Posts by Sean Cruz

Carl Fisher7 said:Sean Cruz already provided those links above. So much for my supposed habit of making things up or lying. It wasn't just me she targeted. Someone who actually left the chat because of how nimbleowl6 was acting reached out to me privately to list other users who had been driven away by her insults. I’m obviously not affected—to put it politely, I stopped caring about her opinion a long time ago. To put it bluntly, her views are garbage, wrapped in a layer of pseudo-intellectual jargon designed to intimidate people. She uses fancy terminology to overwhelm others, banking on the fact that most users will be too impressed by her vocabulary to actually challenge her logic. Personally, I rely on common sense, basic intelligence, and the ability to follow a logical thread.

I missed this part, but it looks like it's being used as "logical proof" 🤦 that I am the user who messaged you privately.

So, here are a few facts:

- No, I am not the user who exchanged private messages with Carl Fisher7, nor is PMing people my standard way of communicating on this site.

- nimbleowl6 didn't drive me away. If either of us needs to feel "inferior," it's her, given her actual level of literacy.

- I was driven away by the double standards enforced by the moderators, specifically regarding how they support provocations that should clearly be sanctioned under our community guidelines.

And I am still waiting for her to produce any evidence for the post where she claims I told someone I would "drink their blood"—because that is straight-up slander.

Ashley Evans71 said:he’ll come after you or insult you just like you used to insult other users on other forums—if that were true, I would have deleted you already.

Point out exactly where I supposedly "came after someone," along with any other insults you claim I made. If you don't have the receipts, what you're saying is just a lie.

And let's be honest: you tolerate incredibly negative comments directed at users from different threads who aren't even active in the chat, yet you don't delete those insults, do you?

Yeah, a narcissist is my friend, and I couldn't care less if that bothers you. 😉

Are you actually suggesting this post should be deleted just because of some swearing? 🍿

Ashley Evans71 said:What's interesting is that neither you nor your "DM friend" have received a single red card from me. Yet you accuse me of playing favorites and being unable to moderate objectively. 😉

So now you're targeting me, claiming I'm Carl Fisher7's "DM friend"? 🤦 🤣

Prove it if you're going to make such a public accusation; otherwise, it's just another shameless lie (which it is).

Emily Patel70 said:You can't just go around telling people on the forum to screw off; it has absolutely nothing to do with this thread. It’s also pretty funny that you’re suddenly deciding that having a post deleted from months ago is such a major issue today.

We shouldn't keep debating this here since we're just getting in the way of the admins handling this PDF file.

My post here is strictly for demonstration purposes—proof that other users aren't lying when they say Scott Miller4 applies double standards when moderating.

By the way, if I actually broke any rules on Reddit, my posts should have been penalized accordingly. As I see it, deleting content is just a way to "silence" one side while letting the other side say whatever they want.

That's all from me. 👋

Emily Patel70 said:Do you really think those chat messages have anything to do with this topic? They were barely borderline offensive at most, yet somehow yours were wiped instantly because they were blatant insults and profanity.

Since the site admins are the only ones who can actually see deleted posts (and unfortunately, I didn't save screenshots), I wouldn't go making such bold accusations if I were you.

I made it perfectly clear that my response wasn't even directed at this specific thread.

Ashley Evans71 said:Regarding mentioning Nausicaja—I’ve already told you that I personally deleted both your posts and hers when you were insulting one another. If you spot any unmoderated posts, just report them to me. Those posts don't exist anymore, and I don't play favorites, as you well know. So please, stop making these ugly accusations and lying.

How convenient to accuse others of being liars.

Take, for instance, this post

I read through that conflict of yours, and in my opinion, your opponent's main tactic is constantly projecting feelings and attitudes onto you that you never actually expressed. But hey, I suppose some people think they can act as both a messiah and a polygraph at the same time.
Personally, I find the whole thing incredibly distasteful—a very low and dirty 'game.'

as well as this one

I find it fascinating when people criticize psychotherapy while clearly being terrified of it themselves.
I've encountered them in real life, and honestly, here on the Reddit too. They start these intense, angry outbursts, acting out because they claim I'm constantly diagnosing them and such.

regarding similar provocations from your friend Nausicaja, you reacted by deleting my replies (where the only thing potentially "inappropriate" was me telling her to screw off). So, instead of accusing others of lying, maybe take a moment to reflect on why you hold everyone to such double standards. 😉

I am only bringing this up so that someone doesn't accidentally believe you or assume other users are lying when they point out your double standards. This isn't even about the specific topic at hand—I haven't even read it.

