Posts by Laura Rivera3

Bans, locked threads—it happens way too often here. Here’s a perfect example of how a thread gets shut down and how they talk to users:

I mean, why couldn't the moderator have been just a little more helpful? What’s the harm in saying, 'Hey, we already have a thread about Germany, so I'm going to move your post over there so someone might actually answer you. Good luck.'
Why leave people with the impression of—I don't know—just "get lost, you're not welcome"? Maybe she did move the post, I didn't check, but honestly, this was enough for me to get the point.

And here's another one:

Since when does the tone of a message involve threatening bans just because of two posts about Walmart and some grammar issues? It's like they don't even care to understand the context behind why people were talking
about it in the first place.
Look, nobody said being a moderator for the diaspora was going to be an easy gig. There are tons of people hanging around who are asking questions, just killing time, feeling frustrated, or maybe just unhappy with the state of things back home—they're looking for conversation, advice, whatever. If you aren't ready for that, I guess why bother being a diaspora moderator at all?

At the end of the day, the members make the subforum. Maybe they should try to actually understand the kind of people they're dealing with—their traits and quirks—so they can moderate in a way that's actually pleasant. You know, like what the word "moderate" actually means, rather than just playing heavy-handed cop with a baton.

Grace Diaz76 said:I also hope that the constant off-topic tangents and arguments about the American economy won't start happening in the emigration threads again.

The diaspora section is a lower-traffic subforum and it’s very strictly moderated—well, when it actually gets moderated at all.

The mods don't really participate in the discussions, or if they do, it's minimal. You, Grace Diaz76, you don't seem to be participating in the conversation so much as acting like a cop, showing up just to drop written warnings in bold letters.

Off-topic? So what? Wherever there’s a conversation, there are going to be tangents. If an off-topic subject is actually interesting, a moderator should probably step in and spin it off into its own thread so people can actually keep talking.
Arguments about the American economy in an emigration thread are... what? Something weird?
I mean, most people are part of the emigration movement because of the American economy in the first place. To act surprised that those topics come up in the diaspora section? I guess they should be guided, corrected, shaped—given a chance to voice opinions, debate, and settle things—but no, Grace Diaz76 has spent years treating the diaspora section like some sterile vacuum where both new and old emigrants are only supposed to talk about, I don't know, vacations or hotel services.

There should be a bit more awareness of what the American diaspora has actually been over the last twenty years. Where people go, why they leave, the kind of people involved, their struggles, their motivations. And how the internet can serve new emigrants, and how this forum plays such a massive role in exchanging opinions, recipes, and nostalgia.

Showing up on threads just to hand out penalties isn't really what moderation is for. The general vibe in that subforum is one of emptiness and confinement—as soon as anyone starts talking (and people in the diaspora speak differently because their lives and circumstances are different from the rest of the forum), if it isn't exactly how the moderator wants it, the conversation gets stifled. Wouldn't it be better to guide it? Or correct it?

We can discuss that way of talking if we want. I'm not saying it's always pleasant, and I'm not saying it's always right—politically or ethically speaking. But emigrant lives aren't always pretty either.

The diaspora is specific, and I think it should be treated as such.

Grace Diaz76, why are you even a moderator for the diaspora section? I'm asking in good faith.

Could you guys just shorten my handle to Laura Rivera3? I checked the user list, and I couldn't find that version anywhere. I'm not asking for a total overhaul, just a quick trim.🙂
Thanks!

I don't think you looked closely enough—Laura Rivera3 actually exists. But since the last activity was way back in 2007 and there isn't a single post on the account, maybe just reach out to New Orleans and see if they can swap it for you.🙂

brightpuma said:It’s pretty straightforward. You just click on Politics or whatever similar subforum you want, find the thread about it, and click. You can even jump straight to the "last page."
I didn't realize you needed a psychic or something just to navigate a basic forum.

Then again, maybe you do—I guess Skattemus made some interesting points regarding that matter... 🤷

Anyway, whoever was actually interested in the debate found the right thread and talked. Everyone else just ended up getting warnings or cards for bringing it up in subforums where it didn't belong... 🤷

Yeah, she did make some interesting points, that's true. And here you are, acting like her personal lawyer and confirming them. Given my limited intellectual capacity—not that I'm being modest—it would be incredibly difficult for me to navigate your precious "Politics" PDF. So instead, I chose the PDF where people like me gather—you know, the ones who are supposedly "limited" and constantly called out by you and whoever you're defending.

