The Powerlock Case

Sean Cooper65 said:Why don't someone from the right side come along and call one of the Politics moderators a left-wing Scum with a poisonous tongue? Let's see how long they last on here.

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? 🤷

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.

lonehawk172 said:Look, you've been on this forum far too long to play dumb. You know perfectly well that every sub-forum reserves the right to set its own specific moderation standards.

Sam Wright21 said:Look, I’m fairly certain this specific user's writing style isn't being stifled by any moderator oversight; rather, it's simply that slybison8 lacks a true law-enforcement mindset.

Take the thread author, for instance—he posts absolute nonsense that even a stray dog wouldn't touch, yet he provides evidence through his own two posts, only to be slapped with a one-point penalty for one of them. 😍 It really speaks volumes about the supposedly "noble" soul of PL.

It’s honestly laughable that they're using him as a "case study." Besides, you can clearly see that a mob of disgruntled users hasn't descended upon this topic, because there aren't any—which is quite telling in its own way.

Aside from him, we have Robert Hall7 on the thread, and she certainly doesn't carry herself like some heavy-handed authority figure either.

Personally, I find this arrangement quite refreshing; it seems to me that the two of them, along with Vojky, are unique personalities among the moderators—they aren't constantly breathing down your neck or manufacturing unnecessary tension.

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.

Edward Fisher86 said:Oh, "unique." 😕.
And it’s more than just "unique" when the guy keeps insisting that we're all just agents for the previous administration, that I'm personally Linić's tax agent, or some kind of fiscal tyrant. It's all the same; the guy's writing is so "unique" that I'm starting to see imaginary agents appearing right in front of my face. 🙄

The linked posts are only part of it, to be clear; mostly, I was linking his connections to Nazism.

All of that might hold water, but there is one but.
I feel like finally snapping back at the guy: your uncle is the agent!
He'll give his usual response, I'll give mine, and then you've got a massive blowout on the thread.
That's why communication rules exist, and why we have mods to ensure we all stick to them.

Kudos to the Guild for their endless patience on this thread; I truly take my hat off to her. 🙏 That stoic, infinitely patient way of responding, explaining, and refusing to react to provocations is something you rarely see. (I was reading this earlier, and I hope she hasn't snapped 😬).

Clearly, you're a fan of PL. Fine, but my experience has been different. I saw this thread just a day or two after it opened, and despite all the provocations here, I jumped in for one reason:
I saw that PL wrote a warning to "his clique" on the thread only *after* he read and responded to things here. Sure, he didn't accept the criticism, but he hurried over to the thread to "clean up" his own mess.
Well, that behavior is extremely distasteful to me.

Furthermore, whoever deleted that one reported post essentially confirmed the inappropriateness of that unique text.
Yet, that same text keeps looping around and around.

Regarding the discussion on Fiscalization, when you read through Branko99's posts, someone really needs to clarify 🤷.

The guy doesn't understand how to use quote tags properly, so he's always fine, and he frequently inserts his own commentary right inside the quote block. This makes it so anyone who isn't paying close attention can't actually tell whose words are whose.

Edward Fisher86 said:Oh, "unique." 😕.
And it’s more than just "unique" when the guy keeps insisting that we're all just agents for the previous administration, that I'm personally Linić's tax agent, or some kind of fiscal tyrant. It's all the same; the guy's writing is so "unique" that I'm starting to see imaginary agents appearing right in front of my face. 🙄

The linked posts are only part of it, to be clear; mostly, I was linking his connections to Nazism.

All of that might hold water, but there is one but.
I feel like finally snapping back at the guy: your uncle is the agent!
He'll give his usual response, I'll give mine, and then you've got a massive blowout on the thread.
That's why communication rules exist, and why we have mods to ensure we all stick to them.

Kudos to the Guild for their endless patience on this thread; I truly take my hat off to her. 🙏 That stoic, infinitely patient way of responding, explaining, and refusing to react to provocations is something you rarely see. (I was reading this earlier, and I hope she hasn't snapped 😬).

Clearly, you're a fan of PL. Fine, but my experience has been different. I saw this thread just a day or two after it opened, and despite all the provocations here, I jumped in for one reason:
I saw that PL wrote a warning to "his clique" on the thread only *after* he read and responded to things here. Sure, he didn't accept the criticism, but he hurried over to the thread to "clean up" his own mess.
Well, that behavior is extremely distasteful to me.

