What are your thoughts on Deedy's moderation at the CIA?

Hey, fellow CIA members, I wanted to open this thread so you can all weigh in on Deedy...
I'm looking for your honest thoughts and experiences with him, whether they're good or bad.
Thanks in advance!

I'll kick things off.
The thing is, Deedy’s whole attitude and the way he handles moderation just doesn't mesh with the vibe or the banter we have here at the CIA, and honestly, that’s exactly why everything is blowing up right now. This tension has been simmering under the surface for ages, but now it's finally boiling over. In a group like ours, guys joke around constantly—that's just how it works—and nobody holds actual grudges, but Deedy is different because you can't even poke fun at him without him nuking your post... and if you actually manage to annoy him, he comes after you personally, which is exactly what we're seeing play out today. He’ll delete your posts for the tiniest, most insignificant reasons, even clearing out flagged stuff just to make it look like nothing ever happened. I’ve already complained about him here a few times because if you dare ask him, "Deedy, why are you deleting my posts?" on the main board—which is a legitimate question about moderation and shouldn't be treated like some high-stakes legal inquiry—he won't just give you a straight, reasonable answer like any sane mod would... instead, he just wipes your comment and hands you a strike. So then you end up coming over to the complaint section because you can't actually talk to him about it, but complaining feels useless because there's always some nonsense excuse used to justify why he's right, and if there isn't, everyone just stays quiet. Then you get frustrated, trying to find a way to fix the injustice, so you start pushing his buttons just a little bit, and before you know it, you're buried under a mountain of strikes, but you don't even care because you're just fed up and want to see the fallout, and that's how the cycle continues... that's my experience, anyway, though I see other users going through the exact same thing.

It’s reached a point where half the sub-forum basically hates his guts because he’s managed to alienate everyone, and since he knows nobody likes him, he’s just retreated into his own little bubble, stopped joking around or interacting with people, yet he still hangs around the sub-forum constantly, just waiting for an excuse to delete a post, hand out a strike, or lock a thread, knowing damn well it'll drive you insane enough to trigger another strike. 😁

I meant to start this thread a few months ago, but it was summer and I was swamped with work. I don't have much time to reply right away, but I had to get this out there before he decides to shut down the entire sub-forum.

Come on, bring back those banned users. This place just isn't what it used to be, and honestly, I feel like we've always been under fire—whether it was from feminist groups or whatever other outside drama comes our way. But even back then, nothing really stuck because we’d just laugh it off and turn everything into a joke. Now, Quark is gone, Basil is getting targeted, and it feels like someone's getting gray-listed every single day.

I’m standing with the CIA crew, regardless of how things shake out.

I’ll never quite wrap my head around why they bother deleting posts that have already been flagged; even my own get wiped, and it seems like someone gets grayed out while we're all online at once, yet I can't see any actual reason for it since, as gentlegull93 puts it, the post is already gone. Honestly, if a post is already flagged, what’s the point of scrubbing it, other than just playing psychological games with the person being targeted, and what does that actually accomplish for the rest of the CIA community? Well, let me tell you—it accomplishes nothing—because someone else will just step up and face the same fate, and that’s exactly how a community starts to dissolve, which is what people call censorship in any modern system these days. And what is censorship really for? It’s just there to mess with people. Come on, guys, go deal with your frustrations in your real lives instead.

Bring back Quark and Basil, to start with.

Look, no single decision here is ever made in a vacuum. Every move Deedy makes is backed by the entire CIA moderation team—myself included!—so when it comes to those administrative calls or general forum direction, it’s really a collective effort. Honestly, picking on Deedy individually just doesn't make much sense; every step he takes is essentially one we've all taken together. That said, I suppose someone still had to be the one to actually click the buttons.

LP/AC

Of course the mods back each other up; it would be pretty stupid if they didn't. That’s just called solidarity. And we're just as solid.

All our questions really boil down to one thing: why act this way? Why go around deleting even mediocre posts, effectively psychologically bullying the members, while simultaneously triggering a massive backlash among the rest of the community—those PDF types—whenever actual issues arise, causing people to drop like flies?

Do you mods even understand what it feels like to be banned, or what it's like to get screwed over while you're banned, knowing you can't do a single damn thing because someone can just end you with a single click whenever they feel like it, regardless of whether you actually had a point to make?

