Why is there constant censorship on the Psychology subforum?

Why were my last two posts on the "the truth about psychiatry" thread deleted again? I was just providing a reasoned perspective from yet another highly competent expert, along with some Wikipedia entries regarding ethics within the pharmaceutical industry.
Is it more of the usual "trolling, personal attacks, criticizing the mods, or going off-topic"? Or is it just "crusading through threads about psychopharmacology, psychiatry, or any topic I happen to find convenient for venting about evil psychiatry, Big Pharma, and other white-collar conspiracies"?

It’s becoming a total farce. At this point, I'm starting to wonder if the moderation team is biased due to some conflict of interest. ☕

@Nica, I want an explanation from you, not from the usual censors who without valid explanations delete my work and issue warnings.
Michelle Evans and Sophia Kern43—thanks for the responses you already gave; honestly, don't bother anymore, since you both already said that the "debate" is over on your end.

Do you actually support this blatant censorship of the truth on this forum, @Nica?

Come on, Nica, do you have even an ounce of integrity left to give me a straight answer before your proteges ban me for actually responding to that last provocation on this thread?

Heh, you all know how incredibly hypocritical it is to expect something from someone else that you won't even practice yourselves.

My post was deleted after I told this woman she sounded like a masochist. It seems some moderators over at Psychology really do tend to overreact.

You sound like a bit of a masochist to me. Into BDSM, perhaps?... 🙂😁

Regarding your post. For the original author, it was actually quite constructive, empathetic, and helpful for gaining some fresh perspective on their own situation.

It’s perfectly fine that the moderators removed your comment.

Michelle Evans said:Your post. For the original poster, it was quite constructive, empathetic, and genuinely helpful for gaining new insight into her own situation.

It’s perfectly reasonable that the moderators deleted your post.

I don't see what the issue is. I didn't insult anyone; I was just being a bit lighthearted, which is why I used emojis. It's no wonder these forums lose their appeal when you start deleting things arbitrarily.

Deleting an intrusion on a thread where people are actually asking for advice was just plain rude.

Richard Grant56 said:So, my post got nuked right after I... I don't know about this woman. He wrote that she sounds like a masochist. Honestly, it feels like some of the moderators over at Psychology are actually taking things a bit too far.

They're exaggerating a bit, wouldn't you say? 😲Wait, what was I saying? Honestly, my thoughts are all over the place today. It’s like... does anyone else feel that way? Just completely lost in the middle of a sentence? No need for a lengthy explanation. Deleted forum posts—all perfectly valid, neutral, and based on nothing but my own personal perspective. So, why were they scrubbed? If you want to prove me wrong, go ahead—I’m practically daring the administration to step up.

I’m not going to dodge the fact that I tend to lean into colorful hyperbole when making a point—which, let's be honest, can sting if you take things personally. Then again, why should I feel guilty about someone else's emotional reaction, especially when they aren't exactly being mindful of how they impact others? That said, I have zero interest in being made a spectacle over some alleged violation of "formal rules." If you actually bother to look at the fine print, those rules aren't even consistent from one point to the next.

So, I see my access to the psychology subforum has been cut off. A partial ban, then? Interesting.

You know what? I couldn't care less about my reputation among people I don't even respect—that’s just who I am in real life, believe it or not. But this isn't about me. This is about issues that have a massive impact on actual lives. It is honestly a total disgrace on your part to refuse to let the voices of reason be heard, especially when they hold different perspectives.
We all live in the real world, where most work isn't exactly driven by ethics—it’s driven by necessity—and quite frankly, it’s often far from morally pure. But honestly, screw the system if we aren't allowed to have an open, honest conversation about it behind the safety of anonymity. By strangling free speech, you're essentially doing yourselves a massive disservice. When you end up supporting these little totalitarian regimes wrapped in layers of corporate formality, don't act surprised when you find yourself stuck in that same subordinate position one day. And trust me, there won't be anyone left to bail you out.

@Nica, what a disaster. 😠I trust you as much as Paul trusts Jesus—so, what’s your take on all of this? Give me something! If you honestly believe I deserve to be torn apart, then go ahead and kill me—but please, just be honest with yourself.

Michelle Evans said:...
It’s perfectly fine that those moderators wiped that post. Honestly, they did the right thing.

Which moderators are we actually talking about here? Is it Sophia Kern43, the one who can’t seem to resist taking cheap shots at anyone with a different opinion? Look, if you're going to mock people, fine—but have the decency to do it on equal footing. You shouldn't be acting like you're untouchable when you're just as vulnerable to being called out as everyone else.
Could you perhaps provide me with some more specific explanations? Regarding this particular subject.Aside from all that administrative gatekeeping and those royal decrees issued from on high...