Like I said, it's really hard for me and people like me to wrap our heads around what your private little PDF group is actually for. Is it for talking about the diaspora, within the diaspora, or just daily life abroad? Because if it's the latter, we've already established that we weren't even aware of the referendum—we basically just voted blindly without having any clue what we were actually doing.
I put together a list of topics we *are* allowed to write about, so go ahead and weigh in.
Just explain it to us, will you? Since you've labeled us as less intelligent—implying we lack the capacity to understand—tell us what we're actually permitted to discuss on this PDF that suits you so perfectly you can't find a single flaw in it, even though you're working pro bono for it in your free time.

Emily Fowler52 said:regarding the eight hundred sixty-eight times we've talked about this: there isn't going to be a dedicated chat because of all the massive issues within the diaspora. maybe one day, somewhere, once...
but not anytime soon.
and I honestly don't get why you guys are making such a tragedy out of it when you've been pointed toward off-topic dozens of times already—where you can talk about whatever you want, provided you stay within the rules of this site. 🤷 there's just a bunch of people who want to chat, but they won't find space on the "home base" subforums; everything works perfectly fine over in off-topic. so why is this such a huge deal for you? It’s just constant chatting, and more chatting, and even more chatting.
Look, THAT isn't what this forum is for. This isn't some group instant messaging service; it's a place for actual, coherent discussion, free from all that internal chatter.

Yeah, I realize a lot of you have been here since the forum first launched, and I get it, you miss those old days. But folks, the users have changed, interests have shifted, things are never going to be the way they used to be—and a chat topic is probably the last thing that's going to help fix that. 🤷

Now, for some specifics. We've all had a chance to talk this through and we've reached the conclusion that we need to loosen the reins a little bit. 😬
There won't be formal warnings for every little thing anymore—instead, we'll just be deleting posts. We'll also hand out bans if someone really crosses the line. We're going to let more stuff slide—but that doesn't mean if you're on a thread about, say, applying for an MBA or the IELTS, you can suddenly pivot to talking about what you had for dinner yesterday. 😁 That's off-topic, and it will be deleted. However, if a discussion veers off onto a different path but still has the potential to turn into something constructive, we'll pull it out or merge it with an existing thread rather than shutting it down. For instance—just to use my own example—instead of us all writing about credential evaluation under a specific immigration thread, I actually started an old thread where we could all swap experiences regarding various countries and procedures.

Use the report buttons!!!!!!!
They aren't just there to tell us when someone is being rude to someone else; use them for stuff like this too! If you think a thread has gone off the rails but the conversation itself is actually good, flag it so we can decide how to handle it. 😉
Let's try to cooperate instead of acting like "evil moderators."
😬
Once again, yeah, I haven't been around much lately. The admins knew I was away, and my colleagues knew too. I admitted it. I'm saying I'm sorry, and I'll try to be more present.

Greetings, Peter Doyle2. Since I'm the one who kicked off this thread, it's only right that I thank you for the cooperation. 🙂
I'm hoping we see some positive changes. I just hope those changes aren't taken by certain individuals as a green light to start attacking people or acting foolishly.
I hope we can just have casual conversations in good spirits.
I hope we can brighten each other's mornings over a cup of coffee. Or maybe even over some stuffed cabbage rolls (which sounds like such an exotic dish in the Northern Hemisphere 😁).
And I hope those of us who tend to lose our tempers every once in a while won't be immediately targeted with bans. 😁

Before I go ahead and declare peace on earth, I’m really hoping someone actually steps up to give credit where it's due—specifically to a guy who has truly carried this subforum on his back, a man known as Satro Gospon.
On behalf of everyone who has wandered through here searching for a little bit of happiness, I want to say thanks for all the help.

Anyway, I’m hoping we can keep things relaxed, open, and actually friendly around here.

So, for now, I wish you all peace in the world. 😍

brightpuma said:All I’m saying is that this topic has popped up on other subforums here before, and every single one handled it differently. So, what specific way would we handle it in the diaspora section that hasn't already been covered by some thread elsewhere? 🤷

Ummm, hold on—let me go ask a psychic Milan exactly how the users would talk about this topic.

I mean, honestly, this is unbelievable. The topic exists on other subforums and they deal with it their own way, but apparently, it doesn't belong in the diaspora section because—ummm, ohhh—"how exactly are we going to approach it?" Like, how, how, and why, why, why. 🙄

Since the topic is supposedly "covered" in other parts of the forum, just go find it there. Well, you’re in the diaspora section anyway, so first off, you have plenty of time to read through the endless novels posted here; second, most of you don't actually care about what's happening back home in America; and third, maybe you shouldn't be expressing political opinions... oh wait, no, you can vote on the American Constitution, but heaven forbid you comment on actual events.

Because the diaspora section is a PDF specifically designed for what?

Sharing... recipes?

Look, please stop trying to play lawyer. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. 😁

brightpuma said:Look, man, you should probably be the last person chiming in on stuff like this. Besides, it’s already been laid out why this topic is such a non-starter (not just because it's honestly kinda irrelevant to people living outside the US) and why you've basically been blacklisted here...

Absolutely phenomenal. Bravo! Way to go, genius! Bravo!
It’s not that it doesn't matter to people living outside America—they had the chance to vote, which means they have a hand in deciding the fate of everyone living there. And yet, somehow, that makes the topic off-limits.🙄

So I guess they don't get to talk about it within the diaspora either? Because having the right to vote in Canada is what—something they can technically do, but aren't allowed to actually discuss? Makes sense, I guess.

Honestly, your posts and your constant defending of this are just pathetic.

driftingcanyon16 said:The diaspora can't be the moderation team even if they really wanted to—and honestly, I’m not asking them to be. But I do think that since everyone is already complaining so much, maybe they could just take it easy on the warnings for a second and actually let people have a conversation without constant interference. The moment there's even a hint that a discussion might stray a little bit, she swoops in out of nowhere screaming "NO OFF-TOPIC" or "NO CHAT." It’s just exhausting, man. 🤣

Yeah, that’s exactly what we're looking at here. I mean, I think I already mentioned this, but my gut feeling—my overall impression, anyway—is that we're basically looking at a crackdown on free speech.
And then there’s the whole issue of overreaching with labels—you know, like when people start slapping the 'hate speech' tag on basically everything. It feels like we're constantly overcomplicating things by labeling stuff that doesn't really fit the description. I guess it just makes everything more polarized than it needs to be.

It looks like my little theory about those "drunk drifters" is still being dragged around here—though I’m quoting them from memory since the original post was nuked. When they delete a thread like that, you lose all the context, and they just cherry-pick one line to make it look bad. It wasn't even an attempt at understanding what I actually meant. I was talking about specific people—you know, the types I see wandering around downtown all the time—not some sweeping generalization about an entire nation. But honestly, I guess it doesn't really matter who cares.
I mean, honestly, what is the point of banning free speech anyway? It feels like we're living in this weird contradiction where if I spot five drunk members of some extremist group out on the street, I'm apparently not allowed to call them out by name—yet they get to keep their identities. What’s even the purpose of having names at all if you can't use them to identify who people actually are? It just seems a bit nonsensical, I guess.

Honestly, I think it would be pretty helpful if, when someone drops a comment like mine during a debate, the moderators actually stepped in to broaden the conversation. It’d be nice if they jumped in to facilitate things—just to gauge whether a person is actually pushing hate speech or if they're just talking casually about something completely mundane that happens to sound a bit edgy. Just to add some perspective, I guess.
Maybe it’s worth actually checking this out—since it feels like this sub is mostly just populated by grease monkeys and locksmiths anyway—just to see how much we can actually put into words, or if we even have the capacity to express ourselves properly. 🙂

Look, even us illiterate types are allowed to hang around this forum, so I guess people should probably show us some respect—flaws and all—before jumping to conclusions or accusing us of things we don't even have the slightest clue what they mean.😉

It’s honestly kind of wild to just throw around hate speech accusations like that. In the real world—you know, how things actually work out here in the States—we’d probably both be standing in front of a judge right about now, and I’m pretty sure the settlement would be massive, with all that money landing right in my pocket. And honestly? I wouldn't even mind the satisfaction of winning.

I work in human rights protection—or at least, that’s the field I’m in. And because of that, I feel like I have the right to speak my mind and be blunt about what Americans and Mexicans and even Native Americans have turned into.

Whispering, gaslighting, and this constant effort to redefine reality—trying to convince us that Black isn't Black or White isn't White, or that intelligence is somehow being downgraded while we’re all just collectively labeled as autistic—it’s all led to this. I guess it’s worked, too. People are genuinely terrified to speak up about anything anymore, whether they're calling out an individual or a whole group. It’s created this atmosphere where everyone is just too scared to bite back.
Just listen to what that Australian Prime Minister was saying the other day. Honestly, you could probably charge her with hate speech if you tried.

If you want this diaspora subforum to be some kind of customer service desk for newbies—or just a place to endlessly debate the best way to make cabbage rolls—then maybe you should actually put that in the rules.
What I really want—and maybe this is just wishful thinking—is to be able to talk about whatever I feel like without feeling judged. Like, if I want to geek out over a recipe for homemade cabbage rolls, I should be able to find someone to nerd out with. Or if I want to vent about the daily political circus, great. I just want to have actual conversations about anything and everything, provided there’s someone actually willing to listen. But honestly? Around here, even bringing up a national referendum feels like walking into a minefield. It’s such a taboo subject that people won't even touch it—they’ve even gone so far as to draw these weird parallels with Canada just to avoid the real conversation.
You guys titled this thread "Socializing," which is fine, I guess—but people actually socialize by talking. If we’re going to do this properly, maybe you should just post a list of approved topics that we're allowed to discuss while we're hanging out, like:

I guess I'm just going to leave this here—sarma.
So, I was just wondering—does anyone actually know where to find some decent mortadella around here? I feel like every time I hit up a grocery store, it’s either overpriced deli meat that tastes like nothing or something that’s been sitting under a heat lamp way too long. I'm looking for the real deal, not that processed stuff you find at a gas station. Any leads?
Where can I find a shop that actually sells irons?
How many miles is it to Red Deer?
I wonder if we’re actually looking at some snow tonight... I guess we'll just have to wait and see, though my gut says probably not.
And what exactly is that white stuff sitting there in the middle of the green hills? I mean, I guess it’s just one of those things you see and wonder about—maybe it's just frost, or maybe it's something else entirely. It's hard to say, really.

There you have it. Once everything finally falls into place like this, it’ll all be crystal clear. I’m not going to lose my cool, and you aren't going to lose yours either—no drama here. We won't give a damn about any referendum regarding Native Americans, and as for hate speech? Well, maybe we can just redirect all that energy toward criticizing the quality of mortadella instead. 🙂

Grace Diaz76 said:If we’re following the Google logic, we might as well just shut down this entire diaspora forum—I mean, you can find pretty much everything online through a quick search anyway.

I guess it makes you wonder what people actually want from a community like this. If every single bit of info is sitting right there on Google, then what's the point?
I suppose there isn't much left to talk about, unless you view the old-timers basically acting as a sort of concierge service for the newcomers.

brightpuma said:Great.

Maybe you should take that advice over to the Law subforum... 🤷 tell them all their info is basically just sitting there on Google anyway... 🙄

What are you even talking about in a thread about moderating the diaspora?!

I mean, seriously, just go tell Sam yourself. Why are you dragging me into this? In case you haven't quite grasped the situation—if people just want raw information, they have Google. If they actually want to talk about things, they have this forum. But I guess you're just not interested in actual discussion. That seems to be the issue here.
And yeah. If you don't have anything specific or useful to say about the diaspora, maybe just leave me out of it.

brightpuma said:, which is basically the only subforum that actually functions close to what the Emigration section ought to be—you know, an actual source for reliable, useful info. Not to mention the endless stream of threads filled with mindless questions or people jumping into existing topics just to ask stuff like, "Hey, what are the odds someone with XXX background gets hired at this specific place?"...

If you’re looking for a source of "accurate and useful information"—if that’s really how you view things—then I guess you don't even need a subforum. You could just use a curated list of links or just hit up Google.

