Coronavirus subforum went ghost mode

For some reason, the Coronavirus subforum seems to have vanished from my view today; is this just a technical glitch, or am I more likely being banned from that specific section?

If it’s the latter, I’d appreciate it if the moderation team could clarify the reasoning behind such a move, if only so I can educate myself and others on what to avoid to ensure we aren't breaking any rules in the future.

Thanks in advance.

EDIT: I logged out briefly to check the Coronavirus subforum again, and noticed one of my recent posts was on a thread regarding Ursula von der Leyen and mandatory vaccinations, where I was debating with user lazybones12; strangely, my last post there was deleted despite containing no insults or violations of the site guidelines, and even my interlocutor seemed puzzled by it in a subsequent post, even though we weren't exactly seeing eye to eye on the subject.

What exactly is the issue here?

I don't think you caught a partial ban just because of that one comment; it was likely a cumulative thing.
Take a look at your disciplinary record on the PDF. Between the Coronavirus situation and people constantly breaking the rules or just being trolls, users end up getting partial bans once they hit a certain threshold of warnings and strikes. That’s just how this forum operates.
Of course, that's just my two cents—I'm not a moderator here. Coronavirus.

Thanks for the food for thought; I’ve been circling around those same ideas myself.

I won't dive into all the other side stories just yet, since there's more than enough to chew on here, but I can't help wondering what exactly was it that finally pushed me over the edge regarding this whole situation.

I’d say you’re one of the very first victims on this forum to fall for that whole omoronocron variant, being all PCR-positive! 😉

wearybison63 said:I don't think you caught a partial ban just because of that one comment; it was likely a cumulative thing.
Take a look at your disciplinary record on the PDF. Between the Coronavirus situation and people constantly breaking the rules or just being trolls, users end up getting partial bans once they hit a certain threshold of warnings and strikes. That’s just how this forum operates.
Of course, that's just my two cents—I'm not a moderator here. Coronavirus.

It’s pretty obvious you aren't actually following this specific sub, otherwise you'd understand why getting banned here works differently than in other parts of the forum.

Jesse Bailey91 said:It’s pretty obvious you aren't actually following this specific sub, otherwise you'd understand why getting banned here works differently than in other parts of the forum.

On the contrary, I believe my colleague explained the situation perfectly. 👍
We don't just hand out partial bans like candy for a single controversial post; if that were the case, the thread author would have been sanctioned ages ago.
We are looking at ten full pages of various threads regarding the Coronavirus PDF, which implies this individual has been systematically violating the rules and ignoring warnings for at least a year.
And now, the streak finally comes to an end.
I wish the author a pleasant time browsing the rest of the Forum, and I truly hope they manage to learn something valuable from this experience.
Oh, one more thing—just a little heads-up: posting via a clone account of a partially banned user is treated with the same severity as posting via a clone of a permanently banned user. In short, it’s simply not worth the effort.

Morgan Peterson said:On the contrary, I believe my colleague explained the situation perfectly. 👍
We don't just hand out partial bans like candy for a single controversial post; if that were the case, the thread author would have been sanctioned ages ago.
We are looking at ten full pages of various threads regarding the Coronavirus PDF, which implies this individual has been systematically violating the rules and ignoring warnings for at least a year.
And now, the streak finally comes to an end.
I wish the author a pleasant time browsing the rest of the Forum, and I truly hope they manage to learn something valuable from this experience.
Oh, one more thing—just a little heads-up: posting via a clone account of a partially banned user is treated with the same severity as posting via a clone of a permanently banned user. In short, it’s simply not worth the effort.

Look, it isn't about how much you post. I've only ever had two warnings, and for reasons I won't even bother speculating on, I got hit with a partial ban on the PDF. One of those two instances was just me commenting on how Western police handle things during recent protests compared to the Black Lives Matter protests—without being insulting or making stuff up.

It's pretty obvious it's a violation of the subforum rules, even though there's nowhere specifically stating we can't call out double standards when it comes to how different protests are treated.

Morgan Peterson said:On the contrary, I believe my colleague explained the situation perfectly. 👍
We don't just hand out partial bans like candy for a single controversial post; if that were the case, the thread author would have been sanctioned ages ago.
We are looking at ten full pages of various threads regarding the Coronavirus PDF, which implies this individual has been systematically violating the rules and ignoring warnings for at least a year.
And now, the streak finally comes to an end.
I wish the author a pleasant time browsing the rest of the Forum, and I truly hope they manage to learn something valuable from this experience.
Oh, one more thing—just a little heads-up: posting via a clone account of a partially banned user is treated with the same severity as posting via a clone of a permanently banned user. In short, it’s simply not worth the effort.

