Mysterious bans and disappearing posts in the 'Libyan War' thread

It’s unfortunate that despite my previous discussions with the moderation team, I find myself having to address some rather peculiar developments and lodge several complaints regarding what I consider to be unjustified moderator actions concerning the thread on the war in Libya.

1 - This past Friday, I was issued a ban by the moderator rezon@tor for "trolling" within that same thread. No granular explanation was provided, though over on the ban appeal thread, he clarified that the reason was my "embellishing text," which he claims constitutes mockery and emotional baiting. He didn't go into much detail, but comparing his definition of "non-emotional" prose to my supposed offense—which apparently stems from my use of the word "phantom"—it seems quite a stretch. Since I maintain that this is an unjust basis for a ban, I am filing a formal appeal and requesting that my 35 penalty points be rescinded.

Link to the discussion on the ban thread:

2 - Then, on Monday, several of my posts were deleted without any explanation whatsoever. First, one was edited due to alleged trolling, only to vanish entirely shortly thereafter, along with my entire exchange with Lockheed Martin regarding the killing of Libyan dissidents. I would appreciate an explanation for this, and if possible, a restoration of those posts, as I believe they are vital to understanding the root causes of the current conflict.

3 - Furthermore, even though I have supposedly already been docked 85 points for trolling in that same thread, those penalties are still appearing in my record.

I realize I might be coming across as difficult. However, since my very reasonable offer to close my account—made because I felt misled by the registration terms—was declined, you cannot now expect me to simply accept being held to standards that aren't being consistently applied. I remain respectful and look forward to a prompt response.

Oh, I should probably mention—I’m not looking to make a scene or call anyone out publicly. My only real interest here is making sure these kinds of situations don't keep happening. If you feel it would be more appropriate to discuss this away from the eyes of the general forum community, I’ve just sent you a private message. 😉

You got slapped with a warning for trolling, and honestly, I think it's totally fair. I'm not looking to take it back.

Besides, nobody’s forcing you to hang out here—if you don't like it, just log off and call it a day. 🙂

That’s certainly within your rights, I suppose, but I can't help feeling this is somewhat unfair. It feels as though the registration terms aren't being applied consistently here. Should a simple desire to debate or point out flaws in someone else's logic really be categorized as "throwing emotional hooks"? Furthermore, I’m struggling to identify who exactly was throwing these supposed hooks. In the post immediately preceding my ban, Lockheed Martin actually called me a "little child who needs everything explained" and claimed I was "getting on their nerves." All I did was express regret over that. It’s truly unfortunate that no one bothered to clarify the situation, because right now, it looks as if I was penalized for trolling simply because someone expected me to lash out or respond to Lockheed Martin's insults regarding my intelligence in kind.

I would appreciate it if you could review my penalty points. Currently, I’m sitting at 220, whereas based on the previous penalties issued for trolling, I should be at 135. Does this mean those prior infractions have somehow been reinstated?

I would also welcome an explanation regarding yesterday's deleted posts.

mellowdrifter32 said:Can you guys please clear my penalty points? I’m sitting at 220 right now, but since those trolling strikes were already taken off, I should be down to 135. I'm just hoping that doesn't mean those old penalties somehow got added back on?

Nah, you just got one 35-point strike taken off. For the rest of them, you just gotta wait for them to expire naturally.

I could also use an explanation for why my posts from earlier today got nuked.

Because they were troll posts again, so they got wiped.

Thanks, mellowraven22, for all the help and the quick reply. Things are much clearer now, especially regarding how those points work. I hope I’m not being a nuisance, but if you have a moment, could you perhaps go into a bit more detail about what exactly you flagged as trolling in that deleted post? I only ask because I want to make sure that, moving forward, I can express my disagreement with certain Lockheed Martin views in a way that is proper and acceptable to you—without being dismissed or accused of trolling. Thanks again for everything; I truly appreciate it and look forward to hearing back from you.

I find your response quite intriguing, but to give you a proper answer, could you clarify exactly what you meant when you wrote:

"But what does it matter if marginal dissident groups are persecuted, or even killed, if they are defending a system that provides absolute social and existential security for 95% of its citizens? A system free from debt, offering women true emancipation and legal equality—even by Middle Eastern standards—and so much more of what many in the West can only dream of?"

