Deleted posts in the Groww program thread

Brian Edwards6 said:Since I happen to be in the somewhat privileged position of actually being able to see the deleted discussion, I’ll go ahead and paste those removed comments here. That way, you can clarify exactly which parts you found useful or which specific points you were hoping to address if they were restored.👍

Since you asked whether moderators can make mistakes and if we're some kind of divine beings, I've provided an example where I, acting as a moderator, was proven wrong, acknowledged the error, and corrected it.👍

That is my assessment, based on the entirety of the deleted comments. And honestly, you could tell me which specific question you feel went unanswered.👍

Given that I have access to tools and options unavailable to the general user base, it does mean I've been granted a degree of formal authority. It isn't absolute, nor is it infallible—as we have already established.👍

As I mentioned previously, I intend to copy all of them into my next comment to ensure there is absolutely no room for anyone to twist the facts.👍

Fair enough, that’s a suggestion I can certainly take to heart. But in your view, would it really have been sufficient to simply issue warnings or hand out suspensions to those refusing to cooperate, rather than deleting comments entirely? Do you truly believe that would have prevented complaints and kept everything running smoothly?😕

If I didn't take it seriously, I wouldn't be putting this much effort into explaining my position, nor would I be paying attention to the fact that you aren't answering my questions and are instead resorting to insults.👍

I didn't ask that. I asked something else.

Brian Edwards6 said:Since I happen to be in the somewhat privileged position of actually being able to see the deleted discussion, I’ll go ahead and paste those removed comments here. That way, you can clarify exactly which parts you found useful or which specific points you were hoping to address if they were restored.👍

Since you asked whether moderators can make mistakes and if we're some kind of divine beings, I've provided an example where I, acting as a moderator, was proven wrong, acknowledged the error, and corrected it.👍

That is my assessment, based on the entirety of the deleted comments. And honestly, you could tell me which specific question you feel went unanswered.👍

Given that I have access to tools and options unavailable to the general user base, it does mean I've been granted a degree of formal authority. It isn't absolute, nor is it infallible—as we have already established.👍

As I mentioned previously, I intend to copy all of them into my next comment to ensure there is absolutely no room for anyone to twist the facts.👍

Fair enough, that’s a suggestion I can certainly take to heart. But in your view, would it really have been sufficient to simply issue warnings or hand out suspensions to those refusing to cooperate, rather than deleting comments entirely? Do you truly believe that would have prevented complaints and kept everything running smoothly?😕

If I didn't take it seriously, I wouldn't be putting this much effort into explaining my position, nor would I be paying attention to the fact that you aren't answering my questions and are instead resorting to insults.👍

I am telling you again: the importance of information is judged by the actual contest participants—the people this thread is actually for—not by you, since you aren't a participant. You still haven't answered my question.

If you're referring to my comment about posts being deleted too quickly, I don't even know how to respond to that; you wiped out 15 comments at once, so I think it's pretty obvious.

Brian Edwards6 said:Since I happen to be in the somewhat privileged position of actually being able to see the deleted discussion, I’ll go ahead and paste those removed comments here. That way, you can clarify exactly which parts you found useful or which specific points you were hoping to address if they were restored.👍

Since you asked whether moderators can make mistakes and if we're some kind of divine beings, I've provided an example where I, acting as a moderator, was proven wrong, acknowledged the error, and corrected it.👍

That is my assessment, based on the entirety of the deleted comments. And honestly, you could tell me which specific question you feel went unanswered.👍

Given that I have access to tools and options unavailable to the general user base, it does mean I've been granted a degree of formal authority. It isn't absolute, nor is it infallible—as we have already established.👍

As I mentioned previously, I intend to copy all of them into my next comment to ensure there is absolutely no room for anyone to twist the facts.👍

Fair enough, that’s a suggestion I can certainly take to heart. But in your view, would it really have been sufficient to simply issue warnings or hand out suspensions to those refusing to cooperate, rather than deleting comments entirely? Do you truly believe that would have prevented complaints and kept everything running smoothly?😕

If I didn't take it seriously, I wouldn't be putting this much effort into explaining my position, nor would I be paying attention to the fact that you aren't answering my questions and are instead resorting to insults.👍

Go ahead and put them back in the thread; I'm not going to get angry.

Brian Edwards6 said:Since I happen to be in the somewhat privileged position of actually being able to see the deleted discussion, I’ll go ahead and paste those removed comments here. That way, you can clarify exactly which parts you found useful or which specific points you were hoping to address if they were restored.👍

Since you asked whether moderators can make mistakes and if we're some kind of divine beings, I've provided an example where I, acting as a moderator, was proven wrong, acknowledged the error, and corrected it.👍

That is my assessment, based on the entirety of the deleted comments. And honestly, you could tell me which specific question you feel went unanswered.👍

Given that I have access to tools and options unavailable to the general user base, it does mean I've been granted a degree of formal authority. It isn't absolute, nor is it infallible—as we have already established.👍

As I mentioned previously, I intend to copy all of them into my next comment to ensure there is absolutely no room for anyone to twist the facts.👍

Fair enough, that’s a suggestion I can certainly take to heart. But in your view, would it really have been sufficient to simply issue warnings or hand out suspensions to those refusing to cooperate, rather than deleting comments entirely? Do you truly believe that would have prevented complaints and kept everything running smoothly?😕

If I didn't take it seriously, I wouldn't be putting this much effort into explaining my position, nor would I be paying attention to the fact that you aren't answering my questions and are instead resorting to insults.👍

I think it would. I believe deleting posts should be the absolute last resort.

Brian Edwards6 said:Since I happen to be in the somewhat privileged position of actually being able to see the deleted discussion, I’ll go ahead and paste those removed comments here. That way, you can clarify exactly which parts you found useful or which specific points you were hoping to address if they were restored.👍

Since you asked whether moderators can make mistakes and if we're some kind of divine beings, I've provided an example where I, acting as a moderator, was proven wrong, acknowledged the error, and corrected it.👍

That is my assessment, based on the entirety of the deleted comments. And honestly, you could tell me which specific question you feel went unanswered.👍

Given that I have access to tools and options unavailable to the general user base, it does mean I've been granted a degree of formal authority. It isn't absolute, nor is it infallible—as we have already established.👍

As I mentioned previously, I intend to copy all of them into my next comment to ensure there is absolutely no room for anyone to twist the facts.👍

Fair enough, that’s a suggestion I can certainly take to heart. But in your view, would it really have been sufficient to simply issue warnings or hand out suspensions to those refusing to cooperate, rather than deleting comments entirely? Do you truly believe that would have prevented complaints and kept everything running smoothly?😕

If I didn't take it seriously, I wouldn't be putting this much effort into explaining my position, nor would I be paying attention to the fact that you aren't answering my questions and are instead resorting to insults.👍

Look, I'm sorry, but I actually did answer your question in my last post and explained why I didn't think it was worth responding to. What else? I've gone back and reread everything you wrote, and I honestly can't find any other points. And where exactly am I insulting you?

Look, half the posts are just collateral damage according to your logic. According to rustydrifter10, two-thirds of the thread is nothing but people bickering. Personally, I don't see what the big deal is with those posts—people are just sharing their takes. My first post was clearly a joke, which is why I added the :toothless: emoji to make it obvious. In my second post, I wasn't even joking; I was actually explaining the reasoning behind the sarcasm in the first one. I wasn't being malicious or worked up at all, because if I actually were, my posts would have looked way different than they did. So, while I find it kind of funny that Miss Dean reacted the way she did, I totally get it. She was just reacting emotionally to the situation, and I honestly don't hold it against her or feel insulted by what she said.

Secondly, there is no way I'm sticking around a place where everything has to be this sterile, sanitized discussion where posts like mine get nuked. Especially since I've put a ton of constructive stuff into that thread where I'm actually explaining things and helping people out—it's not like I'm just trolling for the hell of it.

Just put all the posts back.

bluebadger44 said:I didn't ask that. I asked something else.

I am telling you again: the importance of information is judged by the actual contest participants—the people this thread is actually for—not by you, since you aren't a participant. You still haven't answered my question.

If you're referring to my comment about posts being deleted too quickly, I don't even know how to respond to that; you wiped out 15 comments at once, so I think it's pretty obvious.

Go ahead and put them back in the thread; I'm not going to get angry.

I think it would. I believe deleting posts should be the absolute last resort.

Look, I'm sorry, but I actually did answer your question in my last post and explained why I didn't think it was worth responding to. What else? I've gone back and reread everything you wrote, and I honestly can't find any other points. And where exactly am I insulting you?

I suppose I am, though since we clearly aren't seeing eye to eye on this, it's obvious my response isn't exactly what you were looking for.👍

bluebadger44 said:I didn't ask that. I asked something else.

I am telling you again: the importance of information is judged by the actual contest participants—the people this thread is actually for—not by you, since you aren't a participant. You still haven't answered my question.

If you're referring to my comment about posts being deleted too quickly, I don't even know how to respond to that; you wiped out 15 comments at once, so I think it's pretty obvious.

Go ahead and put them back in the thread; I'm not going to get angry.

I think it would. I believe deleting posts should be the absolute last resort.

Look, I'm sorry, but I actually did answer your question in my last post and explained why I didn't think it was worth responding to. What else? I've gone back and reread everything you wrote, and I honestly can't find any other points. And where exactly am I insulting you?

Since you mentioned earlier:

bluebadger44 said:I also think I should ask the administrators to step in here. This whole thing with Brian Edwards6 has just devolved into petty bickering, and frankly, it isn't helping anyone. I believe I was pretty clear: those deleted posts contained info that actually matters to those of us participating in the contest—which is exactly what this forum is for—so please, just restore them. I don't get how Brian Edwards6 can lecture us on why certain posts are important when he isn't even part of the competition himself. Also, I feel like posts on the Career and Jobs subforum are being wiped out way too easily, which just isn't fair to the users who actually take the time to word things carefully. Thanks.

I was under the impression you had some additional examples to offer beyond that one controversial topic—especially since you're making such sweeping claims about the entire subforum.👍

Do you have any examples like that?😕

bluebadger44 said:I didn't ask that. I asked something else.

I am telling you again: the importance of information is judged by the actual contest participants—the people this thread is actually for—not by you, since you aren't a participant. You still haven't answered my question.

If you're referring to my comment about posts being deleted too quickly, I don't even know how to respond to that; you wiped out 15 comments at once, so I think it's pretty obvious.

Go ahead and put them back in the thread; I'm not going to get angry.

I think it would. I believe deleting posts should be the absolute last resort.

Look, I'm sorry, but I actually did answer your question in my last post and explained why I didn't think it was worth responding to. What else? I've gone back and reread everything you wrote, and I honestly can't find any other points. And where exactly am I insulting you?

