Moderation on PDF: Alternatives to the Science Edge V forum

bluecyclist64 said:Alright, alright... if Hendrix is giving you a headache, I’ll give you Sead Lipovača instead—you might even walk away with some pride from Elizabeth Jackson.🥳

My head is absolutely throbbing; it feels like my entire DNA is vibrating at a quantum level. Honestly, you’re better off listening to Govana or Satriania. Even Zele holds more weight than that overrated violinist. 😁
I wouldn't go for Elizabeth Jackson. Honestly, I'm getting pretty disillusioned with these online romances. 🧐

Ethan Barrett22 said:Look, I'm just gonna put it out there—straight up and without any hesitation—I would absolutely recommend YOU to Nica!
Sure, if you even can—and if you actually want to...

Thanks so much for the kind words, really! But like I’ve mentioned a few times over the last couple of months—and I mean it—I’m just not interested in moderating. Not here, and honestly, not on any other forum either. It’s such a huge responsibility, and it takes up a ton of time—time that I simply won't have to spare anymore.
If I actually had to step up and moderate, I’d focus exclusively on alternative medicine—period. That’s the only way I might actually feel like I’m doing my part for people looking for real help. Honestly, I've been there myself, searching for answers and finding support, and it breaks my heart seeing folks get totally shut down or treated like they're crazy just for asking questions...

Mark Cruz15 said:I am hands down the absolute best choice for moderator! Seriously, let's make it happen!

Since you’re still the most level-headed guy I know when it comes to calling out those "alternative medicine" scams—and honestly, I’d totally nominate you for the job—I’d suggest you in a heartbeat! But, since you actually believe that rubbing mud on your skin is a legitimate way to heal... well, let's be real, that choice would just be straight-up irrational, because... The whole point of being a mod isn't just playing referee—it’s about actually growing the community's vibe. But honestly? You’d probably just spend all your time shutting people down and trying to "silence" anyone with a different opinion!.
================

Logically speaking, mods should really be the ones championing alternative views—just decent, level-headed people who keep things civil. Take Elizabeth Jackson, for example—look, nobody’s a saint, myself included, but she doesn't go around insulting people or making everything about herself! Or, you know, they could just be totally neutral bystanders who don't even know much about the alternative scene and just focus on keeping the peace—basically just making sure there's no bullying, trolling, or people hijacking the threads.

Even though some people aren't exactly fans of the moderator KLCCLK—honestly, I’ve picked up maybe one or two warnings from him over all these years (but zero for being rude!)—I still think he’d be a killer choice to moderate the Alternative section. He might not know every single little thing about that specific area yet, but he’d be a fantastic "enforcer" to keep things running smoothly.

bluemason3 is also a great candidate in my book, but since he already stepped down from moderating, I don't think he'd want to jump straight from the kiddie pool into a boiling pot of drama—especially if there isn't even any cash involved! 😁

I can't believe we're still dealing with this level of incompetence, honestly. It’s like nobody in this entire country has even a shred of common sense left, and frankly, I’m getting tired of watching the same ridiculous patterns repeat themselves day after day. You look around at what's happening, you see the absolute lack of accountability, and you have to wonder if anyone is actually paying attention or if everyone has just collectively decided to tune out the chaos. It’s exhausting to be one of the few people actually willing to point out how broken the system feels right now. Grace Ramos says:
Alright, alright... if you’re already getting a massive headache just thinking about Hendrix, then let me throw Sead Lipovača at you—and hey, if you're feeling particularly lucky, maybe you'll even score some pride from Elizabeth Jackson.🥳

bluemason3 said:...
I honestly wouldn't go for Elizabeth Jackson; I'm just completely disillusioned with all these forum romances lately. 🧐

Well, looks like two more names have officially been added to Elizabeth Jackson's ignore list. I can already see the inevitable fallout—probably some dramatic, over-the-top post filled with colorful fonts and bold text where they play the victim and whine about being persecuted.
To put it bluntly, you guys completely screwed up.

