Partial on off

coppersailor28 said:And you're just a little bird covered only because of cheating at those slot machines, right ☕
Not because of trolling, obviously...

What a lovely songbird, if you look closely at the feathers. This is exactly why I want trolls kicked off this forum. This is what kicking a troll off looks like:

John Palmer9 said:He isn't actually a leftist; he’s just a plant from the right wing sent to discredit the left, making people say, "Look at what kind of degenerates these leftists are."

On an American online forum, it shouldn't really matter whether someone identifies as a leftist or a conservative. From a purely logical standpoint, the only thing that should matter is whether a user is a troll or not. In the ecosystem of internet forums, I've observed that purging trolls is the single most vital factor for a community's survival.

Poletarac, it’s clear to me that someone swapped out your industrial hemp seeds for some low-grade Indian variety.
Do us all a favor and go tend to your worms and beetles instead of cluttering up this space.

backing up my buddy bluecyclist64 👍

honestly, once we get back in power and start rewarding all our loyal comrades, there won't be any chance of getting a pink slip, let alone some little plot of land. if a heavy hitter like Dr. Vladimir Bakarić were still around today, I bet the rules on this forum would look a whole lot different.

Nicholas Perez20 said:standing by a fellow comrade👍

Once we communists take power again—and we will—those "deserving" comrades won't be getting any handouts, let alone a plot of land. If a man like Dr. Vladimir Bakarić were still alive today, this forum would be operating under much different rules.

I'm talking about Tempo, and Kidrič, and Krajačić.

And especially Comrade Stari.

We might be eternal enemies on this forum, but I will always stand up for free speech, the removal of partiality, and TSL.
Even if we are adversaries, we aren't total assholes.

I fully support getting rid of partiality.

(...and when our paths cross on some thread, I’ll settle things with a single bullet shot 🙂 , just as is fitting. ☕ 😁 )

feralranger said:We might be eternal forum rivals, but I’ll always stand up for free speech, getting rid of partiality, and TSL.
Even if we're enemies, we aren't total assholes.

I'm all for eliminating partiality.

(...though if we ever cross paths in a thread, I'll settle it with a single shot 🙂 , as one should. ☕ 😁 )

So, we're basically the same. Things are one way over at Third, but God forbid we run into each other in the History section...



edit: changed the emoji—small enough that it shouldn't trigger an attack.

They stripped him of his land, then his wife actually let him write this—yet here you all are, still tearing him apart...

I’m totally backing my man bluecyclist64 in his quest to spread that wisdom all over this board. One single PDF and he’s done? That’s it? No nothing?
Let him troll away; maybe it’ll help his digestion or something.
Honestly, let's be real—who here hasn't played the troll at some point? Let the first person throw a stone. 🧐

Emily Cook8 said:I’m all for bluecyclist64 trying to spread his "wisdom" across this entire board. One PDF—that’s it, nothing else.
Let him troll; maybe it’ll help with his digestive issues...
Honestly, who hasn't played the troll at some point? Let's not act holier-than-thou. 🧐

Preach, lady!

PS: I haven't made the switch to sparkling water with juice yet, but it's only a matter of time... 🕺

I guess there’s nothing quite as satisfying as watching a troll get kicked off the forum👍

John Palmer9 said:There’s honestly nothing more satisfying than watching a troll get kicked off the forum👍

Just you wait until we're back in power. We'll be bringing back the Patriot Act in a heartbeat...

John Palmer9 said:Nothing beats watching a troll get kicked off the forum. 👍

If that’s the highlight of your day, you probably need to find some better ways to entertain yourself.
Isn't there an "ignore" button out there somewhere for achieving peak comfort?

Emily Cook8 said:If that’s really the highlight of your day, maybe you should look for better ways to entertain yourself.
Isn't there an "ignore" button out there just to maximize your own comfort?

Jelda, can you imagine him...
The guy is actually pretty sharp—knows his stuff when it comes to history.
But his big fail? He isn't a communist. 🤷 😁

briskwalker10 said:Man, can you imagine him?
He’s actually pretty sharp, knows his stuff when it comes to history and all.
But his big fail is that he isn't a communist. 🤷 😁

I don't know him personally, I'm just reacting to what I'm reading here.

(Miha, thanks for chatting me up here, but we can take this somewhere else.)

Emily Cook8 said:(Miha, thanks for chatting with me here, but we could do this somewhere else.)

Well, look above—we're just chatting where we always do. 🤷

You even called me a bird...

bluecyclist64 said:Hey, can someone please move these partial threads over to Off topic? My crew from the World PDF group is calling my name over there, and they’re actually decent people—just like me.🙂

Totally backing my man on this one. 🙂👍

I’m happy to jump in and offer my support as well... 😁

I really feel the need to return the favor to bluecyclist64, who constantly showers me with such "lovely" compliments every time I post a card, even though he’s never actually present during those heated forum debates...

He's honestly one of the most dedicated trolls and time-wasters on this site. I can't quite pin him down because he doesn't actually contribute anything of substance (at least not in the history threads I follow); he's more like a random commentator on daily news, using a "polite" vocabulary that would probably get most of us regular users permanently banned if we dared to engage in discussions with that kind of tone...

In the five or six years I've been keeping an eye on his presence in my threads or stumbling upon him in the history archives, I don't recall him ever providing a single link, PDF, or academic paper to back up his claims. As I mentioned, his "arguments" are usually just personal musings or random thoughts about life that have almost nothing to do with the actual topics at hand, or maybe only touch on them by a tiny percentage...

He's a pretty poor forum member who offers nothing but grand, "intellectual" conclusions that everyone forgets by tomorrow morning, day after day. Because of that, I personally think it might be time to do the community a favor and hit him with a permanent ban. We could bring in a new commentator to take his place—out with the old, in with the new—and let the cycle continue indefinitely...

bluecyclist64, I hope you aren't taking these kind words of mine personally, and please, do be gentle when you reply...

Frank Foster6 said:He’s honestly one of the biggest trolls and losers on this board. I can't quite put my finger on it because he doesn't actually contribute anything (at least not in the history threads I follow), but he acts more like some news commentator using "polite" language. If any of us regular users used his kind of vocabulary to jump into debates, we would have been permanently banned ages ago...

If you're choosing to argue with someone you consider a "loser," then you're just playing on their level. Is it really okay for a "respectable" user to lecture others just because they think differently?
Forum discussions should be about hanging out, not about moderators trying to shape opinions or forcing people to prove "truths" to one another.

In the five or six years I've been watching him in my threads or popping up in the history PDFs, that guy hasn't once provided a link, a paper, or a single scientific study to back up his claims. Like I said, his takes are mostly just daily musings or personal life thoughts that barely even touch the actual topics being discussed...

I've shared plenty of things exactly like what you're describing—legitimate professional publications anyone can read if they care, like https://www.caleffi.com/usa/en-us/technical-magazine
. But the moderator and the group this forum serves for entertainment claim those kinds of technical resources aren't "appropriate" for us. In their view, it's like a ticking time bomb that could cause damage, whereas they'd rather have people using the forum for advertising. When a moderator supports that mindset, it hurts both the community and the individuals who actually want to learn something useful.
After countless attempts to provide proof, the moderator just decides that banning people is the easiest way to deal with anyone who disagrees with his specific knowledge or views.

Looking at your signature, it's clear you're just stating an opinion. I don't personally agree with it, but I respect it as your view.
Maybe apply that same logic to the "bluecyclist64" situation.🙂

Emily Myers8

If you find yourself getting into heated debates with someone you genuinely consider a lost cause, you have to realize that you're really just shouting into the void—it’s an equal exchange of nothingness. It makes me wonder, though: is it actually right for a decent person on a forum to try and lecture others just because they hold a different perspective?

I’m staying far away from any discussions with bluecyclist64. If you're asking why, it's because whenever he shows up in those history threads, he doesn't actually engage with the material. He won't back up his claims with actual sources or cite reputable historians; instead, he just drops these random personal opinions that have next to nothing to do with the topic at hand. Honestly, it feels like trolling, and he's been doing it for years. To top it all off, his vocabulary can be pretty rough sometimes—it's like listening to a guy straight out of a gritty Western.

Look, let's be clear about what we're doing here: these forum discussions are meant for hanging out and socializing. This isn't some formal debate club where a moderator is trying to mold your perspective, nor is it a courtroom where one person is tasked with proving an absolute truth to another. It's just people talking.

Honestly, if I actually tried to argue against your position—that this forum is just one big social club—I wouldn’t have lasted five years here. I would’ve been slapped with a permanent ban ages ago. I can't quite wrap my head around why bluecyclist64 is allowed to be so loose and casual with the rules, though. Maybe he’s personal friends with the site owner? I can’t say for sure, but it looks that way. It feels pretty inconsistent when you see how many regular users get banned for much smaller, relatively harmless infractions, yet he keeps flying under the radar without any real sanctions, even though he completely ignores the established guidelines for the history section.

I've lost count of how many times I've actually pointed out exactly what you're saying here—it’s essentially a professional resource that anyone could pick up and read if they actually felt like putting in the effort. I was browsing through Caleffi’s technical magazine today, and honestly, it’s a goldmine if you’re looking to dive deep into the nuts and bolts of hydronic heating and cooling systems. It isn't just some glossy brochure meant to sell you parts; it’s actual, high-level technical content that gets into the weeds of system design and efficiency. If you’ve ever felt like you were just guessing when setting up a complex HVAC layout, this kind of resource is exactly what you need to bridge the gap between "it works" and "it’s optimized." They cover everything from basic principles to really advanced troubleshooting, which I find incredibly helpful. It’s structured in a way that feels less like a textbook and more like sitting down with a seasoned engineer who actually wants you to succeed. It’s definitely worth bookmarking for anyone working in the field here in the States—whether you're an installer, a designer, or just someone obsessed with making sure their home system is running at peak performance. Highly recommended for anyone who prefers substance over fluff.
The moderators and the group this forum is meant to serve seem to think that these kinds of technical publications aren't really "our thing." From their perspective, it’s like dropping a ticking time bomb into the community—something that could cause real damage. They claim the only people who actually benefit from this stuff are those looking to use the forum as a platform for self-promotion. In my opinion, when a moderator takes that kind of stance against a group like this, they're doing a disservice to the entire community. More importantly, they're shutting the door on individuals who are genuinely interested in self-improvement and leveling up their own skills. It feels counterproductive to stifle someone just because they want to learn and grow.
After spending countless hours trying to prove my point, the moderator has finally decided that the best way to deal with anyone who disagrees with his perspective or expertise is to just resort to partial truths.

Honestly, I think it’s probably best if we don't get mixed up in this one.

Looking at your signature, it’s pretty clear you’re just laying out your own personal take on things. To be honest, I don't quite see eye to eye with you on this one, but I definitely respect where you're coming from and value your perspective nonetheless.
bluecyclist64

I honestly assumed the only real response to my comment would have been to head straight for my signature...

Look, I’ve got the PDF history right here. Anyone—and I mean anyone—is free to challenge my signature or whatever else I claim. But I’m not just pulling these views out of thin air; I am basing my entire stance on the current state of genetics and the historical facts we have available to us right now. It’s interesting, though—in five years, not a single person has stepped up to dispute or even attempt to debunk my position. I couldn't tell you why that is. Maybe in another five or six years, things will shift regarding how my signature is perceived, because let's be honest, we never truly know what future genetic breakthroughs might reveal. If the science changes, then our respect for those new findings should change too. That's just how it works.

If I had to sum up my perspective for you, the rest of the forum, and anyone else listening, it’s this: we Americans back in the homeland have never truly been part of one big, unified tribe alongside groups like the Canadians, Canadians, Mexicans, or Mexicans. Now, if someone asks why we share such a dominant genetic baseline that suggests we might actually stem from a single common ancestor, I honestly can't say for sure. I can only offer my own take based on the historical records, genetics, and the facts I've laid out before. Just as people here might debate whether certain regional subgroups are distinct Southern Slavic tribes or totally unrelated to the main American identity, I’m asking you to let me share my thoughts on our ethnic origins. It’s all open to criticism and debate, and I'm happy to move the conversation to the appropriate threads for a deeper dive.