Look, I’m not questioning their skills, but when you're in the middle of these high-stakes, heavy-duty surgeries, it really comes down to how much muscle memory and routine they have under pressure.
Is there any way at all to get his father transferred to Washington, D.C.? Or even just send the test results over to Professor Alexandra Milenović, the head of Neurosurgery at the Mayo Clinic? If she gives the green light, then we know it’s actually doable. I don't want to feed you guys false hope, but you've gotta exhaust every single option. Honestly, as far as surgeons go, I don't know if anyone else tops that crew. They're basically wizards.
Which hospital are we talking about exactly? And what’s their track record like—do those doctors actually have much experience handling the heavy-duty, high-stakes cases?
No, that’s just not how it works. None of the oncologists I know—and trust me, I know a lot of them—would ever just write off a patient like that. They’d fight for every possible option, and in this specific case, there really is a legitimate chance for things to turn around. The plan is to use radiation to shrink the tumor and dial back the pain, which then gives the surgical team a much clearer path forward. It’s not just about cutting out the cancer, either; they’ll be working on tissue reconstruction too, all to make sure the patient can actually get back to a decent quality of life.
Neck dissection combined with radiation should handle the issue, so there's really no need to panic. My dad is going to need physical therapy afterward; the neck area is just so packed with veins and nerves that any kind of surgery carries real risks. You've got the Vagus nerve—the twelfth cranial nerve—which is responsible for things like heart rate, lung function, and digestion. Then there's the accessory nerve, which controls the sternocleidomastoid and trapezius muscles; if that gets cut, even lifting your arm above your head can become difficult or impossible. Plus, you have the branches of the facial nerve managing your facial muscles and all that. The actual risks and fallout from a procedure like this depend entirely on how much nerve function is affected; a dropped shoulder is what happens if the accessory nerve is hit, while hoarseness or trouble swallowing comes from Vagus damage. An injured facial nerve might lead to issues with opening your mouth, for example. I’m laying all this out beforehand just to emphasize that, based on my own experience, none of this is insurmountable, even though these are definitely unwanted complications. The bottom line is staying alive, and that only happens if the cancer is completely wiped out using every tool available. Whatever the doctors tell you, listen to them.
Mine was about four by five by one centimeter—just enough for them to classify it as Stage III, whether the lymph nodes were involved or not. But looking back at what I read on another thread, it seems there’s metastasis in the neck too. That’s definitely not a great sign, though we aren't talking about Stage IV yet. Usually, once you hit distant metastasis, it means the lungs have been hit first—it's the shortest path for the cancer to travel—and then it spreads to other organs. That’s the final, most terminal stage. But until that happens, you fight. You do absolutely everything in your power to give the patient a fighting chance. Between radiation and surgery, this is far from a lost cause. We all have to stay hopeful and believe in a recovery.
Radiation therapy works wonders for oral cancers, so it’s pretty much the standard go-to move here. I’m still trying to wrap my head around whether this tumor is actually way bigger than those two centimeters they mentioned, or if it’s just sitting right on top of those critical nerves—either way, radiation should definitely help shrink it down. The big win here is tissue preservation, which I assume is exactly what the surgeons are aiming for. If they can manage to save the swallowing reflex, the patient’s quality of life is going to be night and day better. But there's that dark cloud I was worrying about earlier—those nerves at the base of the tongue that control swallowing. If the surgeon has to cut through them to get the tumor out, the patient could end up needing a nasogastric tube for the rest of their life.
Look, I’m sorry, but that is absolutely no reason to throw in the towel. Things are going to get a little more complicated than you were probably expecting, sure, but modern medicine is incredible—we successfully treat so many different types of cancer these days, so please, don't lose hope. Honestly, a huge part of this comes down to your mindset; it's all about how you handle things mentally. That matters immensely. Both the patient and everyone supporting them need to be acting as engines of optimism and positivity, rather than just feeding into the fear and doubt. Negative thoughts and stress? They aren't helping anyone here. It might actually be a good idea to sit down with a psychologist, just to help everyone process everything and get a better handle on self-control. Most major hospitals, like the Mayo Clinic, usually offer these services to patients, but families need psychological support too. You can always seek a second opinion, just don't forget that time is such a critical factor. This surgery needs to happen as soon as possible.
I'm doing okay, thanks for asking. My tongue cancer was Stage III, but thankfully they caught it in time and operated. They had to reconstruct the tissue using a graft from my arm, and they performed a neck dissection too. Honestly? I felt like I’d been carved up.