Like I was saying just a few hours ago, my point remains exactly the same.

Jerry White29 said:-
I’m fully expecting a thank-you note from Gregory Ramirez2 pretty soon, especially once he realizes he can recommend Elizabeth Jackson without even breaking a sweat.😁

Unprovoked.

Gregory Ramirez2 said:...
If we’re actually following any kind of logic here, the mods ought to be acting as active advocates for the alternative perspective—just decent, reasonable people like Elizabeth Jackson.

😁😁😁

Linda Moore51 might just be some kind of mystical wizard 😁

Wait, so I get zero points just for giving vaśeg Lemon a shoutout? 😒

Gregory Ramirez2 said:Linda Moore51 could honestly be the moderator for anything involving magic or mysticism. 😁

😁
Gregory Ramirez2, look, there’s no magic trick here and there isn't some grand mystery to solve. You don't exactly need a PhD to see exactly who is out here desperately clawing for a moderator position.

Gregory Ramirez2 said:So, let me get this straight: I go out of my way to give vaśeg Lemon some well-deserved credit, and what do I get for it? Absolutely nothing. Zero points. It’s honestly pathetic how much effort goes into being reasonable only to be met with total silence or complete dismissal. 😒

It isn't my business, but if you ask me, that’s exactly how it should be handled. 👍

Look, even though I can't say I agree with you on almost anything, I’ve said it many times before: bluemason3 should have been the one moderating the alternative boards long before anyone else around here was even considered.
From what I can see, he’s just not built for this kind of drama. Honestly, I get where he's coming from. You’d need nerves of steel to sit there and read through Elizabeth Jackson's obnoxious, highlighted posts—those endless, pathetic rants about some supposed "mountain" of medical breakthroughs that are nothing more than blatant lies designed to line her pockets. It’s one thing to deal with the nonsense, but it's another thing entirely when you have to decide whether to slap him with a permanent ban just because he won't stop spreading those fraudulent claims.

Gregory Ramirez2 said:If we’re following any kind of logic, the mods should be active supporters of alternative views—decent people who actually act right, like Elizabeth Jackson (look, nobody is a saint, but at least she doesn't resort to insults or making a spectacle out of everything)

Are you seriously claiming this guy doesn't insult anyone? This is the same person who spends months calling anyone with a different opinion "idiots" or "mercenaries" right in his signature.
You are both completely divorced from any concept of respect, fairness, reality, or basic decency!
Honestly, you two would make perfect candidates for the moderation team.
Just to clear up any confusion: that was sarcasm.

neoneagle93, looks like you noticed too... Brenda Gonzalez12 has been rocking a signature for months now that totally breaks the rules. It’s basically just straight-up insults and harassment aimed at people here, plus the thing is way too many lines long for what we allow.
Hey, Nico, could you please take a look at this and get it sorted out?

Brenda Gonzalez12, when I brought up those links, I was talking about how you're always coming for everyone else, especially Elizabeth Jackson... ever since I started following this alternative health section, you’ve been on her case non-stop, just constant insults without ever actually dropping a single link to prove any of her posts broke the rules. She’s honestly such a model user here, just like Gregory Ramirez2... I don't think they've ever even faced a ban, which is basically the gold standard for being a decent person on this board. People like that wouldn't hurt a fly and would make killer moderators. Besides them, fadedgull42 is also super sharp and keeps things classy, so I think she’d be a perfect fit for the mod team too. These are the folks who actually know their stuff about alternative medicine, and they've proven they can play nice, making them the obvious choice. There are others, like chilout23, but he mentioned somewhere that he's not interested... and man, if Gregory Ramirez2 could just get some access to alternative treatments if nothing else works... anyway, being a moderator doesn't look easy at all. I could never do it myself, honestly... it takes way too much time and my schedule is just too crazy...

stormyrider28 said:neoneagle93, I see you’ve noticed too that Brenda Gonzalez12 has been running a signature that violates the rules for months now. It includes insults and harassment toward other users, and besides, the signature is way too many lines long according to the guidelines.
I’m asking Nico to take a look and fix this.

