The Powerlock Case

Jerry Rogers6 said:Regarding the situation with slybison8—it wasn't just hinted at; honestly, looking back, it was pointed out far too many times if you actually take a moment to think about it properly.
Clear, concise, and backed by facts.
The truth is, people simply lack the will to act anymore.

The administration found it easier to play dumb and treat the users like idiots rather than seriously addressing a moderator who is clearly problematic and unfit for the role.

And all this self-promotion about how there’s been no retaliation or any kind of abuse? That’s just childish nonsense.🙂

Anyway, personally, I’m glad to see more and more people finally noticing what we’ve been calling out for ages—back when his outbursts were much more frequent than they are today.
There isn't a pair of gloves in existence thick enough to hide the sheer extent of his "hospitality" and supposed competence.

Sam Wright21 said:Steven King74, since I participated in the thread regarding Minister Linić before it was merged with this one, I can tell you that you’ve simply laid out a series of sweeping generalizations here, attempting to bolster them with links that ultimately fail to hold water. I clicked through every single one of them, and not a solitary bit of evidence supports the claims you're making.

slybison8 writes with a certain level of intrigue; he doesn't harass those who disagree with him and isn't a nuisance at all—all things considered, he's easily one of the best Moderators we've ever had.

I honestly find it hard to believe that you chose to go after him like this, especially with such an interminable, rambling post filled with nothing but baseless accusations. 😲

It seems some of you are just bothered by the fact that he expresses his views without sugarcoating them; frankly, it feels like you'd actually prefer if he were charged with a verbal offense. That is where the real issue lies, rather than some trivial little reputation score for a post that most people would have gladly given thirty points to.

To be perfectly honest, I don't see why people shouldn't use the harshest language possible to describe what is happening here in America, particularly regarding the actions of that traitor Linić, while the rest of the political scum remains unresponsive to these absurdities as if they were in a trance—and a good portion of the mindless masses is actually cheering him on.

Steven King74 said:I am filing a formal complaint against the moderator slybison8 regarding the Politics sub-forum.
I believe this moderator is abusing his authority to manipulate the forum rather than actually moderating it. Specifically, he uses his privilege to hand out warnings only to those who disagree with him in threads where he participates, while posts from Forum users who share his views remain untouched, even when reported. I will explain why.

The final straw was the decision to issue a warning for an ad hominem attack in the following post:

First, I should mention that the Forum user I was arguing with called *me* Scum first, so it wasn't an insult. I was a bit surprised by the warning given the type of posts usually seen in this thread, but upon reflection, I suppose it passes. I used an argument about origin to refute someone's view; if we're being pedantic, sure, call it an ad hominem. Fine.
However, my reaction to that was simply reporting the post made by that Scum, which is what I was responding to in the first place.

And yet, that post received no warning. I must point out that I used the exact same rhetoric as the Forum user Scum. If refuting an opinion based on where someone is from in Canada is an ad hominem, then it is also an ad hominem to claim that my way of thinking only exists in North Korea or China.

Incidentally, this post is the opinion that started all of this.

I received a symbolic one-point penalty for the post. Normally, I wouldn't waste my time with an appeal, but I believe the issue goes much deeper. First, I see this warning as slybison8 flexing his muscles—a signal that I should watch what I say whenever he's around. Second, I believe I have ended up on slybison8's blacklist because of this post from another thread. It isn't a coincidence that slybison8 warned a post where I mentioned Canada and the diaspora interfering in our domestic affairs; he feels personally targeted by the same criteria since he lives in the US, and Forum users frequently call him out on it.
To understand the full context of this problem, one would need to examine the thread currently titled Fiscalization and Tax Discipline - The Political Mission of Minister Linić.
and slybison8's behavior in this same thread. It’s vital to point out that while these two threads were merged, the original one functioned with surprising quality for a US politics subforum. Users were responding to one another in an orderly, well-argued manner without trolling; arguments were backed by evidence. In reality, slybison8 was the biggest troll in that discussion.
Here are a few examples.

