ZK - clarification on rules regarding the men's and women's community and user records

velvettrucker52 said:Start some threads, get talking... who's stopping you?
If you feel there's a shortage of certain topics, don't look at the moderators. On the women's corner, aside from politics, nothing is off-limits. You can talk about whatever you want.
Honestly, whining about how there are too many "this" types of posts and not enough "that" type of debate isn't going to change anything.

When my posts about my kid, my dog, or whatever else happens to be my life 🙏 manage to offend a massive crowd—much like what happened in this specific thread—then we can start comparing our levels of "venting."

Seriously, Jamie, do you really need to take these cheap shots?
Look, fine, but I'm just not interested in dragging this out. I have no intention of continuing this conversation.

velvettrucker52 said:I know. And you know mine, too.
Look, for the love of everything holy, we simply cannot have unmoderated PDFs floating around here. We just can't. I honestly don't know how many more times I’m going to have to repeat myself in this thread.
The forum is a private space, and the owner is adamant about keeping it moderated. If you decide to take a stand against that, don't hold your breath—it’s going to be an uphill battle trying to talk him into changing his mind.

If I had my way, I’d sign off on getting rid of those cardboard penalties entirely. Instead, we should expand the suspension system to include one, two, or even three-hour breaks. You just lie down, cool your head, and move on with your day. If you’re still feeling heated after that, you stay down for another hour. But unfortunately, we don't exactly have that luxury here.
We’ve got deletions, bans, and warnings.
We’ve decided to scrap the plan to delete everything from the ZK, since that was what you all were asking for.
The warnings and penalties are staying. You ignored every heads-up and every plea to get back on track, so don't act surprised now.
God, they’re just leaving behind nothing but cardboard.
Honestly, I’ve already said this once in this thread, but it truly sucks to have the women's corner sitting empty for three days without its usual regulars.
The final option is to implement a period of forced cooling off—essentially locking things down to let passions simmer down. But even then, you're likely just trading one type of misery for another.

To put it bluntly: we can't please everyone. We’re working with the hand we've been dealt, doing the best we can with the resources at our disposal, and that’s really all there is to it. We’ve tried to play nice and soften our stance as much as possible, but we've hit a wall. At least, not without better tools to work with.

This thread has spiraled into a complete three-way standoff. People are out here venting about every little grievance under the sun—one person even suggested that if we didn't put out the fire ourselves, it would just end up on the nightly news and then some corporate admins would have to step in and handle it. Personally, I’d much rather leave it to us folks who actually understand how this PDF works than hand it over to someone who doesn't have the slightest clue what they're doing.

Look, cartoons are what they are. I can certainly write custom ones—in fact, that’s usually my go-to—but when a topic gets this massive and heated, and everyone starts throwing verbal grenades left and right, I stick to the standard forum fare. That covers the trolling and the insults; if anyone actually needs clarification, I'll step in and explain. They’d earn just as many points as if I had drafted a custom response to handle the exhausting bickering, the constant sarcasm, or any other brand of mindless disruption intended to derail the conversation.

We've got deletions, bans, and warnings hitting the board—it's getting messy.
We decided to stop banning people from the women's corner since you guys were all making such a huge deal out of it.
The warnings and bans are staying put. I mean, we gave you warnings—we practically begged you to just get back on track and focus—but you clearly decided to tune us out.
Dammit, they’re just leaving behind a bunch of cardboard.
Honestly, I’ve already said this on this thread—it sucks. It really sucks having the women's corner empty like this for three days without any of its regulars around.
The last resort is just locking them up—you know, to cool their passions down—but honestly? I guess even then, people are still going to end up miserable.

This thread has completely spiraled out of control—honestly, people are just dumping every single thing they've ever experienced into here now.

