CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online
log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › Are former mods getting special treatment?

Are former mods getting special treatment?

Started by Roger Bishop22 · · 👁 7 views · 26 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants Roger Bishop22Samuel Perez32Gary Patelboldhound8briskorca19feralpilot0steelskipper5Kyle King4hollowtrucker77Richard Perez3Jerry Garcia
steelskipper5 steelskipper5 Active Member
176 messages
joined Feb 2010
#21 ·
Nicole Mitchell said:I don't know about you guys, but I’m starting to think some people just love hearing themselves talk—it’s like they aren't even listening to the actual argument. Seriously. Roger Bishop22, you’re making some pretty wild leaps here—I mean, maybe you believe that, but where's the logic? It feels like you're just grasping at straws to make a point that doesn't really hold up under any scrutiny. And honestly, steelskipper5, if you're going to jump in, at least bring something useful to the table instead of just adding to the noise. It’s getting a bit ridiculous at this point. We should probably get back to the actual topic before this whole thread turns into a complete circus. Or maybe I'm just being cynical—I guess we'll see.

This is a straight-up provocation based on nationality, and honestly? It deserves at least a 30-day ban—maybe even a permanent one. But since the moderator is actually playing the game, I guess we won't be seeing any real consequences here. 🙏🙏🙏

Oh, give me a break. Here we go again—yet another joke at the expense of a small country.
Look, I’m not saying I was absolutely dying laughing or anything—but honestly? It wasn't exactly a joke, either.

Give it a rest already.
Samuel Perez32 Samuel Perez32 Newcomer
5 messages
joined Oct 2008
#22 ·
hollowtrucker77 said:logic doesn't work here; people just shut you down instead of engaging with actual arguments
😁
I find myself wondering why anyone would bother crafting a thoughtful response to one of your hypothetical scenarios in the first place.
If you pose a specific, concrete question, people might actually make an effort to provide an answer—though "satisfactory" is a subjective term, and it certainly won't always mean you're personally satisfied with the outcome.

To be perfectly candid, I have no interest in debating facts when this is more about temperament...

We both know that in nearly every grievance I've aired—admittedly, my comments regarding that Canadian fellow were perhaps more mockery than substance, though I suspect he took them to heart—I was ultimately correct. It seems there is an unspoken policy among you all to protect one another rather than objectively assessing the situation. As for why I received a permanent ban from >? It was because I flagged a thread containing 150 posts consisting solely of emoticons, which had somehow escaped being labeled as spam or trolling. My own posts were scrutinized under a microscope simply because I proved my ban was arbitrary, leading to a quiet directive to remove me from that particular sub-forum. It is quite curious how, despite being labeled such a "problematic" user, I haven't once drifted into spam or off-topic sections outside of my interactions with the small circle of regulars. Very curious indeed.

Furthermore, this entire thread, which has caused such a stir, isn't even an original topic; it serves no purpose other than to troll. Yet, since one of you initiated it, no one dares point out its absurdity, which only highlights a lack of integrity and equality toward the membership. You are essentially flexing your authority. But by all means, continue; it is your prerogative. Our role, apparently, is to wander into off-topic sections, act like trolls, collect warnings, and play the part of the subservient subject to the moderators. If that is the way things work here, then so be it.🙏
Richard Perez3 Richard Perez3 Active Member
215 messages
joined Dec 2014
#23 ·
Nicole Mitchell said:And honestly, this whole thread that everyone's making such a massive deal out of isn't even an original topic. It serves absolutely zero purpose; it's just pure trolling...

What makes it trolling? This was started by a full-fledged member who we all know isn't some random troll. And what do you mean by "original"? Since when did you become a lie detector or some high-brow literary critic? What's this supposed to mean, that it "serves no purpose"? What's the point of a forum if not to talk? What kind of deep, philosophical meaning are you looking for in these random threads?
Samuel Perez32 Samuel Perez32 Newcomer
5 messages
joined Oct 2008
#24 ·
Sarah Edwards38 said:What exactly makes it trolling? It was opened by a long-standing, legitimate member of this community whom I know personally isn't a troll. And what do you mean by "original"? Are you acting as some sort of lie detector or perhaps a literary critic? Furthermore, what do you mean when you claim it "serves no purpose in itself"? What is the purpose of a forum if not to host such discussions? I find myself wondering what specific utility you expect from these off-topic threads.

I find it quite curious how, whenever a moderator needs defending, the same small group of people invariably steps up to act as counsel, regardless of whether the moderator in question actually participated in the discussion or simply appeared out of nowhere like a sudden thunderstorm.
hollowtrucker77 hollowtrucker77 Regular
681 messages
joined Nov 2007
#25 ·
Roger Bishop22, I can't really weigh in on that since I haven't even bothered to look at her
Reddit has its own set of moderators and, from what I can gather, they actually do a decent enough job; besides, looking at everything I’ve read here, the threads are active, people are actually engaging, and everyone’s just having a good time, which is pretty much the whole point of an online community anyway
For heaven's sake, we have subreddits that are inherently more sensitive by design and carry much stricter moderation, and then you have people whining that the mods are being too heavy-handed
But then you have the fun, laid-back, low-stakes subreddits, and suddenly the mods are being way too permissive??
Not every single discussion needs to be conducted at the level of quantum physics, but if the topic is presented in an interesting way and provides enough fuel for a real conversation or a bit of debate—then it's perfectly fine
hollowtrucker77 hollowtrucker77 Regular
681 messages
joined Nov 2007
#26 ·
Nicole Mitchell, consider this my final warning: I am officially done with your constant trolling and all this unnecessary drama you keep dragging us into
Jerry Garcia Jerry Garcia Member
28 messages
joined Jan 2009
#27 ·
Alright, let's wrap this debate up, please.

The topic itself is interesting and timely. It’s framed specifically to spark conversation, which gets people reading and responding. There was never any intention here to provoke, spam, or mock anyone. Honestly, does it even matter if every single detail is factual? 🤷

We used to have that one user, whom everyone knew was just making things up because they were clearly clones, yet their stories were engaging and widely read—nobody complained back then. Personally, I don't care if what deedy wrote is 100% true, and frankly, you shouldn't either. Like someone already pointed out, this is a forum; we're here to have a good time. If a thread doesn't interest you (just like it doesn't interest me), then don't read it, folks... but don't come in here demanding justice. 😉

The forum rules state quite clearly and plainly that moderators have the authority to delete posts, move threads, issue penalties, and so on. They decided to leave this one up. Simple as that.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads