Volver and Zloubot are looking for moderator positions

Betty Fowler said:I honestly have no clue which one of your boyfriends you’re talking about, and frankly, it doesn't matter. What matters is that the readers see I'm telling the truth and that everything is being handled by the rules.

Now, I'd really like to get this discussion back to the actual issue: the terrible abuse of moderation power, which was my original point here.

He isn't a boyfriend. He's an Incel. He's been harassing me for years—and not just me, either. I really thought he had finally moved on.

Betty Fowler said:Now I want to steer this conversation back to the terrible abuse of moderation, which was the whole point to begin with.

If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

Grace Edwards92 said:He’s not some player. He’s an Incel. He’s been hounding me for years. And it’s not just me, either. I honestly thought he would have moved on by now.

Like I said, you know better than anyone what you were doing and who you were doing it with. You know exactly what you’re still doing to certain people who are just sitting around on their couches.

But if you’re labeling the guys you actually went out with as incels, what does that make the ones who never stood a chance?

Jesse Price said:Like I said before, you know better than anyone what you’ve done and who you’ve been with. You also know exactly how you're still messing with certain people who just sit around on their couches all day.

Anyway, if you're calling the guys you actually dated Incels, then what does that make the ones who are just hoping for a chance?

I didn't give SD the time of day. That's probably why you all hate me.

Grace Edwards92 said:I didn't give the SD an inch. That’s exactly why you all hate me.

You're just not my type. Seriously, cut it out—it's starting to get awkward.

A successful Incel, I guess. Nothing more, nothing less.

Jesse Price said:Like I said, you know exactly what you were doing and who you were doing it with. You still know exactly what you're doing to the losers sitting on their couches typing away right now.

And if you're calling people Incels just because they actually have hope, then what does that make everyone else?

She hooked up with someone just because some random guy sent a DM? Wow.

That's your big argument? And we're supposed to tolerate this? Is this really an intellectual debate worthy of a Philosophy major?
Give me a break...🤦

@ Enchy 👍 all that stuff you wrote about the forum and exchanging ideas and whatever. That only works for actual adults.
This isn't a preschool; it's a flea market where we just throw rotten produce at each other and forget why we even showed up in the first place.

Michelle Bennett14 said:So she did it just because some random guy sent her a DM? Wow.

Bros before hoes... you know how it is.

Joseph Bailey41 said:Eyes wide shut?

If this doesn't belong on the forum... then why the hell did it end up in my inbox?

Just a bucket of worms waiting to be dug up, then it's over.

Betty Fowler said:Just so everyone knows, I'm not making any of this up. Some parts got censored because they reveal way more than necessary.

(there's more coming)

I don't get how one frustrated forum user crowing at another is supposed to prove anything. Like, do you guys from the Philosophy department just ditch logic the second you start typing?
And that whole "she gave it to him" argument? It’s total garbage. Using that line just shows you’ve completely run out of actual points to make. Even if she were sleeping with the entire hospital staff—whatever—it doesn't prove anything about her. Honestly, the only thing it proves is how low your own character is for even bringing it up. Stop being so salty. 🙂

dustypilot11 said:It’s just a bucket of worms being dumped out, and that's it.

I don't see how one frustrated forum user nitpicking at another serves as any kind of proof. Do you guys in the Philosophy department just throw logic out the window the second you start typing?
And this whole "argument" about whether a woman "gave" it or not—or if she would be calmer if she had—is something people only bring up when they actually lack a real point. Even if someone were sleeping with an entire hospital staff (my bad), I don't see how that proves anything, other than perhaps your own character for attacking her like that. Don't be bitter. 🙂

Now you're getting caught up in the nonsense too. You won't be able to explain it to them; they're basically acting like a hive mind.

Michelle Bennett14 said:So she did it just because some random guy sent her a DM? Wow.

Is that really an argument? And we're actually supposed to tolerate that level of logic? Is this what passes for a debate in a Philosophy department?
Good grief...🤦

@ Enchy 👍 everything you mentioned about the forum and the exchange of ideas is true. But that assumes we're dealing with adults.
This isn't a preschool; it’s more like a chaotic flea market where people throw rotten produce at each other and quickly forget why they even showed up in the first place.

This isn't philosophy.

But what I wrote in my opening post actually is. It's the kind of discussion your colleague seems to think belongs in a Philosophy seminar.

And frankly, I couldn't care less whether he was half-way there or not. I have my reasons for thinking he was, but it doesn't move the needle for me. Honestly, when I stop to think about the act itself, it's just revolting.

dustypilot11 said:I don't see how one frustrated forum user's screeching serves as proof of anything. Do you people in the Philosophy department just abandon logic the moment you start typing?
And this whole "argument" about whether a woman "gave" him something—whether she actually did or if she would have been calmer if she had—is the kind of thing people bring up when they've run out of actual points to make. Even if she were sleeping with the entire hospital staff, how does that prove anything? Aside from revealing something about your own character by attacking her like that. There’s no need to be bitter. 🙂

What now? Are you feeling targeted too?

