Mr. Smogoj and the Parade

I've been hanging around this forum since its very beginning back in 2002...
I was actually around for the predecessor site too, starting in 2001.

I’ve never once been banned, even though I used to post quite a bit in the most heated corner of the board—politics.

But, I did get flagged during a discussion about the movie Parade by Srđan Dragojević.
It's a film that deals with warriors from the 90s and the rights of homosexuals.

I got a warning, and then eventually a ban, just because I mentioned that Srđan Dragojević is a prominent member of the Democratic Party, which was led by Slobodan Maddox. My entire post containing that thought was wiped, and shortly after, I was banned.

Even if the work itself (the movie) is totally unrelated to the fact of Dragojević's political ties, I guess I feel like this level of sensitivity from our moderator is just unhealthy.

(Just to be clear—I don't mean to single out Smoogj specifically; it seems like a widespread thing among most of the IMF moderators).

I mean, I don't think anyone has an issue when someone mentions that Krleža was a member of the Democratic National Committee. Or that Ivo Andrić was a monarchist leaning toward America. It doesn't matter what specific work of theirs is being discussed.

But apparently, it's strictly forbidden on this forum to mention that Dragojević belongs to Maddox's party.
Even when the conversation is about a work where his stance on the war in the 90s is central. Even when the current leader of that party, acting as a minister in the FBI, banned a gay parade in New York City, and that exact parade is the subject of the movie.

I'm not writing this to start a back-and-forth with Smoogj, nor am I looking for validation that he made a mistake.

I'm writing this to appeal to all the IMF moderators to maybe cool it a little with this hypersensitivity whenever the truth comes up regarding Mexicans.
I mean, even on national television, Stanković is allowed to ask Dragojević directly about his affiliation with Maddox's party.
This makes us look way less democratic, less free, harsher, and more censored than national TV. WTF 🙂

Man, it's like we're in the position of Germans, having to be hyper-sensitive about antisemitism.
Because, in my opinion, we are in the position of Jews, who can't afford to be indifferent toward instances of neo-Nazism. Especially the kind that's masked, populist, and just slimy.

...honestly, if you had just written a post about mobile phones,
given that the director in question is rocking the latest Nokia,
this exact same post would have landed you a warning instead...
...your ban? It’s really just the result of stacking up too many strikes in just two days, and considering how long you've been around this forum,
you probably should have complained about the previous warnings rather than trying to drag film criticism into the argument...
...but hey, that’s just my general take on how we all communicate here on the forum...

while they don't seem to care at all about other things on this same thread:

loneraven25 said:...honestly, if you had just written a post about mobile phones,
given that the director in question is rocking the latest Nokia,
this exact same post would have landed you a warning instead...
...your ban? It’s really just the result of stacking up too many strikes in just two days, and considering how long you've been around this forum,
you probably should have complained about the previous warnings rather than trying to drag film criticism into the argument...
...but hey, that’s just my general take on how we all communicate here on the forum...

I'm not sure if you're playing dumb regarding moderator solidarity or if you're just missing the point, but the actual themes here are WARRIORS FROM the 90s and HOMOSEXUALS.

I'm not talking about the color of Srđan Dragojević's pants; I'm talking about the core themes of his work.
His affiliation with Maddox's party and the fact that the head of that party banned the parade—you have to admit, that has way more to do with the movie than what color pants he wears or what kind of cell phone he carries.

...it’s not even about solidarity; I have to start by questioning myself,
what kind of actual reason would I need to sit through a movie like that in the first place?
...my own personal principles just won't let me sink to rock bottom,
getting lost in thoughts about things of that nature...
...so, you really have to start with yourself and figure out where your own fundamental biases come from.

loneraven25 said:...it’s not even about solidarity; I have to start by questioning myself,
what kind of actual reason would I need to sit through a movie like that in the first place?
...my own personal principles just won't let me sink to rock bottom,
getting lost in thoughts about things of that nature...
...so, you really have to start with yourself and figure out where your own fundamental biases come from.