Sam Robinson said:Honestly, I’ve reached a point where I just don't care anymore whether I can trust someone or not... People are going to interpret whatever you say through their own distorted lens anyway, so why bother? It’s gotten to the point where I find myself trusting fewer and fewer people every single day.

But if we look at chronic distrust through the lens of empirical observation, there are usually a few specific psychological drivers behind it:

1. The individual is a liar themselves—someone who manipulates, plays dirty, and smears anyone in their path just to get what they want. Because they aren't delusional enough to deny their own shady tactics, they naturally assume everyone else is playing the same game.

2. The person has been repeatedly victimized—someone who has been exploited, lied to, manipulated, and brainwashed over and over again, eventually developing a deep-seated cynicism as a survival mechanism.

3. A toxic combination of both scenario 1 and scenario 2.

And frankly, that last one seems to be the most common pattern I see out there...

We live in an era defined by manipulation. Honestly, I don't know a single person who hasn't told a lie at some point. We are conditioned to accept minor manipulations, and frankly, many people don't even realize when they are being manipulative.

A certain level of caution is just common sense; you can never be 100% certain about the character of anyone you meet. In my experience, those who are overly "open"—people who treat everyone with immediate, intense familiarity—are often the ones who end up giving you a headache. It isn't always because they are malicious, but more often because they are simply indiscreet and lack boundaries.

Of course, the hardest part is when someone you considered close betrays you. That's when people tend to build "walls of mistrust" against everyone, which can eventually spiral into something pathological.

Ultimately, I think the most important thing to realize is that anyone can let you down—including ourselves. Carrying excessive suspicion toward everyone else is simply an exhausting way to live.

That doesn't mean you should spill your life story to every stranger you meet, but having a strong intuitive sense of who is trustworthy and who isn't is vital.

Negative experiences are inevitable; it’s all about how you process them. Personally, I keep a very small circle of truly close people (even within my own family), and I find it quite easy to cut others out of my life without much emotional fallout. It doesn't rattle me.

I can't believe I finally sat down to watch

.

Tyler Baker6 said:Everyone seems pretty obsessed with this whole idea of how people are so easily swayed
and how easy it is to manipulate them—but let’s be real, everyone usually only sees it happening to someone else. It’s totally possible we all have that streak in us; it just hits some people harder than others.
Personally, I get way too hyped up about some authority figure and their "expertise" until I catch them slipping on some stupid mistake... and then I end up feeling totally let down by them AND my own flawed judgment.

I don't think anyone claimed to be an exception here. It isn't just a personality quirk; if you develop critical thinking skills and encourage children to question things, the susceptibility to manipulation decreases. However, from the education system to the media, kids are essentially trained to be obedient—it's a form of brainwashing. That's why we see the behavior reflected in these kinds of experiments.

When it comes to media influence, Chomsky described the situation perfectly.

wearyowl29 said:http://pixelizam.com/bizarni-psiholo...-posli-po-zlu/

There’s also the Milgram experiment out there, but personally? I find "The Third Wave" way more fascinating—it's actually what the movie was based on!

It’s fascinating, isn't it? That innate human hunger to feel part of an "elite" inner circle—the desperate need to feel special while simultaneously looking down on anyone who doesn't fit the mold. But what’s even more unsettling is just how easily people can be manipulated. We like to think we're independent thinkers, yet we are shockingly prone to following whatever "authority" tells us to do.

The Psychology of Authority Orwell

The Psychology of Authority Orwell He put that perfectly:

As I sit here typing this, highly civilized human beings are currently flying overhead, attempting to kill me.
There is no personal animosity between us—not on my end, and certainly not on theirs. They aren’t acting out of hatred; they’re simply "doing their duty," as the old saying goes. Most of them would never dream of committing murder in private life. Yet, if one of them manages to blow me to pieces with a well-placed bomb, he won't lose a wink of sleep over it. In his mind, he's just serving his country, and that sense of national service provides all the absolution he needs to wash away the evil.

electrictinker26 said:They have it, you listen, and then you actually hear what they're saying.

