CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › Please provide the American thread title you would like me to rewrite.

Please provide the American thread title you would like me to rewrite.

Started by feralranger · · 👁 3 views · 3 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants feralrangerbluemason3rustydrifter10
feralranger feralranger RegularOP
323 messages
joined Oct 2012
#1 ·
Ovo Not quite. It is my contention that this appeal is not actually about the specific penalty I received, but rather an attempt to highlight the utterly absurd criteria being used and the systemic manipulations orchestrated by the moderator, Belkija.

It is quite apparent, as one can clearly observe, that the moderators and administrators have failed to produce even a single substantive argument capable of justifying his actions. Right here..

Beljki continues with his little games of manipulation, choosing to censor and completely wipe this post just because I attempted to offer a perfectly civil response to my colleague...

Since he didn't just issue a ban, but actively engaged in manipulation—essentially censoring and scrubbing content—I can't exactly provide a direct link. Instead, I’m providing this as a copy-paste:

feralranger As if I haven't heard this all before—feralranger says:

Quote:
It appears we have reached a point where even the most basic attempts at communication have devolved into mere fragments, leaving one to wonder if we are truly engaging in discourse or simply tossing linguistic scraps into a void. One can only assume this cryptic utterance is meant to signify some sort of overwhelming abundance or perhaps a descent into absolute chaos, though I find myself struggling to find the profound subtext you likely believe is hiding beneath such brevity. As per the statement made by feralranger:
I was just about to compose a rather spirited rebuttal for you, only to discover that you've been banned; frankly, I find this turn of events quite delightful, as it effectively forces you into a state of involuntary silence.🤣
Indeed, one could hardly disagree. Right here. The situation has been thoroughly explained, hasn't it?

One thousand tiny little headaches. As per the statement made by feralranger:
So, yes, you certainly didn't have much of a say in whether you were brought into existence or not. But since you've already been fashioned ex Nihilo,

I am not entirely convinced that I simply materialized *ex nihilo*... if there is such a thing. My existence hasn't been some sudden, jarring flash of being; rather, it has been a slow, deliberate accumulation. One does not simply blink into existence as a finished product—that isn't how any person is formed. It is a continuous, unfolding process. It isn't like a cloud of dust appearing out of nowhere, *ex nihilo*, where you didn't exist a mere second ago and then suddenly, quite inexplicably, you are here.

A thousand little headaches, all wrapped up in one messy situation. As if I haven't heard enough of this already, feralranger says:
By its very nature, one simply cannot possess the willpower to lack willpower.

One could certainly choose to be without desire. Plenty of people have harbored such ambitions, and quite a few have actually had the audacity to cross that line.

A thousand small-time grifters. As per the statement made by feralranger:
One might find themselves entertaining the notion that they wish to simply cease existing—to embrace the idea that they were never truly here at all—and while such a desire may indeed take root in the mind, it remains nothing more than a hollow fabrication, a convenient lie we tell ourselves when the weight of reality becomes a bit too much to bear.

No, it simply is what it is. You are attempting to critique the concept by selecting specific terminology based purely on your own subjective preferences.

feralranger said:Will cannot be dissected into more elementary components. Beyond the realm of will—that is, beyond existence itself—lies that which we cannot even articulate because it does not exist. In my estimation, falling into that void was the only alternative available to Lucifer, who, by feeding his own will with fabricated "reasons," essentially chose a false path.

A "fall" into what, precisely, and for what purpose? And what possible connection does a hypothetical Lucifer have to this discussion? I am struggling to grasp the point you are trying to make here...

feralranger said:The fundamental distinction between angels and ourselves is that we were created in the image and likeness of God. A fallen angel, therefore, can do nothing more than tempt. Misfortune arises from a refusal to accept the gift of existence.

Existence itself can be a misfortune. Do I really need to provide examples?

feralranger said:Humans are capable of true suffering, yet suffering and misfortune are not synonymous; when suffering evolves into a false desire (for instance, the desire for nonexistence), it transforms into misfortune.

I suspect you fail to comprehend the subject matter at hand; you are merely taking your own limited lived experience—which is necessarily constrained, as all individual human experiences are—and projecting it onto the whole, assigning attributes to everything based on your own particular affinities and worldview.

feralranger said:whether one longs for, or exists in fear of, even though one can exercise free will at any moment to choose peace in.

That is not possible. I realize you may believe such a thing, but reality is not a projection of your personal convictions. Reality simply is what it is.

feralranger said:Picture a fish that spends its entire existence aching for the sky; the sheer tragedy of its inability to fly leaves it miserable, even though it possesses the perfectly reasonable option of simply learning to love the water.

I don't think we're actually discussing some sort of "irrational," attention-seeking whimsy here at all. While I’m sure your intentions are noble, I suspect you're missing the core of the issue entirely.
bluemason3 bluemason3 Veteran
1.1K messages
joined Jun 2016
#2 ·
Commenting on moderation in posts? Pretty clean work.

If you want to appeal a ban or a warning, use the dedicated thread for that.
feralranger feralranger RegularOP
323 messages
joined Oct 2012
#3 ·
I haven't "commented" on anything; I simply provided a link to the specific thread where moderator conduct is actually debated, precisely so we wouldn't clutter the philosophy discussion with such matters when there is a proper venue for them. Therefore, once again, you are muddying the waters and peddling falsehoods.

The censored post was substantive and composed with perfectly fine grammar.

You are truly the sort of individual who labels a link to a book as an "insult," and then dares to suggest what kind of reading material one might recommend to a librarian regarding a subject they clearly don't grasp... your standards are quite frankly preposterous, as evidenced by that other thread where, for three consecutive days, not a single person more intellectually capable than yourself could find the words to provide a concrete, reasoned justification for your nonsensical actions.

You made your point clear back there; you’re just continuing with the manipulations...
rustydrifter10 rustydrifter10 Regular
693 messages
joined Apr 2011
#4 ·
I’m totally on board with the strikes you were handed, even the ones that ended up getting you banned. You aren't the only one who's had to deal with moderation around here; I took a look back at the whole debate, and honestly, I think Bellamy hit the nail on the head with those calls.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register