About the mods over on the Business forum...

Alexander Thompson said:Well yeah, he’s clearly not a successful lifter...

A little breather from all the populist blowing of whistles regarding the evil banker (ZB):

In this wave of anti-bank hysteria sweeping through the American public, there’s definitely something irrational going on—some kind of inability within American society, especially among certain loud voices, to just face, accept, and deal with the actual logic of money. It isn't anything new, really. You see it in other places and throughout history too. This almost organic reaction toward money—its whole idea, concept, and function—has often, unfortunately, manifested in destructive ways, like smashing store windows, crystal, or whatever else happens to be within reach.

http://www.bank.com/comments-and-anal...american-hysteria

neondriver5 said: Garo, quit trolling. You're dancing on the edge again, and then you'll end up blaming everyone else once it goes south.

So, I guess if you aren't backing the majority on a topic, it's considered trolling?

But I suppose making fun of the true believers is perfectly fine?

ExCenTric said:But honestly, where did you even get that from? What are you expecting on this thread when everything has already been chewed over? That someone would actually agree with you or something? I don't really get you.🙂

ExCenTric said:There’s nothing left to say about the topic; it's all been decided by the courts.
I was talking about you and how you act.

Anyway, seriously, bye.

Waiting for some smart comments here. 🙂

Right, because if there's nothing left to say on a thread, that's the key, isn't it?

The absolute only thing dragging down this economy is that bores like you don't get scrubbed out fast enough.
Do you honestly believe you can just waltz into a conversation, dump your little "philosophical insights" on us, and expect anyone to actually give a damn—especially after we've already spent pages upon endless pages dissecting every single angle of this topic?
Look, if you can't actually keep up with the thread or grasp what's even happening here, do us all a favor: go find a dark corner to sit in and stay quiet.

hollowtrucker77 said:the only real issue with this economy is that nuisances like you don't get kicked out fast enough
do you actually think you can just jump into a thread with your little "reflections" and expect anyone to care—especially after pages and pages of basically everything already being said
if you can't keep up with the conversation and actually follow what's happening, maybe just find a dark corner and stay quiet

So, we weren't really following the thread, were we? You honestly think this whole thing is wrapped up?

If everything was truly settled, I’d be pretty surprised the topic is still even open... though, since you seem to know so much about it, could you maybe point me toward one of those dark corners you mentioned? Sounds like you might have some experience finding them.

Alexander Thompson, you’ve been talking nonsense on this thread from the jump. Honestly, if I had seen your post before my fellow moderator did, you wouldn't have just gotten a warning—you would've been banned on the spot. You’re constantly throwing insults, sometimes subtle and sometimes blunt, like labeling people UPK—successful lifters of loans. Plenty of people here are against taking out those specific loans (myself included), and many of us disagree with the moves made by the Frank Association. We actually think a huge chunk of the blame lies with the people who took out the loans in the first place, but your only contribution to this discussion is stirring the pot and cheap provocation. You even cited that first post where you presented an article from bank magazine as some objective truth—keep in mind, that's the very entity being sued in this case—and you framed it as "refreshing" compared to "populist noise," while calling the opposing side successful lifters. This is the same thread where the Frank Association was formed, leading the way with the first class-action lawsuit against the banks. The case is already at the appellate level now; it isn't even remotely the same situation it was a few years ago. Yet, you keep recycling the exact same arguments that have cluttered the front page for years, just seasoned with more trolling and insults—like when someone posts a facepalm emoji and you snap back that they should have facepalmed before taking the loan, not after.
Sorry, we don't tolerate that kind of behavior.

Robin Rodriguez5 said:Alexander Thompson, you’ve been trolling this thread the whole time. Honestly, if I’d spotted your post before a fellow moderator did, you wouldn’t have just gotten a warning—you would’ve been banned immediately. You’re constantly throwing shade—sometimes subtle, sometimes not—like calling people UPK—successful lifters. Plenty of folks here are against taking out those foreign currency loans (myself included), and a lot of us don't agree with the moves made by the Frank Association. We actually think the bulk of the blame lies with the people who took out the loans in the first place, but your only contribution to this discussion is stirring the pot and cheap provocations. You even quoted that first post where you used an article from Bank magazine—which, by the way, represents the defendant in this lawsuit—as some sort of objective truth to counter "populist noise," all while labeling the other side as successful lifters. This is the same thread where the Frank Association was formed, the group that filed the first class-action lawsuit against the banks. The case is at the appellate level now; it’s not even close to how things were a few years ago, yet you’re still recycling the exact same stuff that’s been posted on the front page of this thread for years—things we've chewed through a thousand times already—all seasoned with provocations like when someone posts a facepalm emoji and you snap back that they should've facepalmed before taking the loan, not after.
Sorry, we don't tolerate that kind of behavior.

My handle here is Alexander Thompson, or just Alexander. Just like yours probably isn't banderas.

I had no idea Bank magazine was a defendant in the suit or that quoting banking experts was somehow off-limits. Care to provide a source for that?

Or is it only okay to talk about evil bankers around here?

I don't recall seeing the same old stories about bank losses being rehashed a thousand times before... but hey, if you say so, I guess you're the moderator...

Look, go ahead—hit me with a quick penalty for being "rude" or whatever since I'm supposedly trolling... And maybe just delete the post too, so nobody gets their feelings hurt, right?

Everything you need to know has already been said. Trollas, you aren’t making any actual arguments; you’re just trying to bait people. This thread is volatile enough as it is, and we aren't going to tolerate anyone throwing fuel on the fire. I tend to be pretty patient on this forum, as you can see, but someone more decisive would have sanctioned you by now—just like I warned you.