I looked it up in the dictionary, and a dissident is defined as someone who holds opinions at odds with those of the established regime. To avoid any further misunderstanding, I would simply ask: do you believe there is ever a justification for killing people merely because they hold a different opinion?
[\QUOTE]

Why on earth would anyone in politics want to waste breath debating Libyan dissidents? Why even open up new threads when we already have this one right here—which covers one of the absolute biggest triggers for those initial protests and demonstrations by families desperate for news about their missing loved ones, and eventually, the whole damn war?

I have to disagree with you there. I think you might need to clarify your reasoning a bit more if you don't want to end up getting banned for the exact same reason again—at this rate, I’ll be hitting my thousandth ban before I know it.

Look, the entire subject at hand is the Libyan Civil War. It seems pretty obvious from the quote that when Lockheed Martin was writing, he was referring to Libyan dissidents. Every single one of my posts on this forum has centered on the Libyan Civil War; if I simply replied to his post without explicitly stating otherwise, please, tell me why anyone would suddenly assume I’d pivoted to discussing American dissidents?

I'll grant you your point about "some people saying this" or "others saying that," but isn't that precisely why forums exist? To facilitate debate between differing viewpoints? And surely you'll agree that the most logical place to discuss the factors that led to the Libyan Civil War is, quite simply, within the thread dedicated to the 'Libyan Civil War'.

To be honest, I’m pretty disappointed with your response. You basically just recycled what you said earlier without actually addressing my specific question. Why exactly am I supposed to start an entirely new thread just because I want to tell Powerlock that I disagree with his stance on killing Libyan dissidents?

I have no interest in getting bogged down in moral dilemmas or pointing out the undertones of hostility in certain posts. However, let me remind you once more: in literature, in debates, or even in everyday conversation, it is absolutely never the standard to redefine terms every single time they are mentioned. To suggest that repeating previously established context violates the norms of basic human communication—and then to label my post as "trolling"—is a stretch. You’re claiming to know my intentions better than I do, yet you don't have a shred of evidence to back that up.

Look, if for some reason you can't provide a straight answer to my questions, why don't we try a compromise? Restore my posts, and as a gesture of good faith, I'll edit them to ensure the adjective "Libyan" is placed before the word "dissidents" every single time.

While I wait for Sam Green73 to get back to me, I’ll be filing a formal appeal against that 50-point penalty. I was under the impression the mark had been wiped clean, but it turns out it just vanished onto another page of my record—all because Powerlock decided I was being "insolent" and lacked "basic manners."

Here is the offending post, including a link to an official Russian news agency to prove how bad the translation actually was:

And here is Powerlock's post containing the translation I was calling out:

If I recall his reasoning correctly, Powerlock basically said, "Who am I to judge someone else's grasp of English?" But since the translation is demonstrably wrong and I provided the evidence to back it up, I believe my arguments hold weight. It seems Powerlock was mistaken to hand down such a harsh penalty just to defend the honor of some anonymous translator. It’s a bit much, isn't it? Especially when far worse insults fly around this forum without any basis at all. For instance, just a few pages back, Powerlock labels a statesman from a country I deeply respect as some sort of "Nazi-style racist":

I appreciate your time and look forward to a prompt response from Powerlock regarding the reversal of this unfair penalty.

I don't mean to rush anyone, and while I’m still holding onto my optimism regarding Powerlock's final decision, I know he's swamped. That said, I wanted to offer a subtle nudge, as time is running short—my penalty, if I've interpreted the forum rules correctly, is set to expire in just a few days on April 20th.

I truly believe that by providing a timely response and having the courage to lift the penalty, Powerlock could most effectively shut down all those wild speculations suggesting he was actually the one behind the poor translation I criticized. Honestly, that idea never even crossed my mind; after all, how could anyone assume a man who has lived in New York City for years wouldn't have a decent grasp of the English language?

I also want to extend my sincere apologies once more for my hasty use of those pointed phrases—"lack of English proficiency" and "wishful thinking"—and for the part anyone had to play in witnessing my uncharacteristic rudeness and lack of tact. I submit this with respect, hoping Powerlock might appreciate my regret. As a symbolic gesture of reconciliation, perhaps he might consider reducing my sentence before it expires in a couple of days? Thank you.

marloc, look, if we were actually planning on pulling any more boxes, we would’ve done it ages ago. If we aren't making a scene, it just means those boxes are staying put.

Also, this thread is getting a bit much. If you feel the urge to vent about the boxes again (and let's be real, you probably will), there's already a perfect thread specifically for all that whining.