#1 ·
So, here we have a moderator from the NASDAQ staff who, before even establishing if any actual "trolling" occurred, decides to hand out a 150-point penalty—which, frankly, flies in the face of our established guidelines—stretching over three months (an observation I’ve only just recently confirmed).
The post in question was deleted specifically to facilitate this manipulation, which makes providing a direct link an impossibility. (It is a classic, tired trick employed by those moderators who are as incompetent as they are malicious.)
Following this blatant manipulation—awarding 150 points for a single post, spanning three months, all under the guise of "trolling"—they occasionally swoop back in to shave off another 35 points just to ensure total silence...
The term "trolling" is such a broad, catch-all label that it is almost always abused, primarily because it remains so elastic and entirely subjective to the whims of whoever is doing the judging. Quite often, what gets labeled as trolling is simply an opinion that someone happens to personally dislike... yet in this specific instance, the manipulation of point totals and penalty durations goes far beyond the usual petty tactics used by moderators to censor and silence anyone who dares to disagree with them.
I feel compelled to draw attention to this problematic moderator who, as I have already detailed, relies on technicalities and mathematical games involving point values and expiration dates... actions that truly bring shame upon the very media outlet that grants them such power...
The post in question was deleted specifically to facilitate this manipulation, which makes providing a direct link an impossibility. (It is a classic, tired trick employed by those moderators who are as incompetent as they are malicious.)
Following this blatant manipulation—awarding 150 points for a single post, spanning three months, all under the guise of "trolling"—they occasionally swoop back in to shave off another 35 points just to ensure total silence...
The term "trolling" is such a broad, catch-all label that it is almost always abused, primarily because it remains so elastic and entirely subjective to the whims of whoever is doing the judging. Quite often, what gets labeled as trolling is simply an opinion that someone happens to personally dislike... yet in this specific instance, the manipulation of point totals and penalty durations goes far beyond the usual petty tactics used by moderators to censor and silence anyone who dares to disagree with them.
I feel compelled to draw attention to this problematic moderator who, as I have already detailed, relies on technicalities and mathematical games involving point values and expiration dates... actions that truly bring shame upon the very media outlet that grants them such power...