Jamie Davis17 said:I wasn't even being snarky. I'm sorry if it came across that way, but what's your deal? 😕
I'm starting (or starting) threads, and I'm definitely not trying to belittle anyone else's topics, but looking at the first page, it's just a massive wall of threads about shopping, stores, plastic surgery, weight, girlfriends, where to buy things, and who to buy them from.
That's all great, really, but that shouldn't be everything there is to talk about.
Nobody is attacking the moderators because of the subject matter; I never said that anywhere.
I was just stating my opinion—that there are just too many of us here for everyone to have the exact same taste in discussions. I mean, come on, we all live different lives, and I certainly don't expect you and me, to say nothing of everyone else reading and writing, to be interested in the exact same things.
I mentioned the kid and the pets because that's how I recognize you here on the women's corner; am I wrong? I don't think that's a bad thing at all, truly, it's just that I don't see you actually participating in the discussions. Whatever the reason might be—whether you're just not feeling it, or you're busy, or you lack the will, or maybe you used to post on similar sites before—honestly, the reason doesn't matter to me—but I just don't see you engaging, aside from moderating.
My only takeaway is that maybe this kind of stuff doesn't interest you right now, which is totally fine, but I could easily say that I'd write about other topics too.
You said that the forum isn't the place for those kinds of discussions, implying that's not what the forum should be used for.
I just don't agree. I really believe the forum is a place for conversation.
I'm not sure why you felt insulted; that wasn't my intention. It's not like I go around insulting people normally; I'm just trying to show you how it looks from someone else's perspective.

Jamie Davis17 As specified by:
You mentioned earlier that this forum isn't intended to be a platform for those kinds of debates—essentially, that it shouldn't serve that purpose at all.
I have to disagree. I truly believe this forum should be a space for actual conversation.

velvettrucker52 said:In the women's corner, a massive amount of stuff is allowed to pass through without any consequences.
And it absolutely does.

However, when the mods step in and tell you to tighten things up because a thread is about to face stricter moderation—which isn't something we issue every single day—it would be reasonable for you to take that to heart.
We typically drop those warnings when people start hurling nasty insults, or when participants or even just lurkers begin reporting posts for being offensive, blatant trolling, or simply being aggravating in other ways.

The women's corner is loosely moderated, but it can't be completely lawless. It just can't. Not if Anderlon has anything to say about it. Absolutely not.
You can get away with a lot more in the women's corner than in any other sub-forum on this site, but even there, you need to know when to pull back once you've been warned. I'm not suggesting you should tuck your tails between your legs and start writing like choirboys and choir girls, but the nasty insults and the trolling? That needs to stop.

To put it simply: for threads where we announce stricter moderation, we expect you to behave with the same decorum you’d use in any other part of the forum. The relaxed nature of the women's corner covers the banter, the occasional troll, the heated debates, and the general nonsense, but certain things are unacceptable even here. When a thread catches fire and everyone starts losing their minds, the moderators have to put down the drinks and step in. 😁

Look, when the mods tell you guys to chill because they’re gonna start tightening the reins on a thread, it’s not happening every single day... so it would be cool if you all just respected that...

Charles Ross3 said:Hey Bliss, I really think you moderators might need to sit down and hash out some clearer guidelines regarding how we handle mentions of politics and religion here on the forum.

I mean, look at this—it feels almost impossible to have a serious discussion about homosexuality without touching upon how it was viewed back in the days of the Soviet Bloc or under those old one-party socialist regimes, which shaped the attitudes people still carry today.

As it stands, it's making it seem like gay rights issues only became a flashpoint here after the early 90s when certain religious rhetoric took center stage, whereas in reality, people were being thrown in prison years before that for "unnatural acts" or supposedly "Western decadence" that threatened the stability of the old socialist state.

If simply bringing up socialism, one-party rule, or historical figures like Stalin or Mao is considered such a sensitive, taboo topic that we get instant warnings telling us "keep politics out of this shop," then shouldn't we also consider banning these endless debates over religion? There are plenty of other sub-forums for that, after all... if someone is truly interested in those topics, they can just head over to the Politics or Religion boards.

To be honest, as many others have pointed out, there’s this lingering impression that mocking or belittling believers—mostly Catholics, let's face it—is perfectly fine, yet the second anyone mentions politics (usually referring to the old communist era or the Cold War), it's treated like something scandalous and unwelcome. If both subjects are open to criticism—and they absolutely are—then why shouldn't both be allowed? It doesn't feel particularly fair if one is declared off-limits while the other is left wide open for debate.

Charles Ross3 said:Bradley Sanders4, with all due respect, I wasn't actually addressing you, but rather the moderators.

It simply isn't possible to separate those two things, whether it's on this specific thread or any other topic here.
If the policy on ZK is so strict that mentioning the political system we lived under just twenty years ago is deemed "improper"—under the guise that someone might feel offended, hurt, or belittled—then where is the consistency? We often see the moderators explaining that bringing up politics leads to people losing their cool, and let’s be honest, it’s pretty obvious that some forum members really do struggle with anger management. If that's the reasoning, then why isn't it understood that bringing religion and faith into the mix to the level of mockery, disparagement, and outright insults is just as problematic? Why isn't that treated with the same level of scrutiny when similar topics pop up on ZK?