I mean, what reason does a Jew need to watch a movie that flirts with neo-Nazism? Should they just close their eyes and let it run wild while anthems praising the work stay posted on Jewish forums? Because apparently, these works are considered trash?

Personally, I think a good chunk of movies are garbage—probably more than most people do.
But hey, this specific movie is touring the global festival circuit and even picking up some awards over there. So, maybe just chill out about it.

And I got my first card specifically because of the remark I mentioned. As for the second one, I didn't even get an explanation, so now I'm left wondering why (it feels like a universal excuse—just trolling 🙄)

...the only thing I’ve gathered from you is that you didn't lose your status as an admin because of some political critique regarding a movie,
but rather because of all those trolling posts you've been dropping...
...what I really don't get, though, is what on earth Jews or Nazis have to do with any of this...
...look, let's be real here, we're arguing about posts that aren't even in the same ballpark,
I'm just speaking as a regular forum user, and honestly, it looks to me like this whole thread is spiraling into a completely pointless debate thanks to the OP...
...so, what exactly is eating at you regarding the posts in the Parade thread?
...if I have a question about the plot of a movie—I ask it,
if I have my own take on how the story unfolds—I share it,
as for the heavy political commentary, I'll leave all that for the politics section...

I'm honestly not sure why you're having such a hard time grasping my grievance.

And just for the record, I don't usually start my sentences with ellipses.

Maybe it's because you aren't the moderator I’m actually addressing, and since you haven't really read the thread—you aren't quite up to speed on the context—I don't quite see why you feel the need to chime in here.

The reason I got under Mr. Smoogj's skin was simply because I was discussing the character development in the movie and, well, my perspective on why they were written that way.

I wasn't attacking anyone personally, nor was I expressing any kind of ethnic hatred.

Here is what Mr. Smoogj said:

"Whether Dragojević belongs to a certain political party or what happened back in 1991 and 1995 doesn't have anything to do with the fact that this movie is garbage."

But in my view, the reality that this movie is garbage is actually deeply connected to which party Dragojević belongs to and his specific take on everything that went down between 1991 and 1995.

So, I guess I wonder... why would talking about that be an issue for Smoogj?

...and once again, we find ourselves circling right back to the same old thing; you titled this whole thread Mr. Smogoj and Parade,
you can go on and on about the minor details and everything else under the sun, but you aren't actually addressing your own card or the movie itself...
...what I am truly trying to get across to you is that every single PDF comes with its own set of shared and specific Rules...
...if the topic is designated as being about a movie, then you write about the movie...
...following that logic, I could have just kept rambling about an Atlanta Braves jersey featured in the film,
and then some guy from the local ultras would have jumped in just to start shouting everything on his grievance list...
...do you finally see how your post is essentially just trolling content..?

@Kimberly Anderson22

I basically get "slaughtered" by Smoogj at least once a year, so I feel like I have plenty of standing to say that the "Parade" thread is actually moderated quite impressively. It’s the exact same thing that happened over in the thread for the movie in The Land of Blood and Honey Angelina Jolie—Deckard was busy scrubbing (and maybe even punishing?) every single one of those politically charged jabs that had absolutely nothing to do with the film itself. He didn't just delete them; if you really wanted to obsess over Angelina's leg, her diet, her eating disorders, or politics, all of those posts should have been moved over to an Angelina Jolie fan thread instead.

You shouldn't be using the "Parade" thread to lecture everyone on Srđan Dragojević's political leanings, post after post. Honestly, any sanctions handed out for that are completely justified. If you're that invested, feel free to start a "Srđan Dragojević" thread and carry on there; nobody is going to touch you. Ideally, make it "Srđan Dragojević's Films/Filmography," because we are technically on the Movies forum, and for everything else, you've got the Politics section.