Forum user Alexis, offering a counterargument regarding a cafe closing due to a mere $0.35 difference, writes this post where she reveals the actual owners of the establishment, suggesting that information provided by only one side should be taken with a grain of salt. slybison8's reaction is extremely heated, accusing her of having a "secret police" mentality just for daring to present that information. If we want to be blunt, the argument stands—it’s a classic ad hominem attack, even if it does highlight the questionable nature of the source claiming a business closed over pennies. But why doesn't slybison8 react as aggressively to posts like this first one and this second one, where he accuses Linić and the users defending him of being losers because they don't have children? Isn't that also, in every sense, an ad hominem argument? It’s also worth noting that Alexis hasn't posted once since slybison8's outburst, likely because she expects a disciplinary warning or a ban. slybison8 achieved his goal: he drove her away from the thread.
Finally, here are two of slybison8's posts from that thread, where he attempted to derail what was otherwise a civil debate through sheer trolling ( first and second ).

What kind of Moderator calls other users' posts "pathetic, miserable, cheap, and shameless demagoguery"? Who describes America as a totalitarian, despotic dictatorship? Who can't write a single post without mentioning communism, neo-communism, or secret police tactics? Who uses their authority to settle scores with those who disagree?

I’ve tried to illustrate the problem with these examples, and I hope you see what I mean. These aren't the only instances of such behavior; it happens across many threads, but I simply don't have the time or the energy to go through them all in detail. That should be the administration's job.
In closing, I am directing this complaint to the administration. I have no intention of getting into a back-and-forth with slybison8 here or anywhere else. Handle that in your own corner. Honestly, I’m not holding my breath that this complaint will yield results, but I might as well try. The US politics section should be a serious space, but I have to admit, it's functioning poorly. It is a massive mistake to appoint Moderators where some pull left and others pull right, then expect balance. Proper moderation means defining clear, unambiguous rules and enforcing them regardless of who is involved. After opening this thread, I feel like there's nothing left for me to ask of the US politics section, because I know I'd have to weigh every word just to avoid giving slybison8 a reason for revenge. Perhaps one day, if the administration decides to get things in order, they will appoint well-meaning Moderators who take the job seriously—rather than having a Moderator who is the very first person I want to put on my ignore list.

bluecyclist64 said:You’ve all been taking aim at PL, but I think you need to learn how to distinguish a regular Forum user from a Moderator.
As a Forum user, PL is a right-wing Scum with conservative views and a truly toxic way of speaking, but when he steps into his role as a Moderator, he plays fair and doesn't hold grudges. To me, the latter matters much more.

Robert Hall7, when did you last take a photo for your avatar? You used to be much more attractive... 🤣

Sam Wright21 said:Steven King74, I’ve gone ahead and clicked almost every single one of those links you posted above, and frankly, it leads me to the conclusion that you wouldn't be able to handle even an ounce of open discourse; if you actually had any real power in your hands, you’d likely stifle any dissenting opinion immediately.

Champion, I’m at a bit of a loss here—who exactly is being persecuted so terribly? Could you perhaps provide some specifics? Who is targeting whom? Are we talking about the persecution of "conservatives," or is it the "liberals" who are under fire?

Steven King74 said:I believe this complaint was clearly intended for the administration. But since they refuse to step up and instead we have random Forum users chiming in who don't know the first thing about the topic, I have no choice but to accept this chat being turned into whatever this is.
I’m going to lay out my complaint one more time in full detail, just in case certain points were misunderstood.
I’m jumping into this discussion with the following observation:
What’s so strange about that? This is an official state celebration. If you don't like it, you don't have to show up. Personally, I can't stand it when Cardinal Bozanić gives a political speech from the altar on Christmas, so I don't bother going. If something bothers you, just look away or be somewhere else. Why does anyone feel the need to force their opinions on everyone else and ruin a celebration that others actually came to see?
I think this post is perfectly fine and should actually spark some debate. I’ve laid out a very clean comparison between celebrating Independence Day and attending an official Christmas Mass. My question to those who claim that booing during an Independence Day celebration isn't a breach of public order is this: do you also believe it would be appropriate to boo through Cardinal Bozanić's entire sermon during Mass? Or would that, too, be considered a disturbance of the peace?
So, this is the response I get:
It’s strange, isn't it? You only find that kind of thinking in places like North Korea or China.
This kind of mindset has no place in Europe. So, if anyone actually finds our version of democracy offensive, I suggest they pack their bags and move to countries like that.
In my opinion, this is nothing but a pure troll response. It has absolutely zero connection to anything I actually wrote. There isn't a single valid argument here—just someone accusing me of being exactly what they claim. Just like me. (Ad hominem) He thinks I’m living in North Korea or China (communism). You think some people—who, heaven knows who—actually move to those countries? So, instead of getting a single meaningful argument against my point, all I get is an accusation that I'm a communist. That is the only reason this entire post was even written.
That’s my response:
Listen here, Scum.
This is how thinking works in a democracy. Just because you’ve convinced yourself that your opinion carries more weight than everyone else's doesn't make it true. That kind of arrogance only flies in Canada—which is probably where you're posting from.