As I’ve mentioned before, my approach is pretty straightforward: if a comment violates the rules, it gets deleted. Period. However, if there happens to be a nugget of actual useful information buried within that rule-breaking post, I don't just toss it in the trash. Since editing isn't an option here, I'll send a copy of that specific part to the user and politely ask them to repost just the helpful bits. So far, this process hasn't caused any friction—neither with the rules nor with the users whose posts I've had to clear away.👍

bluebadger44 said:I didn't ask that. I asked something else.

I am telling you again: the importance of information is judged by the actual contest participants—the people this thread is actually for—not by you, since you aren't a participant. You still haven't answered my question.

If you're referring to my comment about posts being deleted too quickly, I don't even know how to respond to that; you wiped out 15 comments at once, so I think it's pretty obvious.

Go ahead and put them back in the thread; I'm not going to get angry.

I think it would. I believe deleting posts should be the absolute last resort.

Look, I'm sorry, but I actually did answer your question in my last post and explained why I didn't think it was worth responding to. What else? I've gone back and reread everything you wrote, and I honestly can't find any other points. And where exactly am I insulting you?

Here is what I consider an insult:

bluebadger44 said:@Brian Edwards6

Why are you even replying to a post that wasn't meant for you? Are you people all just interchangeable or something? And since you're clearly so eager to chime in, why didn't you answer my actual question: How on earth do you think you know what matters to me and what doesn't?

What kind of terms did you agree to when you took that moderator gig? Honestly, I don't even care. If you actually think being appointed as a moderator gives you some kind of inherent authority, you're dead wrong. If I see someone stepping on me—which is exactly what you're doing right now—of course I'm going to speak up. You don't have to physically assault someone or throw them in a holding cell just to be a bully.

Who exactly is this "nobody"? Show me my post where I actually said I didn't believe her. I suggested she contact ExxonMobil to make sure there wasn't some kind of mistake.

Since we’re still debating this a day later, it’s clear we can't just move on or pretend there's some alternative explanation. Why would anyone try to spin the story or act like nothing even happened? What happened, happened. Deleting posts just opens the door for manipulation, whereas keeping them would have let us see everything clearly in black and white.

We could have actually had a real discussion without all this constant bickering if you’d just stepped in and told us to dial it back. Instead, you let things escalate, and now most people have just checked out entirely. And then there are some folks who can't even weigh in because they haven't even seen what's been going on.

Yeah, even a kid could see you take this job way too seriously.

You’re labeling me a bully, but frankly, I don't see myself that way. I certainly have my share of flaws, but no one who actually knows me could reasonably make that accusation (for purely objective reasons).👎

bluebadger44 said:@Brian Edwards6

Why are you even replying to a post that wasn't meant for you? Are you people all just interchangeable or something? And since you're clearly so eager to chime in, why didn't you answer my actual question: How on earth do you think you know what matters to me and what doesn't?

What kind of terms did you agree to when you took that moderator gig? Honestly, I don't even care. If you actually think being appointed as a moderator gives you some kind of inherent authority, you're dead wrong. If I see someone stepping on me—which is exactly what you're doing right now—of course I'm going to speak up. You don't have to physically assault someone or throw them in a holding cell just to be a bully.

Who exactly is this "nobody"? Show me my post where I actually said I didn't believe her. I suggested she contact ExxonMobil to make sure there wasn't some kind of mistake.

Since we’re still debating this a day later, it’s clear we can't just move on or pretend there's some alternative explanation. Why would anyone try to spin the story or act like nothing even happened? What happened, happened. Deleting posts just opens the door for manipulation, whereas keeping them would have let us see everything clearly in black and white.

We could have actually had a real discussion without all this constant bickering if you’d just stepped in and told us to dial it back. Instead, you let things escalate, and now most people have just checked out entirely. And then there are some folks who can't even weigh in because they haven't even seen what's been going on.

Yeah, even a kid could see you take this job way too seriously.

By insinuating that there is manipulation happening, you are also insulting me.👎

bluebadger44 said:@Brian Edwards6

Why are you even replying to a post that wasn't meant for you? Are you people all just interchangeable or something? And since you're clearly so eager to chime in, why didn't you answer my actual question: How on earth do you think you know what matters to me and what doesn't?

What kind of terms did you agree to when you took that moderator gig? Honestly, I don't even care. If you actually think being appointed as a moderator gives you some kind of inherent authority, you're dead wrong. If I see someone stepping on me—which is exactly what you're doing right now—of course I'm going to speak up. You don't have to physically assault someone or throw them in a holding cell just to be a bully.

Who exactly is this "nobody"? Show me my post where I actually said I didn't believe her. I suggested she contact ExxonMobil to make sure there wasn't some kind of mistake.

Since we’re still debating this a day later, it’s clear we can't just move on or pretend there's some alternative explanation. Why would anyone try to spin the story or act like nothing even happened? What happened, happened. Deleting posts just opens the door for manipulation, whereas keeping them would have let us see everything clearly in black and white.

We could have actually had a real discussion without all this constant bickering if you’d just stepped in and told us to dial it back. Instead, you let things escalate, and now most people have just checked out entirely. And then there are some folks who can't even weigh in because they haven't even seen what's been going on.

Yeah, even a kid could see you take this job way too seriously.

Regardless of your intention, I find that offensive.👎

redtiger15 said:Look, half the posts are just collateral damage according to your logic. According to rustydrifter10, two-thirds of the thread is nothing but people bickering. Personally, I don't see what the big deal is with those posts—people are just sharing their takes. My first post was clearly a joke, which is why I added the :toothless: emoji to make it obvious. In my second post, I wasn't even joking; I was actually explaining the reasoning behind the sarcasm in the first one. I wasn't being malicious or worked up at all, because if I actually were, my posts would have looked way different than they did. So, while I find it kind of funny that Miss Dean reacted the way she did, I totally get it. She was just reacting emotionally to the situation, and I honestly don't hold it against her or feel insulted by what she said.

Secondly, there is no way I'm sticking around a place where everything has to be this sterile, sanitized discussion where posts like mine get nuked. Especially since I've put a ton of constructive stuff into that thread where I'm actually explaining things and helping people out—it's not like I'm just trolling for the hell of it.

Just put all the posts back.

Yes, casualties of useless arguments. There are no direct quotes here, but most of these are responses to comments that were deleted; without context, they would simply be left "hanging in mid-air."👍

redtiger15 said:Look, half the posts are just collateral damage according to your logic. According to rustydrifter10, two-thirds of the thread is nothing but people bickering. Personally, I don't see what the big deal is with those posts—people are just sharing their takes. My first post was clearly a joke, which is why I added the :toothless: emoji to make it obvious. In my second post, I wasn't even joking; I was actually explaining the reasoning behind the sarcasm in the first one. I wasn't being malicious or worked up at all, because if I actually were, my posts would have looked way different than they did. So, while I find it kind of funny that Miss Dean reacted the way she did, I totally get it. She was just reacting emotionally to the situation, and I honestly don't hold it against her or feel insulted by what she said.

Secondly, there is no way I'm sticking around a place where everything has to be this sterile, sanitized discussion where posts like mine get nuked. Especially since I've put a ton of constructive stuff into that thread where I'm actually explaining things and helping people out—it's not like I'm just trolling for the hell of it.

Just put all the posts back.

I never actually claimed you were constantly trolling, but in the section that was deleted, you were either making jokes or explaining why you were making them.👍

redtiger15 said:Look, half the posts are just collateral damage according to your logic. According to rustydrifter10, two-thirds of the thread is nothing but people bickering. Personally, I don't see what the big deal is with those posts—people are just sharing their takes. My first post was clearly a joke, which is why I added the :toothless: emoji to make it obvious. In my second post, I wasn't even joking; I was actually explaining the reasoning behind the sarcasm in the first one. I wasn't being malicious or worked up at all, because if I actually were, my posts would have looked way different than they did. So, while I find it kind of funny that Miss Dean reacted the way she did, I totally get it. She was just reacting emotionally to the situation, and I honestly don't hold it against her or feel insulted by what she said.

Secondly, there is no way I'm sticking around a place where everything has to be this sterile, sanitized discussion where posts like mine get nuked. Especially since I've put a ton of constructive stuff into that thread where I'm actually explaining things and helping people out—it's not like I'm just trolling for the hell of it.

Just put all the posts back.

The deleted comments have been made public. I’m asking you to clarify—just as bluebadger44 and several others have asked—exactly what information you believe is essential here. We are still in the middle of this discussion, and I have no issue changing my mind and restoring the deleted content if it makes sense.👍

Brian Edwards6 said:I suppose I am, though since we clearly aren't seeing eye to eye on this, it's obvious my response isn't exactly what you were looking for.👍

Since you mentioned earlier:

I was under the impression you had some additional examples to offer beyond that one controversial topic—especially since you're making such sweeping claims about the entire subforum.👍

Do you have any examples like that?😕

As I’ve mentioned before, my approach is pretty straightforward: if a comment violates the rules, it gets deleted. Period. However, if there happens to be a nugget of actual useful information buried within that rule-breaking post, I don't just toss it in the trash. Since editing isn't an option here, I'll send a copy of that specific part to the user and politely ask them to repost just the helpful bits. So far, this process hasn't caused any friction—neither with the rules nor with the users whose posts I've had to clear away.👍

Here is what I consider an insult:

You’re labeling me a bully, but frankly, I don't see myself that way. I certainly have my share of flaws, but no one who actually knows me could reasonably make that accusation (for purely objective reasons).👎

By insinuating that there is manipulation happening, you are also insulting me.👎

Regardless of your intention, I find that offensive.👎

Yes, casualties of useless arguments. There are no direct quotes here, but most of these are responses to comments that were deleted; without context, they would simply be left "hanging in mid-air."👍

I never actually claimed you were constantly trolling, but in the section that was deleted, you were either making jokes or explaining why you were making them.👍

The deleted comments have been made public. I’m asking you to clarify—just as bluebadger44 and several others have asked—exactly what information you believe is essential here. We are still in the middle of this discussion, and I have no issue changing my mind and restoring the deleted content if it makes sense.👍

The emphasis is on HALF. I clearly should have made that point more obvious somehow. Even by your super strict standards, half of those posts were perfectly fine. It’s a shame you can't see that maybe, just maybe, you shouldn't have deleted them in the first place. Personally, I think all the posts were fine. Look, I'm not out here campaigning for some sterile, sanitized debate—I honestly don't even enjoy being on this forum if it turns into some sterilized piece of crap.

I never said you were constantly trolling, but in the part that was deleted, you're either trolling or explaining why you're trolling.👍

And I never said you claimed I was *only* trolling. I'm sorry that your way of responding to what I wrote is so selective, and that you're probably intentionally ignoring the actual point I was making.

The deleted comments have been posted. Please explain to me (just like bluebadger44 and everyone else interested) what specific information you think is vital, because we're still discussing this and I have no problem changing my mind and restoring the deleted stuff.👍

Everything is vital to me. People's opinions and experiences matter to me, especially since we're all competing for the same jobs. Plus, I have plenty of thoughts on a lot of the stuff written in those deleted posts.
What, am I supposed to write out every single thought I have about everything that was said right here just so you can judge whether it's "good enough" for you to bring the posts back? Because I really don't feel like doing that.