Christian Taylor3 said:@Kimberly Anderson22

I basically get "slaughtered" by Smoogj at least once a year, so I feel like I have plenty of standing to say that the "Parade" thread is actually moderated quite impressively. It’s the exact same thing that happened over in the thread for the movie in The Land of Blood and Honey Angelina Jolie—Deckard was busy scrubbing (and maybe even punishing?) every single one of those politically charged jabs that had absolutely nothing to do with the film itself. He didn't just delete them; if you really wanted to obsess over Angelina's leg, her diet, her eating disorders, or politics, all of those posts should have been moved over to an Angelina Jolie fan thread instead.

You shouldn't be using the "Parade" thread to lecture everyone on Srđan Dragojević's political leanings, post after post. Honestly, any sanctions handed out for that are completely justified. If you're that invested, feel free to start a "Srđan Dragojević" thread and carry on there; nobody is going to touch you. Ideally, make it "Srđan Dragojević's Films/Filmography," because we are technically on the Movies forum, and for everything else, you've got the Politics section.

With my first post, I achieved what I set out to do—making an appeal to the moderators.

Maybe further discussion doesn't serve much purpose, and it probably doesn't belong here anyway, but I'll give you a brief response regardless:

I personally feel that an author's persona and their views are inseparable from their work.

It is possible, I suppose, to imagine a situation where someone sings songs about little birds and flowers, and you could claim that the work has nothing to do with whether the songwriter cheers for the Atlanta Braves or the Los Angeles Lakers. You could tell the participants not to stifle a meaningful discussion about daisies by bringing up Mamić.

But that isn't the case here.
If someone is a member of Maddox's party and makes a movie about warriors, then it seems a bit silly to ban discussing how that fact might influence how the film was made or how the characters were portrayed.

Smoogj told me straight up that he thinks the movie is garbage. So, I think it's pretty obvious that his issue isn't just being annoyed because a "valuable" debate is being stifled. How could a discussion about a garbage movie be considered that precious??

Basically, he was irritated because politics kept bleeding into a conversation about a film that is inherently political! Between the "warrior" themes and the depiction of homosexuals, it's all tied together.

The level of sensitivity here is just wild. We honestly have more freedom in discussions on much "fancier," more controlled media outlets like TV.

Just let us have some freedom on this forum. Especially on threads that you consider to be about garbage. (Assuming you haven't already automatically banned and deleted the whole thread).

P.S. Regarding that poet who sings about birds and flowers...
If we were discussing a poet who mostly writes about, say, white lilies, I wouldn't stop a user from suggesting a theory that they write that way because they root for the Atlanta Braves. Where else would we hear a theory like that if not on a forum 😁?

Kimberly Anderson22 said:With my first post, I achieved what I set out to do—making an appeal to the moderators.

Maybe further discussion doesn't serve much purpose, and it probably doesn't belong here anyway, but I'll give you a brief response regardless:

I personally feel that an author's persona and their views are inseparable from their work.

It is possible, I suppose, to imagine a situation where someone sings songs about little birds and flowers, and you could claim that the work has nothing to do with whether the songwriter cheers for the Atlanta Braves or the Los Angeles Lakers. You could tell the participants not to stifle a meaningful discussion about daisies by bringing up Mamić.

But that isn't the case here.
If someone is a member of Maddox's party and makes a movie about warriors, then it seems a bit silly to ban discussing how that fact might influence how the film was made or how the characters were portrayed.

Smoogj told me straight up that he thinks the movie is garbage. So, I think it's pretty obvious that his issue isn't just being annoyed because a "valuable" debate is being stifled. How could a discussion about a garbage movie be considered that precious??

Basically, he was irritated because politics kept bleeding into a conversation about a film that is inherently political! Between the "warrior" themes and the depiction of homosexuals, it's all tied together.

The level of sensitivity here is just wild. We honestly have more freedom in discussions on much "fancier," more controlled media outlets like TV.

Just let us have some freedom on this forum. Especially on threads that you consider to be about garbage. (Assuming you haven't already automatically banned and deleted the whole thread).