It should be obvious that calling someone "Listen, Scum" isn't an insult, nor is it some derogatory play on their username. It’s no different than if I had written "Listen, slybison8." If I had said, for example... What kind of Scum are you being here? That would be playing games with someone else's handle.
In part. And what exactly makes you think your opinion carries more weight than anyone else's? I don't believe any rules were broken here. That comment wasn't an ad hominem attack, nor was it an insult. I only said it for the reason I already laid out above: the same people cheering for booing the Prime Minister during the official Homeland Thanksgiving celebration wouldn't dream of doing that during a formal Mass for Christmas when Cardinal Bozanić is speaking. They clearly think their own opinion carries more weight than everyone else's.
I'm continuing. You're barely getting by. You probably aren't even writing this from here—more likely you're posting from Canada.This isn't an attack on any residents of Canada or the users from there. It’s an indictment of Canada as a state that lacks true democracy. I used this rhetoric simply as a parallel to those accusations that anyone who thinks like me must be living under Communism.
Let’s go through the ad hominem attacks one more time. Shall we?
The kind of thinking you're doing only happens in places like North Korea or China.
If someone actually finds this version of democracy offensive, I have a simple suggestion: pack your bags and move to one of those other countries. Why stay?
vs
You’re just passing through Canada anyway—that’s probably where you're writing from.
What exactly did we say to each other that was so different? He sent me to North Korea and China, while I sent him to Canada. Even looking at the rhetoric, I’d argue his was less civil. Why is one post flagged as an ad hominem attack while the other isn't? Let's be clear: this isn't just a complaint about a ban. Posts like these—both of them—have no place in a serious, reasoned debate. In my opinion, both posts deserved a penalty far greater than just a single point. What makes this a legitimate grievance is the blatant double standard in how those two posts were treated.
And this isn't just about those two specific posts. This entire thread is drowning in trolling and ad hominem attacks—at least, that’s how they define it here. Selective banning like this does absolutely nothing to maintain order on the forum. I am simply asking for equal treatment. If you’re going to allow general chaos and unhinged nonsense, then let everyone participate in it. If someone attacks me, let me defend myself; trust me, I know how to handle it. If the goal is to bring order to the discussion, this isn't the way to do it. Right now, the moderation team is sending me a clear message through their politics: I have to sit here and endure insults, yet I can't respond without being the only one getting hit with a ban. What am I supposed to be, a punching bag? All I wanted was an actual, reasoned debate. After being treated like this by the moderators, why on earth should I feel motivated to write anything else?
Here are a few more posts from this same thread that weren't deemed worthy of a ban. Honestly, tell me: is my post any worse than these?

(disgusting and vile hypocrites among the users)
(classic trolling)
(this is hate speech)
(accusing a user of having a petty, small-minded mentality and warped logic—which, by these standards, shouldn't be considered an ad hominem)
(an insulting response claiming a user is from Mexico based on their writing style; what's the difference compared to the one regarding Canada?)
(calling users Titoist hedonists and communists—is that an insult or at least an ad hominem?)
(no comment)
(now, this one is a story in itself. Every other post from this individual is a subtle call for violence. I've personally reported posts where he mentions who deserves a bullet, yet those posts just vanish. It would be interesting if the administration checked if they were actually banned. Also, the very next post after this is slybison8's, so he surely had to see it. Though, if we recall, slybison8 left the moderation team for a while because of his support for this guy, so it’s hardly surprising he didn't want to look. In fact, it was only during that specific administration that we truly saw what slybison8 is capable of. I remember the thread about Breivik and slybison8's comments suggesting he could understand why someone like Breivik would snap after 20 years of leftist rule in the country, trying to explain the whole thing through a leftist lens, which was apparently all that mattered at the time)