Brian Edwards6 said:I suppose I am, though since we clearly aren't seeing eye to eye on this, it's obvious my response isn't exactly what you were looking for.👍

Since you mentioned earlier:

I was under the impression you had some additional examples to offer beyond that one controversial topic—especially since you're making such sweeping claims about the entire subforum.👍

Do you have any examples like that?😕

As I’ve mentioned before, my approach is pretty straightforward: if a comment violates the rules, it gets deleted. Period. However, if there happens to be a nugget of actual useful information buried within that rule-breaking post, I don't just toss it in the trash. Since editing isn't an option here, I'll send a copy of that specific part to the user and politely ask them to repost just the helpful bits. So far, this process hasn't caused any friction—neither with the rules nor with the users whose posts I've had to clear away.👍

Here is what I consider an insult:

You’re labeling me a bully, but frankly, I don't see myself that way. I certainly have my share of flaws, but no one who actually knows me could reasonably make that accusation (for purely objective reasons).👎

By insinuating that there is manipulation happening, you are also insulting me.👎

Regardless of your intention, I find that offensive.👎

Yes, casualties of useless arguments. There are no direct quotes here, but most of these are responses to comments that were deleted; without context, they would simply be left "hanging in mid-air."👍

I never actually claimed you were constantly trolling, but in the section that was deleted, you were either making jokes or explaining why you were making them.👍

The deleted comments have been made public. I’m asking you to clarify—just as bluebadger44 and several others have asked—exactly what information you believe is essential here. We are still in the middle of this discussion, and I have no issue changing my mind and restoring the deleted content if it makes sense.👍

You're needlessly deleting my posts, restricting my freedom of speech, and blocking my access to information—honestly, I consider that straight-up violence. I think it should have been obvious from my previous posts that I take the deletion of my content extremely seriously.

Brian Edwards6 said:I suppose I am, though since we clearly aren't seeing eye to eye on this, it's obvious my response isn't exactly what you were looking for.👍

Since you mentioned earlier:

I was under the impression you had some additional examples to offer beyond that one controversial topic—especially since you're making such sweeping claims about the entire subforum.👍

Do you have any examples like that?😕

As I’ve mentioned before, my approach is pretty straightforward: if a comment violates the rules, it gets deleted. Period. However, if there happens to be a nugget of actual useful information buried within that rule-breaking post, I don't just toss it in the trash. Since editing isn't an option here, I'll send a copy of that specific part to the user and politely ask them to repost just the helpful bits. So far, this process hasn't caused any friction—neither with the rules nor with the users whose posts I've had to clear away.👍

Here is what I consider an insult:

You’re labeling me a bully, but frankly, I don't see myself that way. I certainly have my share of flaws, but no one who actually knows me could reasonably make that accusation (for purely objective reasons).👎

By insinuating that there is manipulation happening, you are also insulting me.👎

Regardless of your intention, I find that offensive.👎

Yes, casualties of useless arguments. There are no direct quotes here, but most of these are responses to comments that were deleted; without context, they would simply be left "hanging in mid-air."👍

I never actually claimed you were constantly trolling, but in the section that was deleted, you were either making jokes or explaining why you were making them.👍

The deleted comments have been made public. I’m asking you to clarify—just as bluebadger44 and several others have asked—exactly what information you believe is essential here. We are still in the middle of this discussion, and I have no issue changing my mind and restoring the deleted content if it makes sense.👍

Human memory is unreliable. That's all I said. Go ahead—tell me otherwise if you think you're right.

Brian Edwards6 said:I suppose I am, though since we clearly aren't seeing eye to eye on this, it's obvious my response isn't exactly what you were looking for.👍

Since you mentioned earlier:

I was under the impression you had some additional examples to offer beyond that one controversial topic—especially since you're making such sweeping claims about the entire subforum.👍

Do you have any examples like that?😕

As I’ve mentioned before, my approach is pretty straightforward: if a comment violates the rules, it gets deleted. Period. However, if there happens to be a nugget of actual useful information buried within that rule-breaking post, I don't just toss it in the trash. Since editing isn't an option here, I'll send a copy of that specific part to the user and politely ask them to repost just the helpful bits. So far, this process hasn't caused any friction—neither with the rules nor with the users whose posts I've had to clear away.👍

Here is what I consider an insult:

You’re labeling me a bully, but frankly, I don't see myself that way. I certainly have my share of flaws, but no one who actually knows me could reasonably make that accusation (for purely objective reasons).👎

By insinuating that there is manipulation happening, you are also insulting me.👎

Regardless of your intention, I find that offensive.👎

Yes, casualties of useless arguments. There are no direct quotes here, but most of these are responses to comments that were deleted; without context, they would simply be left "hanging in mid-air."👍

I never actually claimed you were constantly trolling, but in the section that was deleted, you were either making jokes or explaining why you were making them.👍

The deleted comments have been made public. I’m asking you to clarify—just as bluebadger44 and several others have asked—exactly what information you believe is essential here. We are still in the middle of this discussion, and I have no issue changing my mind and restoring the deleted content if it makes sense.👍

If that counts as an insult, then this does too:

Brian Edwards6 The user said:Yeah, I saw you found that interesting.

Brian Edwards6 said:I suppose I am, though since we clearly aren't seeing eye to eye on this, it's obvious my response isn't exactly what you were looking for.👍

Since you mentioned earlier:

I was under the impression you had some additional examples to offer beyond that one controversial topic—especially since you're making such sweeping claims about the entire subforum.👍

Do you have any examples like that?😕

As I’ve mentioned before, my approach is pretty straightforward: if a comment violates the rules, it gets deleted. Period. However, if there happens to be a nugget of actual useful information buried within that rule-breaking post, I don't just toss it in the trash. Since editing isn't an option here, I'll send a copy of that specific part to the user and politely ask them to repost just the helpful bits. So far, this process hasn't caused any friction—neither with the rules nor with the users whose posts I've had to clear away.👍

Here is what I consider an insult:

You’re labeling me a bully, but frankly, I don't see myself that way. I certainly have my share of flaws, but no one who actually knows me could reasonably make that accusation (for purely objective reasons).👎

By insinuating that there is manipulation happening, you are also insulting me.👎

Regardless of your intention, I find that offensive.👎

Yes, casualties of useless arguments. There are no direct quotes here, but most of these are responses to comments that were deleted; without context, they would simply be left "hanging in mid-air."👍

I never actually claimed you were constantly trolling, but in the section that was deleted, you were either making jokes or explaining why you were making them.👍

The deleted comments have been made public. I’m asking you to clarify—just as bluebadger44 and several others have asked—exactly what information you believe is essential here. We are still in the middle of this discussion, and I have no issue changing my mind and restoring the deleted content if it makes sense.👍

I honestly think your issue is just being unable to admit you messed up and that you don't actually have any valid arguments. Your reaction was way over the top.

What matters most to me:

1. Confidential info leaks from ExxonMobil. Test results are strictly private—even the participants can't access them on their own request. But clearly, some people can. I know from a reliable source that this kind of thing has happened at other massive corporations (not naming names here), so I'm not about to dismiss what Miss Dean wrote.
2. Maybe there was an error when sending out rejection notices. That's actually why I was contacted via DM, and you just labeled my post as mocking.
3. Discussions about getting jobs through connections are always important.

redtiger15 said:The emphasis is on HALF. I clearly should have made that point more obvious somehow. Even by your super strict standards, half of those posts were perfectly fine. It’s a shame you can't see that maybe, just maybe, you shouldn't have deleted them in the first place. Personally, I think all the posts were fine. Look, I'm not out here campaigning for some sterile, sanitized debate—I honestly don't even enjoy being on this forum if it turns into some sterilized piece of crap.

I never said you were constantly trolling, but in the part that was deleted, you're either trolling or explaining why you're trolling.👍

And I never said you claimed I was *only* trolling. I'm sorry that your way of responding to what I wrote is so selective, and that you're probably intentionally ignoring the actual point I was making.

The deleted comments have been posted. Please explain to me (just like bluebadger44 and everyone else interested) what specific information you think is vital, because we're still discussing this and I have no problem changing my mind and restoring the deleted stuff.👍

Everything is vital to me. People's opinions and experiences matter to me, especially since we're all competing for the same jobs. Plus, I have plenty of thoughts on a lot of the stuff written in those deleted posts.
What, am I supposed to write out every single thought I have about everything that was said right here just so you can judge whether it's "good enough" for you to bring the posts back? Because I really don't feel like doing that.

It seems like that's all it comes down to. Unfortunately.

EDIT: I'd like to ask Brian Edwards6 to explain how this post is any different from all those other troll posts on the ExxonMobil thread that got deleted, except this one was written by a moderator. I took this post as an example from the "who moderates the world subforum" thread.

observer said:Now look here, ma'am, the admins can see all three of your posts on this thread that I deleted. They are free to weigh in, and they could even restore them if they believe they deserve to be read.

Glad you're so satisfied with how I handled this situation. 👍

Side note: using terms like "ma'am" and that last sentence when it's obvious the user isn't happy. What is that supposed to mean? That moderators can be condescending while we can't? Stop nitpicking!

When we clear out spam or any unnecessary clutter, we end up wiping the entire thread. That means even those posts that actually had some constructive points get swept up in the process. We do this strictly to maintain the flow and make sure the conversation still makes sense for everyone else reading it. Occasionally, we might leave certain comments standing if they still fit perfectly within the context of the discussion—even without the original quote—but usually, if the text is vital to the topic, it gets cleared out too.

Honestly, there isn't anything in those deleted posts that can't be rewritten properly, and most of it probably isn't new info anyway. Plus, the moderator was kind enough to copy and paste them for you, just in case you felt like you missed out on any essential details.

Honestly, I think it’s just plain rude to keep dodging the actual point by looping back to things you’ve already said—especially when we've already given you our answers on those exact topics.