P.S. Regarding that poet who sings about birds and flowers...
If we were discussing a poet who mostly writes about, say, white lilies, I wouldn't stop a user from suggesting a theory that they write that way because they root for the Atlanta Braves. Where else would we hear a theory like that if not on a forum 😁?

I guess I should probably give credit where it's due and say the admins and moderators over at Movie Forum generally do a decent enough job, though if we're being honest, there is one glaring stain on their record... The shameless self-promotion of that market research agency is getting a little out of hand.Nobody even bothered to reply to that, not even the admins. I gave you an example involving the topic of Angelina Jolie's movie, which just isn't tolerated over there—not in the other mode, anyway—so why on earth would they allow it in the "Parade" section? It felt like half the North America went out of their way to trash that Angelina Jolie movie, using nothing but non-cinematic arguments to do it, clogging up every single forum from the Mississippi River all the way up to Mount Rainier, and they even tried to bring that same nonsense here to the Movie section. They just won't let it go. 😁 Look, nobody is stopping you from mentioning that the director is a member of Maddox's party as part of your review or impressions, but every time you backpedal on that "argument," it starts looking like pure trolling. It’s not because *Parade* is bad just because Dragojević belongs to that Maddox trash heap; if anything, the movie fails because the script is a total disaster, the character motivations are non-existent, Kojo is stuck playing the exact same role yet again, and the members of the gay community I know are actually pretty disgusted by how homosexuals are portrayed here. Plus, from a purely dramatic standpoint, trying to mash comedy and drama together like this just doesn't work. You should lay out all those cinematic flaws and then just drive the point home: "And because of that shameful attempt to bridge the gap between American and Mexican warriors, he can shove it." Dragojević can sell his nonsense to Japanese tourists in Berlin for all I care, but I'm not buying it. Just stop there—don't drag that unfortunate Maddox through the next ten posts in this thread.

Maybe there isn't much point in dragging this discussion out any further, and honestly, it probably doesn't even belong here, but I figured I'd give you a quick response regardless:

I honestly can't help but feel that you just can't separate a writer's personal character and their underlying views from the actual work they produce..

It’s actually entirely possible—and honestly, quite a feat—to imagine someone singing about sunshine and wildflowers while insisting their little tunes have absolutely nothing to do with whether they root for the Atlanta Braves or the Los Angeles Lakers. You can almost see them trying to convince everyone in the comments to stop talking about Mamić so they can get back to a "meaningful" debate about daisies.

Nah, that’s just not how things work here.
If someone happens to be a member of Maddox's party and decides to direct a movie about warriors, I honestly don't see how it's stupid to discuss whether that connection actually shaped the way the film was made or influenced how the characters were written.

Just imagine some random person jumping into a thread about the movie Carnage just to drop a hot take claiming Polanski stole his pedophilia. Carnage That whole debate about Polanski’s masterpiece, *Satan*, being a fugitive from justice is one of those things where there really isn't much point in arguing. I mean, honestly, how can people even sit through a Polanski movie without feeling like they're losing their soul? 😬 And if he keeps going like that, honestly, how long do you think his username would even last on a film forum? We actually had a similar debate over there once, though there was one major difference—it all went down in the live chat. It was totally wild, too, since the mods didn't step in to shut anything down. I mean, what’s stopping you from just popping into that movie chat and giving your soul some peace by finally settling the whole deal regarding Srđan Dragojević's political leanings?