The aftermath was... a lot. I basically had to relearn how to swallow, eat, and even speak again. My left shoulder ended up sitting lower than the right, and my back is pretty crooked now. You can fix most of that with physical therapy, but man, it takes a massive amount of time. Still, I'm alive, and at the end of the day, that’s the only thing that matters. Oral cancers are terrifying—they spread fast, they hurt like hell, and they're incredibly disfiguring. There's also a high recurrence rate, so you really have to listen to your doctors, eat clean, and totally overhaul your lifestyle. Alcohol and smoking? Absolutely out of the question for me now.
A nasogastric tube goes in through the nose—that’s how they fed me, at least during the beginning. By the second day, I was already managing to feed myself. But that tube in the neck? That's unavoidable when your mouth is swollen shut and you can't catch your breath. Honestly, it's a brutal, painful procedure. It might just be the single worst thing an oncology patient has to endure. There are thousands upon thousands of nerve endings in your mouth, and the tongue is such an incredibly sensitive organ. That’s why it hurts so much. And those tubes and probes don't actually make things better; they just irritate the trachea and esophagus constantly. You struggle to breathe, you struggle to swallow, and you end up choking on your own blood and the mucus that keeps sliding down your throat. The nurses have this special suction device they use to clear everything out when they notice you aren't getting enough air, but even then, it's just a temporary fix. This misery is going to last for days, but little by little, it starts to become more bearable. The key is for the patient to mentally prepare for it—to gear up with courage and positive energy. And above all, patience. You have to tell them straight up: it’s hell. But it’s a hell that doesn't last forever, and it's one they can and must get through. They need to keep telling themselves, "Tomorrow is a new day, tomorrow will be easier." And it will be, step by step. You have to believe, and you have to fight.
The doctors over at the Mayo Clinic told me that most tumors are actually caught just through a standard visual and physical exam of the oral cavity and neck area. They’ll definitely send my dad in for more intensive testing—that's non-negotiable if you want any kind of diagnostic precision before surgery—but what’s written here is likely accurate. As long as the cancer is still in situ, the prognosis looks pretty good. Things start getting dicey once it spreads to the neck; that's automatically considered stage three. I'm assuming they can cut it out surgically, though he'll probably need some reconstruction work, and they'll likely prescribe adjuvant radiation therapy too.
From what I can gather, the tumor is in stage two, which means it’s about two centimeters big. It hasn't spread to the lymph nodes and there aren't any distant metastases either. You can find all the details on diagnostic stages and grading here, though I've known them for a while now. Honestly? I'd say the prognosis looks relatively good. The only real downside is the location—the base of the tongue. That's never ideal because it starts making you question your swallowing reflex. But look, the surgeons will be able to walk you through the specific procedures much more accurately than I can; at the end of the day, I'm just a patient.
Jonathan Wright2 said:Look, Miller was just a link... I don't actually take him seriously, but at the time I was listening to what he had to say, so I used him in the intro... Not that lonetrucker4 is going to hunt me down asking where I got all this info—I mean, a person can't just pull these things out of thin air without some kind of source, right? Basically, you aren't allowed to have an opinion or think for yourself—you just have to follow the script. That’s the absolute worst thing about lonetrucker4. He just kills any actual discourse.
I don't get it... Am I not allowed to criticize or question the previous regime?
I tried to follow your logic there, but I think you totally lost the plot. You typed out a massive wall of text—and hey, thanks for the effort, really—but the point is: am I not allowed to doubt the official narrative? Am I supposed to just accept whatever is said and written as gospel?
Do you even realize this is a forum...? A forum has a definition. One of those definitions is having opposing views... Disagreement is the literal backbone of a forum. I try to be brutally level-headed. Look, I support the WWII era stuff, but I also understand there's plenty to criticize within it...
I totally hear you, and honestly, thanks for keeping it real. Of course the threads I start have holes in them and missing pieces. No doubt about it... But that’s literally why we’re all here—to hash things out and debate... Except then lonetrucker4 rolls in and shuts the whole thing down, and boom, end of story. If a topic doesn't sit right with him, then it basically shouldn't exist at all.
On the flip side, though, how do you not see what's happening...? Sure, back lonetrucker4 up, he’s a great forum regular, but how can you miss the serious issue with his moderation when it’s actively killing the whole purpose of this place...?!
