Social Science - a quick heads-up (again)

So, following that recent debate, it looks like we’re still seeing ad hominem attacks and insults popping up in this subforum.

It’s really the same old crowd, honestly. You’ve got the people throwing the insults, and then you’ve got the ones just letting it slide.
To be more specific, one particular user was only given a tiny insulting post warning, even though this isn't their first rodeo and we've already talked about this exact style of communication before.

Personally, I feel like if someone drops an insulting comment once in a blue moon, maybe we could just look the other way, especially if they're usually pretty chill. But this kind of thing isn't a one-off; it keeps happening, and it's actually caused some other users to speak up and protest.

Look, I’m not a moderator or anything, so the call is ultimately yours to make. I just reported the post. I guess I'm just letting you know that things haven't fully improved. They've gotten better to a point, I suppose, but it's not quite there yet.

Thanks

PS
If that previous thread about complaints on this subforum hadn't been locked, I probably would have weighed in over there. As it stands, it might actually be a good idea to just merge these two topics together.

I have to be honest and admit things are looking way better than they used to. Indirectly, the whole appeal actually had an impact on Microsoft, and now the student is trying harder to watch her tone in her communications, making her much more approachable 👍
Colbert is easily the best choice right now, and I think she’d be solid as a sub-moderator 👍
And honestly, regarding that issue you pointed out, I think it's a massive improvement compared to how things used to be handled. Especially since the moderator known as Didi stepped in immediately to warn both forum users—something that just didn't happen back in the day.

Just have a little patience here. 😉 There really isn't any need to start new threads; just replying to existing posts should be enough.

Michelle Johnson16 said:Have some patience 😉 There is no need to start new threads; just reply to existing posts.

I wanted to weigh in on the Jacob Thompson76 ban over in the Ban Corner, but apparently, only banned users can post there. Hmmm... nice isolation... though even in prison, visitors are allowed 🤣🤣🤣

I don't think the point is who was right—both Did's arguments and Jacob Thompson76's have been laid out for everyone to see, so anyone can judge.

But: the ban is unjustified regardless. It’s a prime example of short-fused moderation, and an equally inappropriate misunderstanding of her own role by the moderator

Did was the one who used the word "nonsense" in that exchange. It's a shame he took the bait, because once that word left his mouth, the excuse for the ban was found.

The word "follower" (used in this post's title) is grotesque in this context; it belongs in a cult, not a discussion about a PDF. But it seems Did categorizes the Social Science visitors using that exact logic.

Colbert brought a bit of healthy atmosphere to the threads she runs. Tolerance, but with backbone—I respect that. But Colbert is Colbert, and Did is Did... Did clearly doesn't understand the meaning of tolerance (obviously, hasn't bothered to check a dictionary)

To declare myself: I am also a "non-follower." I see no reason to be anyone's follower, nor should that offend anyone. But since I know how things work with Did, I stay away from discussions (which actually achieves her goal of segregation within the language threads)

Professional expertise isn't enough to know how to moderate. Did DOES NOT know how to moderate. She takes everything personally.

Man, I’m not saying he didn't go way too far—though honestly, it’s nothing compared to the stuff people usually get away with, if you look at my first post in this thread

but seriously, provoking someone just so you can hit them with a ban? what kind of logic is that even?

Bellwether,

Can you please explain your claim that Haremszoon is just a clone of someone who was banned?

What exactly are you basing that accusation on in the Ban Corner?

Aside from that last post where he was baited—specifically by the moderator—Harmenszoon has always been incredibly calm and professional... Without an actual explanation, it starts to look like anyone can be labeled a clone just so the moderators can permanently ban whoever they don't like...

Ashley Lopez75 said:Didin's arguments (...) She takes everything personally.

Regarding her networking with those other two, you hit the nail on the head. I would simply add that she seeks these connections out of sheer insecurity regarding certain parts of the curriculum (for instance, recent topics like liquid metathesis or the work of Katičić—though there have been plenty of others). She feels compelled to maintain good relations with them just to shield herself from their criticism, which we already know can be quite vicious.

She hands out reprimands to everyone else indiscriminately, failing to see that she is actually protecting a few select people. In her view, the greatest sin one can commit within a group is to undermine its authority (and even if this Social Science community is virtual, it is still a collective).

In fact, I am posting this here rather than on the main SS board because I am still trying to play it safe. A situation where every moderator acts with true integrity is nothing short of a Borgesian fantasy.