@redtiger15
I have my own personal reasons for staying quiet on certain subforums, and since your PM feature seems to be broken—I don't even see the option when I click your name, is PM disabled for you?—I’ll just drop a brief summary of the deleted conversation here. If you find any of this useful, feel free to move pieces of it back to where they belong.
I know quite a few people over at ExxonMobil, and since I had some personal skin in the game regarding this year's recruitment cycle, I figured I’d take the liberty of sharing what I’ve gathered. For the past few years, ExxonMobil has been focusing on bringing in young talent, specifically targeting those with the top-tier academic results. As it turns out, that hasn't exactly been the winning strategy.
ExxonMobil is currently planning to roll out a new job evaluation system alongside a major reorganization. So, where’s the catch? Well, for instance, ExxonMobil intends to outsource certain departments. Let’s say we’re talking about IT. An outside firm will step in, offering their expertise, and their engineers will handle the heavy lifting. However, at the same time, the company wants to retain a handful of internal staff to handle frequent, relatively basic interventions. Now, imagine hiring someone who won an IT Olympiad, can code circles around everyone, and holds a stack of certifications, just for that role.
Their skillset simply isn't required, and frankly, there's no way to utilize it. The specific roles being advertised don't offer much in terms of upward mobility or advanced training. In this scenario, "overqualified" is actually a liability; such a person will quickly become bored, depressed, and eventually transform into a disgruntled, toxic employee. Apparently, this has been proven 100% through practical experience. That is why the current recruitment drive is looking for the most "suitable" candidate rather than the most brilliant one (and I'm not talking about nepotism here). If there's a development team involved, they'll grab the best of the best. But for these other roles, they often seek someone who is mediocre across the board—someone without massive ambitions who will just perform the tasks with general satisfaction.
Of course, Americans tend to jump to conclusions and cry "nepotism" the moment a hiring pattern looks unusual. Honestly, whether that kind of thing exists at ExxonMobil, I couldn't tell you, but this all makes perfect sense to me because I’ve seen this exact dynamic play out in my own professional life.
The bottom line is that the person with the highest test scores doesn't necessarily need to be hired for every opening because business policy dictates otherwise. The top scorer is definitely not always the optimal choice for certain positions, especially in departments that aren't part of the company's core operations and could easily be outsourced. If you need more specifics, hit me up via PM. I know the inner workings of ExxonMobil pretty well, but beyond what I've laid out here, I don't have any further intel on the recruitment process itself.

And there you have it, that’s exactly my point.
A moderator goes and kills a perfectly good discussion for no reason, leaving us all shortchanged on posts like this one.
But for some reason, they just can't—or won't—wrap their heads around that. It’s apparently more important to scrub away some harmless back-and-forth just to keep the environment feeling sterile and "clean."
Look, I’m not trying to drag out an argument with that particular mod; honestly, the mistake should've been fixed two days ago anyway. Besides, I don't really feel like posting on that thread or even in that subforum anymore.

@Jack Rodriguez7, yeah, my PMs are actually turned off right now.
That's what I was getting at when I mentioned how it makes sense that certain places prefer the "average Joe" types. This isn't the spot to hash that out, and since I’m done posting in that subforum, I'm not going to go through the trouble of moving this post over there myself. If someone else wants to get the ball rolling on this debate again, be my guest.

Anyway, thanks. I'll give you a shout if anything else pops up that I need help with.

With all due respect to the mod, there’s more collateral damage happening here than actual arguing. 🙄

redtiger15 said:The emphasis is on HALF. I clearly should have made that point more obvious somehow. Even by your super strict standards, half of those posts were perfectly fine. It’s a shame you can't see that maybe, just maybe, you shouldn't have deleted them in the first place. Personally, I think all the posts were fine. Look, I'm not out here campaigning for some sterile, sanitized debate—I honestly don't even enjoy being on this forum if it turns into some sterilized piece of crap.

I never said you were constantly trolling, but in the part that was deleted, you're either trolling or explaining why you're trolling.👍

And I never said you claimed I was *only* trolling. I'm sorry that your way of responding to what I wrote is so selective, and that you're probably intentionally ignoring the actual point I was making.

The deleted comments have been posted. Please explain to me (just like bluebadger44 and everyone else interested) what specific information you think is vital, because we're still discussing this and I have no problem changing my mind and restoring the deleted stuff.👍

Everything is vital to me. People's opinions and experiences matter to me, especially since we're all competing for the same jobs. Plus, I have plenty of thoughts on a lot of the stuff written in those deleted posts.
What, am I supposed to write out every single thought I have about everything that was said right here just so you can judge whether it's "good enough" for you to bring the posts back? Because I really don't feel like doing that.

You mentioned that there was some information tucked away in those deleted comments that you actually found important. So, I went ahead and copied all of them right here. I’m hoping you can point out exactly what you were referring to—and please, try to be serious for once; I'm looking for actual substance, not just more of your usual sarcasm.👍

bluebadger44 said:You're needlessly deleting my posts, restricting my freedom of speech, and blocking my access to information—honestly, I consider that straight-up violence. I think it should have been obvious from my previous posts that I take the deletion of my content extremely seriously.

Human memory is unreliable. That's all I said. Go ahead—tell me otherwise if you think you're right.

If that counts as an insult, then this does too:

I honestly think your issue is just being unable to admit you messed up and that you don't actually have any valid arguments. Your reaction was way over the top.

What matters most to me:

1. Confidential info leaks from ExxonMobil. Test results are strictly private—even the participants can't access them on their own request. But clearly, some people can. I know from a reliable source that this kind of thing has happened at other massive corporations (not naming names here), so I'm not about to dismiss what Miss Dean wrote.
2. Maybe there was an error when sending out rejection notices. That's actually why I was contacted via DM, and you just labeled my post as mocking.
3. Discussions about getting jobs through connections are always important.

It seems like that's all it comes down to. Unfortunately.

EDIT: I'd like to ask Brian Edwards6 to explain how this post is any different from all those other troll posts on the ExxonMobil thread that got deleted, except this one was written by a moderator. I took this post as an example from the "who moderates the world subforum" thread.

Side note: using terms like "ma'am" and that last sentence when it's obvious the user isn't happy. What is that supposed to mean? That moderators can be condescending while we can't? Stop nitpicking!

Your comments were removed because they were direct replies to posts that had already been deleted, which is standard procedure under our community guidelines. To provide some context: the user whose original posts were pulled mentioned that her boyfriend didn't land the job despite being one of the top candidates. While sharing that kind of personal frustration is perfectly fine, she spent several comments belittling other participants in the discussion. That behavior triggered the necessary moderation response, as violating our conduct rules isn't permitted here. The thread itself has consistently touched on topics like nepotism and cronyism, both before and after this incident, so you still have full access to all the relevant information available in this format. Furthermore, none of these removals involve allegations of violence or safety issues, so your accusations of insults are quite frankly unfounded.👎

bluebadger44 said:You're needlessly deleting my posts, restricting my freedom of speech, and blocking my access to information—honestly, I consider that straight-up violence. I think it should have been obvious from my previous posts that I take the deletion of my content extremely seriously.

Human memory is unreliable. That's all I said. Go ahead—tell me otherwise if you think you're right.

If that counts as an insult, then this does too:

I honestly think your issue is just being unable to admit you messed up and that you don't actually have any valid arguments. Your reaction was way over the top.

What matters most to me:

1. Confidential info leaks from ExxonMobil. Test results are strictly private—even the participants can't access them on their own request. But clearly, some people can. I know from a reliable source that this kind of thing has happened at other massive corporations (not naming names here), so I'm not about to dismiss what Miss Dean wrote.
2. Maybe there was an error when sending out rejection notices. That's actually why I was contacted via DM, and you just labeled my post as mocking.
3. Discussions about getting jobs through connections are always important.

It seems like that's all it comes down to. Unfortunately.

EDIT: I'd like to ask Brian Edwards6 to explain how this post is any different from all those other troll posts on the ExxonMobil thread that got deleted, except this one was written by a moderator. I took this post as an example from the "who moderates the world subforum" thread.

Side note: using terms like "ma'am" and that last sentence when it's obvious the user isn't happy. What is that supposed to mean? That moderators can be condescending while we can't? Stop nitpicking!

So, let me get this straight—am I actually guilty of manipulation here, or am I just overthinking my own motives?😕

bluebadger44 said:You're needlessly deleting my posts, restricting my freedom of speech, and blocking my access to information—honestly, I consider that straight-up violence. I think it should have been obvious from my previous posts that I take the deletion of my content extremely seriously.

Human memory is unreliable. That's all I said. Go ahead—tell me otherwise if you think you're right.

If that counts as an insult, then this does too:

I honestly think your issue is just being unable to admit you messed up and that you don't actually have any valid arguments. Your reaction was way over the top.

What matters most to me:

1. Confidential info leaks from ExxonMobil. Test results are strictly private—even the participants can't access them on their own request. But clearly, some people can. I know from a reliable source that this kind of thing has happened at other massive corporations (not naming names here), so I'm not about to dismiss what Miss Dean wrote.
2. Maybe there was an error when sending out rejection notices. That's actually why I was contacted via DM, and you just labeled my post as mocking.
3. Discussions about getting jobs through connections are always important.

It seems like that's all it comes down to. Unfortunately.

EDIT: I'd like to ask Brian Edwards6 to explain how this post is any different from all those other troll posts on the ExxonMobil thread that got deleted, except this one was written by a moderator. I took this post as an example from the "who moderates the world subforum" thread.

Side note: using terms like "ma'am" and that last sentence when it's obvious the user isn't happy. What is that supposed to mean? That moderators can be condescending while we can't? Stop nitpicking!

1. If you happen to have such information, please feel free to share it—just as Miss Dean's comment would have remained if she hadn't belittled other users and ignited such a confrontation.
2. That isn't the full extent of that comment, and since it was so neatly copied in a previous reply, I don't believe there was any mention of the fallibility of human memory.
3. Of course there was; it was mentioned previously, and from what I can see, both before and after the deleted argument.👍

bluebadger44 said:You're needlessly deleting my posts, restricting my freedom of speech, and blocking my access to information—honestly, I consider that straight-up violence. I think it should have been obvious from my previous posts that I take the deletion of my content extremely seriously.

Human memory is unreliable. That's all I said. Go ahead—tell me otherwise if you think you're right.

If that counts as an insult, then this does too:

I honestly think your issue is just being unable to admit you messed up and that you don't actually have any valid arguments. Your reaction was way over the top.

What matters most to me:

1. Confidential info leaks from ExxonMobil. Test results are strictly private—even the participants can't access them on their own request. But clearly, some people can. I know from a reliable source that this kind of thing has happened at other massive corporations (not naming names here), so I'm not about to dismiss what Miss Dean wrote.
2. Maybe there was an error when sending out rejection notices. That's actually why I was contacted via DM, and you just labeled my post as mocking.
3. Discussions about getting jobs through connections are always important.

It seems like that's all it comes down to. Unfortunately.

EDIT: I'd like to ask Brian Edwards6 to explain how this post is any different from all those other troll posts on the ExxonMobil thread that got deleted, except this one was written by a moderator. I took this post as an example from the "who moderates the world subforum" thread.

Side note: using terms like "ma'am" and that last sentence when it's obvious the user isn't happy. What is that supposed to mean? That moderators can be condescending while we can't? Stop nitpicking!

