#1 ·
1. About 20 days ago, I submitted a formal request to abolish the religion sub-section
2.
If you take a look at the VERY LAST post in that thread—specifically the response from the moderator, body hallecka—you’ll see that the answer isn't positive or negative. It’s conditional, which really just means it's incredibly vague!
A) They’ve set these bizarre conditions for FORMER MODERATORS 🤔 that, if met, supposedly mean the sub-section gets abolished 🤔
B) Some people have interpreted the moderator's response as nothing more than a joke. 🤔 😲
C) Beyond that, there was no actual answer regarding HOW LONG 🤔 hiddenpuma75—that’s me, being a bit clueless here—has been stuck with this sub-section. Is it unanswered because there isn't an option to address it, or simply because they don't want to say? I'd estimate this sub-section has been hanging around for 7 to 10 years now.
d) There once was a wise man whose words have illuminated the darkness for two millennia.
He recommended that in our speech, we remain simple and honest, speaking clearly to others with a straight "yes" or "no."
Because, as that great teacher and my grandfather used to say, anyone who talks too much ends up lying. 😲
Too much chatter and backroom dealing inevitably leads to obfuscation. And obfuscation leads to politics, to Congress, to landing a spot as one of the seven tourism advisors for a San Francisco Bay Area suburb , or to getting lost in the murky waters of high-level management positions...
====
So, I am asking the forum's expert jury for a simple, "yes or no" style answer.
Is the religion sub-section for hiddenpuma75 being abolished? YES OR NO?
And of course, if the answer is "NO," the judicial council is obligated to provide a formal explanation and instructions on how to appeal.
2.
If you take a look at the VERY LAST post in that thread—specifically the response from the moderator, body hallecka—you’ll see that the answer isn't positive or negative. It’s conditional, which really just means it's incredibly vague!
A) They’ve set these bizarre conditions for FORMER MODERATORS 🤔 that, if met, supposedly mean the sub-section gets abolished 🤔
B) Some people have interpreted the moderator's response as nothing more than a joke. 🤔 😲
C) Beyond that, there was no actual answer regarding HOW LONG 🤔 hiddenpuma75—that’s me, being a bit clueless here—has been stuck with this sub-section. Is it unanswered because there isn't an option to address it, or simply because they don't want to say? I'd estimate this sub-section has been hanging around for 7 to 10 years now.
d) There once was a wise man whose words have illuminated the darkness for two millennia.
He recommended that in our speech, we remain simple and honest, speaking clearly to others with a straight "yes" or "no."
Because, as that great teacher and my grandfather used to say, anyone who talks too much ends up lying. 😲
Too much chatter and backroom dealing inevitably leads to obfuscation. And obfuscation leads to politics, to Congress, to landing a spot as one of the seven tourism advisors for a San Francisco Bay Area suburb , or to getting lost in the murky waters of high-level management positions...
====
So, I am asking the forum's expert jury for a simple, "yes or no" style answer.
Is the religion sub-section for hiddenpuma75 being abolished? YES OR NO?
And of course, if the answer is "NO," the judicial council is obligated to provide a formal explanation and instructions on how to appeal.