That’s not what I said. You kept doubling down on the whole "criticism" thing, and since you clearly value being a critic, let me clarify my point. Real critical thinking means actually digging through the available literature, noting the discrepancies, and then presenting an opposing view based on hard facts and evidence. But here’s the thing—both lonetrucker4 and several others pointed you toward books you haven't even cracked open. You didn't seem aware that tons of historians have done deep dives into the Battle of Sutjeska, much like they’ve studied the Ottoman expansion into Europe or the victims of old-school intelligence agencies. Instead, you just flat-out declared everything was garbage and demanded we start from scratch. Do you see the difference between your approach and actual methodology? Science has protocols; you can't just waltz in and spout nonsense. Did you study existing research? No. Did you build an actual argument? No. Instead, you just jumped straight to a conclusion. A conclusion that, as it turns out, was wrong. So, maybe don't act surprised when people call you out on it.
If I actually asked you to define what those "nonsense" topics were, you wouldn't have an answer. And honestly, I’m not even expecting one from you... But please, just try to grasp the fundamental essence of history. It’s a constant search. People think it’s some dead, dusty subject, but it isn't—it’s a living, breathing organism. Try drawing your own conclusions from what you read—compare things, subtract, add, ask questions, be skeptical, or choose to believe... Just don't lean on history as if it's some unchangeable, dogmatic fact. It's a marathon discipline, not a sprint.
I can't live without reading... And as far as lonetrucker4 goes, my intentions are good. I'm just pointing out when he oversteps... nothing more. Plenty of guys have left because of it. Lots of people disagree with me, and that's totally fine. But plenty of people disagree with lonetrucker4 too... Isn't it fair and decent to just be honest about it?
Now, this version of history that dances on the edge of science? I consider that a completely different category altogether, but I get that my views don't sit well with you, which is legitimate and I've got nothing to argue against... You're entitled to your opinion...
You’ve clearly got a way with words... Why don't you try your hand at poetry or something? Look, I'm just trying to have a conversation here, but the mods won't tolerate any communication that doesn't perfectly align with their own narrow little preferences.
This isn't some personal vendetta between me and lonetrucker4. The real issue is the fundamental nature of this online space. Who actually gets to decide how this platform is used? Is it me? Is it him? Or is it all of us?
We are heading down a seriously bad path.
If I post something that clashes with what everyone else thinks, why should it be deleted? Why should I get slapped with a penalty? Honestly, if my logic is weak or my argument is shaky, then let the other users tear it apart. That's how it works. We don't need some self-appointed censor deciding what can be said and how it should be phrased... It's just nonsense...
We need more freedom... You feel me?! More people, more activity, more liberty.... Just let people speak their minds... That’s the whole damn point of a forum.
Oh, I definitely could. You kicked off that whole thread about the Ottoman Empire based on some guy's amateur lectures—and I use the word "lectures" very loosely. Then you spent half the time spouting absolute garbage regarding Turkish and European military history. Sure, you started that discussion on the Battle of Sutjeska with some potential, but then you spiraled into these wild theories that the old regime completely rewrote history, implying we need to scrap everything and start from scratch. And don't even get me started on your take regarding the execution of prisoners. You used that pathetic, over-dramatic rhetoric straight out of a cheap political manifesto: "How shall we confront this national trauma? How can we unite a fractured society?" It was honestly nauseating. If you had to deliver a weather report using that style, it would go something like this: "Heat! How has it overtaken America? Are we, as a society and as individuals, truly prepared for its arrival? Are we responsible? Have we come to terms with our current state? Is it enough to simply wade into the shallows and grab a beer, or do we require more long-term measures? Are we dedicating sufficient attention to the heatwave in our media and public discourse? Is the intellectual elite even engaging with this? Where is the line between mere warmth and a debilitating heatstroke, and will temperatures ever return to their former lows? Can we think with cool heads? How will future generations look back upon this moment, and can such a thing happen to us again?"
Look, it’s not personal. I have nothing against you, you don't bother me, and I’m certainly not telling you to leave. But seriously, ask yourself if the way you communicate is actually appropriate for a scholarly forum. I’m not saying things have to be dry and mind-numbing—not at all—but you just haven't done the legwork. Not once. Every single topic you touch is just a disorganized mess of half-baked ideas, and you can't make progress like that. All you end up doing is cheapening whatever intelligent points you actually manage to make.
John Palmer9 said:Whether there are quotation marks or not, I guess I won't bother commenting on whatever lonetrucker4 wrote.