If that's how you feel, it would be nice if you backed up those claims with something concrete. Which post isn't proof of what I'm saying? I believe they all confirm my point, one by one. But let me summarize.
Why is it considered acceptable for slybison8 to accuse a perfectly orderly post by Alexis of having a secret police mentality? Is that merely a matter of political opinion, or is it an insult to a user, or even an ad hominem?
And why is it fine for a post by Edward Fisher86 to be labeled as wretched, pathetic, cheap, and shameless demagoguery? Seriously, what is the difference between that and calling a female user a pathetic, wretched, cheap, and shameless demagogue directly? To me...I have no idea where you’re likely writing this from, yet you somehow manage to frame everything as an ad hominem attack. Seriously, can't this be interpreted as someone straight-up insulting a Forum user?
On top of that, I won't bother repeating myself since there are plenty of links provided, but it seems we just look the other way when there's a pile of direct insults and comparisons between Forum users and Communists or Nazis.
Look, if you've decided to join the World and Discussion, please just be specific. Or is the rule here "I see, but I'm not allowed to see"?

Sam Wright21 said:Well, look at this example:

I click on this supposedly "exceptionally heated reaction," and frankly, I don't see anything particularly intense about it at all. 🤷

Regarding Alexis's post, she merely swapped the arguments—since the individual in question is a convicted sexual predator, it seems perfectly reasonable to shut down his business due to $8.00 excess. However, dredging up past sins that have nothing to do with the specific case is just a way to justify an unjustifiable action. If that reminds anyone of old-school surveillance tactics, so what? She has every right to voice her opinion.

Besides, if you can't see that attacking someone based solely on where they live—especially when you lack actual arguments—is incredibly low, then I truly don't know what to tell you.

Furthermore, your claims about being on some "blacklist" and therefore too afraid to post anymore, along with the assertion that Alexis stopped writing "because she's scared of getting banned," are pure paranoia. One only needs to look at the thread—is it practically bleeding red from constant bans?

To be honest, neither slybison8 nor Robert Hall7 are breathing down anyone's neck; in fact, they are generally pleasant company, unlike many of the other blowhards here.

I felt compelled to step in because those two are my favorites, along with drota13. And it's precisely because they aren't blowhards in the slightest. They never lecture others like a teacher addressing a wicked or dim-witted child, which is the standard style of most other Moderators, and quite frankly, it drives me up the wall.

Sam Wright21 said:Well, look at this example:

I click on this supposedly "exceptionally heated reaction," and frankly, I don't see anything particularly intense about it at all. 🤷

Regarding Alexis's post, she merely swapped the arguments—since the individual in question is a convicted sexual predator, it seems perfectly reasonable to shut down his business due to $8.00 excess. However, dredging up past sins that have nothing to do with the specific case is just a way to justify an unjustifiable action. If that reminds anyone of old-school surveillance tactics, so what? She has every right to voice her opinion.

Besides, if you can't see that attacking someone based solely on where they live—especially when you lack actual arguments—is incredibly low, then I truly don't know what to tell you.

Furthermore, your claims about being on some "blacklist" and therefore too afraid to post anymore, along with the assertion that Alexis stopped writing "because she's scared of getting banned," are pure paranoia. One only needs to look at the thread—is it practically bleeding red from constant bans?

To be honest, neither slybison8 nor Robert Hall7 are breathing down anyone's neck; in fact, they are generally pleasant company, unlike many of the other blowhards here.

I felt compelled to step in because those two are my favorites, along with drota13. And it's precisely because they aren't blowhards in the slightest. They never lecture others like a teacher addressing a wicked or dim-witted child, which is the standard style of most other Moderators, and quite frankly, it drives me up the wall.

Sam Wright21
Furthermore, your claims about being on a "blacklist" and therefore too afraid to post, along with the assertion that Alexis hasn't written anything because she's "scared of getting banned," are pure paranoia. Just look at this thread—is it turning red from all those bans?