So, my stance is simple: either we allow political discussion, or we ban religious bickering as well. If we go the latter route, shouldn't those users who are itching for those kinds of debates be directed toward appropriate PDFs or dedicated threads focused on politics, religion, and such?

If politics on ZK is banned to the point where just mentioning the system we lived under only twenty years ago is considered taboo—basically because someone might feel offended, hurt, or slighted—then what are we even doing here?

And honestly—it’s pretty obvious that some of the folks on this forum seriously need to work on their anger management.

So, I’m torn—either we let this kind of political talk slide, or we just ban religious debates entirely. If we go that route, maybe we could redirect all those users who are clearly itching for a debate toward the actual policy PDFs and the specific threads dedicated to politics and religion. It might actually work, I guess.

Charles Ross3 said:Bradley Sanders4, with all due respect, I wasn't actually addressing you, but rather the moderators.

It simply isn't possible to separate those two things, whether it's on this specific thread or any other topic here.
If the policy on ZK is so strict that mentioning the political system we lived under just twenty years ago is deemed "improper"—under the guise that someone might feel offended, hurt, or belittled—then where is the consistency? We often see the moderators explaining that bringing up politics leads to people losing their cool, and let’s be honest, it’s pretty obvious that some forum members really do struggle with anger management. If that's the reasoning, then why isn't it understood that bringing religion and faith into the mix to the level of mockery, disparagement, and outright insults is just as problematic? Why isn't that treated with the same level of scrutiny when similar topics pop up on ZK?

So, my stance is simple: either we allow political discussion, or we ban religious bickering as well. If we go the latter route, shouldn't those users who are itching for those kinds of debates be directed toward appropriate PDFs or dedicated threads focused on politics, religion, and such?

Bradley Sanders4 said:Yeah, and? So am I. I’m officially calling for an end to this forum sterilization.

velvettrucker52 said:Honestly,
I should probably mention I’m typing this on a tablet. It supposedly has a touchscreen, but I feel like a complete Neanderthal trying to use it. A total caveman. I have zero coordination with this thing; I’m tapping away like I’m using a shovel, and it’s making me just as frustrated as I’m sure it’s making you.
Basically, all this is just a bunch of nonsense.
Regarding the continuation of work actions following a final warning, I believe such measures need to be strictly enforced. I trust that women will hold their ground in these matters. Personally, I wouldn't dare attempt anything through this piece of junk device.
As for banning discussions regarding religion, I am firmly against such an amputation of the ZK. That said, this specific thread hasn't exactly proven that ZK is the perfect environment for such debates.
On the subject of politics—I remain relentlessly opposed. We don't need it. Bradley Sanders4 explained everything perfectly in post 26, and I have nothing more to add to that.
Regarding the idea of banning certain topics altogether—given everything that has unfolded here, the idea actually seems brilliant today. If this thread has demonstrated anything, it’s that lightly moderated forums like this tend to attract the most offended and agitated users. You ignore the warnings, you wonder why the rules exist, and then you feel targeted when things get wiped—but even that isn't an option anymore. Everyone acts perfectly fine and "cool" here, yet they tell a completely different story in their official applications.
To be blunt, I’m getting a bit tired of everything that has been happening within and surrounding this thread. There.

Feel free to tear this post apart. I don't have the mental energy to wrestle with this devilish device any longer today.

Insert emojis at your leisure.
This post isn't aimed at anyone in particular, but if you recognize yourself in it, well, that’s just how it goes.

Thanks. Now, please, feel free to mock my touchscreen skills.

velvettrucker52 said:Honestly,
I should probably mention I’m typing this on a tablet. It supposedly has a touchscreen, but I feel like a complete Neanderthal trying to use it. A total caveman. I have zero coordination with this thing; I’m tapping away like I’m using a shovel, and it’s making me just as frustrated as I’m sure it’s making you.
Basically, all this is just a bunch of nonsense.
Regarding the continuation of work actions following a final warning, I believe such measures need to be strictly enforced. I trust that women will hold their ground in these matters. Personally, I wouldn't dare attempt anything through this piece of junk device.
As for banning discussions regarding religion, I am firmly against such an amputation of the ZK. That said, this specific thread hasn't exactly proven that ZK is the perfect environment for such debates.
On the subject of politics—I remain relentlessly opposed. We don't need it. Bradley Sanders4 explained everything perfectly in post 26, and I have nothing more to add to that.
Regarding the idea of banning certain topics altogether—given everything that has unfolded here, the idea actually seems brilliant today. If this thread has demonstrated anything, it’s that lightly moderated forums like this tend to attract the most offended and agitated users. You ignore the warnings, you wonder why the rules exist, and then you feel targeted when things get wiped—but even that isn't an option anymore. Everyone acts perfectly fine and "cool" here, yet they tell a completely different story in their official applications.
To be blunt, I’m getting a bit tired of everything that has been happening within and surrounding this thread. There.