You're ignoring the entire reason this thread exists, and you're brushing off the insults thrown my way, yet you seem deeply offended by the way I'm discussing a woman who earned that specific style of communication. Great.

Jesse Price said:What now, you feeling called out too?

Ignoring the whole point of this thread and the insults thrown at me, while getting all worked up because I’m talking about a woman who basically earned that treatment? Great.

Again, irrelevant. Just gotta ask, purely so I know who I'm even dealing with here—what's your IQ?

I can't speak on steelridge58 or the mods since I don't know them, but regarding what you linked, I definitely have thoughts. If you talked to me or about me like that, I'd trash you too. 🤷

Jesse Price said:This isn't Philosophy.

But what I wrote in my opening post actually is. It’s a debate your colleague thinks is worthy of being called Philosophy.

And honestly, I couldn't care less if she was half-naked or whatever. I have my reasons for thinking she was, but it's not my problem. Actually, just thinking about the whole thing makes me sick.

First off, I don't even know her.

Second, we're talking about actual Philosophy here, not some random forum hookup drama.

Third, you're the one who turned this into an argument about private hookups and judging some woman's life outside of this site.

Who went off-topic? Doesn't really matter, because you did.

Jesse Price said:This isn't philosophy.

But what I wrote in my opening post actually is. It’s the kind of debate your colleague thinks is worthy of being called philosophy.

And honestly, I couldn't care less whether she did or didn't. I have my reasons for thinking she did, but it doesn't change anything for me. To be truthful, just thinking about the act itself makes me feel a bit sick.

If that's the case, why did you ask me (publicly) if I'd give you sex if you held a gun to my head?

dustypilot11 Asks:
Once again, we’re missing the point entirely. I actually have to ask, just so I know who I'm dealing with here: what's your IQ?

What exactly is this?

dustypilot11 said:I can't really weigh in on the situation between steelridge58 and the moderators since I don't know the full story, but regarding the link you shared? I definitely have thoughts. If someone spoke to me the way you’re speaking to me, that’s exactly how I’d judge them, too. 🤷

It seems like you aren't particularly well-versed in several of these matters, yet that doesn't seem to stop you from acting like an expert. You keep zeroing in on one specific post while completely ignoring everything that came before it. Is there really any point in debating someone who is this selective about what they choose to criticize?

Look, I’ve had my fair share of scraps with steelridge58—I’ve been banned and I’ve scrubbed some of my own posts—but I want to go on the record here and back her moderation. She’s doing the work to keep this place from turning into a total circus, keeping the discussions decent and staying objective. Honestly, if you’re out here hunting for flaws in her, you should probably take a long, hard look in the mirror first.

Jesse Price said:Over on the Philosophy subforum, the moderator steelridge58 has been abusing her power for a while now, not just toward me but toward other users too, and today she really crossed a line.

That’s straight-up slander, so I’ve reported both your post and this entire thread.

Jesse Price said:I got a strike today because I made this post regarding the druid topic:

...which was directed at a user named Joseph Bailey41, who just a day earlier had posted a list of all the insults (which I referred to above as "collected pieces") that a deceased forum member had written here on the site.

Right before that struck post in this same thread, you already got a strike for commenting on the moderation after they deleted a post—a post you later claimed was criminal because steelridge58 took it down.
- You got a strike. And then another one when your subsequent comment referenced that deleted post. On top of all that, that post was reported.

Jesse Price said:This afternoon, Joseph Bailey41 (whom I've been avoiding for a long time because she staged that whole meltdown of mine over in the Psychology section—starting an argument full of nasty insults and lies, and then teaming up with her friend the moderator Almost Rosey to ensure I got banned, but that's a whole different story) started a conflict right here. First, she implies that I'm full of shit for absolutely no reason, then she dehumanizes me and my family by calling us cannon fodder, then she goes as far as to imply that, in her words, I sleep with my sister (she even knows who she is because a few years back in a chat during a debate, I posted a childhood photo of me and my sister when we were 6 and 8. This isn't the first time she's used that against me, which is why I said she's predictable and why this whole thing is just bizarre), then she mentions how people will leave her funeral happy, and finally wraps it up with fuck you.

And for any of that, the user in question didn't get a single verbal warning, a strike, or even have her posts removed. Nothing. The moderator was online the whole time and just sat there letting it happen.

Have you actually reported any posts that you felt were offensive?

No, I haven't.

So what exactly are you complaining about—that the moderator didn't step in to arbitrate some petty back-and-forth argument happening in your private chat?

But then look at my response:

http://www.exampleforum.com/showthread.php?p=87153589

...and suddenly I'm hit with an immediate 25-point penalty. Of course, this isn't really about the points themselves, it's about the sheer hypocrisy and the double standards that a moderator shouldn't be showing, especially on a sub-forum that's supposed to be built on logic, reason, and basic human decency.

You got penalized for being insulting and for attacking the moderator and the moderation team.

Besides, there's a specific thread dedicated to appealing penalties, yet you decided to open this one in such a provocative and malicious way, trying to paint me as a moderator who's just abusing their power—which is exactly why I mentioned earlier that the way you titled this whole topic feels like nothing short of slander.