Sam Wright21 said:Well, look at this example:

I click on this supposedly "exceptionally heated reaction," and frankly, I don't see anything particularly intense about it at all. 🤷

Regarding Alexis's post, she merely swapped the arguments—since the individual in question is a convicted sexual predator, it seems perfectly reasonable to shut down his business due to $8.00 excess. However, dredging up past sins that have nothing to do with the specific case is just a way to justify an unjustifiable action. If that reminds anyone of old-school surveillance tactics, so what? She has every right to voice her opinion.

Besides, if you can't see that attacking someone based solely on where they live—especially when you lack actual arguments—is incredibly low, then I truly don't know what to tell you.

Furthermore, your claims about being on some "blacklist" and therefore too afraid to post anymore, along with the assertion that Alexis stopped writing "because she's scared of getting banned," are pure paranoia. One only needs to look at the thread—is it practically bleeding red from constant bans?

To be honest, neither slybison8 nor Robert Hall7 are breathing down anyone's neck; in fact, they are generally pleasant company, unlike many of the other blowhards here.

I felt compelled to step in because those two are my favorites, along with drota13. And it's precisely because they aren't blowhards in the slightest. They never lecture others like a teacher addressing a wicked or dim-witted child, which is the standard style of most other Moderators, and quite frankly, it drives me up the wall.

slybison8 said:God, what an intense complaint regarding a symbolic one-point penalty. 🙂

Well, I suppose I should respect the effort. Even though this appeal isn't specifically directed at me, and the Forum user has made it quite clear they have no desire to discuss this specific penalty with me further, I have been officially asked to provide my statement, so I shall do so.

First off, the two posts cited by the Forum user—where he argues it's unfair that his first post received a symbolic one-point penalty while the second received nothing—actually serve to prove that the first contained ad hominem attacks, whereas the second did not.

In the first post, the sanctioned Forum user was using a derogatory nickname for another Forum user, which implies an insult; he also mentioned that person's possible geographic origin in a negative context, noting he wasn't even sure if the other Forum user was actually from Canada—which leads me to believe his target might not have been that specific individual, but rather all Americans from Canada.

The second post is not an ad hominem because the Forum user emphasizes more than once that he struggles with the mindset being discussed; if anything, the only part that could be interpreted as an ad hominem is the very end of that post, where he suggests that people demonstrating such views should perhaps leave the US.

If there is indeed an ad hominem in that second post, it is quite clearly used in a much milder form than the ad hominem found in the first, penalized post.

If my responsibility in this matter is being re-examined, I am convinced it can only be determined by concluding that the penalized post should have actually received the standard 45-point penalty for insulting a Forum user, or perhaps even a harsher one due to the collective disparagement of Americans from Canada—meaning, I guess, that I was too lenient toward the appellant, rather than being too strict.

I also want to state very clearly that, as a Moderator, I do not maintain any "blacklists." Up until this moment, I wasn't even aware that the author of this appeal was the same person who wrote the post accusing me of "fleeing America." I generally don't even notice such trivial personal matters, and besides, this particular Forum user's handle is so complicated with its mix of letters and numbers that it is honestly difficult to even remember.

I don't wish to expend any more energy on the rest of the entry, as it seems to be just another significant ad hominem.

However, I would like to answer one question the Forum user posed:

I would say he is an absolutely wonderful moderator. One who holds various opinions on posts but, unlike the appellant, always respects other Forum users as individuals regardless of the differences in our content. A moderator who is free-thinking and independent enough to clearly identify the symptoms of state repression against certain American citizens and call them what they are: despotic, totalitarian, and dictatorial behavior stemming from the unfortunate and shameful legacy of the communist dictatorship we all once lived under.

I am glad that Steven King74 recognized this.

Respectfully,

PL

lonehawk172 said:For someone who only has 23 posts and just signed up recently, you seem pretty well-versed in the work and reputation of a certain Moderator. Either that, or your relationship with slybison8 goes back much further than you’re letting on.

Is there really anything wrong with concluding that dragging in private drama—like what Alexis did—is completely off-topic and honestly feels a bit like those old-school FBI interrogation tactics?

If the topic is Fiscalization, then stories about sexual harassment or any other kind of dirty laundry involving someone selectively targeted by a specific law are totally off-topic. They should be sanctioned, especially since they spend so much time talking about this one Forum user and her methods.

