I'm shocked by the moderation on this forum

I’m trying to stay level-headed and professionally request that administration address the constant rule-breaking on this forum. People are insulting me in the most primitive ways possible, and frankly, it’s getting harder to ignore. I’m reaching a point where if I snap back at these insults, I’ll be the one getting banned instead of them.

I need the admins to answer a few questions. I'll start with the most recent instance.

1. A user called me an idiot and only received a 25-point penalty for it. Can someone explain which rule allows calling participants "idiots" with such a minimal, laughable sanction? If a blunt, primitive insult like that isn't subject to strict enforcement, then I really have nothing left to say.

2. Is it permissible to use avatars of convicted war criminals? I assume that might be acceptable in Mexico, but I hope not on the largest forum in America. It seems far too common for users to sport avatars of war criminals—including the individual who just insulted me.

3. Is it allowed to label a user a terrorist or a supporter of terrorists and radical Islamists? To be clear, someone is accusing me of being a terrorist simply because I am Muslim. Take a look at these comments directed at me:

Honestly, I'm shocked. If someone had told me that the most prominent forum in America permits this kind of chauvinistic and primitive commentary, I wouldn't have believed them.🤦

dustycrane2 said:2. Is it acceptable to use avatars of convicted war criminals?

I will take this opportunity again to ask about the unconvicted notorious war criminals. A few forum members have Putin on their avatars, and one—just so there is no confusion—has Bashar ali Assad in both his avatar and his username. 🙏

And while we are talking about Praljko, would it be tolerated if certain groups showed up tomorrow using avatars of Šešelj, Mladić, and the rest of that crowd?

As far as insults go, my experience is that the forum is moderated with high quality...

dustycrane2 said:I am trying to remain calm and request an administrative response to the persistent rule-breaking here. Users are insulting me in the most primitive ways possible. It is becoming difficult to maintain composure. I am reaching a point where I might retaliate, and I would rather not be the one punished for reacting to their abuse.

I am asking the administration to address several questions. Let’s start with the most recent incident.

1. A user called me an idiot and received a mere 25 penalty points for it. Please explain which rule dictates that calling fellow participants "idiots" warrants such a minimal, laughable sanction. If a crude, primitive insult like that isn't subject to strict disciplinary action, then I truly have nothing left to say.

2. Is it permissible to use avatars of convicted war criminals? I assume such things might be tolerated in Mexico, but I hope they aren't allowed on America's largest forum. I ask because it seems common for users to use such imagery—including the individual who just insulted me.

3. Is it acceptable to label a user a terrorist or a supporter of terrorists and radical Islamists? To accuse someone of being a terrorist simply because they are Muslim is baseless. Look at these comments directed at me:

Honestly, I am shocked. Had I been told that the most prominent forum in America permits such chauvinistic and primitive commentary, I wouldn't have believed it.🤦

For the record, the person you modeled your handle after was one of the earliest Muslim military leaders. He was never officially convicted of war crimes, but he was a fanatic, leaving behind ruined cities and horrific atrocities.

It is clear your outrage isn't born from humanitarianism; you are simply targeting specific users whom you perceive to be on the opposing side.

What is the moderation's stance on this?

Keep your clichés and nonsense to yourselves. The figure I use for my handle is respected by historians worldwide—a commander who never lost a battle. If anyone has an issue with me, take it up privately.

Regarding Praljko, I’m not interested in discussing him with you. Taking his own life doesn't turn him into a saint or erase his actions. If Americans don't recognize the Hague tribunal, just say so plainly. You were all cheering when they made that shocking pivot to release General Gotovina. Hypocrisy is a bad look.
The fact that my username identifies me as Muslim clearly gives people a free pass to call me names without consequence. For a nation that claims to uphold Western democratic values, that’s pretty ugly.

cosmicgull52 said:I’m going to take this chance again to ask—what about those unconvicted notorious war criminals? A few folks on here have Putin on their avatars, and just to be clear, one person actually has Bashar al-Assad in both their nick and their avatar. 🙏

I can't help but wonder... would you react the exact same way if it were Bush, Obama, or Blair on an avatar?

briskwalker10 said:I have to ask—would you be reacting this way if the avatar featured Bush, Obama, or Tony Blair?