People aren't machines, after all. A forum is meant to be a place for exchanging ideas and having discussions. Even if those questions seem incredibly stupid sometimes—which they do—people are different. Some are smart, some are clueless, some can write, others can barely string a sentence together... it's just how it is.

The moderator is probably a decent, intelligent person. I'd bet she's trying her best and acting in good faith. But, look, moderating isn't just about the technical side of running a forum. If you focus too much on that, you might end up with a perfectly organized structure but absolutely zero substance left inside. Just something to think about. I'm certainly not the only one who's noticed that something is fundamentally off here.
And, honestly, if people start losing their cool and go on the offensive—like I did, just lashing out at everyone in sight—a good leader should have ways to steer the conversation back on track and de-escalate the tension.
I mean, I truly believe the moderator is a good person, but maybe she just isn't a very good moderator.

So, hey everyone,

I wanted to take a second to talk about the moderation over in the Diaspora subforum. To be fair, I haven't been super active there—I’ve mostly just been lurking and reading rather than actually posting. Which brings me to my point about the moderation.

I’ve always assumed that a moderator's job was to guide discussions and actually participate in them in a way that builds something up. Apparently, that’s not how things work here. The moderator there seems to participate almost exclusively in the role of a beat cop. Her version of "moderating" basically boils down to constant warnings and penalties, stuff like:

Keep the chat civil, please!
If you don't stop this, I'm going to issue a ban.
Last warning!
This isn't the place to discuss this topic.
This isn't the spot for technical questions.
This isn't the thread for debating the referendum.
This isn't the place to voice opinions on ethnic groups, and so on...

In the thread titled "What annoys you about the country you live in," someone mentioned being annoyed by cheese culture, and she responded with this condescending attitude. She didn't engage in any constructive conversation; she just shut it down with a vibe of, "Ugh, what are you even talking about? How could that possibly bother you? You clearly have no clue about this or that specific culture."

My overall impression is that the atmosphere in that subforum feels a bit like living under a regime. Every joke, every bit of sarcasm, even the little mistakes we all make as humans—like generalizing things—is strictly punished. Everything has to be phrased with surgical precision, as if you're writing a PhD dissertation instead of just posting on an internet forum. The penalties follow instantly; there's this rigid stiffness where every single word is scrutinized.

The moderator gives off this impression of being incredibly stiff, just trying to drill discipline into people through constant warnings or bans. There's no room for nuance or actual discussion. When people were talking about trivial stuff, like who prefers which brand of coffee, it was fine. She let people run wild, almost like she was letting kids play in a sandbox. But the second a differing opinion comes up, she wipes it out and shuts down any further conversation.

I actually got a warning myself because of the language I used. It's true, it wasn't appropriate, but it's also true that sometimes you have to speak to people in a way they actually understand. But hey, that's fine. I'm not complaining about that. What bothers me is the whole Inquisition vibe—the systematic punishments, the constant warnings, the climate of fear, and her total dictatorship.

I don't know. If other members feel the same way, maybe something might change. If not, oh well. I just wanted to voice my thoughts as a member—someone who would love to write about life in the diaspora while respecting the rules, but without the dictatorship of a moderator who treats her role like she's a prison warden, a judge, and an executioner all rolled into one.

Thanks for reading.

ironmarlin1 said:That's a fair point, certainly, but I think the flip side is just as fascinating to observe. Have you noticed how easily someone can commit a theft, perpetrate a fraud, or exploit another person entirely, yet somehow manage to walk away still convinced they are a fundamentally good person? It's quite a psychological feat, really.

True. But I guess that’s just psychology at work.

Mark Torres14 said:Since you brought up Brecht, I have to drop his next poem on you:

Questioning Goodness

Step forward; we have heard
That you are a good man.
You cannot be bribed, nor can the lightning
That strikes a house—that too
Cannot be bribed.
You stick to what you said.
But what was it you actually said?
You are honest, you say your piece.
Which piece?
You are brave.
Against whom?
You are wise.
For whom?
You don't care about your own gain.
Whose gain, then, do you care about?
You are a good friend.
Are you also a good friend to good people?