You can be an obedient little sheep, or you can actually listen—and choose to be rebellious instead.

electrictinker26 said:Every single day, we follow guidance. We spend our lives listening—whether it’s to our own inner voice, someone else's advice, or a gut feeling deep within us. It's practically hardwired into the human experience; we can't function without it. Of course, people view this concept differently; some see it as a positive force, while others see it as a burden. With following guidance comes responsibility, which is exactly where most people stumble. Most people honestly don't know what they truly want. Personally, I don't subscribe to the idea of sin. Instead, I believe in making mistakes—errors in judgment that we can rectify whenever we choose, or when we happen to be blessed with the clarity of free will and grace. I have a lot of respect for those who change their minds to help others, just as much as I respect those who jump in immediately to assist. I've been in those shoes myself. Usually, it's after you've felt the sting of a bad decision and realize you never want to go through it again that you truly begin to value guidance. This is especially true when dealing with someone more experienced than you, or even a stranger, if you remain open enough to receive wisdom and realize how prudent it is to listen. If you adopt the attitude that you don't need to listen to anyone, eventually, no one will listen to you, and that leads to a downfall. That said, there are moments when you absolutely have to say NO. Like anything else in life, it's all about balance. You have to listen because, truthfully, you don't have all the answers. When you refuse to listen, you end up judging rather than understanding. Naturally, following guidance blindly isn't the ideal way to live. But ultimately, justice prevails, because God sees everything and knows what is in our hearts.

Obedience and listening are two distinct concepts; they aren't even remotely synonymous.

wearyowl29 said:

You know, everyone talks about the seven deadly sins, but there’s an eighth one hiding in plain sight—one that doesn't even look like a sin at first glance. It's obedience. Honestly, it's caused enough chaos to earn its spot on the list.
It's funny, really. People often toss aside their own common sense and intelligence just to follow some authority figure. They turn into a total herd mentality from the get-go. It’s much easier to let someone else make the calls than to actually think for yourself, right? So they just trade away their freedom of thought for convenience.
Any society built on rigid authority relies on that exact same mindset, and frankly, so do most ideologies and religions.

Check out this episode of Science Magazine dedicated to this "eighth sin."

Looking at it through a spiritual lens, what do you all think? Is blind obedience a good thing or a bad thing when it comes to a person's spiritual growth and maturity?

How do you guys handle your own obedience—or lack thereof? What kind of impact has it had on your life?

Blind obedience isn't just damaging to the individual; it can have devastating societal consequences. For instance, Hitler wouldn't have been able to orchestrate the atrocities he did if the German people hadn't been so prone to following orders without question.

How do you personally handle obedience versus disobedience, and what kind of impact does that have on your life?

To me, obedience is an oxymoron. 😁 I struggle with disobedience at times because my stubbornness can drive me to extremes, but I’d much rather wrestle with those internal "demons" than live in total ignorance of my own subconscious.

Matthew Adams4 said:I’m sticking to my guns on this one: you can't really be "overly" polite. You either have manners or you don't.

That’s exactly what I was getting at earlier—you're looking at this in strictly black and white.

People keep hyperventilating over extremes here, even though the author made it clear she wasn't questioning the basic tenets of common decency and polite behavior.

feralranger said:One ought to maintain direct eye contact, perhaps observing the mouth only through one's peripheral vision... the musculature surrounding the eyes reacts instinctively to true emotion, whereas a forced smile is merely a localized movement of the lips...

Naturally, you cannot simply retake the assessment now that the correct and incorrect answers have already lodged themselves in your memory... however, you might find it useful to observe whether you notice those subtle cues...

I know, I think my focus is just slipping right now. In my actual day job, I’m actually quite good at "reading" nonverbal cues, regardless of how much someone smiles or acts polite. Honestly, I'm better at it than most...

Matthew Adams4 said:Nah. There’s a massive difference between suppressing how you feel and just taking it out on everyone in sight because you're having a moment. People can tell when I'm feeling down, but that doesn't mean I'm going to be a jerk to them.

And who even brought up "taking it out on others" in the first place? Is everything just black or white now? Are we really incapable of seeing any nuance here? 🙄

feralranger said:This might also stem from a simple breakdown in communication, or rather, a misunderstanding. For instance, if I were discussing that friend of mine I mentioned earlier during a casual chat, I might describe her as being 'always cheerful,' without expecting anyone to interpret that 'always' with such grueling literalism.

Naturally, if we were engaged in a heavy, serious discussion involving a deep dive into psychological states, I certainly wouldn't be quite so reckless with a word like 'always.'

And... was my smile 'contagious'?

...masks, yes... it could be about whether using them is (un)justified...

Have you finished that test regarding fake versus genuine smiles?
What did you end up getting? (I managed to trip myself up twice, which means I correctly identified an authentic versus a forced smile about 90% of the time...)

That's possible, but in my experience, people who are excessively polite and smiley usually have an ulterior motive. Like I mentioned before, when someone tries to force a sense of "closeness" through forced smiles and friendliness toward a total stranger, I find it incredibly grating. Honestly, I'd rather get hit in the head with a rock.