Cut the demagoguery. A country in the European Union needs zero tolerance for this kind of thing; international court rulings aren't optional. Being a supporter of Slobodan Praljak doesn't grant him immunity for his crimes.
I'm done with this part of the argument. I expect the administration to answer my questions—specifically regarding the insults directed at me. I care less about Praljak.

There’s really no point in playing the victim when you don't fit the mold—if you aren't part of the crowd, the majority is naturally going to push back against you. It’s a universal truth that applies to every corner of America, and honestly, you just have to learn how to handle it.

As the Psalmist points out:

dustycrane2 said:Keep your platitudes and nonsense to yourselves. The individual whose name I use as my handle is respected by historians worldwide—a commander who never lost a battle. If anyone has an issue with me, they can take it up separately.

Regarding Praljko, I won't debate him with you. Drinking poison doesn't make him a saint, nor does it wash away his actions. If America and the American people refuse to recognize the Hague Tribunal, then just say so plainly. You were all celebrating when they pulled off that shocker by acquitting General Gotovina. Hypocrisy is a foul trait.
Apparently, using a handle that identifies me as Muslim gives everyone permission to call me an idiot or a terrorist without consequence. For a nation in the EU that claims to uphold European and democratic values, that looks pretty ugly.

Look, I said he wasn't a war criminal because that term didn't even exist back then.
But it remains a fact that he committed more crimes than everyone you're defending combined—ten times over.
Besides, as you noted, he was a commander, and a religious fanatic at that. His nickname was "God's Sword."
Given the specific handle you chose, it’s interesting; I'd bet money it’s a message aimed at the forum users you claim to dislike.

And I see you've already started lying about what I actually wrote. Your handle doesn't bother me.

dustycrane2 said:Cut the demagoguery. Any country in the European Union should have zero tolerance for this kind of stuff—international court rulings are meant to be respected. Being a fan of Praljko doesn't give him a free pass for his crimes.
I’m done addressing this specific point. I expect the administration to answer my questions—starting with the insults directed at my account. I couldn't care less about Praljko.

I didn't even bring up Praljko. We actually agree on that. It was him who brought up Putin, so I just asked if he'd react the same way if the avatar featured Bush, Obama, Blair, or that little guy Sarkozy.

briskwalker10 said:I have to ask: would you react this way if the avatar showed Bush, Obama, or Blair?

No. These are legally elected former presidents and prime ministers from our allied nations. They are not tyrants better suited for low-budget Hollywood movies than for actual life.

John Doe... seriously? So, Bashar al-Assad is some kind of war criminal, but George W. Bush—who basically turned an entire nation into nothing but dust and ash, costing hundreds of thousands of lives—is totally fine because he was "legally elected"? Give me a break. Jane Doe... same thing with Barack Obama. He goes after Libya, tens of thousands of civilians end up dead, and suddenly everyone acts like it’s perfectly acceptable...

Oh, and by the way, Assad was legally elected too. Just thought I'd drop that logic bomb.

Honestly, someone please just shut down this thread of absolute nonsense being typed out here.

Just lean into religion and everything will work itself out.

Joseph Stewart38 said:John Doe... Bashar al-Assad is a war criminal, but George W. Bush—who basically turned an entire nation into dust and ashes, leaving hundreds of thousands dead—is perfectly fine just because he was "legally elected". Jane Doe... same goes for Barack Obama; he invaded Libya and killed tens of thousands of civilians, but that's totally okay too...

By the way, Assad was also legally elected.

Do us all a favor and stop typing this nonsense here.

Right. I guess legality and legitimacy are just divine gifts granted to Bush and his crowd. 🙄

But what if someone actually decides to use Adolf Hitler as their username?
That would be absolutely horrific, man... just thinking about it gives me chills.

And honestly, what's the real distinction between Adolf Hitler and any other leader who spearheaded an occupationist war?

