Fish1968 - moderator on Astrology II

Since the thread with this title was already closed, I’m starting this one because I have some questions and complaints regarding how the astronomy pdf is being moderated.

So, on the exoplanet thread, the moderator labeled me a troll. Apparently, any astrological discussion involving my takes on her views is considered "post butchering" and such:

"The forum is a place for people to express their opinions and views. As our header states, we encourage 'astrological education, exchange of ideas, discussions...' What you've been doing on this thread for weeks isn't any of those things. It isn't arguing or debating your peers as you claim; it's just pure force-feeding your own opinions." "That's why there's almost no post from anyone on this thread that hasn't been sliced up in that characteristic way, which also implies a total lack of respect for other users."

- Is commenting on someone's astrological theory actually banned?
- Isn't it the moderator's job to ban someone (in this case, me) if they communicate inappropriately, rather than stalking a thread for a month, jumping into the debate, and then calling the whole thing "force-feeding"—which, by the way, isn't the first time that's happened on the astronomy pdf? Plus, it's a direct insult to other users.
- Are moderators allowed to delete parts of a text, or do they have to wipe out the entire post?
- If possible, can I get a copy of my last post from the exoplanet thread? Most of it was clearly written within the context of the astrology topic, and I want an explanation for why it was deleted.

"Of course, nobody would think to respond to this kind of communication because it makes zero sense. Enough people on this thread have pointed out what you're doing, and people are actually giving up on talking because this isn't real communication. So, I'm asking again: stop slicing up other people's posts. You can share your opinion or disagreement without doing that."

- In whose name was this written? Personally, nobody complained to me. Which people? If I'm bothering someone, they should tell me. (Or they can just ignore me.) 🤷
- Is this forum a place where people come to write personal blogs, or is it a place where you can freely comment on someone's views in line with the topic (which might lead to or not lead to a conversation)?
- Is it allowed to express a negative opinion about recognized authors in the field of astrology?

Since this is the first time my post has been deleted (a post containing my arguments against her previous text, which now sits there looking like some reasonable moderator warning when it is NOT), and since a similar situation with Fish happened on several threads (Movies, Pope) regarding my astrological comments on her practice... I'd like someone above Fish to step in. I think she has lost her professional edge and has become biased and subjective.

On top of those questions, here is another: am I allowed to express an astrological opinion (read: a disagreement) when it comes to Fish's astrology, or even other users'...?
Do I always have to agree? Because if I don't, is that "mental force-feeding"?

And the thing we keep fighting about... what exactly constitutes an astrological ARGUMENT?
- A real-life example from a natal chart?
- A quote from an astrology book?
- A quote from a psychology book?

What does it actually mean to "troll" an astrology topic?

Trolling, in your case, basically means taking someone else's post, cutting it up, and twisting their words.
To be honest, none of us really get what you're trying to achieve or what the point of your posts even is. 🤷It isn't about a simple disagreement—nobody is saying you can't have an opinion—but the way you go about it feels like you're trying to force your views on everyone else, which just isn't helpful or pleasant.
People find it annoying.
You've actually been asked on several threads before to stop communicating this way.

The moderators haven't done anything wrong; the moderator Fish already gave you a warning to back off and actually think about how you're posting.

Emily Fowler52 said:Trolling in your case means taking someone else's post, cutting it up, and twisting it. Honestly, none of us really get what you're trying to achieve or what your posts are even for. 🤷It isn't about disagreeing or anyone stopping you from having an opinion, but the way you go about it feels like you're forcing your views on other users. It’s not okay and it’s not pleasant.
People find it annoying.
They even asked you in the threads to stop communicating like that.

The moderators didn't do anything wrong. The moderator Fish gave you a warning to stop and think about how you post.

The whole point of my appeal was to get answers to my questions. There were 10 clear questions. They couldn't be any clearer. Is that a problem?

What do you mean, "what my posts are for"? Someone shared an opinion I disagreed with, so I shared mine. How is that forcing a view? If someone doesn't like what I say, it's more reasonable to just ignore me instead of dragging me into an argument and then acting like I'm the one being pushy. That's just baiting someone—dragging them into it—and then once their argument loses, they start attacking character: calling communication "exhausting," questioning the "level" of discussion, claiming I'm "forcing opinions," "mental assault," and finally, "troll."

The post you linked here is exactly like my style of communication. I could have easily told that user that I'd been saying the same thing for three days while she kept misinterpreting me. She said her piece and moved on. So what? Should I have done the same?

I don't know what I'm supposed to reflect on because I believe everything I said was valid. Especially that last deleted post, which I'll post here if I'm allowed....

Slow post that got deleted. Is this off-topic regarding exoplanets? Is this just trolling? If it is, someone please enlighten me.