Feel free to tear this post apart. I don't have the mental energy to wrestle with this devilish device any longer today.

Insert emojis at your leisure.
This post isn't aimed at anyone in particular, but if you recognize yourself in it, well, that’s just how it goes.

Thanks. Now, please, feel free to mock my touchscreen skills.

Charles Ross3 said:Bradley Sanders4, with all due respect, I wasn't actually addressing you, but rather the moderators.

It simply isn't possible to separate those two things, whether it's on this specific thread or any other topic here.
If the policy on ZK is so strict that mentioning the political system we lived under just twenty years ago is deemed "improper"—under the guise that someone might feel offended, hurt, or belittled—then where is the consistency? We often see the moderators explaining that bringing up politics leads to people losing their cool, and let’s be honest, it’s pretty obvious that some forum members really do struggle with anger management. If that's the reasoning, then why isn't it understood that bringing religion and faith into the mix to the level of mockery, disparagement, and outright insults is just as problematic? Why isn't that treated with the same level of scrutiny when similar topics pop up on ZK?

So, my stance is simple: either we allow political discussion, or we ban religious bickering as well. If we go the latter route, shouldn't those users who are itching for those kinds of debates be directed toward appropriate PDFs or dedicated threads focused on politics, religion, and such?

So, I'm either for allowing (i) politics or banning the religious bickering entirely, so that users who want those kinds of debates can head over to the appropriate subreddits or threads on politics, religion, and stuff like that.

Frank Williams6 said:I haven't really posted on this topic before, but I just had to weigh in.

Exactly.
People are overdoing it without any filter at all.
When you talk about human rights, that includes the right to faith and human dignity. If there's a right to love whoever you want, which there is, why is the right to believe suddenly less important?
Attacking the gay community is called homophobia, but attacking and insulting Catholics is just called being "liberal" and "open-minded." Yeah, right.

This is what greeted me yesterday in a chat I write in:

Totally out of nowhere, people just started losing their minds over something with a Catholic vibe.

In three years of chatting with Bradley Sanders4, Yevgeniya, Bios, etc.—people I totally disagree with—I've never seen such an unhinged, baseless meltdown.
Basically, intolerance and hate speech toward believers have been quietly slipped through the back door while everyone was busy focusing on the rights of every other group.

Debates, questions, healthy humor, sarcasm—that's all fine. But this general mania of "let's crucify the Catholics" is just way too much.

So, I'm either for allowing (i) politics or banning the religious bickering entirely, so that users who want those kinds of debates can head over to the appropriate subreddits or threads on politics, religion, and stuff like that.

I'm not a fan of bans.

Bradley Sanders4 said:Actually, yeah, it is possible. We haven't lived under a one-party system for twenty years, and frankly, that history isn't nearly as relevant to this topic as, say, ancient Greece or some Islamic states might be. The real issue is that the go-to arguments in these debates usually boil down to "well, things were better under Marshall," which is just a nasty way of implying that gay people are all atheists or nostalgic for the old regime. Once someone pulls that kind of "logic" out of their pocket, of course someone else is going to jump in to call them out.

Stop dragging Marshall and Stalin into this as if they're valid talking points, otherwise, we'll never get any actual political discussion done. Cut the philosophy crap.

Frank Williams6 said:I haven't really posted on this topic before, but I just had to weigh in.

Exactly.
People are overdoing it without any filter at all.
When you talk about human rights, that includes the right to faith and human dignity. If there's a right to love whoever you want, which there is, why is the right to believe suddenly less important?
Attacking the gay community is called homophobia, but attacking and insulting Catholics is just called being "liberal" and "open-minded." Yeah, right.

This is what greeted me yesterday in a chat I write in:

Totally out of nowhere, people just started losing their minds over something with a Catholic vibe.