I don't have jurisdiction over the subforum where you copied that comment, so I have nothing to offer in response there.👍

Jack Rodriguez7 said:@redtiger15
I have my own personal reasons for staying quiet on certain subforums, and since your PM feature seems to be broken—I don't even see the option when I click your name, is PM disabled for you?—I’ll just drop a brief summary of the deleted conversation here. If you find any of this useful, feel free to move pieces of it back to where they belong.
I know quite a few people over at ExxonMobil, and since I had some personal skin in the game regarding this year's recruitment cycle, I figured I’d take the liberty of sharing what I’ve gathered. For the past few years, ExxonMobil has been focusing on bringing in young talent, specifically targeting those with the top-tier academic results. As it turns out, that hasn't exactly been the winning strategy.
ExxonMobil is currently planning to roll out a new job evaluation system alongside a major reorganization. So, where’s the catch? Well, for instance, ExxonMobil intends to outsource certain departments. Let’s say we’re talking about IT. An outside firm will step in, offering their expertise, and their engineers will handle the heavy lifting. However, at the same time, the company wants to retain a handful of internal staff to handle frequent, relatively basic interventions. Now, imagine hiring someone who won an IT Olympiad, can code circles around everyone, and holds a stack of certifications, just for that role.
Their skillset simply isn't required, and frankly, there's no way to utilize it. The specific roles being advertised don't offer much in terms of upward mobility or advanced training. In this scenario, "overqualified" is actually a liability; such a person will quickly become bored, depressed, and eventually transform into a disgruntled, toxic employee. Apparently, this has been proven 100% through practical experience. That is why the current recruitment drive is looking for the most "suitable" candidate rather than the most brilliant one (and I'm not talking about nepotism here). If there's a development team involved, they'll grab the best of the best. But for these other roles, they often seek someone who is mediocre across the board—someone without massive ambitions who will just perform the tasks with general satisfaction.
Of course, Americans tend to jump to conclusions and cry "nepotism" the moment a hiring pattern looks unusual. Honestly, whether that kind of thing exists at ExxonMobil, I couldn't tell you, but this all makes perfect sense to me because I’ve seen this exact dynamic play out in my own professional life.
The bottom line is that the person with the highest test scores doesn't necessarily need to be hired for every opening because business policy dictates otherwise. The top scorer is definitely not always the optimal choice for certain positions, especially in departments that aren't part of the company's core operations and could easily be outsourced. If you need more specifics, hit me up via PM. I know the inner workings of ExxonMobil pretty well, but beyond what I've laid out here, I don't have any further intel on the recruitment process itself.

You are perfectly free to participate in the discussion just like anyone else.👍

redtiger15 said:And there you have it, that’s exactly my point.
A moderator goes and kills a perfectly good discussion for no reason, leaving us all shortchanged on posts like this one.
But for some reason, they just can't—or won't—wrap their heads around that. It’s apparently more important to scrub away some harmless back-and-forth just to keep the environment feeling sterile and "clean."
Look, I’m not trying to drag out an argument with that particular mod; honestly, the mistake should've been fixed two days ago anyway. Besides, I don't really feel like posting on that thread or even in that subforum anymore.

@Jack Rodriguez7, yeah, my PMs are actually turned off right now.
That's what I was getting at when I mentioned how it makes sense that certain places prefer the "average Joe" types. This isn't the spot to hash that out, and since I’m done posting in that subforum, I'm not going to go through the trouble of moving this post over there myself. If someone else wants to get the ball rolling on this debate again, be my guest.

Anyway, thanks. I'll give you a shout if anything else pops up that I need help with.

No, you aren't talking about that, nor did you discuss it in those deleted comments.👍

redtiger15 said:And there you have it, that’s exactly my point.
A moderator goes and kills a perfectly good discussion for no reason, leaving us all shortchanged on posts like this one.
But for some reason, they just can't—or won't—wrap their heads around that. It’s apparently more important to scrub away some harmless back-and-forth just to keep the environment feeling sterile and "clean."
Look, I’m not trying to drag out an argument with that particular mod; honestly, the mistake should've been fixed two days ago anyway. Besides, I don't really feel like posting on that thread or even in that subforum anymore.

@Jack Rodriguez7, yeah, my PMs are actually turned off right now.
That's what I was getting at when I mentioned how it makes sense that certain places prefer the "average Joe" types. This isn't the spot to hash that out, and since I’m done posting in that subforum, I'm not going to go through the trouble of moving this post over there myself. If someone else wants to get the ball rolling on this debate again, be my guest.

Anyway, thanks. I'll give you a shout if anything else pops up that I need help with.

Jack Rodriguez7 didn't participate in the deleted discussion, and there wasn't a single comment in that thread even remotely as high-quality as this one of his.👍

redtiger15 said:And there you have it, that’s exactly my point.
A moderator goes and kills a perfectly good discussion for no reason, leaving us all shortchanged on posts like this one.
But for some reason, they just can't—or won't—wrap their heads around that. It’s apparently more important to scrub away some harmless back-and-forth just to keep the environment feeling sterile and "clean."
Look, I’m not trying to drag out an argument with that particular mod; honestly, the mistake should've been fixed two days ago anyway. Besides, I don't really feel like posting on that thread or even in that subforum anymore.

@Jack Rodriguez7, yeah, my PMs are actually turned off right now.
That's what I was getting at when I mentioned how it makes sense that certain places prefer the "average Joe" types. This isn't the spot to hash that out, and since I’m done posting in that subforum, I'm not going to go through the trouble of moving this post over there myself. If someone else wants to get the ball rolling on this debate again, be my guest.

Anyway, thanks. I'll give you a shout if anything else pops up that I need help with.

To be perfectly honest, I find that quite regrettable.

Jose Hayes4 said:With all due respect to the mod, there’s more collateral damage happening here than actual arguing. 🙄

Unfortunately, that’s the reality. Comments were removed because they were direct responses to deleted posts that consisted of nothing but bickering and mockery; it simply wouldn't make sense to leave them standing alone when it's glaringly obvious they were meant as follow-ups or rebuttals to something else.👍

Brian Edwards6 said:You mentioned that there was some information tucked away in those deleted comments that you actually found important. So, I went ahead and copied all of them right here. I’m hoping you can point out exactly what you were referring to—and please, try to be serious for once; I'm looking for actual substance, not just more of your usual sarcasm.👍

Your comments were removed because they were direct replies to posts that had already been deleted, which is standard procedure under our community guidelines. To provide some context: the user whose original posts were pulled mentioned that her boyfriend didn't land the job despite being one of the top candidates. While sharing that kind of personal frustration is perfectly fine, she spent several comments belittling other participants in the discussion. That behavior triggered the necessary moderation response, as violating our conduct rules isn't permitted here. The thread itself has consistently touched on topics like nepotism and cronyism, both before and after this incident, so you still have full access to all the relevant information available in this format. Furthermore, none of these removals involve allegations of violence or safety issues, so your accusations of insults are quite frankly unfounded.👎

So, let me get this straight—am I actually guilty of manipulation here, or am I just overthinking my own motives?😕

1. If you happen to have such information, please feel free to share it—just as Miss Dean's comment would have remained if she hadn't belittled other users and ignited such a confrontation.
2. That isn't the full extent of that comment, and since it was so neatly copied in a previous reply, I don't believe there was any mention of the fallibility of human memory.
3. Of course there was; it was mentioned previously, and from what I can see, both before and after the deleted argument.👍

I don't have jurisdiction over the subforum where you copied that comment, so I have nothing to offer in response there.👍

You are perfectly free to participate in the discussion just like anyone else.👍

No, you aren't talking about that, nor did you discuss it in those deleted comments.👍

Jack Rodriguez7 didn't participate in the deleted discussion, and there wasn't a single comment in that thread even remotely as high-quality as this one of his.👍

To be perfectly honest, I find that quite regrettable.

Unfortunately, that’s the reality. Comments were removed because they were direct responses to deleted posts that consisted of nothing but bickering and mockery; it simply wouldn't make sense to leave them standing alone when it's glaringly obvious they were meant as follow-ups or rebuttals to something else.👍

Alright, seriously, what's your deal?
Why are you playing dumb and twisting my words so aggressively? Or is it possible you genuinely have no clue what this whole thread is even about?
It’s starting to look like you’re just getting a kick out of this—just rambling on with endless nonsense while trying to act all polite and burying it under a mountain of overly sincere apologies. 🙄

So, here is my actual comment from two days ago:

redtiger15 said:

I don't even know where to start with this one, honestly. It feels like we're just spinning our wheels at this point, chasing these tiny little crumbs of information while everyone else seems to be miles ahead of us. I mean, look, I’m probably overthinking it—classic me, right?—but there’s just something about the way things are moving that feels... off. It's like we're all staring at the same blurry map, hoping someone finally points out where the actual road is, but instead, we just get more noise. It’s exhausting, really. I'll probably still be sitting here, over-analyzing every single detail while the rest of the world moves on, because apparently, that's my special talent. kaže:
Look, I didn't say anything like that, and honestly, that wasn't even my intention. You asked me, and I was just trying to break things down for you with the best of intentions, really. If I stepped on any toes or offended you, I’m truly sorry.👍

Nah, I wasn't actually asking a question. I was just stating a fact, you know? Because if I had actually wanted to start a whole new thread about this, believe me, I would've just gone ahead and opened it myself.

Look, I get that this would’ve been huge news if it actually mattered, but that’s kind of the whole point here—you acted like it wasn't even worth noting and just spent the whole time making fun of the person who posted it.👍

Look, I’ve already said my piece, but if my little joke is really such a massive thorn in everyone's side—and if we’re all suddenly required to be so damn sterile and perfect in here—then fine, whatever. If it makes you feel better, go ahead and leave my two deleted posts gone, but for the love of God, give me back the rest of them. I actually managed to dig up some genuinely useful and interesting stuff in those deleted threads, stuff I probably would've kept finding if you hadn't gone and nuked the entire discussion.

Anyway, I totally messed up how I handled the way she phrased that whole thing. I mean, I’ve already made my position pretty clear on that before, haven't I? Just because I was making fun of her delivery doesn't mean I'm dismissing the actual info she dropped in her post—there's still some meat on those bones, even if her approach was a total disaster.

Look, at the end of the day, what the users think matters way more than whatever some moderator has to say, but honestly? That doesn't mean your take on this specific situation is actually right or that you've totally nailed it.👍

Just because you hold a moderator badge doesn't mean your opinion is automatically gospel, you know? It’s funny how you always act like you're 100% right, yet you only ever flip-flop on your decisions when the admins step in and tell you to. Honestly, I don't even see the point in sitting here all night trying to go toe-to-toe with you—it's just a waste of energy since everything that needs to be said has already been laid out right here. I'm just calling on the admins to step up and actually deal with this situation now.

Comments like Jack's never stood a chance because you were too busy scrubbing EVERYTHING. Do I really need to spell that out for you? That's basically what I'm getting at here.
I honestly don't get how you can keep twisting things like this without feeling any shame. You haven't got a leg to stand on. Just give it up, man. Don't do this. It's pathetic. Really, truly pathetic.