What an absolute disaster! Honestly, have you no shame whatsoever?!
What kind of headspace do you have to be in to write something like this?!!?
Did you hit rock bottom, and then decide to grab a shovel and dig even deeper?

It’s clear that reading comprehension just isn't your strong suit.
Why don't you sit down, actually read what was said, and think about it for once!
And considering how much you clearly "understand" what you read, I highly doubt you'll learn a single thing from this!

stormyrider28 said:Brenda Gonzalez12, when I mentioned links, I was referring to your accusations against others—specifically Elizabeth Jackson. Ever since I’ve been following this alternative health scene, you’ve been attacking her non-stop and insulting her constantly, yet you’ve never provided a single link to any of her posts to prove she actually broke any rules. She is a prime example of a model forum user, just like Gregory Ramirez2; in my opinion, they’ve never been banned and likely never will be, which makes them the best examples of decent contributors. I’m certain people like them wouldn't hurt a soul and would make excellent moderators. Along with them, fadedgull42 is also a very intelligent and respectful user, and I think she’d be a great moderator choice. These are people who truly understand the world of alternative medicine and have proven themselves to be incredibly civil, making them perfect candidates. There are others too, like chilout23, though he mentioned somewhere that he isn't interested, and if Gregory Ramirez2 could at least access alternative treatments if nothing else... I know being a moderator isn't easy; I’d never want to do it myself because it takes so much time, and I simply don't have it.

Oh sure, those two are the perfect examples of "model" users.
The kind of people who lie, make things up, can't handle a shred of criticism, and when they get backed into a corner, they resort to the ultimate weapon of the internet warrior: the ignore button—and then they actually have the nerve to brag about it.
But that doesn't stop people from holding them accountable for their posts.
Just like Rorion and the person who triggered this entire thread in the first place.
Kudos to all the "alternative medicine" enthusiasts.
That was sarcasm, in case anyone was confused.

They wouldn't hurt anyone?!?!
If any of them were actually appointed as moderators, they’d end up banning half the people in this discussion.
Want to guess which half?

If you and your buddies want to post without anyone else weighing in, feel free to go start some personal blog.
This is a forum; try to grasp what that actually means for everyone else here.
A moderator exists to penalize rule violations and insults (which wasn't the case regarding the person who started this thread—that was just petty), not to play favorites or take sides.
Which, ironically, is the exact ultimate goal behind the pipe dream held by those two "models"...

Alright, let's circle back to this issue.
When are we actually going to see some decisive action regarding this user’s behavior and their relentless disregard for the forum rules?
They just keep steamrolling through everything without facing any consequences, acting like the rules don't even apply to them...

Kate Wilson said:Look, this isn't the way or the place to pick moderators—and y'all know that.
Plus, this thread shouldn't be some playground for bickering and back-and-forth arguments; it's meant for actual complaints and suggestions , just like the rules say.

Don't you feel like something is seriously off with how we choose mods?
Because honestly, everyone’s feeling the lack of them (especially the active ones!) across the whole site, and there hasn't been a real alternative for months now.

When something isn't working out in life, trying the exact same thing over and over is basically like trying to break through a brick wall with your forehead... kinda painful, right?

So, maybe it's finally time to shake things up a bit.
What if we did something like other online communities where the users themselves vote for mods—sort of like a democratic election style?
First, people who actually *want* to moderate a specific section or sub-forum would volunteer, and then the rest of us could vote on those candidates.
That way, you get dedicated help chosen by the community itself!

With the current setup, we're seeing fewer mods—not because they stopped showing up (just look at bluemason3's activity), but because there's just zero incentive to stick around.
If we switched to this new system, people would step up voluntarily, giving us a guarantee that they'll put in the work for a set amount of time because they actually *wanted* to be there (thanks to the vote!).