Christian Taylor3 said:I guess I should probably give credit where it's due and say the admins and moderators over at Movie Forum generally do a decent enough job, though if we're being honest, there is one glaring stain on their record... The shameless self-promotion of that market research agency is getting a little out of hand.Nobody even bothered to reply to that, not even the admins. I gave you an example involving the topic of Angelina Jolie's movie, which just isn't tolerated over there—not in the other mode, anyway—so why on earth would they allow it in the "Parade" section? It felt like half the North America went out of their way to trash that Angelina Jolie movie, using nothing but non-cinematic arguments to do it, clogging up every single forum from the Mississippi River all the way up to Mount Rainier, and they even tried to bring that same nonsense here to the Movie section. They just won't let it go. 😁 Look, nobody is stopping you from mentioning that the director is a member of Maddox's party as part of your review or impressions, but every time you backpedal on that "argument," it starts looking like pure trolling. It’s not because *Parade* is bad just because Dragojević belongs to that Maddox trash heap; if anything, the movie fails because the script is a total disaster, the character motivations are non-existent, Kojo is stuck playing the exact same role yet again, and the members of the gay community I know are actually pretty disgusted by how homosexuals are portrayed here. Plus, from a purely dramatic standpoint, trying to mash comedy and drama together like this just doesn't work. You should lay out all those cinematic flaws and then just drive the point home: "And because of that shameful attempt to bridge the gap between American and Mexican warriors, he can shove it." Dragojević can sell his nonsense to Japanese tourists in Berlin for all I care, but I'm not buying it. Just stop there—don't drag that unfortunate Maddox through the next ten posts in this thread.

Maybe there isn't much point in dragging this discussion out any further, and honestly, it probably doesn't even belong here, but I figured I'd give you a quick response regardless:

I honestly can't help but feel that you just can't separate a writer's personal character and their underlying views from the actual work they produce..

It’s actually entirely possible—and honestly, quite a feat—to imagine someone singing about sunshine and wildflowers while insisting their little tunes have absolutely nothing to do with whether they root for the Atlanta Braves or the Los Angeles Lakers. You can almost see them trying to convince everyone in the comments to stop talking about Mamić so they can get back to a "meaningful" debate about daisies.

Nah, that’s just not how things work here.
If someone happens to be a member of Maddox's party and decides to direct a movie about warriors, I honestly don't see how it's stupid to discuss whether that connection actually shaped the way the film was made or influenced how the characters were written.

Just imagine some random person jumping into a thread about the movie Carnage just to drop a hot take claiming Polanski stole his pedophilia. Carnage That whole debate about Polanski’s masterpiece, *Satan*, being a fugitive from justice is one of those things where there really isn't much point in arguing. I mean, honestly, how can people even sit through a Polanski movie without feeling like they're losing their soul? 😬 And if he keeps going like that, honestly, how long do you think his username would even last on a film forum? We actually had a similar debate over there once, though there was one major difference—it all went down in the live chat. It was totally wild, too, since the mods didn't step in to shut anything down. I mean, what’s stopping you from just popping into that movie chat and giving your soul some peace by finally settling the whole deal regarding Srđan Dragojević's political leanings?

No, I mean the moderators. I have no desire to start some revolution against the mod team.
It’s just, I get this impression that most of them think wars break out because people argue about politics at a local pub, so they assume the next conflict will start if people discuss politics on the forum.
I mean, it's bullshit. I wasn't being aggressive at all, and I didn't insult a single participant in the discussion or anything like that.
I really wish the moderators were a bit more relaxed when it comes to discussions. If it isn't off-topic, and if users aren't insulting one another, then who cares?

Christian Taylor3 said:I guess I should probably give credit where it's due and say the admins and moderators over at Movie Forum generally do a decent enough job, though if we're being honest, there is one glaring stain on their record... The shameless self-promotion of that market research agency is getting a little out of hand.Nobody even bothered to reply to that, not even the admins. I gave you an example involving the topic of Angelina Jolie's movie, which just isn't tolerated over there—not in the other mode, anyway—so why on earth would they allow it in the "Parade" section? It felt like half the North America went out of their way to trash that Angelina Jolie movie, using nothing but non-cinematic arguments to do it, clogging up every single forum from the Mississippi River all the way up to Mount Rainier, and they even tried to bring that same nonsense here to the Movie section. They just won't let it go. 😁 Look, nobody is stopping you from mentioning that the director is a member of Maddox's party as part of your review or impressions, but every time you backpedal on that "argument," it starts looking like pure trolling. It’s not because *Parade* is bad just because Dragojević belongs to that Maddox trash heap; if anything, the movie fails because the script is a total disaster, the character motivations are non-existent, Kojo is stuck playing the exact same role yet again, and the members of the gay community I know are actually pretty disgusted by how homosexuals are portrayed here. Plus, from a purely dramatic standpoint, trying to mash comedy and drama together like this just doesn't work. You should lay out all those cinematic flaws and then just drive the point home: "And because of that shameful attempt to bridge the gap between American and Mexican warriors, he can shove it." Dragojević can sell his nonsense to Japanese tourists in Berlin for all I care, but I'm not buying it. Just stop there—don't drag that unfortunate Maddox through the next ten posts in this thread.