If you had been the first one to wrap this up in a multi-day funk back when everything was being sanctioned before that temporary lockdown, you wouldn't be talking like this. You’re lacking objectivity. And honestly? It’s pretty glaring.
It doesn't matter. We've already made ourselves clear—follow the rules, or we’re going to request a partial ban. You have more than enough pages of history under your belt here to know exactly what it means to follow, or fail to follow, the guidelines.
The discussion on our end is officially over. There’s really no point in dragging this out any further.
The key.

Since this subforum is titled "Messages, Complaints, and Comments," I suppose we should probably stick to that.
You haven't actually been clear at all. You aren't pointing out where or how I’m supposedly breaking the rules; you're just tossing out empty clichés to justify your sweeping decisions.
Why on earth did one of you two delete my previous posts? I was only sharing the perspectives of top-tier psychiatrists and neuroscientists regarding the pharmaceutical industry—no personal attacks, no addressing anyone directly, nothing. Just facts.
So, after all that, you just hand out bans or split my posts apart because I’m actually responding to the provocations you lot seem so determined to ignore?

If you can't explain it, just say so—I’m more than capable of understanding things from a psychological perspective. 🙂

So, sanctions are your only way of responding?

It’s fascinating how nobody seems to mind that in the thread titled "the truth about psychiatry," a bunch of immature kids—who seem incredibly proud of their status as legalized junkies—are throwing around ad hominem attacks. We've got shady characters who can't string two coherent sentences together yet suddenly jumped from wearing swim trunks to playing psychiatrist. Then there are the types who openly admit to abusing both legal and illegal substances for everything from depression to quitting smoking. Add to that the wide spectrum of users who have been medicated their entire lives without ever actually finding stability, or causing it in others due to heavy medication—yet, apparently, one casualharbor9 really rubbed someone the wrong side of the bed by offering an argued critique of entrenched views instead of just recommending psychotropic drugs for every physiological function from breathing to basic motor skills.
Kudos on the objectivity.

I’d also like to congratulate the forum administration for allowing this subforum—which, by default, is a natural science section meant to deal with the mechanisms and manifestations of the human psyche—to morph into a grotesque billboard for the pharmaceutical industry. It’s being aggressively criticized by the authentic, unbought group of top-tier experts dedicated to the natural science known as medicine, as well as those concerned with the ethical questions of our society.
Secondly, I suppose one can't expect anything else from a mirror reflecting this intellectual swamp of ours, where the final word always belongs to the safely entrenched mediocrities who remain completely oblivious to the reality of the common citizens they supposedly serve.

Why not just lock the thread now instead of providing any actual explanatory comment? In fact, you might as well just delete everything; perhaps then fewer people will notice what’s actually happening here.

My apologies! Since I’m not allowed to edit the original post, I’ll just add my thoughts here:

Secondly, I suppose we can't really expect anything better from a mirror reflecting our own intellectual swamp. In this place, the final word always seems to belong to those *bureaucratic* paper-pushers—the career mediocre types who are completely out of touch with the reality of the average American they supposedly serve.

casualharbor9 said:Why did one of you two delete my previous posts where I was just mentioning seeing top-tier psychiatrists and neuroscientists regarding the pharmaceutical industry—without any ad hominem attacks or anything directed at anyone personally?

Look, mouse🙂, the reason is simple: those posts were just copy-pasted articles from the internet. If you had actually bothered to read the forum rules—or even respected them as a guideline for how to post here—it would be obvious to you that this isn't some conspiracy against you personally. Those types of posts get deleted. Period. You want to debate? Fine. But use your own words and keep it civil. (And honestly, you’ve had plenty of chances to do that, and you've repeatedly proven you aren't capable of it.)

So after all that, you hand out bans or partial bans because I'm responding to provocations that you guys just stubbornly ignore?

No. 🙂 You got a partial ban because you were told exactly what would happen after your next outburst, and yet you (QED) just can't help yourself—turning everything into a personal vendetta and your "holy war" against the "evil mods" who apparently have a specific grudge against you alone 😳 and then jumping into the thread to critique the moderation itself. Again, if you had read the rules, you'd know that's strictly forbidden. A user with nearly 9,000 posts shouldn't be ignorant of the rules, especially when they've already been sanctioned for the exact same thing.

We won't be seeing each other on the Psychology PDF anymore.

Look, regardless of how much you disagree with them, the moderators are absolutely spot on here. This isn't some sudden issue that popped up overnight; this has been an ongoing thing with you for quite a while now. I know they’ve tried to be patient and give you plenty of grace, but you’ve just been tuning out their warnings and stubbornly doing things your own way. Honestly, I don't have anything else to add to what they've already said.