If those kinds of low-level rules actually held weight, every single American politician would have to step down immediately. Instead, we see that the only thing separating individuals from their positions is a prison sentence that physically prevents them from doing the job.

You can't say much against slybison8 as a Moderator, aside from his lack of reaction and being perhaps too collegial or submissive when handling borderline cases involving his peers. He moderates the PDF World section flawlessly; his posts there are always worth reading because he isn't just a Moderator, he's an actual participant who is exceptionally well-read and informed. I’d go as far as to say he’s the most constructive Moderator on this entire subforum.

The issue is that he hasn't clearly picked a side with the party. If he were even slightly more right-wing than he already is, he wouldn't even be among the Moderators. Why? Because of the Politics that turn some Forum users into pampered pets while others are chased away like rabid dogs.

Steven King74 said:That sex offender's statement to the media claims his bar was closed over a mere $2 change. The IRS hasn't confirmed that. The media only reports one side of the story. It's entirely possible the owner is lying. While bringing up his past doesn't have a direct connection to the case, it does say something about his character and why his word shouldn't be taken at face value.
Alexis's post is actually one of the more reasonable ones regarding Politics, even on this topic since the merger. At least she found some links and made an effort to write something argumentative. The real question regarding where we should detect slybison8's bias is: why did he choose to attack *this* specific post and accuse a female Forum user of having a totalitarian mindset, yet he doesn't do the same to much worse posts by Branko and Ferrari? Why didn't Ferrari go Googling whether Linić has children? Isn't that also a totalitarian mindset? And this isn't the first time he attacks Alexis the moment she finds any reason to justify herself to the administration.
Look, I know one single post can't prove anything. But the issue is the continuity of this behavior, which has been going on for years. I could provide examples here, but I'm not going to dig through the entire archive from several years ago. I've already wasted too much time on this. And we have to consider that a good portion of the Politics threads have been deleted and are only accessible to the administration.

Fine, but while I'm being called a communist and told to move to China or North Korea, what am I supposed to do? I live here. The consequences of political decisions will hit me in the face, not those people in Canada or Vanguard. It bothers me when outsiders tell me I live in a dictatorship. Why don't you come back here and deal with this mess with us? I bet they'd sing a different tune once they saw how high the taxes are here compared to what they don't have to pay. It's easy to talk trash on a Forum, but once they log off, their entire connection to this country vanishes.

Sam Wright21
Furthermore, your claims about being on a "blacklist" and therefore too afraid to post, along with the assertion that Alexis hasn't written anything because she's "scared of getting banned," are pure paranoia. Just look at this thread—is it turning red from all those bans?

slybison8 is calculating. There are no bans because nobody gave him a direct reason. But since that can't be proven, I’ll drop that part of my complaint.

It’s a matter of taste. To me, the aforementioned users are among the most obnoxious Forum users (excluding drota13), and I’ve definitely noticed them acting condescendingly.
Here is an example:

And what exactly was it that I "saw"?

lonehawk172 said:Take this post, for example—this kind of thing is only allowed for a select few users on the entire Forum.
It wouldn't even fly with most Moderators, who would have handed out a warning card immediately in this situation.

lonehawk172 said:Conservatives are being persecuted. If you can't see that, then it's definitely not my problem, and I have no intention of
spinning my wheels here because it's a waste of breath. Plenty of people smarter, more constructive, and more articulate than me
have tried and achieved absolutely nothing. Personally, I have enough common sense to not waste my time
on something that is essentially the equivalent of tilting at windmills.

Sean Cooper65 is just one more victim in a long line of selective enforcement by the moderator clique over at Politics.

Jerry Rogers6 said:That's just classic behavior. Honestly, if you look closely, you can see how history repeats itself, especially if you check out my second post

Just ignore the crowd that's clearly here on a specific assignment again 😁

Michelle Alvarez8 said:I can't help but notice that the posts Steven King74 linked actually have some serious grounds for sanctions—meanwhile, I’m out here getting flagged for posts that are way more benevolent than those.