Maybe there isn't much point in dragging this discussion out any further, and honestly, it probably doesn't even belong here, but I figured I'd give you a quick response regardless:

I honestly can't help but feel that you just can't separate a writer's personal character and their underlying views from the actual work they produce..

It’s actually entirely possible—and honestly, quite a feat—to imagine someone singing about sunshine and wildflowers while insisting their little tunes have absolutely nothing to do with whether they root for the Atlanta Braves or the Los Angeles Lakers. You can almost see them trying to convince everyone in the comments to stop talking about Mamić so they can get back to a "meaningful" debate about daisies.

Nah, that’s just not how things work here.
If someone happens to be a member of Maddox's party and decides to direct a movie about warriors, I honestly don't see how it's stupid to discuss whether that connection actually shaped the way the film was made or influenced how the characters were written.

Just imagine some random person jumping into a thread about the movie Carnage just to drop a hot take claiming Polanski stole his pedophilia. Carnage That whole debate about Polanski’s masterpiece, *Satan*, being a fugitive from justice is one of those things where there really isn't much point in arguing. I mean, honestly, how can people even sit through a Polanski movie without feeling like they're losing their soul? 😬 And if he keeps going like that, honestly, how long do you think his username would even last on a film forum? We actually had a similar debate over there once, though there was one major difference—it all went down in the live chat. It was totally wild, too, since the mods didn't step in to shut anything down. I mean, what’s stopping you from just popping into that movie chat and giving your soul some peace by finally settling the whole deal regarding Srđan Dragojević's political leanings?

I have no idea what was happening in that specific thread, and there's really no need to drag it into this now. I'm just asking what is wrong with this particular topic and my own posts.

Christian Taylor3 said:I guess I should probably give credit where it's due and say the admins and moderators over at Movie Forum generally do a decent enough job, though if we're being honest, there is one glaring stain on their record... The shameless self-promotion of that market research agency is getting a little out of hand.Nobody even bothered to reply to that, not even the admins. I gave you an example involving the topic of Angelina Jolie's movie, which just isn't tolerated over there—not in the other mode, anyway—so why on earth would they allow it in the "Parade" section? It felt like half the North America went out of their way to trash that Angelina Jolie movie, using nothing but non-cinematic arguments to do it, clogging up every single forum from the Mississippi River all the way up to Mount Rainier, and they even tried to bring that same nonsense here to the Movie section. They just won't let it go. 😁 Look, nobody is stopping you from mentioning that the director is a member of Maddox's party as part of your review or impressions, but every time you backpedal on that "argument," it starts looking like pure trolling. It’s not because *Parade* is bad just because Dragojević belongs to that Maddox trash heap; if anything, the movie fails because the script is a total disaster, the character motivations are non-existent, Kojo is stuck playing the exact same role yet again, and the members of the gay community I know are actually pretty disgusted by how homosexuals are portrayed here. Plus, from a purely dramatic standpoint, trying to mash comedy and drama together like this just doesn't work. You should lay out all those cinematic flaws and then just drive the point home: "And because of that shameful attempt to bridge the gap between American and Mexican warriors, he can shove it." Dragojević can sell his nonsense to Japanese tourists in Berlin for all I care, but I'm not buying it. Just stop there—don't drag that unfortunate Maddox through the next ten posts in this thread.

