Posts by Kenneth Cruz67

lonetrucker4 said:Honestly, just out of pure curiosity—and I should probably clarify that since I’m a moderator, I don't have any official connection whatsoever to the legal entities behind Monitor or Reddit, Inc.—could someone perhaps help me understand what this guy is actually getting at here?

What kind of personal data are we actually talking about here? I mean, are we referring to his specific username or something else entirely? 🤔

I guess it’s worth mentioning that under the CCPA, any posts made under a specific username on social media platforms or online forums are actually treated as personal data.

I'm not entirely sure what exactly a "sticky thread" entails in this context, but I suppose it makes me wonder which specific pieces of personal information we're talking about here—and more importantly, whose data is it, and where exactly is it being pulled from in the first place? 🤔

I was just thinking that, if we really want to do this right, we should probably look into decoupling the IP addresses, email addresses, usernames, metadata, and even the actual posts within the database. I guess it might be a bit more complex than we initially thought, but maybe breaking everything down like that would be much better for the overall architecture.

I suppose it would be quite wonderful if, instead of just using a standard username, the author could post as an Anonymous User, perhaps even keeping their IP address completely hidden! It might also be lovely if the system didn't require an email address or collect any specific profile data that could be used for things like targeted advertising, though I guess that's a pretty big ask for most platforms these days.

Wait a second... did he actually go and post his own private info himself? Like, I don't know, maybe he wrote something like "I live in Brooklyn" or mentioned he has blonde hair, and now he’s suddenly demanding that Reddit, Inc. delete the post or else he'll sue the company behind this site? 😲

I don't want to oversimplify things here, because I really think we shouldn't trivialize the situation. It isn't just about the specific data points he's shared out in the open; rather, I suppose the real concern lies in the sheer volume of everything else that gets gathered—you know, all those cookies, trackers, system logs, and every other little digital footprint left behind.

Hmm... Well, maybe that isn't such a bad idea after all! I actually signed up for Reddit, Inc. back in the day using a pseudonym first, but then I switched over to my actual legal name around 2007. Now, I find that my full identity is just sitting there, completely exposed, across thousands upon thousands of old posts. So, I guess you could say I am currently in the middle of suing Monitor and Reddit, Inc., seeking about $110,000 in damages because they've been broadcasting my private information everywhere—it’s honestly quite shameful! 🎉

I suppose if you actually go through the trouble of requesting that your data be anonymized and the platform just flat-out refuses to comply, you might actually have some legitimate grounds to take them to court.

I suppose if you just take a quick look at how other forums across the European Union handle their data anonymization, you could probably just copy their solution and call it a day! It seems like such a straightforward way to get everything sorted, don't you think?

Donna Watson65 said:I have to admit, I’ve only just recently started popping back up on the forums, but if my memory serves me right, I clearly recall plenty of girls using entire collections of those little creative works as their avatars 🤷

Oh, I see how it is....
Still, what some people might label as explicit content feels more like... well, maybe a conceptual metaphor to me 🙂

[Name] I suppose even some folks might actually agree with me there 👋

Sent from my iPhone using Reddit

Honestly, who cares what you call it? It's really just about how Google defines it lol

Morgan White said:Is it actually allowed to use explicit imagery like that for an avatar on this forum?

I don't think so. Generally speaking, explicit images are only permitted in those specific sub-forums that aren't running any Google ads. I suppose if you were only posting within those particular threads, you might be able to get away with an explicit avatar, but anything outside of that carries the huge risk of getting our entire forum banned by Google. It isn't really about morality or anything like that; it's more about protecting our revenue. 😁

mistyridge3 said:Unbelievable!
I mean, are the forum rules actually shorter than my hair? 😁

E:
By the way, it’s actually Adis Šabović, not Šabović Adis. 😛

I suppose I might just be honing my instinct for spotting clones on you😁

It seems to be exactly the same situation as the last two times this has happened. I guess I should kindly ask the relevant authorities to take a look at 👍
.

Eric Newman75 said:And Leibniz? You think he was just copying those Greek guys he mentioned? Not even close. And let’s be real—he didn't "know everything," nor did he explain everything. Science back then was a hundred, maybe a thousand times less developed than what we have now. The modern person simply isn't built to know everything anymore; we can only specialize. Things have expanded way too much in terms of both breadth and depth. You’d need several lifetimes just to truly master a single field. Even something like mathematics.

But I wonder, is it actually possible for an AI to engage in true philosophy? 🤔

Rachel Richardson said:How much offense is actually being taken in this post? 😲

That’s actually exactly why I decided to clip it and pull out what I consider to be the most polite section 😬

It looks like we're seeing the exact same thing as a few days ago, honestly, just another clone of Johnson.

I’d probably try to report this using the little triangle icon, but I guess there’s really no point since there aren't any moderators active right now.

Christian Martin4 said:Whose crimes are we even talking about, kid? We've convicted and punished every single criminal we ever put behind bars, whereas you guys are just some loud-mouthed crowd at a stadium that nobody actually cares about. Who on earth do you think you've judged or punished, you absolute wreck of a person? And what do you mean by "degenerates"? Who do you even think you are?
Just realize that something isn't a crime just because you decide to call it one!

Jacob Cruz42 said:Isn't it pretty obvious he's only suggesting this because the moderator is a woman? (And he clearly has some issues with that, judging by his recent posts over on the minimalism forum...) Plus, she isn't even an American citizen, right?

