Where did the "Religion" PDF go, or is it just me?

The "religion" PDF isn't showing up on my homepage. I tried searching for it directly through Google to get to the file, but I just get hit with this message:

"Arthur Flores2, you don't have permission to access this page. There could be a few different reasons for this:

Maybe your user account doesn't have enough privileges to view this page. Are you attempting to edit someone else's post, or maybe trying to use admin tools or some other restricted part of the system?
If you're just trying to post, the admin might have disabled your account, or perhaps it's still waiting to be activated."

...do you guys actually bother reading your private messages?
...The PDF Religion sub hasn't exactly vanished from Reddit...

I haven't received any private messages...

Arthur Flores2, I’ve got that partial grade for your religion class uploaded as a PDF. Mod was supposed to shoot you a message to let you know it was ready, so I am really sorry you didn't get that heads-up.

What does a partial PDF on religion even mean? Is there some kind of expiration date on it?

And why did I even get this thing in the first place?

So, when we talk about a partial ban, what that really means is you've lost the ability to actually write on that specific PDF. You can still pull it up and read through it just like a guest or someone who isn't logged in, but the writing privileges are totally stripped away. These kinds of restrictions don't have an expiration date—they're permanent. That said, in some pretty rare cases, if enough time passes and it’s clear that a user has genuinely turned things around and fixed the behavior that got them flagged in the first place, those restrictions might be lifted.

I wonder if anyone actually knows what that moderator did to him?

Maybe it was just his own ego getting in the way?

Henry Kim3 said:I wonder if anyone actually knows which moderator was responsible for that?

Could it have been his ego getting in the way?

Actually, that specific decision was made collectively by the entire moderation team regarding that particular PDF file.

rustydrifter10 said:The decision regarding that specific PDF was made collectively by the entire moderation team.

Well, if I may offer my own perspective:

ARTHUR FLORES2 WAS UNJUSTLY BANNED!

Henry Kim3 said:Look, if you want my two cents:

ARTHUR FLORES2 WAS UNJUSTLY BANNED!

Of course it was undeserved, and let me tell you exactly why:

At one point, three musketeers popped up on that PDF: Arthur Flores2, Henry Kim3, and a Creationist. All three of them are sharp, educated, and intuitive people. You can't mess with guys like that using half-baked, illiterate arguments. Because they actually have brains and intuition, they formed this unstoppable religious triangle—an absolute juggernaut that just grinds through everything in its path.

And a forum like Reddit is simply NOT going to tolerate that!!!

As simple as that!

Sean Moore said:Of course they won it unfairly, and I suppose I can explain why:

It’s because at one point on that thread, three musketeers emerged: Arthur Flores2, Henry Kim3, and the Creationist. All three are highly intelligent, educated, and intuitive individuals who aren't going to let you mess with them using stupid or half-baked arguments. So, naturally, acting in accordance with their intellect and intuition, they established themselves as a formidable religious triangle—an unstoppable force that just crushes everything in its path.

And something like that simply WILL NOT and CANNOT be tolerated on this American forum!!!

As simple as that!

Exactly, because there are just so many corrupt people on this site, it's honestly unbelievable...!

Unfortunately, the moderators will, as per usual, stomp all over the believers while keeping an eye on everyone else...!

So sad as that...!

Henry Kim3 said:Exactly—it's because places like Reddit are just crawling with such incredibly corrupt people, it’s actually unbelievable...!

And I suppose you don't have the spare time to actually provide any evidence for such a serious insult, do you?

Nicholas King said:I suppose you don't have the time to actually look for evidence of such a serious insult, do you?

Well, do I even need it? Look at you—aren't you living proof?

I haven't offended anyone, have I? No... I haven't. Maybe just try not being as sensitive as a cheap pair of rubber boots...!

Nicholas King said:I'm guessing you don't have the time to actually go out and find the proof for such a serious insult, do you?

Look, we aren't God. It isn't our place to sit in judgment and start labeling people as "good" or "bad." If we actually claim to be devout, authentic believers, then stepping into that role is something we simply shouldn't be doing. Period.

And then there was that period when Blue Bird was running the show as moderator. 👍 It was a level playing field, honestly. Even if you had just one Creationist standing toe-to-toe against ten evolutionists, the fight felt balanced. At least in the sense that both sides were allowed to use the same terminology and speak the same language. Sure, there were insults flying—some subtle jabs from the evolutionist camp and some straight-up blunt attacks from others—but the debate kept moving without hitting a wall. In the end, everyone walked away feeling like they actually had the freedom to speak their minds.