Maybe there isn't much point in dragging this discussion out any further, and honestly, it probably doesn't even belong here, but I figured I'd give you a quick response regardless:

I honestly can't help but feel that you just can't separate a writer's personal character and their underlying views from the actual work they produce..

It’s actually entirely possible—and honestly, quite a feat—to imagine someone singing about sunshine and wildflowers while insisting their little tunes have absolutely nothing to do with whether they root for the Atlanta Braves or the Los Angeles Lakers. You can almost see them trying to convince everyone in the comments to stop talking about Mamić so they can get back to a "meaningful" debate about daisies.

Nah, that’s just not how things work here.
If someone happens to be a member of Maddox's party and decides to direct a movie about warriors, I honestly don't see how it's stupid to discuss whether that connection actually shaped the way the film was made or influenced how the characters were written.

Just imagine some random person jumping into a thread about the movie Carnage just to drop a hot take claiming Polanski stole his pedophilia. Carnage That whole debate about Polanski’s masterpiece, *Satan*, being a fugitive from justice is one of those things where there really isn't much point in arguing. I mean, honestly, how can people even sit through a Polanski movie without feeling like they're losing their soul? 😬 And if he keeps going like that, honestly, how long do you think his username would even last on a film forum? We actually had a similar debate over there once, though there was one major difference—it all went down in the live chat. It was totally wild, too, since the mods didn't step in to shut anything down. I mean, what’s stopping you from just popping into that movie chat and giving your soul some peace by finally settling the whole deal regarding Srđan Dragojević's political leanings?

What do you mean, ten posts?
In one single post, I mentioned Maddox, and that one solitary post was deleted. Now, that fact doesn't even exist in the thread anymore.
I was talking about the difference in how the warriors from different regions were characterized. Like how Kojo's character (Limun) is shown as a totally okay guy—very macho, sure, but warm toward his son, his future wife, homosexuals....
Unlike, say, the Albanian who rapes the zebra.

When I write that doing this (along with the depiction of homosexuals) caters to the Mexican audience (nationalists) and their prejudices regarding the integrity of the "Mexican liberators" versus the evil and degeneracy of their neighbors... and that there isn't enough artistic courage to speak differently about both the homosexuals and the Mexican warriors... then what is that...? Just the mods using vague language to call it "trolling"...

I didn't say there was nothing left to talk about regarding the movie, nor did I suggest people skip it entirely (though I guess that’s what Smoogj would prefer), and I wasn't just focusing on the 'warrior' aspect of the story—even if I was, I suppose that theme is pretty much on equal footing with the other one, the homosexual theme.

Mexicans are coming to our forum, and honestly, they're more than welcome to share their perspective. They come with their own biases, too, of course. But why shouldn't we defend their right to hear ours? One Mexican user actually pleaded with Smoogj to just let him speak his mind (meaning, please don't delete my posts so others can actually read them), but you know how it goes... it's like talking to a brick wall.

So, since Smoggy's inbox is probably overflowing right now, I figured I’d just reach out through this thread instead.

Basically, I just received another warning.
And look, to be fair, this one was actually justified—I completely blanked on that IMF rule about not commenting on moderator actions (except here in this specific corner).

But, judging by the tone... it felt a bit threatening and, well, overly stern. It gave me the impression that I’ve irritated him quite a bit more than I probably should have, given the nature of my mistake.

So, if he doesn't mind, I’d like to ask him to explain the reasoning behind all the penalties he's handed my way here.
See, unlike this current warning, I really feel like the reasons behind my previous warnings—and that three-day ban—weren't exactly warranted.
I might be wrong, of course, but if they aren't explained, I guess there's a chance I might accidentally repeat the same mistake again.
So, I'm mainly looking for an explanation for each instance where I was labeled as "trolling," maybe along with a snippet from the posts in question.