I haven't been on this Forum for an eternity, yet I've contributed plenty to the Coronavirus discussion and racked up more warnings than in all my other time here, though I think you're well aware that those warnings weren't issued for trolling, but rather for trolling in the wrong direction, if that makes sense.

I'll ask one more time: why exactly did this come to an end, and specifically, which single controversial post was the one that sent me into a partial ban?

Sure, you can just write it in a PDF, you skeptic.

Larry Walker24 said:Sure, you can just write it in a PDF, you skeptic.

I don't think it works like that.

The whole "alternative facts" crowd moved over the second the 'Skeptics' subforum opened up...
...which, for the record, wasn't even intended for those types using 'alternative' logic on the main 'Coronavirus' subforum.

coppersailor28 said:I don't think it works like that.

The whole "alternative facts" crowd moved over the second the 'Skeptics' subforum opened up...
...which, for the record, wasn't even intended for those types using 'alternative' logic on the main 'Coronavirus' subforum.

We don't need your manifesto. Please, don't.☕

Larry Walker24 said:Sure, you can just write it in a PDF, you skeptic.

I can't.

coppersailor28 said:I don't think it works like that.

The whole "alternative facts" crowd moved over the second the 'Skeptics' subforum opened up...
...which, for the record, wasn't even intended for those types using 'alternative' logic on the main 'Coronavirus' subforum.

Ugh, I'm having a hard time decoding this one; could someone give me a hand?

Charles Fox10 said:We don't need your manifesto. Please, don't.☕

I wasn't aware our colleague @Larry Walker24 was "one of yours." 🤷
To be more precise, I didn't realize @Larry Walker24 belonged to some "club" that (from what I can tell) I am apparently not part of.

As far as I'm concerned, @Ronald Chavez2 is free to pursue the idea
(advice, suggestions, legal aid, guidance... whatever you want to call it)...
offered by @Larry Walker24:
"you can always post over at the Skeptics subforum"

Personally, I hadn't realized it worked that simply, which is why I back then expressed my doubts to @Larry Walker24... though I reached out to him as a private entity.

Ronald Chavez2 said:I can't.

Ugh, I'm having a hard time decoding this one; could someone give me a hand?

Sure 🙂 (not an official stance, obviously)

On the 'Coronavirus' forum, posts started appearing that were unacceptable for such a serious (public health / pandemic/) section.
To allow those with 'unconventional' views to still participate, the 'Skeptics' subforum was created within the 'Coronavirus' section.

At that point, back then everyone who had been penalized due to their 'alternative' stances on the single 'Coronavirus' forum
... ...was given the chance
(specifically those penalized strictly because of 'thematic' non-conformity)
to post in that 'skeptic' section of the 'Coronavirus' forum.

My take was (!!!), that you don't qualify to post in 'Skeptics' because your penalty came from other reasons (meaning, you were flagged for the 'usual' reasons).

coppersailor28 said:I wasn't aware our colleague @Larry Walker24 was "one of yours." 🤷
To be more precise, I didn't realize @Larry Walker24 belonged to some "club" that (from what I can tell) I am apparently not part of.

As far as I'm concerned, @Ronald Chavez2 is free to pursue the idea
(advice, suggestions, legal aid, guidance... whatever you want to call it)...
offered by @Larry Walker24:
"you can always post over at the Skeptics subforum"

Personally, I hadn't realized it worked that simply, which is why I back then expressed my doubts to @Larry Walker24... though I reached out to him as a private entity.

Sure 🙂 (not an official stance, obviously)

On the 'Coronavirus' forum, posts started appearing that were unacceptable for such a serious (public health / pandemic/) section.
To allow those with 'unconventional' views to still participate, the 'Skeptics' subforum was created within the 'Coronavirus' section.

At that point, back then everyone who had been penalized due to their 'alternative' stances on the single 'Coronavirus' forum
... ...was given the chance
(specifically those penalized strictly because of 'thematic' non-conformity)
to post in that 'skeptic' section of the 'Coronavirus' forum.

My take was (!!!), that you don't qualify to post in 'Skeptics' because your penalty came from other reasons (meaning, you were flagged for the 'usual' reasons).

Your input on this board isn't really about interpreting admin decisions, mostly because they don't affect you directly.
Once you've had enough Budweiser or Miller Lite to actually have something worth posting here, feel free. Until then, just read along if you feel like it.

Ronald Chavez2 said:I haven't been on this Forum for an eternity, yet I've contributed plenty to the Coronavirus discussion and racked up more warnings than in all my other time here, though I think you're well aware that those warnings weren't issued for trolling, but rather for trolling in the wrong direction, if that makes sense.

I'll ask one more time: why exactly did this come to an end, and specifically, which single controversial post was the one that sent me into a partial ban?

I am repeating my question.