I guess there are clones everywhere if you look hard enough, especially with people claiming that kiseli1 and bluecyclist64 are just extensions of the moderator lonetrucker4. Maybe you’re a clone too, for all I know, but I’d at least like to know if I'm actually debating a clone.
I'll stick to the forum rules, obviously, though I suppose that doesn't really stop me from having my own opinions.
Look, when I first showed up here back in early 2003, I was going by Stitch. So, by that logic, yeah—I'm a clone. But everyone knows that. I don't use my old retired handle anymore. I switched it after I took a break from the site, and ever since I came back in 2009, I've been posting consistently as Eric Newman75.
As for this whole "clone" theory? It's total nonsense. All three of these users have their own distinct way of talking and their own specific style. You can't just flip a switch and mimic someone else's voice perfectly. You'd have to try pretty hard to pull that off, and even then, it wouldn't look quite right.
John Palmer9 said:I guess you don't necessarily have to be some hardcore ideological Stalinist to try and push someone around like that, though. Maybe you should just ask him why he’s even trying to force the issue in the first place.
I've actually got lonetrucker4 on ignore, so I'm trying not to dwell on his posts or comments, though I suppose I did end up reacting to one of them once. I guess a moderator should probably just stick to moderating, rather than trying to jump into the discussions and arguments like any other regular member.
The whole thing about Jasenovac isn't even the real issue here. The stance taken on this forum—that any calls for excavations at those sites amount to historical revisionism—is something we're expected to respect since the site admins set the rules, even if I think that logic is completely misguided. From a professional historiographical standpoint, and even from the perspective of a liberal democracy, it just feels like a total miss to me, I guess. It’s not really about the massive expenses, I guess.... Even if they don't turn up anything substantial, I guess that might just be proof that the official victim count from the DOJ isn't actually accurate.The idea that we aren't digging because finding nothing might prove the federal registry is wrong is exactly the kind of thing historical revisionists live for, I guess. I guess the best way to push back against historical revisionism might just be to flood the zone with as many actual facts and details as possible, even the ones that seem pretty trivial. I guess it’s just like digging, if you think about it that way.
Technically, you can't actually put a moderator on "ignore." So, what are you saying here—that we're looking at a case of self-censorship?
John Palmer9 said:I guess you don't necessarily have to be some hardcore ideological Stalinist to try and push someone around like that, though. Maybe you should just ask him why he’s even trying to force the issue in the first place.
I've actually got lonetrucker4 on ignore, so I'm trying not to dwell on his posts or comments, though I suppose I did end up reacting to one of them once. I guess a moderator should probably just stick to moderating, rather than trying to jump into the discussions and arguments like any other regular member.
The whole thing about Jasenovac isn't even the real issue here. The stance taken on this forum—that any calls for excavations at those sites amount to historical revisionism—is something we're expected to respect since the site admins set the rules, even if I think that logic is completely misguided. From a professional historiographical standpoint, and even from the perspective of a liberal democracy, it just feels like a total miss to me, I guess. It’s not really about the massive expenses, I guess.... Even if they don't turn up anything substantial, I guess that might just be proof that the official victim count from the DOJ isn't actually accurate.The idea that we aren't digging because finding nothing might prove the federal registry is wrong is exactly the kind of thing historical revisionists live for, I guess. I guess the best way to push back against historical revisionism might just be to flood the zone with as many actual facts and details as possible, even the ones that seem pretty trivial. I guess it’s just like digging, if you think about it that way.
Total nonsense. Back in the day, someone like Dilecto Filio used to run around with two different handles—one for moderating and one for regular posting—and it was pretty similar to how Nitko Drugi handled things over at the Philosophy forums. But let’s be real: nobody actually follows that practice anymore. Not here, not on any other major US message board for that matter. It’s just not efficient, it isn't smart, and there's zero payoff. Especially when you consider that a massive site like Reddit or something similar would have hundreds of mods and admins on staff. Instead of creating the clarity you're aiming for, all you'd end up doing is making everything a confusing mess.
Just because you keep shouting some half-baked, ridiculous idea doesn't mean it suddenly starts sounding smart. It just makes you sound like a broken record.
John Palmer9 said:I guess you don't necessarily have to be some hardcore ideological Stalinist to try and push someone around like that, though. Maybe you should just ask him why he’s even trying to force the issue in the first place.
I've actually got lonetrucker4 on ignore, so I'm trying not to dwell on his posts or comments, though I suppose I did end up reacting to one of them once. I guess a moderator should probably just stick to moderating, rather than trying to jump into the discussions and arguments like any other regular member.