But then things shifted. Arthur Flores2 and Henry Kim3 decided to jump on the bandwagon and side with that Creationist guy. Suddenly, instead of a 1:10 ratio, we were looking at 3:10. It completely threw the balance off. That Creationist was already tearing through those ten guys like Leo hunting coyote pups, but once Arthur Flores2 and Henry Kim3 joined the fray, the fight became a total slaughter. It wasn't even a fair contest anymore. At that point, Ego had no choice but to step in. If he didn't, this whole damn forum was going to turn into a Sunday morning sermon.

So, what does the word "forum" actually mean? What’s the core point of it all? Obviously, the whole idea isn't about banning certain philosophical or religious viewpoints. That's not the issue. The real point is that people should be allowed freedom of thought and speech—something that clearly isn't happening here. From where I'm sitting, it's obvious as day: the moderation team is just aggressively pushing their own pro-evolutionist and pro-religion agendas.

It’s as straightforward as that.

Sean Moore said:We aren't God, so we have no business judging people or labeling them as good or evil—that simply isn't our role, provided we are truly pious people and authentic believers..

It’s just that you, Henry Kim3—who had the audacity to pass judgment on me just a moment ago by categorizing me among the corrupt, essentially branding me as someone who lacks both piety and authentic faith—have clearly missed the mark.

Nicholas King said:You’re acting just like Camelot, judging me instantly and labeling me as one of those corrupt, ungodly, and disingenuous believers.

Man, the way you're talking is just unbelievable...!

I guess I have to fully agree with what Sean Moore wrote in the previous post... It actually makes sense...

And what exactly are you doing here? You're just confirming that I'm right... Instead of actually resolving anything, you showed up just to insult me (even if you're being "polite" about it). What does that say to you?

Look, I don't really feel like getting into a fight with you; this isn't about religion. 🙂 I think you might have missed the point entirely... 🙂

Sean Moore said:Look, we aren't God, so we have no business judging people or splitting them into categories of good and evil. That simply shouldn't be our role if we actually consider ourselves to be God-fearing people and authentic believers.

And back when Blue Bird was handling the moderation duties. 👍 The debate felt surprisingly balanced, even if it was just one Creationist standing their ground against ten evolutionists. It held its own, at least in the sense that both sides were permitted to use the same terminology and engage with the same level of charisma. There was certainly some insulting thrown around—the evolutionists tended to be more subtle about it, while the other side was pretty blunt—but the discussion flowed without any real interruption. In the end, I guess everyone walked away satisfied with the freedom of speech provided.

But then, Arthur Flores2 and Henry Kim3 decided to jump on the bandwagon and support the Creationist religion on the PDF. That shifted the ratio from 1:10 down to 3:10. Since that one Creationist was already tearing through that group of ten like Leo hunting coyote pups, bringing Arthur Flores2 and Henry Kim3 into the mix made the fight completely one-sided. At that point, ego simply had to step in if he didn't want the PDF religion to turn into nothing more than a Christian pulpit.

But what does the word "forum" actually mean? What is the core essence of that word? Of course, the point isn't that we shouldn't allow certain philosophical or religious stances to dominate; the point is that people should be allowed freedom of thought and speech. That clearly isn't happening here. It is blindingly obvious that those in charge of moderation are openly biased toward both pro-evolutionist and pro-religion agendas.

It’s as straightforward as that.

I suppose I could agree with everything that's been laid out here...!

I’ve always been someone who enjoys a good conversation, but I happened to stumble into a discussion about religion the other day, and honestly, I was just floored. Seeing the kind of rhetoric being thrown around—the blatant disrespect toward God and all that—it really caught me off guard. I mean, how is anyone supposed to just sit there and stay silent when people say things like that? I don't think I could.

Whatever. I just hope things settle down over there and the tempers cool off a bit.

And yeah, Blue bird = respect...

Nicholas King said:...proved herself...

Now they'll sue you for calling him a d*ck (you completely ignored the Ciceipic part) 😬

coppersailor28 said:Now they’re going to sue you just because you called him a d*ck (you completely ignored what Sean Moore said) 😬

Watch this. We are in the middle of a serious discussion regarding blatant moderator bias and the targeted harassment of specific groups who share certain philosophical and religious views (which, if you do the math, covers a massive chunk of the global population—so just consider how much arrogance and fascism we're actually dealing with here). In a debate this heavy, your big contribution as a moderator is to make jokes about my username? Is that really the best you can do?

Pathetic.

The fact that you'd resort to that is the ultimate proof that everything Henry Kim3 and I have argued in this thread so far is ABSOLUTELY TRUE.

Pathetic. Did I say pathetic?

Sean Moore said:Watch it. As a moderator...

...
so, in a thread this serious, you as a moderator...

Pathetic.

Making things up out of thin air... Truly pathetic. 🙂

Sean Moore said:Did I say Pathetic?

Yes.