Furthermore, whoever deleted that one reported post essentially confirmed the inappropriateness of that unique text.
Yet, that same text keeps looping around and around.

Regarding the discussion on Fiscalization, when you read through Branko99's posts, someone really needs to clarify 🤷.

The guy doesn't understand how to use quote tags properly, so he's always fine, and he frequently inserts his own commentary right inside the quote block. This makes it so anyone who isn't paying close attention can't actually tell whose words are whose.

Edward Fisher86 said:Oh, "unique." 😕.
And it’s more than just "unique" when the guy keeps insisting that we're all just agents for the previous administration, that I'm personally Linić's tax agent, or some kind of fiscal tyrant. It's all the same; the guy's writing is so "unique" that I'm starting to see imaginary agents appearing right in front of my face. 🙄

The linked posts are only part of it, to be clear; mostly, I was linking his connections to Nazism.

All of that might hold water, but there is one but.
I feel like finally snapping back at the guy: your uncle is the agent!
He'll give his usual response, I'll give mine, and then you've got a massive blowout on the thread.
That's why communication rules exist, and why we have mods to ensure we all stick to them.

Kudos to the Guild for their endless patience on this thread; I truly take my hat off to her. 🙏 That stoic, infinitely patient way of responding, explaining, and refusing to react to provocations is something you rarely see. (I was reading this earlier, and I hope she hasn't snapped 😬).

Clearly, you're a fan of PL. Fine, but my experience has been different. I saw this thread just a day or two after it opened, and despite all the provocations here, I jumped in for one reason:
I saw that PL wrote a warning to "his clique" on the thread only *after* he read and responded to things here. Sure, he didn't accept the criticism, but he hurried over to the thread to "clean up" his own mess.
Well, that behavior is extremely distasteful to me.

Furthermore, whoever deleted that one reported post essentially confirmed the inappropriateness of that unique text.
Yet, that same text keeps looping around and around.

Regarding the discussion on Fiscalization, when you read through Branko99's posts, someone really needs to clarify 🤷.

The guy doesn't understand how to use quote tags properly, so he's always fine, and he frequently inserts his own commentary right inside the quote block. This makes it so anyone who isn't paying close attention can't actually tell whose words are whose.

Sam Wright21 said:Me, a fan? Hah! You should look at yourself before you start talking 🙂

No, it isn't about fandom; I simply have zero tolerance for any kind of repression. 🤷

Ziher doesn't have some "clique"; if anything, he seems like quite the individualist. However, I think you've interpreted his actions through a rather biased lens here.

I don't tolerate verbal offenses either. But a man is allowed to express his opinion, for heaven's sake.🤷

It's a bit lackluster, I'll admit—especially with those quotes you mentioned, and the fact that he writes in such an odd way—but personally, I would much rather see someone writing whatever they please than deal with the heavy hand of censorship.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

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.

Steven King74 said:Just so I can put what Edward Fisher86 added into the context of this complaint. As you can see from the examples provided, the PDF is riddled with ad hominem attacks and trolling that mostly goes unpunished. I’d also add that the go-to argument against anyone defending anything coming from the Democratic Party is to label them a communist, an agent of the old regime, a nostalgic, or a traitor. I hope it’s clear to the administration just how stupid and baseless those accusations are. If not, let me clarify. The Democratic Party grew out of the social-democratic wing of the former Communist Party of America, and it is a member of the Socialist Party, a group based in Brussels that includes 32 different European parties. Part of the party's name doesn't imply communism—because if it did, we wouldn't have elections or the privatization of state assets; we'd be looking at nationalization instead. This persistent counter-argument used against any Forum user defending the party by calling them a communist is becoming irritating, and I would declare it as trolling. In those cases, the attacked user starts defending themselves, and the discussion gets derailed from the actual topic.
I’ll leave it to chance whether all sorts of people write on Politics, but slybison8 isn't stupid; he's more than educated enough to know this. When the same moderator uses such arguments in their own discussions, while leaving a forest of similar posts unsanctioned—yet hands out bans to people who are genuinely using aggressive ad hominems simply because they hold a different political view—it raises the question: what is this moderator's motivation for working on this site? Honestly, I believe this moderator is actively trolling and abusing their authority to tilt the discussion toward whatever side suits them personally.
Therefore, I would ask the administration: is it the official stance of this platform as a legal entity that the Democratic Party is trying to bring communism back to America? Or is such a stance merely a matter of political opinion? Would you agree with me that such views constitute trolling? And if you agree that it is trolling, then I think I am asking a perfectly reasonable question: by what criteria did you decide that slybison8 was fit for moderator duties?