Steven King74 said:That sex offender's statement to the media claims his bar was closed over a mere $2 change. The IRS hasn't confirmed that. The media only reports one side of the story. It's entirely possible the owner is lying. While bringing up his past doesn't have a direct connection to the case, it does say something about his character and why his word shouldn't be taken at face value.
Alexis's post is actually one of the more reasonable ones regarding Politics, even on this topic since the merger. At least she found some links and made an effort to write something argumentative. The real question regarding where we should detect slybison8's bias is: why did he choose to attack *this* specific post and accuse a female Forum user of having a totalitarian mindset, yet he doesn't do the same to much worse posts by Branko and Ferrari? Why didn't Ferrari go Googling whether Linić has children? Isn't that also a totalitarian mindset? And this isn't the first time he attacks Alexis the moment she finds any reason to justify herself to the administration.
Look, I know one single post can't prove anything. But the issue is the continuity of this behavior, which has been going on for years. I could provide examples here, but I'm not going to dig through the entire archive from several years ago. I've already wasted too much time on this. And we have to consider that a good portion of the Politics threads have been deleted and are only accessible to the administration.

Fine, but while I'm being called a communist and told to move to China or North Korea, what am I supposed to do? I live here. The consequences of political decisions will hit me in the face, not those people in Canada or Vanguard. It bothers me when outsiders tell me I live in a dictatorship. Why don't you come back here and deal with this mess with us? I bet they'd sing a different tune once they saw how high the taxes are here compared to what they don't have to pay. It's easy to talk trash on a Forum, but once they log off, their entire connection to this country vanishes.

Sam Wright21
Furthermore, your claims about being on a "blacklist" and therefore too afraid to post, along with the assertion that Alexis hasn't written anything because she's "scared of getting banned," are pure paranoia. Just look at this thread—is it turning red from all those bans?

slybison8 is calculating. There are no bans because nobody gave him a direct reason. But since that can't be proven, I’ll drop that part of my complaint.

It’s a matter of taste. To me, the aforementioned users are among the most obnoxious Forum users (excluding drota13), and I’ve definitely noticed them acting condescendingly.
Here is an example:

And what exactly was it that I "saw"?

Steven King74 said:That sex offender's statement to the media claims his bar was closed over a mere $2 change. The IRS hasn't confirmed that. The media only reports one side of the story. It's entirely possible the owner is lying. While bringing up his past doesn't have a direct connection to the case, it does say something about his character and why his word shouldn't be taken at face value.
Alexis's post is actually one of the more reasonable ones regarding Politics, even on this topic since the merger. At least she found some links and made an effort to write something argumentative. The real question regarding where we should detect slybison8's bias is: why did he choose to attack *this* specific post and accuse a female Forum user of having a totalitarian mindset, yet he doesn't do the same to much worse posts by Branko and Ferrari? Why didn't Ferrari go Googling whether Linić has children? Isn't that also a totalitarian mindset? And this isn't the first time he attacks Alexis the moment she finds any reason to justify herself to the administration.
Look, I know one single post can't prove anything. But the issue is the continuity of this behavior, which has been going on for years. I could provide examples here, but I'm not going to dig through the entire archive from several years ago. I've already wasted too much time on this. And we have to consider that a good portion of the Politics threads have been deleted and are only accessible to the administration.

Fine, but while I'm being called a communist and told to move to China or North Korea, what am I supposed to do? I live here. The consequences of political decisions will hit me in the face, not those people in Canada or Vanguard. It bothers me when outsiders tell me I live in a dictatorship. Why don't you come back here and deal with this mess with us? I bet they'd sing a different tune once they saw how high the taxes are here compared to what they don't have to pay. It's easy to talk trash on a Forum, but once they log off, their entire connection to this country vanishes.

Sam Wright21
Furthermore, your claims about being on a "blacklist" and therefore too afraid to post, along with the assertion that Alexis hasn't written anything because she's "scared of getting banned," are pure paranoia. Just look at this thread—is it turning red from all those bans?

slybison8 is calculating. There are no bans because nobody gave him a direct reason. But since that can't be proven, I’ll drop that part of my complaint.

It’s a matter of taste. To me, the aforementioned users are among the most obnoxious Forum users (excluding drota13), and I’ve definitely noticed them acting condescendingly.
Here is an example:

And what exactly was it that I "saw"?

