's moderation style; I provided an example of a situation that felt unfair to me, and my post got pulled (thanks Nick). But honestly, I wouldn't have batted an eye if I'd been penalized, provided that Gipper (whose post I was actually quoting) got hit with the same thing.

Mistakes happen, and frankly, the whole purpose of a forum like this is to point those mistakes out when they occur.

Who am I to play gatekeeper and decide who gets to post on this board? I was simply offering some insights and ideas on how we might minimize issues within this thread, yet somehow it looks like I'm taking sides against someone.

I should probably clarify: if someone is feeling salty or constantly complaining, that person isn't me.😛

This entire discussion has been infected by a Ukrainian theme. It’s become two polarized camps where you're either with us or against us, leaving almost zero room for any actual constructive dialogue.

So, look, guys, from both sides—no thanks.

loneraven25 said:Pure nonsense. I don't agree with Rocky on much,
including his supposedly "unbiased" approach to moderation.
So now, because a handful of cloned profiles in the Ukrainian thread are demanding
that a moderator actually jump into an argument with a clone?!?
Look, I can't speak for him, but personally, I wouldn't fly to that circus for any reason under the sun;
no matter how much people grumble or throw a tantrum, you don't just manufacture clones to satisfy the audience's whims.

I think you’ve got me confused with someone else entirely. I’m trying here, really, but I don't see where I ever said I wanted Rocky to be cloned, nor do I actually believe I am one myself.
If I am, I guess I’ll have to have a very awkward conversation with my parents about it...
I don't feel angry, and if my posts make it look like I'm just sitting here grumbling, then there's clearly been a massive breakdown in communication somewhere, because being grumpy or just voting against the grain isn't my intention.🙂

Regarding that specific snippet of mine you quoted:

For example:

Imagine I'm a referee in a big game, and both teams playing are ones I have strong feelings about—one's my favorite, and the other is a team I just can't stand. Even though I want to be fair, I'm not entirely sure I could pull off true impartiality. So, what do I do? I hand the whistle to someone else, grab a seat in the stands, and just enjoy the match.

That's what I would do, but obviously, that doesn't mean everyone else has to follow my playbook or think the exact same way.😉

rustydrifter10 said:I pulled that card, but let’s all just take a collective breath here. This thread is absolutely exploding right now—it feels like there were like 500 posts dropped on this topic just yesterday alone. It’s physically impossible for us to moderate everything instantly; things are going to slip through the cracks, and yeah, someone might make a mistake. If you were out there throwing personal insults, being provocative, or just plain being rude, don't bother coming here to whine about your sanctions. Instead, maybe try reporting the posts that are actually breaking the rules.

Thanks, Nico. I'm on the same page with what was said.

granitefalcon26 said:I’d just like to ask the admins to reconsider the title of this thread. At the end of the day, everyone is entitled to their own political views; that's a private matter. I've been hanging around this forum for a long time, but I have never seen anyone targeted or insulted by moderators quite like Rocky. Whether Rocky leans red, green, or yellow, that’s his prerogative, just like anyone else here.
The thread title just doesn't fit.
As far as moderation goes, expecting total satisfaction from everyone is basically an illusion. We can't expect moderators to be glued to the screen 24/7, reading every single bit of nonsense we post while maintaining a perfect zen state. Rocky just started moderating Rock World. And seriously, where did Powerlock disappear to??
It's like when you start a new job at a big firm like Amazon or Google; you get a three-month probationary period to find your footing. Why shouldn't Rocky have that same basic courtesy? Those first three months would give us all time to get used to having him running the show here in Rock World. Objectively speaking, moderators are humans. They aren't machines. What one moderator sees as trolling or an insult, another might see as totally harmless.

Just my two cents. Maybe "Red" Rocky isn't because of his politics, but just because of the color of the card he's holding?

Because if we're splitting this thread into two warring camps, there's no way Rocky is "Red." He's firmly on the side of the current Ukrainian government. And a lot of people on that side are busy accusing Russia of trying to bring back the USSR.
So, if someone really needs to be labeled "Red," it's me (and I'm certainly not).

Whatever, change the thread title or don't, it's all the same to me.

Regarding the mods, look, they are people. But a certain group of folks in this thread feels like the moderation isn't always hitting that sweet spot of impartiality. It's just human nature—when you're fired up about a topic, you tend to spot every single flaw in your opponent's argument while completely overlooking the same mistakes made by your own side. We might be totally off base, but this subforum exists specifically for debating this exact issue.

I already mentioned that I think it would be best if Rocky shared his opinions here without actually being the one holding the ban hammer. It's like the old saying: too many cooks in the kitchen.