Anyway, I'm out. Peace. 👍

I think my post got deleted

First off, regarding this whole deleting comments thing—honestly, I find it pretty unacceptable.
I don't see why anyone feels offended or called out just because someone suggested that getting a job at ExxonMobil is mostly about who you know. My friends over at ExxonMobil have dealt with much worse than nepotism... I mean, let's be real, we live in America, and we all know how things actually work here. No matter how hard someone wants to pretend otherwise.

On another note, just because someone gets rejected doesn't necessarily mean they failed some psychological evaluation. We weren't all taking the exact same version of the test to begin with.
There are so many people at ExxonMobil reviewing our tests and resumes and reaching out to us; I doubt for a second that everyone there is using the exact same selection criteria.

We realized a long time ago that there isn't much logic behind anything ExxonMobil does with this recruitment drive... so it’s probably best to just view this as another useful experience and look for opportunities elsewhere. That doesn't mean we won't get lucky with Groww or somehow land a role at ExxonMobil through the Groww program later on.

To those who actually got an invite: good luck, whether you got in through connections or not.

...and as for why the comment was deleted, it's clearly that first sentence :-) nothing more to say.

Brian Edwards6 said:You mentioned that there was some information tucked away in those deleted comments that you actually found important. So, I went ahead and copied all of them right here. I’m hoping you can point out exactly what you were referring to—and please, try to be serious for once; I'm looking for actual substance, not just more of your usual sarcasm.👍

Your comments were removed because they were direct replies to posts that had already been deleted, which is standard procedure under our community guidelines. To provide some context: the user whose original posts were pulled mentioned that her boyfriend didn't land the job despite being one of the top candidates. While sharing that kind of personal frustration is perfectly fine, she spent several comments belittling other participants in the discussion. That behavior triggered the necessary moderation response, as violating our conduct rules isn't permitted here. The thread itself has consistently touched on topics like nepotism and cronyism, both before and after this incident, so you still have full access to all the relevant information available in this format. Furthermore, none of these removals involve allegations of violence or safety issues, so your accusations of insults are quite frankly unfounded.👎

So, let me get this straight—am I actually guilty of manipulation here, or am I just overthinking my own motives?😕

1. If you happen to have such information, please feel free to share it—just as Miss Dean's comment would have remained if she hadn't belittled other users and ignited such a confrontation.
2. That isn't the full extent of that comment, and since it was so neatly copied in a previous reply, I don't believe there was any mention of the fallibility of human memory.
3. Of course there was; it was mentioned previously, and from what I can see, both before and after the deleted argument.👍

I don't have jurisdiction over the subforum where you copied that comment, so I have nothing to offer in response there.👍

You are perfectly free to participate in the discussion just like anyone else.👍

No, you aren't talking about that, nor did you discuss it in those deleted comments.👍

Jack Rodriguez7 didn't participate in the deleted discussion, and there wasn't a single comment in that thread even remotely as high-quality as this one of his.👍

To be perfectly honest, I find that quite regrettable.

Unfortunately, that’s the reality. Comments were removed because they were direct responses to deleted posts that consisted of nothing but bickering and mockery; it simply wouldn't make sense to leave them standing alone when it's glaringly obvious they were meant as follow-ups or rebuttals to something else.👍

What are you even going to say to deny that I consider this violence? I’m sticking to what I said, and I’ll add that you won't even answer my questions (again, depriving me of information). And besides, for the hundredth time, who are you to decide what counts as relevant information to me? As for the belittling part, I think you're the only participant who actually took what happened seriously.

Brian Edwards6 said:You mentioned that there was some information tucked away in those deleted comments that you actually found important. So, I went ahead and copied all of them right here. I’m hoping you can point out exactly what you were referring to—and please, try to be serious for once; I'm looking for actual substance, not just more of your usual sarcasm.👍

Your comments were removed because they were direct replies to posts that had already been deleted, which is standard procedure under our community guidelines. To provide some context: the user whose original posts were pulled mentioned that her boyfriend didn't land the job despite being one of the top candidates. While sharing that kind of personal frustration is perfectly fine, she spent several comments belittling other participants in the discussion. That behavior triggered the necessary moderation response, as violating our conduct rules isn't permitted here. The thread itself has consistently touched on topics like nepotism and cronyism, both before and after this incident, so you still have full access to all the relevant information available in this format. Furthermore, none of these removals involve allegations of violence or safety issues, so your accusations of insults are quite frankly unfounded.👎

So, let me get this straight—am I actually guilty of manipulation here, or am I just overthinking my own motives?😕

1. If you happen to have such information, please feel free to share it—just as Miss Dean's comment would have remained if she hadn't belittled other users and ignited such a confrontation.
2. That isn't the full extent of that comment, and since it was so neatly copied in a previous reply, I don't believe there was any mention of the fallibility of human memory.
3. Of course there was; it was mentioned previously, and from what I can see, both before and after the deleted argument.👍

I don't have jurisdiction over the subforum where you copied that comment, so I have nothing to offer in response there.👍

You are perfectly free to participate in the discussion just like anyone else.👍

No, you aren't talking about that, nor did you discuss it in those deleted comments.👍

Jack Rodriguez7 didn't participate in the deleted discussion, and there wasn't a single comment in that thread even remotely as high-quality as this one of his.👍

To be perfectly honest, I find that quite regrettable.

Unfortunately, that’s the reality. Comments were removed because they were direct responses to deleted posts that consisted of nothing but bickering and mockery; it simply wouldn't make sense to leave them standing alone when it's glaringly obvious they were meant as follow-ups or rebuttals to something else.👍

Don't put words in my mouth. I only said that human memory is fallible; I wasn't calling anyone out. My answer was general.

Brian Edwards6 said:You mentioned that there was some information tucked away in those deleted comments that you actually found important. So, I went ahead and copied all of them right here. I’m hoping you can point out exactly what you were referring to—and please, try to be serious for once; I'm looking for actual substance, not just more of your usual sarcasm.👍

Your comments were removed because they were direct replies to posts that had already been deleted, which is standard procedure under our community guidelines. To provide some context: the user whose original posts were pulled mentioned that her boyfriend didn't land the job despite being one of the top candidates. While sharing that kind of personal frustration is perfectly fine, she spent several comments belittling other participants in the discussion. That behavior triggered the necessary moderation response, as violating our conduct rules isn't permitted here. The thread itself has consistently touched on topics like nepotism and cronyism, both before and after this incident, so you still have full access to all the relevant information available in this format. Furthermore, none of these removals involve allegations of violence or safety issues, so your accusations of insults are quite frankly unfounded.👎

So, let me get this straight—am I actually guilty of manipulation here, or am I just overthinking my own motives?😕

1. If you happen to have such information, please feel free to share it—just as Miss Dean's comment would have remained if she hadn't belittled other users and ignited such a confrontation.
2. That isn't the full extent of that comment, and since it was so neatly copied in a previous reply, I don't believe there was any mention of the fallibility of human memory.
3. Of course there was; it was mentioned previously, and from what I can see, both before and after the deleted argument.👍

I don't have jurisdiction over the subforum where you copied that comment, so I have nothing to offer in response there.👍

You are perfectly free to participate in the discussion just like anyone else.👍

No, you aren't talking about that, nor did you discuss it in those deleted comments.👍

Jack Rodriguez7 didn't participate in the deleted discussion, and there wasn't a single comment in that thread even remotely as high-quality as this one of his.👍

To be perfectly honest, I find that quite regrettable.

Unfortunately, that’s the reality. Comments were removed because they were direct responses to deleted posts that consisted of nothing but bickering and mockery; it simply wouldn't make sense to leave them standing alone when it's glaringly obvious they were meant as follow-ups or rebuttals to something else.👍

You're grasping at straws.

Brian Edwards6 said:You mentioned that there was some information tucked away in those deleted comments that you actually found important. So, I went ahead and copied all of them right here. I’m hoping you can point out exactly what you were referring to—and please, try to be serious for once; I'm looking for actual substance, not just more of your usual sarcasm.👍

Your comments were removed because they were direct replies to posts that had already been deleted, which is standard procedure under our community guidelines. To provide some context: the user whose original posts were pulled mentioned that her boyfriend didn't land the job despite being one of the top candidates. While sharing that kind of personal frustration is perfectly fine, she spent several comments belittling other participants in the discussion. That behavior triggered the necessary moderation response, as violating our conduct rules isn't permitted here. The thread itself has consistently touched on topics like nepotism and cronyism, both before and after this incident, so you still have full access to all the relevant information available in this format. Furthermore, none of these removals involve allegations of violence or safety issues, so your accusations of insults are quite frankly unfounded.👎

So, let me get this straight—am I actually guilty of manipulation here, or am I just overthinking my own motives?😕

1. If you happen to have such information, please feel free to share it—just as Miss Dean's comment would have remained if she hadn't belittled other users and ignited such a confrontation.
2. That isn't the full extent of that comment, and since it was so neatly copied in a previous reply, I don't believe there was any mention of the fallibility of human memory.
3. Of course there was; it was mentioned previously, and from what I can see, both before and after the deleted argument.👍

I don't have jurisdiction over the subforum where you copied that comment, so I have nothing to offer in response there.👍

You are perfectly free to participate in the discussion just like anyone else.👍

No, you aren't talking about that, nor did you discuss it in those deleted comments.👍

Jack Rodriguez7 didn't participate in the deleted discussion, and there wasn't a single comment in that thread even remotely as high-quality as this one of his.👍

To be perfectly honest, I find that quite regrettable.

Unfortunately, that’s the reality. Comments were removed because they were direct responses to deleted posts that consisted of nothing but bickering and mockery; it simply wouldn't make sense to leave them standing alone when it's glaringly obvious they were meant as follow-ups or rebuttals to something else.👍

Excuse me? I didn't ask for your reaction. You don't need to be a moderator just to reply to someone's post. Isn't that literally the whole point of an online forum? I simply asked you to compare that comment to the one that was deleted and explain the difference, but you're dodging the question again. I assume the site rules apply to every section of this forum (except maybe the politics board) and to everyone participating? I am asking you once more to comment on the quoted post—and I'm asking Nicky too.

And yet again, you refuse to address this pathetic response of yours, which I've already posted three times in this thread:

drot13 said:Yeah, I saw that you found it interesting.