The whole thing about Jasenovac isn't even the real issue here. The stance taken on this forum—that any calls for excavations at those sites amount to historical revisionism—is something we're expected to respect since the site admins set the rules, even if I think that logic is completely misguided. From a professional historiographical standpoint, and even from the perspective of a liberal democracy, it just feels like a total miss to me, I guess. It’s not really about the massive expenses, I guess.... Even if they don't turn up anything substantial, I guess that might just be proof that the official victim count from the DOJ isn't actually accurate.The idea that we aren't digging because finding nothing might prove the federal registry is wrong is exactly the kind of thing historical revisionists live for, I guess. I guess the best way to push back against historical revisionism might just be to flood the zone with as many actual facts and details as possible, even the ones that seem pretty trivial. I guess it’s just like digging, if you think about it that way.
That’s your take, I guess. To me? It just feels completely pointless. So, what now?
Jonathan Wright2 said:lonetrucker4 is totally laying it on thick... He's totally overreacting. Things are seriously hitting the breaking point. It’s all going off the rails. That’s exactly the point right there. You might be totally fine with whatever personal ideological baggage you're dragging around—and hey, that's your business—but let's be real for a second: it’s still not right. It just isn't okay. Look, this whole "fascist vs. anti-fascist" debate is honestly just a side show at this point... it’s practically irrelevant. It’s not even a real thing here, which is a massive joke for a site like Reddit—it's a huge flaw in how this community functions. Honestly, the mods here have such massive egos that they basically turn the whole platform into their own little playground, manipulating the entire conversation just to make themselves feel important. It’s pathetic, really.
It’s not just me... My coworkers are out here getting written up and handed disciplinary warnings just because lonetrucker4 thinks that’s how things should be run—it’s absolute madness, honestly. There aren't any actual criteria here—it’s just whatever fits his mood or whatever he feels like saying at the moment. It’s totally arbitrary. You’re putting way too much faith in lonetrucker4’s "objectivity"—honestly, it’s a little scary—so I’m calling you out here. You need to start digging deeper into the history side of things and actually start throwing some of your own damn opinions into the mix. Trust me, once you start showing some actual teeth, that’s exactly when lonetrucker4 is going to jump out from behind a bush and try to bully you for it. Maybe try actually pulling your weight first before you start handing out life lessons to everyone else... seriously.
Are you kidding me right now? Seriously, what on earth are you even talking about?! Look, let’s call this what it actually is—forced censorship. We're being told exactly who gets to speak, how they're supposed to sound, and how everything needs to be polished up until it looks all neat and tidy for the powers that be. It’s just a way to control the narrative by smoothing out any edges that don't fit their perfect little mold. lonetrucker4 has basically turned into some kind of high-level editor-in-chief—it’s like he’s been given this absolute power to scrub through every single text and reshape them until they fit his own specific ideological mold. It's honestly ridiculous—he just tweaks everything to match that particular worldview he’s been clinging to for years, all because he’s too sentimental about his own past experiences to see anything else. Just pure, unfiltered bias at this point.
Honestly, lonetrucker4 is an absolute legend on this board—super dialed in, always around, and just constantly keeping things moving... I'm definitely backing him as a fellow member. Look, I’m telling you, the guy went way too far with that moderator thing... like, seriously, he totally crossed the line there.
What really gets under my skin—and honestly, what keeps me up at night—is how the administration still hasn't even begun to wrap their heads around the absolute train wreck we're looking at. It’s like they’re staring right at the wreckage and still acting like everything is totally fine. You'd think after all this time, the sheer scale of the disaster would have finally clicked for them, but nope. Still zero results, zero accountability, just total denial. It’s infuriating, man. Honestly, this whole site has just devolved into a playground for a handful of people who all think exactly the same way. It’s like a giant echo chamber at this point—just a small circle of clones repeating the same tired talking points over and over again. The whole damn point of this forum—the entire reason we even bother showing up to debate and dig into historical research together—has been completely trashed. It used to be a place where people could actually get together, toss out their theories, and start new threads just to expand what we know about history, but now? That vibe is totally dead. Gone. Everything that made this a community for actual study and deep dives has been nuked. lonetrucker4 basically boils all of history down to what’s "allowed" and what isn't. It’s such a narrow way to look at things.
Honestly, Reddit has been pushed to the absolute brink of being completely useless lately...
And yeah, obviously, I’m bummed about how things are going. But look, I really want to shift the focus here—this whole platform is falling apart because of this incredibly ego-driven, selfish style of moderation... People are jumping ship left and right, and frankly, nobody seems to give a damn.