Listen to us; we know
That you are our enemy. So we will
Put you against the wall now. But considering your
Merits and virtues
We will put you against a good wall and shoot you
With a good bullet from a good gun and bury you
With a good shovel in good soil.

Bertolt Brecht – from Slavoj Žižek’s book – on violence "can a man

Can a person truly be good, or is everything just a matter of measuring different levels of corruption?

First off, you've gotta define what "good" even means.

Mark Torres14 said:That's a really interesting point. But why is she more satisfied?
Ever notice how you get this little rush of satisfaction when you finally pay off a bill, settle a debt, or give someone a gift and they actually appreciate it? Why does that happen?
A total Scoundrel would just feel miserable having to part with anything.
Reminds me of that old saying, "Give a hand to a friend."😁

It’s because we only really prove our own existence through the eyes of others—I guess that's just how it works. We rely on everyone else to give some kind of meaning to our lives, or maybe we just need them to make us feel like we actually exist.🙂

Could you please change my name to Vivian? Thanks in advance.

I can't do that. It's already taken by:

Mark Torres14 said:Almost everything living out there is specialized in some way. Elephants have trunks, eagles have sharp vision, storks have specific beaks... you get the idea. Humans aren't specialized for anything. So, isn't specialization actually just a retreat back to being animals?🤷

Then how did that essence lead to the division of labor, specialization, and civilization? I probably haven't quite grasped your definition of specialization, which is why we're talking past each other.

Hope that clears things up.🙂
As Nietzsche writes in Thus Spoke Zarathustra:

"We have invented happiness," say the last men, and they blink their eyes... From time to time a little poison: that makes for pleasant dreams. And at last, a lot of poison, so that dying is easy. There is still work to do, for work is play. But watch out that you don't wear yourself out from all the playing.

Sure. But I’m talking about physical specialization—if that even makes sense (just thinking out loud here). And it gets me wondering: Is the human mind itself our version of specialization?

Is the evolution of the mind basically the price we pay for lacking that physical specialization?
Is developing a complex mind what actually prevents us from ever returning to an animal state?

And finally—does that inability to go back to being "animal" force us to stare directly into the abyss?😁

Mark Torres14 said:I see it differently.
Human beings are built for freedom. We know there are endless paths open to us at any given moment. But every time you hesitate or stall, you shrink that freedom and trap your own consciousness. Eventually, your narrow interests become your entire identity, and you start seeing yourself only through that lens.
Just look at how many people define themselves solely by their job or a single obsession. Anything outside of that feels like a distraction to them.
That leads right back to hyper-specialization—which is really just a regression to primal, animalistic behavior.
The whole point of being human is staying unspecialized and keeping the ability to pivot in a thousand different directions. But that’s also the fatal flaw. By spreading our freedom too thin, we end up losing our sense of self and our inner core.

That’s a great way to put it. Still, I’m a little confused here. If the essence of humanity is found in non-specialization and having all those paths open to us, why do you think that leads to losing one's personality or intimacy?

Isn't it actually the opposite—that we preserve our personality precisely because it remains untouched by the narrow constraints and influence of specialization?

Mark Torres14 said:It’s simple.

I can believe in God without needing to wrap my head around Him. He’s who I respect, who I love, and who I lean on when things get rough. Faith gives my life purpose.
Philosophy, at its core, is just humans trying to make sense of the world. In that context, God stops being an object of my devotion and becomes an object of my intellect. A "philosophical God" is the version of God that a philosopher tries to logically figure out.

So, you mean they're just trying to grasp the concept of God?

...since you did say, "if such a thing even exists"...
I guess if we're going by that logic, then we're really just talking about an idea.😕

But anyway, what was the actual point of this thread again?😁

Mark Torres14 said:It’s simple.

I can believe in God without needing to wrap my head around Him. He’s who I respect, who I love, and who I lean on when things get rough. Faith gives my life purpose.
Philosophy, at its core, is just humans trying to make sense of the world. In that context, God stops being an object of my devotion and becomes an object of my intellect. A "philosophical God" is the version of God that a philosopher tries to logically figure out.

So, what, one God, but two different types of people? Philosophers versus everyone else?

The ones who don't think and the ones who do?😁