PS: Yeah, seriously, where is Powerlock? He was practically born to moderate this specific thread.

granitefalcon26 said:Oh, sure. Why stop there? We should just disqualify anyone who doesn't nod along with your specific worldview. Everyone knows exactly what constitutes hate speech, right? The penalty and the point deduction were completely justified.
Look, I’ve been handed a warning before too, but you don't see me coming in here to whine about it. I’m always going to stand up for the idea that everyone deserves a seat at the table to express their views. Rocky has that exact same right—just like you and me. And let's get one thing straight: Rocky isn't some lone wolf moderator jumping into debates; most of the mod team does the same thing.
You can call Collins an idiot, or try to label me with all sorts of nasty names, but don't think for a second that you're going to get away with it. You won't.☕
None of Rocky's mods have taken a hit unless they actually earned it.
Your whole goal seems to be pushing this forum toward total anarchy so you can insult people without any consequences. That's not how this works, and it's not going to fly. ☕

But plenty of people deserved them and didn't get them.

And that is exactly my point.

Here’s a hilarious little scenario: Tutankhamun and The Gipper are getting into it in the off-topic section, arguing over whether Americans are actually hungry.

Tut tells The Gipper:

He drops a link and basically asks if he even knows how to use Google.

The Gipper responds:

He just posts a link to some chubby kid eating at McDonald's and writes, "I know."

When I saw that, I nearly died laughing because his big, brilliant argument for why Americans aren't hungry was literally a photo of one of the most obese people on the planet.
By total coincidence, the kid is Russian.😁

So, I chime in:

I ended up getting slapped with 30 points for breaking the subforum rules, but honestly, no big deal—I'm not even complaining.

But seriously, where is the impartiality in all this?
The post I replied to wasn't even flagged, nor were any of the other comments that led me to jump in.

So, who hands me the penalty? Well, goldenowl73, obviously.😁

granitefalcon26 said:A moderator is entitled to their own opinion just like any other user on this board. Regarding the actual moderation itself, I haven't seen Rock handing out bans to people who don't deserve them. You all really need to get it together and realize that ad hominem attacks aren't actual arguments; that kind of behavior gets you flagged on every forum out there, including this one.
Please refrain from insulting and attacking our colleague Michael Collins.
If anyone here has a legitimate reason to complain about moderation, it’s me, because your group actually called me a fascist. That's exactly why I had to start a whole separate thread in this PDF world.
Stop whining and try to defeat Michael Collins, myself, and the rest of the users using actual, logical arguments instead.
We would be very grateful if you could stop shouting, stop the insults, and stop resorting to ad hominem attacks.☕

My "group"? Who, exactly? Ivy, grandma, Daniel? I'll be sure to mention to them over a beer later today how inappropriate that was.
Look, I don't have a "group" on this forum. On the thread about Ukraine, I disagree with you and MC, and on plenty of other threads, I disagree with both of you. Does that suddenly make us a coordinated squad? Does it?
Calling people fascists or using ad hominem attacks is just as tedious and exhausting as calling people sympathizers of Maddox or Hitler.
I’m all for the moderation being strict—really, I am—but the rules have to be applied equally to everyone. It shouldn't be a situation where one person racks up 500 points while someone else gets slapped with a zero for something even more egregious.

I’m going to chalk those comments about insults and ad hominem attacks up to your own mistake, because they couldn't possibly apply to me or my circle; I don't play those games, and my friends aren't even on this forum, as far as I know.🙂

PS: Obviously, a moderator is allowed to have an opinion. That goes without saying. It’s just that when a thread splits into two main opposing sides fighting with data and links (and occasionally with insults and ad hominem🙂), it might be easier for Rock to just step back from the moderator role for a moment and argue like everyone else. It would take the pressure off him—he could actually engage with the topic rather than feeling like he has to police every single participant, and then everyone walks away happy.

redheron30 said:this goldenowl73 won't even touch the subject of Ukraine because he can't handle it; honestly, it's embarrassing. He selectively uses cardboard to censor anything that doesn't fit his specific narrative, just wiping away posts he doesn't like. It’s pretty obvious he’s struggling with a bit of a Russian complex.

How many times do we have to go over this? It’s fundamentally unprofessional to jump into a debate as a biased participant while also acting as the moderator—it's a textbook conflict of interest. A moderator's entire job is to stay neutral and maintain the balance between both sides of the argument.

The whole thing is just a sad comedy.

I'm with you on that.
goldenowl73, look, there's absolutely nothing wrong with you joining the conversation, but if we're talking about basic fairness, you really ought to step back from moderating since you clearly have a side in this particular topic.

Justin Smith5 said:The US, obviously. The only superpower actually looking out for everyone else's interests.

Just adding another one to my collection of quotes.

If you keep this up, I might just have to publish a book of your gems; if CNN were still around, they’d probably have found you a publisher by now.

But since they aren't, I guess I'll just have to go hunting for one myself.