But whatever... I guess that's just how it's gonna be. I'll take my share of the blame, though—I'm a responsible user, after all.
Give me a break. Seriously. I was posting in History back when you didn't even know what a computer was, let alone how to get online. I am perfectly aware of the rules—rules that you constantly break by obsessing over absolute nonsense. Try reading an actual book instead of jumping at every single thread where lonetrucker4 is mentioned. You do exactly that, which is easy enough to verify if anyone bothers to check the moderator logs. To you, Egyptian pyramids or Atlantis aren't science or facts; they're just some pub debate about "what if." And the second someone calls you out—or when lonetrucker4 hands you a ban—you start whining and crying like your life is falling apart. Why don't you take all that energy you waste on writing these endless, tear-soaked manifestos and fake polls and spend it studying the stuff you claim to be an expert on? Is that too hard? Yeah, probably. It's much easier to just pick fights for no reason.
John Palmer9 said:😲 I don't recall ever being flagged for ideological reasons.
The issue with lonetrucker4 is that his enforcement feels pretty inconsistent; for instance, he'll hand out a warning to one user saying "we aren't interested in your emotional outbursts," yet then a hundred posts go by filled with nothing but pure emotion—including several of his own emotional rants—without anyone saying a word.
If I take something from a professional historian's book—and I'd include the source too—and then I post a link to it, apparently that's a problem? For example, there's this site, maybe something like Britannica or a major university archive, that I like to use, and almost every single entry explicitly states, "this was published by this specific historian in this particular book." It was recently the anniversary of some famous historical figure's birth, and while some historians celebrate him, others label him a criminal, listing specific names of victims, so I thought posting that here for a discussion would be fine... at least under this moderation, right?
Wait, haven't you mentioned lonetrucker4’s "Stalinism" in your appeals several times now? You keep whining about how "liberal thinking"—whatever that means—is being suppressed and how people are being chased off the forum. What is that if not an ideological clash? Or maybe just a disagreement over how to interpret the will of God?
If the fallout from events like the Lincoln Assassination era is the bone of contention—and let's be real, it is—then why do you keep spinning this same tired narrative in circles? There are historical studies, there are fairly accurate figures, and there is a clear consensus regarding the policies enacted by the regime back then. Do you honestly think your "liberal thinking" is going to make those policies any less genocidal, criminal, or shameful? Think it'll make that dark chapter any less catastrophic for Americans? What's the point of all this digging? Are you trying to argue that the death toll wasn't 130,000, but actually just 129,000? How does that change anything? Even if it were only a thousand, that regime would still have been a total disgrace, and those traitors would still be viewed as having sold out the American people and our national interests.
Look, we don't need to push lonetrucker4 out. Sure, he’s got his flaws, but he moderates with a level of consistency and fairness that’s basically the gold standard for what a mod should be. He laid down the law from day one: he isn't going to sit there and let anyone try to play down Nazi or Fascist atrocities. If certain people can't wrap their heads around the fact that we aren't talking about "creative interpretations" but actual, documented historical horrors—even after being told a thousand times—well, that's on them. Then you've got Jonathan Wright2, who seems to think History is just some playground for endless, empty theorizing. Sadly, he’s not the only one. And John Palmer9? He’d rather scrape content from sketchy fringe websites than actually do the work of citing a real book. Neither of them is getting flagged because of some "ideological vendetta," which is how they love to spin it; they're getting flagged because they’re missing the entire point. This is a scientific subforum. The focus is on actual knowledge and verifiable facts. If people want to prioritize entertainment or political grandstanding, they really ought to find somewhere else to hang out.
They’ll probably suggest adjuvant chemotherapy, but honestly, this is one of those cancers that’s actually among the most manageable ones out there—it carries a really solid prognosis. And please, don't bother with that THC oil nonsense; that's just stuff people believe when they're being naive.
John Palmer9 said:I don't really hang out on other message boards, but if things keep going this way, this place is going to tank. Besides, everyone's migrating to Facebook anyway.
So, you're just talking out of turn, then. Clearly, you aren't caught up on the actual facts here. This forum is basically dying as we speak, so it’s pretty irrelevant to worry about what happens if things "continue this way." And even if it weren't shutting down, there's nothing wrong with the alleged "decline"—having moderators participate in discussions just like everyone else doesn't violate any internet etiquette. In fact, having mods post regularly alongside the users is standard practice everywhere.