Alexander Thompson said:I had no idea the Bank magazine was actually a party in this lawsuit, let alone that we aren't allowed to quote the banking experts there. Care to back that up with some proof?

Oh, it's pretty obvious. 🙂 The publisher of Bank magazine is modern business communication LLC. And guess who founded that company? Chicago Bank.

And there you have it—just a little glimpse into how much you actually know about the topics you love to weigh in on. 🤷 I guess trolling is really just your main way of doing things, isn't it?

neondriver5 said:You’ve already said all this. Trollas, you aren't actually making an argument—you're just poking people. This topic is pretty heated as it is, and we aren't going to tolerate anyone fanning the flames. Look, I'm a fairly tolerant guy on this forum, as you can see, but someone a bit more decisive would have sanctioned you by now, much like how I just warned you.

So, it isn't an argument to point out that only the sued banks actually turned a profit? Or that they were clearly the only ones who knew how to manage entrusted money? (I mean, the whole point of investing money—mine or yours, for instance—is to make a profit... ☕)

But sure, obviously, if we don't like something, it's just "trolling"...

BTW, I'll give you that, you are tolerant...

Raymond Ross33 said:Oh, absolutely. 🙂 The publisher of bank magazine is modern business communication LLC. And the founder of that company is Chicago Bank.

There you go—it really shows how much you know and how qualified you are to weigh in on the topics you keep jumping into. 🤷 I guess trolling is just your main modus operandi, huh?

I think you've missed the point on a few things here, but hey, you're clearly trying to lecture me... bank magazine isn't a party in this lawsuit... and the guy has some pretty solid arguments that aren't exactly easy to debunk. It's much easier to just label me a troll...

I suppose making money is just as hard as that—it's way easier to just take out a loan, I guess. ☕

Are you suggesting we should just ban interested parties from commenting on the thread? I feel like there'd be a massive amount of posts getting deleted—maybe even yours, or the mods'... ☕

Or should we just ban any comments that don't head in the "desired" direction?

Alexander Thompson said:The bank magazine isn't actually a party to the lawsuit... and honestly, the guy’s making some pretty solid points that aren't easy to just brush off... It’s much easier for people to just label me a troll, isn't it?

What part of the sentence "the bank magazine is owned by ZaBa, which is a party to the dispute, therefore the bank is representing a party to the dispute" needs more clarification? 😁

But according to your logic, the bank magazine isn't a party to the suit (since it isn't the one being sued in this specific case, so—it’s not a party!) but instead, it's somehow an "objective" entity. 🤣

Keep it up. Just keep going with that logic. 😉

rustydrifter10 said:Look, let's not get into a massive back-and-forth here—seriously. I'm going to take a look at what's actually going on, so please, just bear with me for a second.

After this, I don't think anyone’s actually going to bother responding—except maybe the mod and his buddy (plus a few die-hard fans, obviously, but honestly, I'm not even in the mood to deal with them here)...

The bottom line is this—when you try to talk about the whole Swiss franc loan mess, anyone who doesn't jump right into the populist bandwagon and start pointing fingers at banks as the sole source of all our problems gets attacked. It’s pretty wild. And honestly? It isn't just some random high-and-mighty users on the forum doing the shaming—even the site admins seem to be getting in on the action, which is... well, something.

So, honestly... there's this intense, almost fanatical vibe going on—kind of like a sports crowd where everyone’s just screaming at the ref—that basically lets the debtor dodge any actual responsibility. It’s wild. It’s like we’ve all collectively decided that the only reason we’re even in this mess is because someone else messed up, right? Everyone's just pointing fingers, trying desperately to prove that the lender is the one truly at fault for everything... I guess it's easier than looking in the mirror, maybe.

It feels like this whole vibe is pretty much being fueled by the Forum and its admins... I mean, it’s pretty obvious at this point.

I’m honestly not going to waste any more energy trying to prove—not that anyone seems to care anyway—that the real responsibility lies with whoever actually pocketed the cash and blew it, rather than the person who just handed it over. I mean, it’s kind of wild that people are acting shocked that the money has to be paid back according to the contract two perfectly capable business entities signed, but whatever. Still, I really feel like I need to point out how incredibly biased the stance on Foruma.hr has been about this whole thing...

I’m starting this thread about Spectrum Geo, since they've been doing all that underwater exploration here in the States, and I noticed there isn't a dedicated discussion for them yet.

Did you end up shooting a message over to the mods to see where they moved your thread?

rustydrifter10 said:Did you reach out to the mods to see where your thread went?

No. I didn't realize right away that it was gone, so I was just searching through everything thinking maybe I just missed it.
And it’s really not there anymore, though I honestly can't wrap my head around why they would just pull it down like that.

Sean Gray2 said:Nah, I didn't catch right away that it was missing, so I was searching for it, thinking maybe my eyes were just playing tricks on me.
And seriously, it's gone. But honestly, why would they even bother removing "I don't see it"? What's the logic there?

Just shoot them a direct message—that's usually the quickest way to get someone's attention. 🙂

rustydrifter10 said:Try sending them a direct message, because that's usually the quickest way to get their attention. 🙂

I actually sent over a message yesterday, right after I took your advice to heart.
I messaged the moderator, Banderas, with the PDF attached, and I also reached out to the Economics department.
Now I'm just sitting tight and waiting to see what they have to say.

I went ahead and gave them a nudge, so you should hear back from someone pretty soon.

rustydrifter10 said:I gave them a nudge, so someone should be getting back to you pretty soon.

Thanks so much.

It’s honestly baffling why the moderation over on the Business forum needs such a massive overhaul.
I mean, is anyone actually going to explain why this thread was even considered appropriate in the first place?
I’m calling on the admins to step up and address how much they're silencing everyone here.