Furthermore, her primary tactic is that of a "barroom quip": she prioritizes delivering a quick, seemingly clever retort to create the illusion of having answered, regardless of whether the response is superficial or built upon flawed intuition and pure sophistry.

Justin Newman38 said:I'm posting this here instead of on the SS forum because I'm still trying to play it safe...

I highly doubt Didi will take it that way. She’s already made her stance on "well-meaning criticism" very clear.

As far as I'm concerned—being completely honest—I'm not just protecting her, I'm protecting myself. Analyzing Didi's behavior and trying to map out her psychology is getting incredibly tedious.

Regardless, I am still waiting for an answer to the question already asked.

The question was directed at Bellwether. If she finds it too difficult to answer, then I ask that someone else from a higher level—someone actually privy to the information used to justify the permanent ban on Harmenszoonov—steps up and does it.

Ashley Lopez75 said:Bellwether,

Could you please explain your claim that Haremszoon is just a clone of someone who was previously banned?

....

One could easily get the impression that you can just label anyone a "clone" and then use it as an excuse to permanently ban whoever the moderators don't like.

This lack of response is becoming strange at best, and it calls into question the integrity of the entire moderation system.

If there weren't solid arguments behind that decision, then the only logical move would be to overturn the ban.

Perhaps you should take a moment to wonder if you aren't becoming a bit tedious, yourself, along with your cohort of equally tiresome clones. ☕

Bellwether, while you're busy auditing everyone else, would you be so kind as to run a quick check on the IP address of Jacob Thompson76’s tireless attorney? Since she seems so visibly shaken, please verify immediately whether her anxiety is actually warranted. I suspect it is, though my own psychic abilities are admittedly far less refined than hers—after all, she possesses the uncanny knack of not only predicting the future but also accurately profiling every single soul over on Social Science after a mere fifty posts. (We were discussing moderator objectivity, the good intentions of the old guard, or perhaps the motives of those recent arrivals who have sprouted up like weeds after a spring rain, despite the fact that their post counts and registration dates make their true purpose quite obvious.) Regardless, do investigate the validity of my assumption. And if she turns out to be right, do reward her for the effort.

Much obliged.

Ethan Martinez11 said:Maybe you should ask yourself if you’re becoming a nuisance, along with your group of clone colleagues. ☕

Bellwether, while you're at it, check the IP address of Jacob Thompson76's diligent lawyer, please. She clearly seems spooked, so find out if her fear is justified. I suspect it is, though my paranormal abilities aren't quite as sharp as hers—since she can apparently not only predict the future but also accurately profile everyone on Social Science after just fifty posts (we were discussing moderator objectivity, the good intentions of old-timers, or the motives of those popping up like mushrooms after rain despite their post counts and join dates making their true purpose obvious)... anyway, verify my assumption. And maybe reward her for all that effort.

Thanks.

we've already googled the provocations

☕

I am certainly not one to indulge in foolishness. And that, if you ask me, is precisely where the trouble begins. ☕

Ethan Martinez11 said:I don't play stupid games. And that’s exactly where the issue lies. ☕

The provocation tactic here is pretty obvious
Don't expect any more replies from me, but don't let that ruin your fun

I truly expect nothing from you, given that I am quite well aware of your limitations.

Ethan Martinez11 said:Look, I’m not expecting much from you anyway. I know exactly what you're capable of.

Once upon a time—even back in the rugged parts of the old US, during those murky, lost days of the socialist era—
getting an education almost always meant you picked up some culture along the way.
At least some basic social graces, right? A certain level of civilized communication.
In this brand-new version of Arvacka, "education" just seems to breed arrogant cannibals and frustrated experts in cloning and various other conspiracy theories.

Real men 🤣 used to prove themselves in different ways, not through these impotent, hysterical outbursts.

Jerry Roberts15 said:back in the day—even in those rougher parts of the North America, or even back when we were lost in the dark fog of socialist times—
education almost always meant you picked up some culture too.
Like, at least some level of social etiquette or a decent way of communicating like a civilized human being.
But in this super new Arvacka, education just seems to be churning out arrogant cannibals and frustrated experts in cloning and other conspiracy theories.

real men 🤣 used to prove themselves in different ways, not through these impotent, hysterical outbursts.