So if a person is sleeping, meaning they aren't conscious—they are "on the other side"? No.
If something exists "on the other side" outside of human consciousness, then the question arises: what is this "something," and what kind of "side" is it?
Or maybe that "other side" is just a massive NOTHING that humans call "the beyond" simply because they don't understand it... just like how people used to worship fire as a divine force before they invented it. Since they didn't know about fire back then, they perceived it as "otherworldly." Even though fire was part of objective reality, humans believed its cause was a higher power.
A "higher" Martian force....
I wonder how a caveman would react to, say, a spacecraft or an astronaut (UR)... and how his consciousness (SO) would register that encounter and experience.

I know you know that, but I wrote it in the context of your claim that "exoplanets represent a trip to the beyond because they change our perception of life." From that, I concluded you prioritized exoplanets over personal growth when it comes to human evolution. So, I don't know what you meant, but I'm just pointing out that this applies equally to all ten planets. It's just less visible with the faster planets. For example, nobody talks about Mercury transits or Mercury's cycle, where some information or news (ME) also drives change and evolutionary progress. These are those everyday things and experiences we take for granted... and through them, humans develop as individuals. Like when humans first appeared on the Moon from Earth, that was definitely some influence of Mercury and the moon... on all of humanity.
I agree, but that doesn't mean what is beyond space (JU) and time (SA) transcends reason, rather it completes it, improves it—like Mercury's seat in GE and VI, or Mercury's exaltation in Aq. The signs are arranged in a circle, not a hierarchy where one thing transcends another. If they were, Gemini would transcend Taurus, and Taurus would transcend Aries. Just like Sagittarius doesn't transcend Scorpio, nor does Aquarius Capricorn....

Here, I disagree. It’s not about how long the transit lasts. Take the example of a human and a computer (UR)—introducing technology into a workplace. Two people might react positively, while two others react negatively, regardless of how many years pass. They react based on their entire natal chart, specifically emphasizing Uranus. Say both people are older; one loves computers, the other hates them. Both are experiencing a tense Uranian transit at that moment. The one who hates them will be frustrated, while the one who loves them will feel the effort and stress until they master the new tool.... Get it? It's not about Uranus being a "generational planet"; it's about who those two people are: one is a Capricorn, the other is an Aquarius, or one has UR on the Ascendant and the other has it in the 12th house. What is that guy who hates computers (UR) supposed to integrate, man? He could go through countless half-cycles and cycles and still stay uninterested. In an extreme case, he'll just quit and do something completely unrelated to modernization. His Uranus will manifest differently based on how it's positioned and tied to his horoscope. So, a change will happen at work, but he doesn't have to, as you say, change and live according to trends. He has a choice... to remain true to his core essence (SO), perhaps just in a different work environment.
In that moment, he manages his Uranus in a way unique to himself. His colleague adapts and learns how to use the computer (UR), while he might go into private business and work for himself (UR).
Look, when someone is exhausting by "forcing" their opinion on me, I just bypass them. I don't get into the argument. Even if they comment on what I wrote. When the level of communication doesn't match mine, I withdraw. But you, or anyone else? Why do you stubbornly reply to my posts just to end up saying I have no arguments and that I'm forcefully pushing my view??
Look, if anyone actually has an issue with what I’ve written, they can just tell me directly. No need for the "who are you speaking for?" routine.

I'm not out here "slaughtering" anyone's posts. It's perfectly clear who I've been talking to and whose posts I've commented on (you, Hermes7, Aquarius, 12House). You four probably all share the same opinion I was reacting to. You made your points, and I made mine. So what? Some people stopped responding because it’s too much work, and others probably just have nothing left to say. What does "total disrespect for your opponent" even mean? Do you actually have a reason to ban me? If you do, then show me—with a specific explanation. Regarding the "herd mentality" and "thinking for oneself," I literally cited and linked the astrologer who wrote that—then I mentioned it again in a later post. How is that offensive? It's just a blunt description of the relationship between Saturn and Uranus that she wrote about. And as for famous astrologers, I'm allowed to have my own opinion, right? Even if the reading was negative.

One more important thing to clear up. What actually counts as an "argument" against an astrological theory?
- An example from a birth chart and real life?
- A quote from an astrologer's book?
- A quote from a psychology book?

To me, an argument against an astrological theory is an example from a horoscope and real life. Everything else is just theory. That's why I'm writing these intense posts—because there's so much being said purely theoretically, both from astrology and psychology perspectives.

Anyway, anyone reading this thread on exoplanets can see two sides: one theory where exoplanets can't rule because they are above humans, and another theory saying all 10 planets are equal. Theory 1 versus Theory 2. Let others judge how clear the arguments are...

p.s. If you think I should be banned, fine. If not, can I please continue on this forum without your moral lecture on how to communicate?

Back when I was just starting out reading astronomy pdfs, Fish helped me out more times than I can count. She answered my rookie, amateurish questions constantly, and honestly, I’ll always be grateful for that. It was a kind gesture. Plus, you have to respect how much sweat and hours she pours into that astronomy pdf. It’s clearly a massive undertaking.