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.

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"?

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"?

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"?

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"?

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

Edward Fisher86 said:A PL fan because you showed up to this thread just to play "defender." I wasn't thinking anything particularly serious 😉.

The clique—those are just PL supporters in the thread about Fiscalization. I'm not being biased; they really are being shielded.

The group was mocking Linić, treating him like he was mentally unstable or sick, saying he lost his mind because he doesn't have kids.

One guy even went so far as to seriously explain how he has experience dealing with middle-aged people who don't have children 🙄. They moved on to Linić's sexual preferences, suggesting S&M and all sorts of other nonsense.

That isn't freedom of speech. It's more like public defamation, insults, or whatever else you want to call it, directed at a person. If someone were targeted like that in real life, they could sue. They are publicly making fun of a specific individual with a name and a reputation. The Moderator should have stepped in to stop it.

The Moderator is there not just to guide discussions, but to ensure no one gets unfairly harmed.

You can express an opinion on the Minister's tax policy without comparing him to Nazis.

PL let all of it slide, as if it were just one little comment. He allowed this disgusting mockery from his own supporters, even after calling my post pathetic 🤣—think what you will. Criteria?

Two days after Homeland Thanksgiving, when something entirely different was under scrutiny, PL shows up waving a finger, telling everyone to watch what they say. Right after this thread. Only he knows why.

Communication rules and censorship are not the same thing. There have to be certain general rules of the game.

In the meantime, I did a bit of digging into PL (since I haven't had any direct or indirect contact with him until now), and honestly, I wouldn't say he's all that great; if anything, it's the opposite.
But it's good that my own personal experience came first.

That's it. I don't feel like bothering myself with this anymore. Let the authorities do whatever they feel they need to do.
🙂 Night.

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.

casualharbor3 said:Written by a Forum user who gets away with swearing at and insulting other users without any consequences.☕
http://www.forum.com/showpost.php?p=4...postcount=3224

Edward Fisher86 said:It’s not that I don't fully grasp you 🤷.

Are you trying to say that calling a country's tax policy a quasi-Nazi system of control is "criticism," or that labeling SA members as fascists, Nazis, or SA units is just "criticism"? 😕

Fine, if that's how it works, let me know so I can play along too.

Regardless, it’s not like you’re part of the administration anyway.

There's something new here 😲

And once again, you'll probably insist that you aren't using Nazi, Goebbel's-style propaganda, yet you stigmatize all entrepreneurs with a few choice examples.
Just like your predecessors did with their Nazi ways.
If one Jew scams someone, everyone starts stigmatizing all Jews as thieves.

🤷 This is a critique of my position, of my post 🤷

slybison8, and actually Robert Hall7 as well, are participating steadily in this topic.
Maybe this is just standard practice in Politics 🤷 🙂

Susan Price30 said:Wait, who actually wrote that post? Was it slybison8?

Either you guys are complaining about multiple users posting without any Mod on the Politics board handing out bans—even though you think they should have—or you’re specifically pointing fingers at slybison8 and Robert Hall7 for not stepping in just because they happened to be participating in the thread at the time.
To me, that sounds totally backwards. Just because someone is chiming in as a regular Forum user doesn't mean they're running the show. If we're being objective here, responsibility for moderation lies with the entire Politics moderation team as a whole, not just those two specific people you're calling out. Right?

(Especially when you consider that both Robert Hall7 and slybison8 are top-tier moderators. Dragging them through the mud in a thread, labeling someone a "special case," or blaming them for something that isn't even their mistake feels pretty extreme to me. That's basically my take on it...😉

And what was the actual motivation behind all this drama? Was it just one single penalty point for a post that rightfully deserved a ban? Give me a break...

Jesse Ortiz71 said:Let them drag them through the mud. They knew exactly what they were signing up for when they agreed to be the "proof" that this Forum isn't an ideological echo chamber when it comes to picking Moderators.