Brian Edwards6 said:You mentioned that there was some information tucked away in those deleted comments that you actually found important. So, I went ahead and copied all of them right here. I’m hoping you can point out exactly what you were referring to—and please, try to be serious for once; I'm looking for actual substance, not just more of your usual sarcasm.👍

Your comments were removed because they were direct replies to posts that had already been deleted, which is standard procedure under our community guidelines. To provide some context: the user whose original posts were pulled mentioned that her boyfriend didn't land the job despite being one of the top candidates. While sharing that kind of personal frustration is perfectly fine, she spent several comments belittling other participants in the discussion. That behavior triggered the necessary moderation response, as violating our conduct rules isn't permitted here. The thread itself has consistently touched on topics like nepotism and cronyism, both before and after this incident, so you still have full access to all the relevant information available in this format. Furthermore, none of these removals involve allegations of violence or safety issues, so your accusations of insults are quite frankly unfounded.👎

So, let me get this straight—am I actually guilty of manipulation here, or am I just overthinking my own motives?😕

1. If you happen to have such information, please feel free to share it—just as Miss Dean's comment would have remained if she hadn't belittled other users and ignited such a confrontation.
2. That isn't the full extent of that comment, and since it was so neatly copied in a previous reply, I don't believe there was any mention of the fallibility of human memory.
3. Of course there was; it was mentioned previously, and from what I can see, both before and after the deleted argument.👍

I don't have jurisdiction over the subforum where you copied that comment, so I have nothing to offer in response there.👍

You are perfectly free to participate in the discussion just like anyone else.👍

No, you aren't talking about that, nor did you discuss it in those deleted comments.👍

Jack Rodriguez7 didn't participate in the deleted discussion, and there wasn't a single comment in that thread even remotely as high-quality as this one of his.👍

To be perfectly honest, I find that quite regrettable.

Unfortunately, that’s the reality. Comments were removed because they were direct responses to deleted posts that consisted of nothing but bickering and mockery; it simply wouldn't make sense to leave them standing alone when it's glaringly obvious they were meant as follow-ups or rebuttals to something else.👍

Sure, but that discussion—the one you think was excessive—is what "triggered" his quality comment...

How many users have to complain about a moderator before something actually gets done about this?

I’m still trying to wrap my head around the sheer absurdity of what just happened in Lütje. Honestly, it feels like one of those fever dreams you have after eating too much greasy diner food at 2 AM—just surreal and fundamentally nonsensical. It’s one of those situations where you find yourself staring at the ceiling, wondering if everyone else actually witnessed the same chaos or if I’ve finally lost my grip on reality. It’s almost impressive, in a deeply frustrating sort of way, how quickly things can spiral when logic decides to take a permanent vacation. kaže:
Comments like the one from bluebadger44 shouldn't have even been an issue, but then again, you managed to scrub the entire thread before anyone could even react.

Once the thread was scrubbed, the conversation shifted toward relationships and other topics, settling into a much more civil tone—similar to the kind of level-headed commentary you’d expect from someone like Brian Edwards6. Honestly, if the discussion had maintained that sort of decorum from the very beginning, none of those deletions would have been necessary in the first place.👍

I can't say I have much to add regarding Ljutica. It seems we've hit a bit of a dead end here. kaže:
It seems you’ve run out of actual arguments to lean on.

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion, but I’m under no obligation to agree with it. In this particular instance, I find myself in disagreement—and, if I do say so myself, the site administration feels exactly the same way.👍

It’s officially a local holiday here, which means the usual chaos is in full swing. You know how it goes—everything slows down, the streets get packed, and you spend half the day wondering why anyone thought this was a good idea in the first place. Just another typical day of trying to navigate the festivities while pretending I'm not just looking for the nearest quiet corner and a decent cup of coffee. kaže:
Well, looks like they went ahead and nuked my post.
Well, there you have it. The very first sentence explains exactly why this was deleted. Honestly, what more is there to say?

Look, since editing comments isn't an option here, the entire post—which was actually quite coherent and grounded—got nuked just because of that one sentence where you decided to take a shot at the moderation team. Honestly, there were several warnings posted right on the thread, complete with links to the subforum rules and this specific discussion, yet you went ahead anyway. You knew exactly what you were doing, so really, you have no one to blame for the deletion but yourself. This is how it works, and frankly, this is how it will continue to work for every future comment of this nature. The rule against critiquing the moderators within a main discussion thread exists for a very practical reason: if we let people hijack the topic to complain about oversight, a discussion that’s already hundreds of comments deep would be completely smothered by meta-arguments. It's all laid out clearly. You've been asked to simply repost your comment without the commentary on the staff; if you have grievances regarding how things are run, feel free to air them here instead.👍

bluebadger44 said:What are you even going to say to deny that I consider this violence? I’m sticking to what I said, and I’ll add that you won't even answer my questions (again, depriving me of information). And besides, for the hundredth time, who are you to decide what counts as relevant information to me? As for the belittling part, I think you're the only participant who actually took what happened seriously.

Don't put words in my mouth. I only said that human memory is fallible; I wasn't calling anyone out. My answer was general.

You're grasping at straws.

Excuse me? I didn't ask for your reaction. You don't need to be a moderator just to reply to someone's post. Isn't that literally the whole point of an online forum? I simply asked you to compare that comment to the one that was deleted and explain the difference, but you're dodging the question again. I assume the site rules apply to every section of this forum (except maybe the politics board) and to everyone participating? I am asking you once more to comment on the quoted post—and I'm asking Nicky too.

And yet again, you refuse to address this pathetic response of yours, which I've already posted three times in this thread:

Sure, but that discussion—the one you think was excessive—is what "triggered" his quality comment...

How many users have to complain about a moderator before something actually gets done about this?

It’s the exact same situation I’m dealing with at my place.👍

bluebadger44 said:What are you even going to say to deny that I consider this violence? I’m sticking to what I said, and I’ll add that you won't even answer my questions (again, depriving me of information). And besides, for the hundredth time, who are you to decide what counts as relevant information to me? As for the belittling part, I think you're the only participant who actually took what happened seriously.

Don't put words in my mouth. I only said that human memory is fallible; I wasn't calling anyone out. My answer was general.

You're grasping at straws.

Excuse me? I didn't ask for your reaction. You don't need to be a moderator just to reply to someone's post. Isn't that literally the whole point of an online forum? I simply asked you to compare that comment to the one that was deleted and explain the difference, but you're dodging the question again. I assume the site rules apply to every section of this forum (except maybe the politics board) and to everyone participating? I am asking you once more to comment on the quoted post—and I'm asking Nicky too.

And yet again, you refuse to address this pathetic response of yours, which I've already posted three times in this thread:

Sure, but that discussion—the one you think was excessive—is what "triggered" his quality comment...

How many users have to complain about a moderator before something actually gets done about this?

Furthermore, for the umpteenth time, I have judged the utility of a comment based on the reaction it provoked.👍

bluebadger44 said:What are you even going to say to deny that I consider this violence? I’m sticking to what I said, and I’ll add that you won't even answer my questions (again, depriving me of information). And besides, for the hundredth time, who are you to decide what counts as relevant information to me? As for the belittling part, I think you're the only participant who actually took what happened seriously.

Don't put words in my mouth. I only said that human memory is fallible; I wasn't calling anyone out. My answer was general.

You're grasping at straws.

Excuse me? I didn't ask for your reaction. You don't need to be a moderator just to reply to someone's post. Isn't that literally the whole point of an online forum? I simply asked you to compare that comment to the one that was deleted and explain the difference, but you're dodging the question again. I assume the site rules apply to every section of this forum (except maybe the politics board) and to everyone participating? I am asking you once more to comment on the quoted post—and I'm asking Nicky too.

And yet again, you refuse to address this pathetic response of yours, which I've already posted three times in this thread:

Sure, but that discussion—the one you think was excessive—is what "triggered" his quality comment...

How many users have to complain about a moderator before something actually gets done about this?

The topic at hand concerns deleted comments within this specific thread, not every random post across the entire site, so I have no intention of weighing in on things that don't pertain to me. Should someone post something like that in the subforums I moderate, I would be more than happy to engage in a discussion.👍

bluebadger44 said:What are you even going to say to deny that I consider this violence? I’m sticking to what I said, and I’ll add that you won't even answer my questions (again, depriving me of information). And besides, for the hundredth time, who are you to decide what counts as relevant information to me? As for the belittling part, I think you're the only participant who actually took what happened seriously.

Don't put words in my mouth. I only said that human memory is fallible; I wasn't calling anyone out. My answer was general.

You're grasping at straws.

Excuse me? I didn't ask for your reaction. You don't need to be a moderator just to reply to someone's post. Isn't that literally the whole point of an online forum? I simply asked you to compare that comment to the one that was deleted and explain the difference, but you're dodging the question again. I assume the site rules apply to every section of this forum (except maybe the politics board) and to everyone participating? I am asking you once more to comment on the quoted post—and I'm asking Nicky too.

And yet again, you refuse to address this pathetic response of yours, which I've already posted three times in this thread:

Sure, but that discussion—the one you think was excessive—is what "triggered" his quality comment...

How many users have to complain about a moderator before something actually gets done about this?

Why call it snarky? She didn't provide a substantive answer to that first deleted comment; she immediately pivoted to making fun of it, which was quite clearly her intent. To avoid any confusion, that was a perfectly justified and understandable reaction to that initial comment. If she had found the discussion actually interesting, she would have had something substantial to contribute rather than just that.👍

bluebadger44 said:What are you even going to say to deny that I consider this violence? I’m sticking to what I said, and I’ll add that you won't even answer my questions (again, depriving me of information). And besides, for the hundredth time, who are you to decide what counts as relevant information to me? As for the belittling part, I think you're the only participant who actually took what happened seriously.

Don't put words in my mouth. I only said that human memory is fallible; I wasn't calling anyone out. My answer was general.

You're grasping at straws.

Excuse me? I didn't ask for your reaction. You don't need to be a moderator just to reply to someone's post. Isn't that literally the whole point of an online forum? I simply asked you to compare that comment to the one that was deleted and explain the difference, but you're dodging the question again. I assume the site rules apply to every section of this forum (except maybe the politics board) and to everyone participating? I am asking you once more to comment on the quoted post—and I'm asking Nicky too.

And yet again, you refuse to address this pathetic response of yours, which I've already posted three times in this thread:

Sure, but that discussion—the one you think was excessive—is what "triggered" his quality comment...

How many users have to complain about a moderator before something actually gets done about this?

Not by a long shot. Miller's comment was prompted by the deletion of posts in the Legal subforum and our private exchange via DM. He and I have an unrelated dispute, and this provided him a chance to express his dissatisfaction, doing so politely, as he always does.👍

bluebadger44 said:What are you even going to say to deny that I consider this violence? I’m sticking to what I said, and I’ll add that you won't even answer my questions (again, depriving me of information). And besides, for the hundredth time, who are you to decide what counts as relevant information to me? As for the belittling part, I think you're the only participant who actually took what happened seriously.

Don't put words in my mouth. I only said that human memory is fallible; I wasn't calling anyone out. My answer was general.

You're grasping at straws.

Excuse me? I didn't ask for your reaction. You don't need to be a moderator just to reply to someone's post. Isn't that literally the whole point of an online forum? I simply asked you to compare that comment to the one that was deleted and explain the difference, but you're dodging the question again. I assume the site rules apply to every section of this forum (except maybe the politics board) and to everyone participating? I am asking you once more to comment on the quoted post—and I'm asking Nicky too.

And yet again, you refuse to address this pathetic response of yours, which I've already posted three times in this thread:

Sure, but that discussion—the one you think was excessive—is what "triggered" his quality comment...

