Trolling in Politics

That’s not even the half of it, so please, do yourselves a favor and actually read the other posts in this thread. I’m genuinely struggling to figure out if we’re dealing with some dedicated trolling or just a full-blown psychotic break here. There’s this constant stream of conspiracy theories claiming that certain groups are being discriminated against, and honestly, it’s exhausting.

I’m asking you—please, just appoint two more moderators and start handing out much stricter penalties for these... well, I don't want to get flagged myself, but there needs to be some actual order in the Politics section, and frankly, reading these posts is starting to get under my skin.

Chloe Roberts2 said:I think it might be helpful if you appointed two more moderators to ensure things stay orderly; please consider being stricter with those... well... I suppose I don't want to get flagged myself, but there really should be more order within Politics, as certain posts are becoming quite unsettling for me.

I suppose there isn't much to penalize in these two specific posts. The authors seem to be engaging at an appropriate level regarding the actual substance of the debate. Their style might not be to your liking, and perhaps you find their arguments hard to accept—but I don't see any trolling in these two instances. There doesn't seem to be a reason to issue a ban.

Furthermore, the ability to sanction trolling when people are discussing actual merits is somewhat limited; I guess it can only really be applied when participants ignore facts that are universally recognized and indisputable.

Once the conversation shifts toward more specialized topics, making such a judgment becomes quite difficult, because it is hard to tell if someone truly lacks knowledge or if they are simply pretending to be ignorant.

Deliberate provocation, presenting arguments in an aggressive or unbearable manner, using ad hominem attacks, or trying to disqualify other participants are the most common ways people troll. I admit, there is quite a bit of that in Politics—but in these two posts you mentioned, I didn't notice those specific behaviors.

The way Elizabeth Davis claims the American Red Cross is some kind of sanctuary for people with mental health issues is just wrong, and calling psychiatry anything less than a legitimate science is honestly pretty gross. To me, this whole thing feels completely off; it seems like a blatant attempt to take shots at the American Red Cross and mothers simultaneously—essentially implying moms are mentally unstable without providing a shred of actual evidence. By attacking the field of psychiatry, she’s indirectly insulting mothers by suggesting they're unwell and then claiming doctors can't even help them, which leads to the ridiculous conclusion that kids should be handed over exclusively to their fathers.

I'd love to hear what the other moderator thinks about this.

Chloe Roberts2 said:http://www.reddit.com/showpost.php?p=4...&postcount=261

http://www.reddit.com/showpost.php?p=4...&postcount=263

That’s just the tip of the iceberg; you really need to dig through the other posts in this thread. I’m asking you—please, actually look at the rest of them. I honestly can't tell if we're dealing with deliberate trolling or some kind of collective psychosis. It's constant conspiracy theories about how fathers are being discriminated against, and things of that nature.

Please, appoint two more moderators and start handing out stricter penalties for these... these... well, I don't want to get flagged myself, but there needs to be order in the Politics section. These posts are genuinely unsettling me.

Chloe Roberts2, please, feel free to jump into the conversation. Based on what you just said, I'm certain you have different data regarding maternal custody assignments, the work done by the American Red Cross, recovery rates from psychologists (not psychiatrists), and so on.
Any information you can provide would be incredibly valuable for a discussion that—contrary to your perception—is aimed at the welfare of the children, not the fathers. You have to admit that when nearly 90% of women are granted custody (considering there are millions of single parents in America), a debate of this magnitude is absolutely necessary. If you can contribute, we would be very grateful. Well-reasoned opinions that counter the links you provided are just as welcome.

I'm with Chloe Roberts2 on this one. It’s straight-up trolling, and honestly, it feels like a low blow toward single moms. You can see what I mean if you check it out. I honestly don't even know where to start with this one. It’s just... opus. Check out Bradley Scott2 over on the Greenpeace thread about domestic violence. He was trolling in basically the exact same way there, except the mods shut him down almost immediately. I’m pretty sure the admins can still see that deleted part, too—it feels like a chunk of his rant is missing.

Chloe Roberts2 said:Saying the American Red Cross is some kind of haven for people with mental health issues and calling psychiatry a pseudoscience is just awful. It feels like a direct attack on both the American Red Cross and mothers (it implies mothers are mentally ill without any proof). Attacking psychiatry is basically an indirect way of attacking moms—starting by labeling them as unwell and then saying psychiatry can't help, which leads to the conclusion that kids should only ever be left with their fathers.

I stand by everything I've said.
You can always report this to the District Attorney; I could easily gather evidence to back up my claims.
Maybe you should personally visit a father's rights group and hear firsthand what they and their children are actually going through?

Most of what I’ve posted here was already included in a formal petition I hand-delivered to various government agencies five years ago—The Administration, federal departments, relevant Congressional committees, the Attorney General for civil rights, the child advocate, the Ombudsman, and even the Democratic Party...
So, none of this will come as a surprise to them.
Why do you think these legal amendments are happening? It's because even the Secretary herself realizes the current system is broken!

And now, I'm preparing to send another formal letter to the Department regarding these legislative changes.

Both myself and other users on Reddit have provided examples and links documenting this behavior in various threads—anyone who looks will find them. We haven't shared many here because no one really asked; most discussions are held by those of us who already know the sad reality of the situation.

What I am talking about is a very serious societal issue. My children are victims of the system, just like so many others.

I'm not claiming that every mother is a malicious manipulator or a psychiatric case. There are absolutely problems with fathers too, in all forms—violence, alcoholism, neglect, etc. I even know of cases where it's the opposite, where the system works against the mother, such as when a manipulative father has the mother (the child's grandmother) acting as the judge in family court. Where in my writing does it say I justify that kind of behavior?
But the system tries to fight against that (how effectively is another question), while problematic mothers are simply ignored.

If the mods and admins feel that my writing—and my advocacy for the truth and the well-being of children and society—needs to be sanctioned, then so be it. One day, that will be a stain on this forum too.

I have already put my story in writing and had it notarized (and I am adding recent events to it). Once my children are adults, this story will see the light of day in a book alongside at least twenty other stories from fathers and their children who were harassed and abused by the very system meant to protect them. If Reddit wants to be included in that book as a negative example, then go right ahead!

Elizabeth Davis said:I’m with Lyanna, this feels like blatant trolling and honestly kind of insults single moms. You can check

Can you give me one specific example where I was actually being rude or insulting to single mothers?

Your post is just a reach and a false accusation.

Bradley Scott2 said:Give me one actual, specific instance where I was being rude or insulting to some single mother!

This whole thing you're doing is just baiting people and throwing out fake accusations.

I’m not even gonna go digging for more. Honestly, what was linked in the first post is enough. I have zero interest in debating this with you—I said what I thought about your posts, and I don't care if you disagree. In my book, it’s still trolling, lying, and being totally uncalled for.

Elizabeth Davis said:I don't need to look any further; what was linked in the first post covers it. I'm not going to argue with you. I've already said what I think about your posts, and I really don't see how you aren't trolling, lying, being insulting, or just being unoriginal.

Well, those are some pretty heavy accusations.
Per the forum rules, you'll need to back them up with actual proof or take them back.
So, specifically—where exactly am I being disrespectful toward single mothers?