But there's a flip side to this.
The reality is that Fish can be incredibly passive-aggressive. She can't stand anyone who disagrees with her. If you play along with her "saintly" mentorship, you're fine. But the second you dare to have an opinion that clashes with hers? That nurturing mentor persona vanishes instantly, replaced by a bruised ego. Sure, her astrological knowledge is deep, but it feels strictly textbook and theoretical. Yet, she treats it like gospel. She gets defensive whenever she senses someone else might actually possess a more nuanced or comprehensive understanding than she does, and she’ll try to discredit them in the most subtle ways possible.

Look, I’m not taking velvetsailor6's side here. I’m just pointing out that there are two sides to every story.

Don't take this personally.

Best,

Amanda Miller, I’m not trying to force anyone to pick sides. I just wanted to file an appeal regarding this insult toward my communication style—basically my personality and how I express myself—given that the reason for deleting my post was completely baseless.

I've read the forum rules, and unless I missed something, I couldn't find anything about:

- nitpicking posts—what does that actually mean? A moderator acting in an official capacity here should stick to the forum rules in serious situations, rather than acting like we're just shouting on a street corner...
- slicing and twisting posts?
- deleting posts? Fine, delete text (or move it) if it's off-topic or offensive (insults, profanity)...
- trolling is clearly defined as: insulting others, intentionally provoking personal arguments, or non-constructive national, religious, or similar conflicts (trolling),

So, based on the definitions in the rules:
- Who did I insult? (If someone feels targeted, please quote them so I can explain or apologize if needed)
- Please provide a quote from my posts where I am intentionally provoking a personal argument
- Or any non-constructive national/religious conflict?

If my last deleted post doesn't have clear grounds for removal, please put it back where it was. If there are clear reasons to delete it, then please just point out exactly which rule was broken.
Thanks.

The way you communicate is frankly exhausting. Your astrological theories are completely incoherent to me. At times, I get the impression that the planets have absolutely nothing to do with your actual theory; rather, it feels like you’re just developing some personal life philosophy and occasionally tossing a planet into the mix just to justify it. This isn't just about one single post, either—it’s a pattern found throughout your entire series of posts.

That's all from me.

Amanda Miller said:However, there is another side to this coin.
And that is that Fish is passive-aggressive, cannot tolerate anyone with a differing opinion, and favors those who submit to her self-righteous mentorship. Yet, if they dare to hold a view contrary to hers, this supposedly "caring" mentor immediately retreats behind her wounded ego. Furthermore, while her astrological knowledge is extensive, it remains almost entirely textbook and theoretical; nonetheless, she treats it as sacrosanct and feels threatened by anyone she suspects might possess more nuanced or comprehensive expertise than her own. She then attempts to discredit them in a subtle, sophisticated manner.

That is incorrect. I serve as a moderator for the Astrology group alongside Fish, and our perspectives on the subject differ significantly.

For instance, I am not a proponent of "psychological" astrology, and I rarely even consider the planets "behind" Saturn when conducting a horoscope analysis, as I believe very few people are actually influenced by them.

Ryan Wilson2 said:The way you communicate is exhausting. Your astrology theories make zero sense to me. Sometimes it feels like the planets have nothing to do with your theory at all—it’s more like you're just building a life philosophy and throwing a planet in here and there just to fit. It isn't just about one single post; it's the whole series of posts.

That's my take.

And what does that have to do with deleting a post? Sharing a personal opinion about how tiring my communication style is or how confusing my astrological theories are has absolutely nothing to do with the role of moderator that you are performing. Look, I don't care at all what you or anyone else thinks about my work, but I do care about reacting when a moderator fails to moderate according to the forum rules. If there were an actual reason for the deletion, my question would have received a specific answer... instead, these comments just turn into personal attacks.

A moderator will always protect a moderator, so it's probably pointless to expect anything reasonable here. I'm not the first or last person to leave this astronomy pdf for these exact same reasons.
lp

Ryan Wilson2 said:Your communication style is just exhausting. Honestly, your astrology theory makes zero sense to me—sometimes I get the feeling the planets have nothing to do with your actual theory and you're just building some life philosophy and tossing a random planet in there now and then... just to have it. And it’s not just about one single post, it’s the whole damn thread.

That's all from me.

Judging by Sardon's posts here in this thread and that link Luna shared, she argues her points incredibly politely and clearly. Even looking at those two posts, you can tell she's actually a high-quality conversationalist.

And even if she wasn't, you're a moderator, which means you shouldn't be allowing this kind of communication style.
When you tell a user that you don't understand them or that their way of talking is "exhausting," that should be your cue to you just walk away from the conversation—nobody is forcing you to engage. That's how decent people handle things in the real world.
But here? You don't just quietly bypass someone you don't get—instead, you use your own lack of understanding and your distaste for her communication style as an excuse to delete her post!?

If you weren't a moderator, it wouldn't matter. But this outburst... I really hope it's just an unconscious moment of frustration from both you and the senior staff who didn't step in to delete your post and give you a warning.

I'm just sitting here timing how long it takes for my own post to get deleted.