Joseph Stewart38 said:LOL... So Bashar al-Assad is some kind of war criminal, but George W. Bush—who basically turned an entire nation into dust and ash while hundreds of thousands of people died—is totally fine just because he was "legally elected"? Give me a break. Same goes for Barack Obama; he went after Libya and left tens of thousands of civilians dead, but I guess that's cool too...

By the way, Assad was legally elected too.

Seriously, stop feeding into all this absolute nonsense being posted here.

I’d also point out that Vladimir Putin was legally elected, it’s just that he didn't slaughter hundreds of thousands of people, so he doesn't fit into that little "democratic leader" fantasy the poor soul you're quoting seems to be hallucinating about at his own peril.

Sure, he wins every single election by crushing whatever "opponents" aren't already sitting in prison, living in exile, dead, or just acting as his little democratic figureheads.

Seriously, how can you have the nerve to call those "fair elections"? 🙏

Look, the guy is a dictator and you clearly don't care, so why pretend? Do you honestly think anyone sane actually buys this?

It works fine for regular people.
Clearly not for you.

briskwalker10 said:It’s funny—you look at those lists of history's biggest monsters, and you won't find Americans or their little sidekicks anywhere.

You’d almost think it was just the Koreans, the Vietnamese, and whoever else—as if they just wiped themselves out on their own.

Then again—maybe those millions of victims caught up in the supposed fight for "freedom and democracy" weren't actually human beings... so why bother counting them? 🤔

Exactly. We're talking about mass killings on a scale that's hard to wrap your head around. It hasn't stopped—honestly, I don't think they've stopped fighting since WW2. Does anyone ever actually talk about the innocent people—the children—who have been slaughtered for decades by the so-called "cradle of democracy"?
https://www.nytimes.com/news/world/war/.../482758/

dustycrane2 said:I'm trying to stay cool and professionally ask the mods to step in, but people keep breaking the rules and insulting me in the most low-class ways imaginable. It's getting harder to keep my head. I’m reaching a point where I might actually snap back, and I refuse to be the one getting banned just because they can't act like adults.

Admin, I need some answers to these questions. Let's start with the most recent example.

Some guy on the forum called me an idiot and got slapped with a measly 25 penalty points. Can someone explain which rule makes calling participants idiots punishable by such a joke of a sanction? If that isn't considered a blatant, primitive insult that warrants a serious crackdown, I honestly have nothing left to say.

I can't believe people still fall for this stuff. It's honestly embarrassing.

Given your track record on this forum, it’s a bit awkward seeing you play the victim here. That user already caught a warning for the post in question, plus an earlier strike and a few deleted posts. If he keeps this up, he’ll face a heavier ban, but he actually cooled off after those first two strikes. We aren't looking to ban people for their first mistake—especially on sports threads where fans tend to get carried away. That said, any personal insults get an immediate yellow card, which is exactly what happened here.

Look, everything you post about the UFC is loaded with political and religious baggage. If we actually stick to the rules here, you wouldn't even be allowed in this thread anymore.

Examples:

Khalid B. Velid Olivia Taylor2 said:You don't hate Islamic terrorists; you just hate Muslims. Where’s the proof that Khabib supports terrorists? If there were even a single suspicious thing in his background, he wouldn't be able to get an American visa. Being Muslim doesn't matter—if you have even the slightest hint of anything related to terrorism on your record, you aren't getting into the US.
Look, when you step back and look at the big picture, it’s obvious you’re just fueled by this deep-seated hatred for Muslims. It's honestly pathetic. May God have mercy on your soul.

Khalid B. Velid Olivia Taylor2 said:Conor is basically Al Qaeda at this point, given everything he’s pulled in his career—from attacking a bus full of his own teammates to lunging at a referee in the cage. He’s just pure hatred mixed with hypocrisy. A lethal combination. 🤦

+ deleted posts

Anyway, the guy already laid it all out in that other thread.

"Islamophobes, bigots, hypocrites, just a bunch of hateful losers," those were your exact words.