Could you please provide a link or a quote showing where I expressed any issue with her being a woman? Thanks so much!

As for her citizenship, I think I've already touched on that point in my previous posts.

Kenneth Cruz67 said:It might also be worth mentioning that since the moderator lives abroad, she doesn't quite experience the current social climate or the atmosphere here in the States firsthand, so maybe it wouldn't hurt to have someone local in the role too. I mean, I don't mean anything bad by it toward her! 🤷

I honestly feel like that’s one of the most important considerations when choosing a moderator for the philosophy section.

steelridge58 said:Actually, let me just add one more thing, where on earth would you have gotten the idea that I’d be announcing my own appointment as a moderator on some philosophy thread before the actual administration gets a chance to do it? It feels like you're coming onto this forum just to complain, maybe even maliciously hinting at things that are really just products of your own interpretation.

I don't think there's any malice involved here at all. I honestly opened that thread with nothing but good intentions. I guess it might have been better if, instead of being confrontational, you had just addressed my concerns and what I was worried about. By reacting this way, it probably just makes it harder to feel confident that you can remain an unbiased and fair moderator.

steelridge58 said:I honestly can't believe this.
You’ve completely taken my previous post out of context, and I suppose that’s all I really have to say about it. 👎

I guess this is just one single instance in what feels like a whole series of your rather concerning posts, especially when you consider the fact that you're slated to become a moderator. To be perfectly honest, I didn't bother digging them all up simply because I was feeling a bit lazy.

And there isn't anything out of context here at all; I mean, your true intentions and motives are clear enough for even a blind man to see. 🤷

ironcyclist58 said:Look, they don't even need to be on a .us domain (plus, just because a site uses a US domain doesn't mean everything on there has to be in English).
The easiest way is just what I suggested to him—literally three clicks of the mouse...

It doesn't actually matter which domain you're looking at; what you really need is to run a search specifically for the content-language: en meta tag.

ironcyclist58 said:There are actually some pages written in American that don't even have ".com" in the URL.

Well, they don't necessarily need to have the domain suffix if they are hosted on an American domain, I suppose.

If someone really wants to dig deep, they could probably just make use of the advanced search features

https://www.google.com/advanced_search

Or maybe even try adding the lr=lang_en operator directly into the URL, which might work

https://www.google.com/search?q=HDtune&lr=lang_en

Anthony Hernandez19 said:So, in your opinion, are there actually any users on here who really deserve a partial ban?

I honestly feel like handing out partial bans right this second might actually be a bit counterproductive, mostly because emotions are running so high right now, and since the forum has been without moderators for a while, things have gotten a little chaotic. I guess it might be a much smarter move to just draw a clear line in the sand first, see how everyone behaves, and then maybe consider partial bans later on. It would probably be better to aim for something like a fresh start with some new moderators rather than jumping straight into a revenge spree filled with insults and punishments. In my view, moderators who try to force their authority through partial bans aren't really doing such a great job anyway.

Man, you guys really made this way more complicated than it needs to be 😁

HDtune site:com

It's honestly as easy as pie 👍

Anthony Hernandez19 said:I think the Templar order mentioned they might step in to help moderate.

Oh, I definitely agree! I mean, having a moderation duo consisting of the Templar order and steelridge58 would probably be such a much better, more balanced vibe for the forum than just having steelridge58 on their own. 👍

It’s not like we don't have plenty of high-quality, drama-free users who aren't pushing any specific agendas, you know? So, I suppose it really doesn't matter which part of the spectrum they come from.

Anthony Hernandez19 said:So, who would you put on the right side?

I guess I'm not entirely sure, honestly. Maybe someone a bit more moderate and less controversial? It doesn't even strictly have to be someone from the right wing; they could be neutral or even lean left, as long as they aren't quite as deeply entrenched as steelridge58, just to help keep things a little more balanced and under control. 🤷

It might also be worth mentioning—and I really don't mean this in a mean-spirited way toward steelridge58—that since they don't actually live here in the States, they don't experience the current social climate or the specific era America is going through firsthand. So, perhaps it wouldn't be such a bad idea to pick someone local. 🤷

Anthony Hernandez19 said:I mean, we’d basically be looking at a full-blown civil war among the moderators, haha.

Well, I suppose if they’re actually sane, well, that wouldn't happen. But if they aren't quite all there, then I guess they probably shouldn't be serving as moderators in the first place, anyway.🤔

Anthony Hernandez19 said:I mean, does a moderator actually have the authority to personally reinstate users who've been permanently banned?

Well, I suppose they certainly can. Or, if they choose, they could just play dumb and pretend they haven't noticed someone running around with a cloned account. My main point is that she hasn't even officially stepped into her moderator role yet, and she's already openly suggesting that she won't be upholding the very foundational rules this entire community is built upon.

It also seems pretty obvious that she's aligned with one specific clique and one particular faction within a forum that is already incredibly divided.

If nothing else, I guess I’d like to suggest to the site administration that they perhaps appoint a moderator from the opposite side of the spectrum alongside her, just to ensure there's some sort of healthy balance in the leadership. 👍

Just one quick question for the folks in charge.

steelridge58 said:...and then comes the counterbalance to Sisyphus, I suppose. Just to maintain some kind of cosmic balance.

If you look at that quote, I guess her intentions seem pretty transparent.

I can't help but wonder if a decision of this magnitude shouldn't perhaps involve a bit more of a broad consensus among the leadership. 🤔