How many users have to complain about a moderator before something actually gets done about this?

In my experience, even a single legitimate grievance should suffice, as evidenced by some of my previous threads.👍>

Brian Edwards6 said:

I’m still trying to wrap my head around the sheer absurdity of what just happened in Lütje. Honestly, it feels like one of those fever dreams you have after eating too much greasy diner food at 2 AM—just surreal and fundamentally nonsensical. It’s one of those situations where you find yourself staring at the ceiling, wondering if everyone else actually witnessed the same chaos or if I’ve finally lost my grip on reality. It’s almost impressive, in a deeply frustrating sort of way, how quickly things can spiral when logic decides to take a permanent vacation. kaže:
Comments like the one from bluebadger44 shouldn't have even been an issue, but then again, you managed to scrub the entire thread before anyone could even react.

Once the thread was scrubbed, the conversation shifted toward relationships and other topics, settling into a much more civil tone—similar to the kind of level-headed commentary you’d expect from someone like Brian Edwards6. Honestly, if the discussion had maintained that sort of decorum from the very beginning, none of those deletions would have been necessary in the first place.👍

I can't say I have much to add regarding Ljutica. It seems we've hit a bit of a dead end here. kaže:
It seems you’ve run out of actual arguments to lean on.

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion, but I’m under no obligation to agree with it. In this particular instance, I find myself in disagreement—and, if I do say so myself, the site administration feels exactly the same way.👍

It’s officially a local holiday here, which means the usual chaos is in full swing. You know how it goes—everything slows down, the streets get packed, and you spend half the day wondering why anyone thought this was a good idea in the first place. Just another typical day of trying to navigate the festivities while pretending I'm not just looking for the nearest quiet corner and a decent cup of coffee. kaže:
Well, looks like they went ahead and nuked my post.
Well, there you have it. The very first sentence explains exactly why this was deleted. Honestly, what more is there to say?

Look, since editing comments isn't an option here, the entire post—which was actually quite coherent and grounded—got nuked just because of that one sentence where you decided to take a shot at the moderation team. Honestly, there were several warnings posted right on the thread, complete with links to the subforum rules and this specific discussion, yet you went ahead anyway. You knew exactly what you were doing, so really, you have no one to blame for the deletion but yourself. This is how it works, and frankly, this is how it will continue to work for every future comment of this nature. The rule against critiquing the moderators within a main discussion thread exists for a very practical reason: if we let people hijack the topic to complain about oversight, a discussion that’s already hundreds of comments deep would be completely smothered by meta-arguments. It's all laid out clearly. You've been asked to simply repost your comment without the commentary on the staff; if you have grievances regarding how things are run, feel free to air them here instead.👍

It’s the exact same situation I’m dealing with at my place.👍

Furthermore, for the umpteenth time, I have judged the utility of a comment based on the reaction it provoked.👍

The topic at hand concerns deleted comments within this specific thread, not every random post across the entire site, so I have no intention of weighing in on things that don't pertain to me. Should someone post something like that in the subforums I moderate, I would be more than happy to engage in a discussion.👍

Why call it snarky? She didn't provide a substantive answer to that first deleted comment; she immediately pivoted to making fun of it, which was quite clearly her intent. To avoid any confusion, that was a perfectly justified and understandable reaction to that initial comment. If she had found the discussion actually interesting, she would have had something substantial to contribute rather than just that.👍

Not by a long shot. Miller's comment was prompted by the deletion of posts in the Legal subforum and our private exchange via DM. He and I have an unrelated dispute, and this provided him a chance to express his dissatisfaction, doing so politely, as he always does.👍

In my experience, even a single legitimate grievance should suffice, as evidenced by some of my previous threads.👍>

You totally misunderstood. I was talking about that specific part of his post regarding outsourcing at Intel... I guess that bit was probably prompted by the Intel discussion, not your private messages. 🤷

Jim Miller said:...

👍

bluebadger44 said:You totally misunderstood. I was talking about that specific part of his post regarding outsourcing at Intel... I guess that bit was probably prompted by the Intel discussion, not your private messages. 🤷

I understood perfectly fine. The man is clearly intelligent and likely has plenty of insightful things to say on just about any topic, but he didn't come here to discuss the subject matter—he came here for me.👍

Brian Edwards6 said:👍

I understood perfectly fine. The man is clearly intelligent and likely has plenty of insightful things to say on just about any topic, but he didn't come here to discuss the subject matter—he came here for me.👍

Oh, so this was personal... I wonder what triggered that. Maybe it's just how poorly you're handling your job as a moderator?

Prompted by your post about your "threads," I did a quick search through the forum, and honestly, I have no idea how you still hold a moderator position after all this.

View on reddit

But hey, the main thing is that Nicole is happy. 🙂

redtiger15 said:And there you have it, that’s exactly my point.
A moderator goes and kills a perfectly good discussion for no reason, leaving us all shortchanged on posts like this one.
But for some reason, they just can't—or won't—wrap their heads around that. It’s apparently more important to scrub away some harmless back-and-forth just to keep the environment feeling sterile and "clean."
Look, I’m not trying to drag out an argument with that particular mod; honestly, the mistake should've been fixed two days ago anyway. Besides, I don't really feel like posting on that thread or even in that subforum anymore.

@Jack Rodriguez7, yeah, my PMs are actually turned off right now.
That's what I was getting at when I mentioned how it makes sense that certain places prefer the "average Joe" types. This isn't the spot to hash that out, and since I’m done posting in that subforum, I'm not going to go through the trouble of moving this post over there myself. If someone else wants to get the ball rolling on this debate again, be my guest.

Anyway, thanks. I'll give you a shout if anything else pops up that I need help with.

Actually, you're losing those posts because certain users seem to think they can break the rules as long as the rest of their message stays on-topic and helpful. Newsflash: they can't. If you stop mixing inappropriate comments with constructive ones, the good stuff won't get lost in the shuffle.

bluebadger44 said:What are you even going to say to deny that I consider this violence? I’m sticking to what I said, and I’ll add that you won't even answer my questions (again, depriving me of information). And besides, for the hundredth time, who are you to decide what counts as relevant information to me? As for the belittling part, I think you're the only participant who actually took what happened seriously.

Don't put words in my mouth. I only said that human memory is fallible; I wasn't calling anyone out. My answer was general.

You're grasping at straws.

Excuse me? I didn't ask for your reaction. You don't need to be a moderator just to reply to someone's post. Isn't that literally the whole point of an online forum? I simply asked you to compare that comment to the one that was deleted and explain the difference, but you're dodging the question again. I assume the site rules apply to every section of this forum (except maybe the politics board) and to everyone participating? I am asking you once more to comment on the quoted post—and I'm asking Nicky too.

And yet again, you refuse to address this pathetic response of yours, which I've already posted three times in this thread:

Sure, but that discussion—the one you think was excessive—is what "triggered" his quality comment...

How many users have to complain about a moderator before something actually gets done about this?

It’s not really about the quantity of complaints; it’s about what the complaints are actually about and whether they’re frequent and justified.

Drought is an incredibly active moderator and does a ton of heavy lifting here, and honestly, given how much work they put in, minor grievances—like complaining about edits or having off-topic posts removed—are hardly a reason to let go of such a solid moderator.

We all mess up sometimes; nobody's perfect. But in this specific instance regarding the deleted posts, Drought didn't do anything wrong.

Brian Edwards6 said:

I’m still trying to wrap my head around the sheer absurdity of what just happened in Lütje. Honestly, it feels like one of those fever dreams you have after eating too much greasy diner food at 2 AM—just surreal and fundamentally nonsensical. It’s one of those situations where you find yourself staring at the ceiling, wondering if everyone else actually witnessed the same chaos or if I’ve finally lost my grip on reality. It’s almost impressive, in a deeply frustrating sort of way, how quickly things can spiral when logic decides to take a permanent vacation. kaže:
Comments like the one from bluebadger44 shouldn't have even been an issue, but then again, you managed to scrub the entire thread before anyone could even react.

Once the thread was scrubbed, the conversation shifted toward relationships and other topics, settling into a much more civil tone—similar to the kind of level-headed commentary you’d expect from someone like Brian Edwards6. Honestly, if the discussion had maintained that sort of decorum from the very beginning, none of those deletions would have been necessary in the first place.👍

I can't say I have much to add regarding Ljutica. It seems we've hit a bit of a dead end here. kaže:
It seems you’ve run out of actual arguments to lean on.

You’re certainly entitled to your opinion, but I’m under no obligation to agree with it. In this particular instance, I find myself in disagreement—and, if I do say so myself, the site administration feels exactly the same way.👍

It’s officially a local holiday here, which means the usual chaos is in full swing. You know how it goes—everything slows down, the streets get packed, and you spend half the day wondering why anyone thought this was a good idea in the first place. Just another typical day of trying to navigate the festivities while pretending I'm not just looking for the nearest quiet corner and a decent cup of coffee. kaže:
Well, looks like they went ahead and nuked my post.
Well, there you have it. The very first sentence explains exactly why this was deleted. Honestly, what more is there to say?

Look, since editing comments isn't an option here, the entire post—which was actually quite coherent and grounded—got nuked just because of that one sentence where you decided to take a shot at the moderation team. Honestly, there were several warnings posted right on the thread, complete with links to the subforum rules and this specific discussion, yet you went ahead anyway. You knew exactly what you were doing, so really, you have no one to blame for the deletion but yourself. This is how it works, and frankly, this is how it will continue to work for every future comment of this nature. The rule against critiquing the moderators within a main discussion thread exists for a very practical reason: if we let people hijack the topic to complain about oversight, a discussion that’s already hundreds of comments deep would be completely smothered by meta-arguments. It's all laid out clearly. You've been asked to simply repost your comment without the commentary on the staff; if you have grievances regarding how things are run, feel free to air them here instead.👍

It’s the exact same situation I’m dealing with at my place.👍

Furthermore, for the umpteenth time, I have judged the utility of a comment based on the reaction it provoked.👍

The topic at hand concerns deleted comments within this specific thread, not every random post across the entire site, so I have no intention of weighing in on things that don't pertain to me. Should someone post something like that in the subforums I moderate, I would be more than happy to engage in a discussion.👍

Why call it snarky? She didn't provide a substantive answer to that first deleted comment; she immediately pivoted to making fun of it, which was quite clearly her intent. To avoid any confusion, that was a perfectly justified and understandable reaction to that initial comment. If she had found the discussion actually interesting, she would have had something substantial to contribute rather than just that.👍

Not by a long shot. Miller's comment was prompted by the deletion of posts in the Legal subforum and our private exchange via DM. He and I have an unrelated dispute, and this provided him a chance to express his dissatisfaction, doing so politely, as he always does.👍

In my experience, even a single legitimate grievance should suffice, as evidenced by some of my previous threads.👍>

I'm with you on this.

Since things have devolved into insults and provocations, and both the moderator and the admin team have made their positions clear, I'm locking this thread.