As for whether these democratically elected mods actually do a good job? Well, you could always give every new mod a trial period to see how they handle things.
If they flop—new elections, new mods. Easy.

Honestly, just closing threads about the lack of mods and shrugging your shoulders isn't going to fix anything constructive here.

The issue with the site search lasted over a year, but I think we can all agree that was a much smaller headache than what we're dealing with now regarding the moderator shortage—and that's the backbone of any forum!

Gregory Ramirez2 said:Don't you think there’s a fundamental flaw in how we pick moderators?
It feels like everyone is feeling the lack of oversight across the whole site, especially from those who are actually active, yet we haven't had a real alternative for months.

When a strategy fails in life, trying the exact same thing over and over is like trying to break down a brick wall by slamming your head against it...

So, maybe it’s finally time to change the approach.
Perhaps we could adopt a system used on other major US forums where the users themselves elect mods through a public vote—sort of like a democratic election.
First, users who are interested in moderating a specific section or sub-forum would step forward voluntarily, and then the community votes on the candidates.
That way, you get a dedicated workforce chosen directly by the people who actually use the site.

With the current setup, our moderation team is shrinking—not necessarily because people aren't visiting the site anymore (just look at the activity levels of bluemason3), but because they simply have zero incentive to stick around.
Under a new system, people would volunteer themselves, which guarantees they'll actually do the "job" for free for a set period because they were chosen by the community.

As for the quality of work from these democratically elected mods, you could implement a trial period for every newcomer to see if they can actually handle the role.
If they fail? New elections, new mods.

By just closing threads about the lack of mods or shrugging our shoulders, I don't think we're doing anything constructive to solve the actual problem.

The issue with the site search tool lasted over a year, and I think anyone would agree that was a much smaller headache than the current moderator shortage, since moderation is the backbone of any community.

But let's be clear: this isn't a thread for submitting nominations for new moderators.
If you go back to the start of the thread, you'll see what this is actually about—it's about one user's behavior.
Now, this wannabe moderator has started trolling...
If you want a discussion about recruiting new staff, go ahead and open a separate thread; don't clutter this one with off-topic nonsense.

It is painfully obvious that moderation isn't working here.
If it were, the individual who triggered this entire thread (which is the fifth one in a row, mind you!) would have been properly disciplined by now.
And yet, here we are today with two more posts where he is "subtly" insulting others.
Naturally, I expect the same reaction we've seen every single time: total silence regarding his conduct.
Or, as has already happened, the thread just gets moved to the archives so he escapes any real consequences...

Anyone whining about the lack of moderation is just being incredibly naive.

Honestly, I’d much rather have zero moderation than deal with a biased mod team—that's exactly why this forum has been a total disaster for years.

Personally, I'm loving the current state of things. I've got nothing to complain about; I just step into a debate, absolutely dismantle my opponents, and keep Darwin happy.😁

Peter Peterson said:I’m actually enjoying things right now—nothing to complain about, really. I just absolutely crush my opponents in debates, and honestly... Darwin would be proud.😁

Njofr, you absolutely destroyed them with this post... 😁

Peter Peterson said:So, what exactly is this "scientific fact" that all these sphere-obsessed conspiracy theorists claim to know regarding the shape of the Earth?

I honestly think Gregory Ramirez2's suggestion regarding how we select moderators is top-tier—probably the fairest way we could possibly handle it. 👍
I won't dwell on the specifics here because I really don't want to drift off-topic, but it would be wonderful if the administration took this particular option into serious consideration. It feels like a completely democratic approach that would ultimately benefit both the community members and the moderators themselves.

Ethan Barrett22 said:Gregory Ramirez2, you’re absolutely spot on! Honestly, it isn't even worth the headspace to worry about them. Half the people on this forum are already on my ignore list anyway, and by tomorrow, I’ll probably have the other half blocked too!
Look, I get where everyone is coming from, but honestly, that doesn't excuse the fact that the moderation has been totally nonexistent for months now. That’s exactly why we’re seeing people run wild and break the rules in the most embarrassing ways possible! It's just a direct result of nobody keeping an eye on things.
Oh, come on! We totally believe in Nica, and honestly, we’re just counting down the days until the PDF finally gets some actual moderators on board!