And... was the smile "contagious"?

Who wouldn't catch it from Bobby? 😍

...masks, yes... one could discuss whether their use is justified or not...

Exactly. To me, using them as a tool to exploit others is completely unacceptable.

Did you finish that test distinguishing fake smiles from real ones?
How did you do? (A couple tripped me up, so I landed at about 90% accuracy in spotting whether they were genuine or fake...)

You're doing much better than I am. 😬 I only got 12 right. 😁🤣

Matthew Adams4 said:Honestly, I rarely get sad or angry—maybe a couple times a month tops. And even then, I try my best not to take it out on people who didn't do anything wrong. I save my attitude for the people actually causing the drama, whenever I can help it. Besides, feeling crappy doesn't stop me from being polite, unless it's to the exact person I'm annoyed with.

Reading through these threads, it feels like you guys think it's abnormal if you don't have something making you miserable every single day. 😢

You claim that being kind and smiling is your "normal" state and that you aren't acting, yet you just admitted that you have to work at not showing your bad moods (which means you're masking what you feel, which is essentially acting).

Reading these posts makes it seem like someone isn't functioning normally unless they have something to be pissed off or upset about every single day. 😢

Where did I ever say that? I asked if it had ever happened, not if it happened every single day.

feralranger said:If we define normality simply by what the masses do or how the crowd behaves, then "being normal" isn't necessarily a virtue in many contexts. It is, rather, a secondary characteristic...

An internal state that serves as a prerequisite for such a thing feels quite foreign to me... though I must admit, I have a profound appreciation for a spontaneous smile, and I find people prone to them quite endearing. My tennis partner is exactly that kind of person... and a portion of her effortless cheerfulness is, shall we say, "contagious"... (though I might argue that I find it easier to connect with slightly more "brooding" personalities...) There are moments when I find myself "envying" that quality in her—not that I would ever wish to dampen her spirits, mind you, but rather that I wish I possessed a fragment of that temperament myself. Perhaps not perpetually, but occasionally.

Artificial, calculated, or duplicitous smiles are, predictably, utterly repulsive to me...

Incidentally, genuine smiles can be distinguished from their fake counterparts by the specific facial muscles engaged during the expression.

human Body & Mind - Spot The Fak smiliti Quote : Soul Sister

Are you skeptical?

It is unlikely that anyone exists who is literally, perpetually, in that state, but there are certainly those for whom it is their predominant "nature"...

I believe I have already shared this link with you once, but here it is again — Smile. 🙂

Of course I am. Someone who is always smiling and isn't faking it—meaning they truly feel as happy as they look—is either completely detached, superficial, or on medication.

There probably aren't people who are literally like that all the time, but there are those who are predominantly that way; it's just their 'nature'...

I think I already sent you this link once, but here: Smile. 🙂

Yes, thanks. 🙂

This thread is about aggressive and excessively polite people who cross the line of what's considered "standard politeness" (the OP confirmed that too).

As for myself, I'd call myself "moderately polite." No one has ever described me as aggressive, but they haven't seen me as the opposite either—just "reserved." I smile often, but I'll be honest: my true internal state feels more like the lyrics to this song...

Matthew Adams4 said:And I am exactly who I am behind closed doors, so I have no clue where you're getting the idea that I'm different.

So, what? You're always polite and smiling, and never once sad or angry?

Jose Carter2 said:😢

There it is. That classic American mindset: Americans invaded and wrecked Iraq just to grab the oil and loot the place.

It’s funny how people ignore things like Auschwitz or the Mexican Srebrenica massacre when they can't see the proverbial tree for the forest.

The human brain just isn't wired to process the sheer chaos and complexity of the modern world, so it defaults to these little simplifications...

If you want the full picture, go read Colos by Niall Ferguson. I don't really have the energy to break it all down for you, but it covers it quite well.

It isn't "typical American logic"; it's an objective fact. If you want a truly disastrous example, look at what happened in Libya.

Americans had Auschwitz and Mexican Srebrenica, yet they can't seem to see the log in their own eye.

Should we discuss how America built its entire history on the backs of others? Like those same Indians they herded into reservations like animals...

The human brain simply can't process the sheer chaos and complexity of the global landscape, so it resorts to oversimplification.

If you want to learn about the "glories" of globalization, I highly recommend reading this book.

This is getting off-topic, but I get a bit of a chill whenever someone starts talking about the American superpower.