Jerry Roberts15, I really need to cheer you up a bit here. First off, I don't see you actually talking about the state of the SS forums (besides what's in the title), so honestly, it feels like you're just trolling. Second, you know perfectly well that if it turns out you're—well, I believe you are for now—an actual clone, you're gonna get "banned" all the way down the line?! And third, we just got two new "moderators" on the SS boards a few days ago, so that should solve everything. Fourth, you're really pushing your luck here. Just keep going like this, and well, you know how it goes—even the best "proxies" don't mean much these days if they aren't useful. Michelle Scott32 is trying to calm me down, but man, my blood is just boiling. It's such a bummer because my juicer/pre-juicer wiped out my entire post where I answered all your doubts point-by-point... and I wrote it all in English, too. Such a shame. I'm reading you—so read me. 😉

Jerry Roberts15 said:Once upon a time, even in the rugged stretches of the North America or amidst the gloom of socialist wasteland eras,
education almost always implied culture.
At the very least, some semblance of social grace—a certain standard of civilized communication.
In this brand-new Arvacka, however, "education" seems to be breeding nothing but arrogant cannibals and frustrated experts in cloning and other conspiracy theories.

Real men 🤣 used to prove themselves through action, not through impotent, hysterical outbursts.

Looking at your post, I see two distinct things: first, a classic case of ad hominem argumentation; and second, what psychology refers to as projection—a hallmark trait of all those internet quasi-experts.

That post tells me absolutely nothing about who I am. But it reveals quite a lot—perhaps everything, in fact—about you. ☕

Michelle Scott32 said:I guess chatting with Didi helps take the edge off, but honestly, my blood is still kind of boiling over here. It’s such a massive pain because my juicer—well, more like a total disaster of a juicer—actually wiped out my entire long-form response I wrote for you. I had everything laid out in a perfect list, answering all those little doubts you were having, and I even wrote the whole thing in English. It’s just a real shame, really. So, I guess I'm just counting on you to read between the lines and catch what I'm trying to say. 😉

Yeah, I caught that too.

I still can't quite wrap my head around why you haven't handed out even a single warning or a strike, especially since they just keep pulling that same kind of nonsense over and over again. I feel pretty bad that I was a bit slow getting the link to that specific post over to the Corner here, but I'm assuming the mods can find it easily enough within the Social Science threads without me having to point the way.

I mean, honestly, I guess I’d just suggest you try tackling that one on your own. I mean, I guess you could say things are getting a little bloody... or maybe just intense? Not that I'm trying to be dramatic or anything, but man, it feels like everything is just hitting the fan lately. It’s kind of wild how fast things can spiral, I suppose. Just one of those days, I guess. Just take a breath and chill out. For what it's worth—and I mean this more seriously than anything else I've said—you're actually doing a pretty decent job so far. 🙂

I can see you're really putting in the work here, so just... try not to blow the whole thing.

Look, don't take this personally or anything, I guess, but if someone else was acting exactly like you, I'd probably be calling them out too. 🙂

Michelle Scott32 said:an unconvincing clone... 🙏 🙏 🙏
and they even wrote it in English

🤣 🤣 🤣

Jesse Cooper97 The user states:
Please don't take this personally. If anyone else were behaving exactly like you, I would feel compelled to give them the same warning. 🙂

You certainly have a sharp eye; we're truly fortunate that you notice everything.

Michelle Scott32 said:Vinolio, I feel compelled to offer you some perspective. First, I notice you aren't addressing the current state of the discussion boards, despite what the headline suggests. Are you simply trolling? Second, surely you realize that if it were proven you are merely a clone, your reputation would be completely destroyed across the board. Furthermore, the situation was settled days ago when we welcomed two new moderators to the forums. Fourth, you are truly playing with fire. If you continue down this path, will you not realize that even the most influential proxies carry little weight these days? My mentor tries to calm me, but my blood is absolutely boiling. It is such a tragedy that my recent detailed response to all your doubts—written entirely in English—was lost when my system crashed. Truly, what a loss. I respect you; will you respect me? 😉

I believe the collapse of the "Social Sciences" division actually began on March 15, 2007, when Sovann Maccha (a total mimic of Dementiae praecox) began forcing their own private, distorted version of American English upon us.

When those who value standard English attempted to push back against the massive spread of Sovann's/Dementia's texts, the insults began—and thus, the breakdown of structured, controlled communication occurred.