Steven King74 said:That sex offender's statement to the media claims his bar was closed over a mere $2 change. The IRS hasn't confirmed that. The media only reports one side of the story. It's entirely possible the owner is lying. While bringing up his past doesn't have a direct connection to the case, it does say something about his character and why his word shouldn't be taken at face value.
Alexis's post is actually one of the more reasonable ones regarding Politics, even on this topic since the merger. At least she found some links and made an effort to write something argumentative. The real question regarding where we should detect slybison8's bias is: why did he choose to attack *this* specific post and accuse a female Forum user of having a totalitarian mindset, yet he doesn't do the same to much worse posts by Branko and Ferrari? Why didn't Ferrari go Googling whether Linić has children? Isn't that also a totalitarian mindset? And this isn't the first time he attacks Alexis the moment she finds any reason to justify herself to the administration.
Look, I know one single post can't prove anything. But the issue is the continuity of this behavior, which has been going on for years. I could provide examples here, but I'm not going to dig through the entire archive from several years ago. I've already wasted too much time on this. And we have to consider that a good portion of the Politics threads have been deleted and are only accessible to the administration.

Fine, but while I'm being called a communist and told to move to China or North Korea, what am I supposed to do? I live here. The consequences of political decisions will hit me in the face, not those people in Canada or Vanguard. It bothers me when outsiders tell me I live in a dictatorship. Why don't you come back here and deal with this mess with us? I bet they'd sing a different tune once they saw how high the taxes are here compared to what they don't have to pay. It's easy to talk trash on a Forum, but once they log off, their entire connection to this country vanishes.

Sam Wright21
Furthermore, your claims about being on a "blacklist" and therefore too afraid to post, along with the assertion that Alexis hasn't written anything because she's "scared of getting banned," are pure paranoia. Just look at this thread—is it turning red from all those bans?

slybison8 is calculating. There are no bans because nobody gave him a direct reason. But since that can't be proven, I’ll drop that part of my complaint.

It’s a matter of taste. To me, the aforementioned users are among the most obnoxious Forum users (excluding drota13), and I’ve definitely noticed them acting condescendingly.
Here is an example:

And what exactly was it that I "saw"?

Sam Wright21 said:I fail to see what makes this specific post problematic, nor can I fathom who would issue a warning or why such an action would even be warranted here. 🤷

I wouldn't exactly call myself a right-winger, yet somehow I find myself caught in the crosshairs just the same. It seems to be a recurring theme in my life; I end up facing a ban at least once every month. Most recently, it was because I dared to voice an opinion regarding Politics.

What kind of Task are we even talking about here? Or perhaps, is it you all who are actually facing the Task?

It certainly isn't coming from slybison8 or Robert Hall7, is it?

I wanted to point out that you’re essentially thinking like a totalitarian if you believe a Prime Minister’s speech—or any great leader's address—is so sacred that it shouldn't be interrupted by boos.

And what’s the alternative here? Are you just bitter because someone had enough sense to leave America before things went south? It’s honestly staggering to me that slybison8 sees the reality of this situation more clearly than those of you attempting to shield Linić. ☕

slybison8 certainly has some sense, but as bluecyclist64 mentioned, it isn't about holding a grudge; it's all about fairness.

Well, of course they seem loathsome to you; they don't go stomping through threads looking for a fight, whereas you seem eager to criminalize mere words—that's simply your personal preference. On top of that, it's obvious you can't stand the fact that they have opinions and express them without sugarcoating, and you'd love nothing more than to see them punished for it.

You haven't the slightest clue what true condescension looks like, much like a dim-witted child; you certainly didn't provide a helpful example.

lonehawk172 said:Take this post, for example—this kind of thing is only allowed for a select few users on the entire Forum.
It wouldn't even fly with most Moderators, who would have handed out a warning card immediately in this situation.

Michelle Alvarez8 said:Honestly, I don't really see the point of this question. The Forum rules are pretty clear—and they apply to everyone equally, don't they? 🤷

Daniel Ward87 said:No worries, we're staying on top of this topic. I've already asked the Moderators to review those controversial posts and decide which sanctions to hand out. I'll do a second pass once they're done, so we'll see how things shake out.