Look, I’m just going to say it right here, loud and clear, without even a second of hesitation: Nica, I am absolutely, 100% recommending YOU!
Of course, if you even can—and if you actually want to!

You are honestly the gold standard for what a forum member should be! You’re such a class act that I’m convinced you’ve never even seen a warning, let alone been banned—and honestly, you handle everything here in the most wonderful way possible. Honestly, looking back at everything we've built here, I’m just feeling incredibly grateful! I truly value the reputation I’ve managed to build on this forum over the years. It means the world to me that I’ve been able to maintain such a solid standing among all of you—not just because I love chatting, but because I genuinely strive to be someone who plays by the rules and keeps things respectful. I’ve always believed that being a "big deal" in a community isn't about ego or acting like you own the place; it’s about being consistent, staying fair, and treating everyone with a bit of decency, even when the debates get heated. I try my best to stay level-headed and keep my interactions helpful and polite, regardless of the topic. To me, being seen as a reliable, decent member of this group is way more important than any fancy title. I just want to be that person you can count on for a constructive conversation without all the unnecessary drama!
Honestly, I truly believe—and I’m being 100% serious here—that we won't find anyone better than this. I am completely convinced that they would more than live up to everything Nicin is hoping for!

...

Gregory Ramirez2 said:Logically speaking, moderators should really be the champions of alternative viewpoints—decent, reasonable people who actually know how to carry themselves. Take Elizabeth Jackson, for example. Now, look, she’s definitely not a saint—let's be real, nobody is!—but she isn't out there hurling insults or making a spectacle of herself just for the sake of it. Alternatively, you could have neutral parties who might not even follow the alternative scene closely, but they'd exist simply to keep the peace. You know, just making sure we don't have any personal attacks, trolls running wild, or threads getting completely derailed. That's all we really need, right?

Gregory Ramirez2 said:It always starts the same way around here! First, you’ve got folks stepping up and volunteering to moderate a specific PDF or their own sub-forum, and then the rest of the community jumps in to vote on those who've put their hands up. It’s a pretty straightforward process once everyone gets involved!
That’s exactly how you end up getting free labor, hand-picked by the voters on this forum!

Ethan Barrett22 said:I honestly feel that... Honestly, I think Gregory Ramirez2 hit the nail on the head with his suggestion regarding the moderator selection process. It’s easily the best approach we could take—super fair and actually makes sense for everyone involved! 👍
I won't dive too deep into the specifics because I definitely don't want to derail the conversation and go off-topic, but I really think the admin team should consider implementing an option that’s fully democratic and fair. It would be such a win-win for everyone involved—both for the regular users and the moderators!

Honestly, that level of trolling is just next-level ridiculous. Even at a place like the FBI, they wouldn't let someone get away with that kind of nonsense without stepping in! 🙂🙂 Honestly, it’s just plain exhausting reading these two guys who are clearly trolling the thread on purpose. They’re basically just sitting there feeding each other endless compliments—at this rate, they might as well just announce their undying love for one another right here on the internet! Ugh, seriously! Look, guys, you have private messages for a reason. Go ahead and do whatever nonsense you want over there, but please, for the sake of everyone else, leave us alone on this forum and spare us all from your idiocy.

Gregory Ramirez2 said:Thanks for the kind words...

If we’re being logical here, the moderators should actually be active supporters of alternative views and decent, reasonable people—someone like Elizabeth Jackson...

Ethan Barrett22 said:I honestly think Gregory Ramirez2's suggestion regarding how we pick moderators is brilliant and probably the fairest way to handle it. 👍
....

🤦

Brenda Gonzalez12, you’re seriously sitting there typing away on two different computers at the exact same time again...