Usually, when someone gets a warning, those posts end up getting nuked entirely. But honestly, there isn’t really a hard rule about that; it just kind of depends on how each individual moderator decides to handle things. One mod might slap a warning on a post but leave it sitting right there in the thread, while another might just wipe the whole thing from existence. Either way, though, it doesn't mean the post actually disappears from the eyes of the admins, especially if someone ends up filing an appeal against their warning.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that just making general comments about how a certain moderator is doing their job isn't going to help anyone. It's not a real way to guide anything, and it certainly won't lead to any actual solutions or resolutions for anyone involved.

If you guys have specific instances where you think something went wrong—and I mean actual, concrete situations that you can back up with direct links—then go ahead and post them. We can sit down, hash it out, and actually figure out what's really going on.

Right now, we aren't talking about solidarity—this is purely about action, debate, and how people react to things.
Posts get flagged and removed for plenty of reasons, but one big one is simple: if someone’s posts have been flagged, they clearly aren't adding anything constructive to the conversation, right?

Nobody is getting banned just because Deedy felt like it, and nobody is getting a partial or permanent ban just because he had a whim. To trigger a ban, you need an actual accumulation of points—and for a partial or perm, you definitely need more than just Deedy's personal opinion... So... Goodnight.

LP/AC

William Bennett53 said:Hey everyone, you’ve been missing in action since yesterday... Either back up that complaint with some actual substance and get specific, or we might as well just pack it up and head home. I realize we’re right in the thick of election season, but honestly, why should we bother looking to politicians for any kind of guidance when they spend all their time being completely insincere and hurling accusations at one another?

I don't know how you manage to type all that out with such wit, but you clearly have a knack for it. How exactly are we supposed to recover those deleted posts? I suppose we’re stuck looking to you to verify them, since none of us seem to have access to that option.

Just a quick heads-up on every post, I mean, maybe you could just keep track of everything in your own files? Like, you know, make folders based on the PDF names and the topics, then save all your own posts—if you actually have the time, obviously. Then eventually, you could just DM the mods so we don't end up with an even bigger mess than we already have

gentlegull93 said:I’ve actually complained about this a few times on the CIA forums already, because if you write something like, "Hey Deedy, why are you deleting my posts?"—which is basically just questioning the moderation team—it's treated like some major official grievance, even though it isn't really meant to be that serious.

Look, discussing the moderators within general discussion threads just isn't allowed, regardless of whether you think you're being dead serious or just joking around. If you're genuinely curious about why a post was taken down, the right move is to reach out to the mods via DM or bring it up here on the forum properly. If you had done that, you wouldn't be facing a ban for breaking the rules. It feels like you're complaining about a moderator just because they won't let you do something that's against the rules, and then you get upset and decide to provoke them for simply doing their job. Now, suddenly, they're the bad guy just because they issued a strike after you intentionally decided to troll the thread.

Deleting posts is just standard moderation. Deciding whether to scrub certain comments or let them sit depends entirely on the context—reading the room. Often, there’s no sense in leaving them up; they usually just serve to fuel more trolling, insults, or pointless bickering. Plus, karma exists. There isn't one single rule that covers everything.

That's all from me.

rustydrifter10 said:This isn't just about complaining over deleted posts. If you want to make a claim, you need to provide actual evidence; if certain posts were wiped, you should at least know which thread they were in or roughly what page or date they disappeared from. Just read the rules in this PDF: don't go throwing accusations around unless you actually intend to back them up with something concrete.

Alright, I get where you're coming from.

Restore all the posts that weren't banned, specifically those deleted between October 14, 2013, and today, October 14, 2015. You don't need to dump them into a PDF; just link them through a dedicated link integrated into the forum system. I assume you have a user profile for everyone where all their entries can be gathered in one spot, so surely you have a profile for the PDF itself—in this case, the CIA's profile—where every single post is clearly visible, including the ones that were deleted.

During that timeframe, there are only 19 pages filled with threads, which works out to just over 1,000 topics.

Will that work?