In three years of chatting with Bradley Sanders4, Yevgeniya, Bios, etc.—people I totally disagree with—I've never seen such an unhinged, baseless meltdown.
Basically, intolerance and hate speech toward believers have been quietly slipped through the back door while everyone was busy focusing on the rights of every other group.

Debates, questions, healthy humor, sarcasm—that's all fine. But this general mania of "let's crucify the Catholics" is just way too much.

So, I'm either for allowing (i) politics or banning the religious bickering entirely, so that users who want those kinds of debates can head over to the appropriate subreddits or threads on politics, religion, and stuff like that.

I'm not a fan of bans.

velvettrucker52 said:Honestly,
I should probably mention I’m typing this on a tablet. It supposedly has a touchscreen, but I feel like a complete Neanderthal trying to use it. A total caveman. I have zero coordination with this thing; I’m tapping away like I’m using a shovel, and it’s making me just as frustrated as I’m sure it’s making you.
Basically, all this is just a bunch of nonsense.
Regarding the continuation of work actions following a final warning, I believe such measures need to be strictly enforced. I trust that women will hold their ground in these matters. Personally, I wouldn't dare attempt anything through this piece of junk device.
As for banning discussions regarding religion, I am firmly against such an amputation of the ZK. That said, this specific thread hasn't exactly proven that ZK is the perfect environment for such debates.
On the subject of politics—I remain relentlessly opposed. We don't need it. Bradley Sanders4 explained everything perfectly in post 26, and I have nothing more to add to that.
Regarding the idea of banning certain topics altogether—given everything that has unfolded here, the idea actually seems brilliant today. If this thread has demonstrated anything, it’s that lightly moderated forums like this tend to attract the most offended and agitated users. You ignore the warnings, you wonder why the rules exist, and then you feel targeted when things get wiped—but even that isn't an option anymore. Everyone acts perfectly fine and "cool" here, yet they tell a completely different story in their official applications.
To be blunt, I’m getting a bit tired of everything that has been happening within and surrounding this thread. There.

Feel free to tear this post apart. I don't have the mental energy to wrestle with this devilish device any longer today.

Insert emojis at your leisure.
This post isn't aimed at anyone in particular, but if you recognize yourself in it, well, that’s just how it goes.

Thanks. Now, please, feel free to mock my touchscreen skills.

Frank Williams6 said:I haven't really posted on this topic before, but I just had to weigh in.

Exactly.
People are overdoing it without any filter at all.
When you talk about human rights, that includes the right to faith and human dignity. If there's a right to love whoever you want, which there is, why is the right to believe suddenly less important?
Attacking the gay community is called homophobia, but attacking and insulting Catholics is just called being "liberal" and "open-minded." Yeah, right.

This is what greeted me yesterday in a chat I write in:

Totally out of nowhere, people just started losing their minds over something with a Catholic vibe.

In three years of chatting with Bradley Sanders4, Yevgeniya, Bios, etc.—people I totally disagree with—I've never seen such an unhinged, baseless meltdown.
Basically, intolerance and hate speech toward believers have been quietly slipped through the back door while everyone was busy focusing on the rights of every other group.

Debates, questions, healthy humor, sarcasm—that's all fine. But this general mania of "let's crucify the Catholics" is just way too much.

So, I'm either for allowing (i) politics or banning the religious bickering entirely, so that users who want those kinds of debates can head over to the appropriate subreddits or threads on politics, religion, and stuff like that.

I'm not a fan of bans.

Bradley Sanders4 said:Actually, yeah, it is possible. We haven't lived under a one-party system for twenty years, and frankly, that history isn't nearly as relevant to this topic as, say, ancient Greece or some Islamic states might be. The real issue is that the go-to arguments in these debates usually boil down to "well, things were better under Marshall," which is just a nasty way of implying that gay people are all atheists or nostalgic for the old regime. Once someone pulls that kind of "logic" out of their pocket, of course someone else is going to jump in to call them out.

Stop dragging Marshall and Stalin into this as if they're valid talking points, otherwise, we'll never get any actual political discussion done. Cut the philosophy crap.

Karen Rodriguez3 said:It wasn't even about that. It was about people straight-up falsifying history, and I guess there's no way to stop people from reacting to that.

Yeah, true.
The subject is sensitive, and honestly, it's pretty much impossible to avoid mentioning politics at some point.
If it's just mentioned within the context of the main topic, I don't see why it should be banned. Otherwise, there's really no topic left to discuss.
And maybe if people stopped nitpicking and hitting that report button unless it's actual insults or a serious rule break, things would go smoother.