Deedy has become persona non grata at the CIA, and all these bans and warnings are just the fallout from that intolerance. Honestly, I think he should step down gracefully—just a class act move—because I doubt this can be swept under the rug, and there’s no point in trying since the damage is already done. And I’m not just talking about the banned group; plenty of long-time users who were actually a joy to read, people who made me stick around this forum for years, have left. I won't say everyone left because of him—people get tired and there are other reasons too—but his actions played a part, directly or indirectly.

Personally, I don't have an issue with Deedy. We had a spat a while back, but I don't hold a grudge. In fact, during that argument, he was much more civil than I was. I don't recall him deleting my posts or handing out warnings (I don't think I gave him any reason to), and I actually have a certain amount of respect for him. However, a good portion of the veteran members aren't on board, and that's where the trouble lies. He's lost his credibility as a moderator, which naturally leads to a loss of authority.

I want to be clear: I’m not trying to play anyone's lawyer here, and that isn't the purpose of this post. The banned crew probably got banned because they broke the rules—they essentially tripped over their own feet—but from my perspective, those rules were broken out of pure resentment toward the moderator... okay, SJ, you're repeating yourself now. 🤦

enivej, if things stay exactly as they are right now, we’re going to have bad blood and a toxic atmosphere in this subforum. We've had tension for a while, but it’s been flying under the radar; the worst thing we can do is let the status quo persist.

I see only three options here:

1. Sweep it under the rug and wait for it to explode again, leading to even more bans for long-standing members.
2. Immediately ban anyone standing against the moderator, force a fake peace, and wait for a new crowd to form.
3. Have the moderator step down. He barely participates in discussions anyway, and unlike Charles Fox10 or the mother, 😬 he’s stopped being part of the community. Ultimately, he hasn't proven to be a particularly capable moderator, which was obvious during that legendary thread "What did real men do today," where his lackluster response caused a mess and ended up destroying the topic. Sure, he started a new one, but the title itself signaled it would be nothing more than another mindless chat thread.

rustydrifter10 said:Look, you can't just go around attacking the mods in random threads, whether you think it's serious or not. If you're wondering why your post got nuked, just shoot a DM to the mod team or ask right here on the forum. If you had done that, you wouldn't be getting flagged for breaking the rules. Now you're acting like the bad guy because a mod is actually doing their job by enforcing the rules, and since you decided to troll the thread on purpose, you're mad that you got hit with a warning.

Man, you clearly have way too much time on your hands. Why don't you just say that straight up? Like you said yourself, there’s zero democracy on this American forum anyway. And now you're gonna get flagged just because you didn't include a link.
you guys have seriously turned into a total cult.

I kind of agree with what SJ was saying about certain things here.
I mean, who cares if the mods don't see eye to eye? Like, is it actually going to stop them from supporting another mod or whatever?

The real issue is just that, I guess, the mods aren't really showing up for the CIA anymore. If I'm remembering right, Charles Fox10 is basically the only one active on the main boards, and Harold Taylor6 is mostly hanging out over in the 18+ section.
Now, I don't think SJ is suggesting we need some massive forced takeover or a total replacement of the crew with a "new guard." Mostly because anyone new who shows up usually ends up moving over to that top 18+ PDF area pretty fast anyway, especially since a huge chunk of people already migrated there. The only part that still feels somewhat normal is the pub section, but even that’s only because it’s been sort of neglected.

And look, this isn't about the CIA picking fights with people. It's more that a good portion of the regulars can see which way the wind is blowing. Honestly, I always thought the special thing about the CIA was that you could have these really sharp, heated debates, but then everyone would just laugh it off at the end and turn it into a joke. But now? Discussions just get cut off halfway through, people start handing out bans, conversations never actually finish, and then the whole cycle just repeats.

We can't really do anything about it from our side, I suppose. I have a feeling I know how this ends—the CIA is probably just going to turn into one of those basic chat PDFs where the threads are just stuff like "what do you think of the guy from the north side" or "what about the guy from the south side."

Criticism is one thing, but this? This is something else entirely.
People have repeatedly asked for actual evidence to back up these claims, yet nothing ever surfaces. Instead, we just get this endless, sweeping condemnation that could be aimed at anyone, anywhere. The only specific grievance brought forward was regarding the moderation of comments within the thread and the removal of certain posts—both of which are standard, necessary moderator actions. If you decide to start another thread next time, please find a way to substantiate your arguments rather than just attacking individuals. A digital lynching isn't going to fly here.