CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online
log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › History: Vol. 3

History: Vol. 3

Started by amberwalker4 · · 👁 8 views · 55 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants amberwalker4Gary Perez7Rachel RichardsonLinda Smith7Eric Fox7bluecyclist64Mark Harris66Jose Clark2rustydrifter10
amberwalker4 amberwalker4 Active MemberOP
96 messages
joined Mar 2013
#41 ·
I think people underestimate how much a little bit of consistency matters. It’s easy to get caught up in the chaos of everything happening at once, but if you just focus on one thing at a time, things start to settle. I've been trying this lately. Just staying steady. It works better than chasing every single distraction that comes your way. It's about finding that balance and sticking to it. Not always easy, but worth it. kaže:
Look, some of you guys have broken the rules too. It wasn't nearly as bad as what Faro did, though.

That's exactly it. I'm the first one to step up. Am I looking for special treatment? No. Have I ever asked for anything just for my own sake? Never. I'm simply asking for people to actually do their jobs. This isn't an attack on the moderators—I already sent them a thread about this (there's a link in the first post) and they completely ignored it. Then I filed formal complaints with the head moderator, and it was the same story. So now I'm taking this to upper management. They seem to be playing deaf and blind.

I honestly think people overcomplicate things. It’s simpler than that. We spend so much energy worrying about the small stuff when we should just be looking at the big picture. Life moves fast. You have to stay steady. If you lose your cool over every little setback, you've already lost the game. Just keep moving forward. Focus on what actually matters. Everything else is just noise. The user says:
amberwalker4 just sent me one DM.

That’s not right. I sent three, and those were only to you via PayPal: 4.3, 9.3, and then most recently on 29.5. How many of those three did you actually react to?

Harold Chase48 said:amberwalker4 is notorious for insulting everyone in sight. It just provokes people to lash out, which completely ruins the quality of the discussions in the History subreddits. So far, everything you’ve said to them has just been a mild reprimand.

You basically just described yourself. Besides, everyone knows how this all started. You only have to look back at that thread to see who was actually throwing the first insults.

Harold Chase48 said:If your moderation were actually objective, he would have been slapped with those famous 500 points a long time ago.

If the moderators here were actually objective, you would have been permanently banned from Reddit a long time ago. Again. ☕.

Harold Chase48 said:But nothing. It’s actually the opposite—you're constantly jumping on his reports, handing out points, deleting posts, and all that...

I reported Faro directly three separate times, and he didn't get a single warning. So, who's really doing the targeting here?

Sandra Brown18 said:Faro deserved those points, and honestly, it only happened after he repeatedly insulted an entire profession.
And like I said, it's nice to see everyone teaming up against me. At least you guys can agree on something. 😁.

He got a warning... which was retracted the very next day. Nobody is attacking you, and this thread isn't even about you. This admin team is clearly incompetent when it comes to the History PDF, and they seem to lack any professional decency too, considering how hard it is for them to just show up in a thread.

We already knew they were playing favorites. Back when warnings for insults were flying everywhere... they weren't being handed out to everyone. Some users got hit, others didn't.

And now someone wants to lecture me about favoritism—coming from a clone of a user who was permanently banned from Reddit. Please.
amberwalker4 amberwalker4 Active MemberOP
96 messages
joined Mar 2013
#42 ·
Sandra Brown18 said:To be honest, most of you should have been penalized already. I didn't want to come down hard on everyone immediately. I gave several warnings.
Nothing changed. From now on, there will be consequences. Very few people here actually follow the rules.

Fine. Let me quote the rules for you, since apparently they keep getting ignored:

Starting a Thread
1. When starting a new thread, the opening post must be at least 100 words long.
2. The initial post needs to present a specific question or hypothesis for discussion. If you can't do that, provide a valid reason.

Discussion Guidelines
1. The goal of this subforum is learning and exchanging knowledge, so please use reasoned arguments.
2. Base your discussions on relevant literature and credible sources. Relying on "I think" or "I heard" without verifiable evidence will result in being cut off from the discussion.
3. Fabricating sources or literature is strictly prohibited and heavily penalized.
4. If you want to discuss unverified info or just have a quick question that doesn't fit existing threads, use the "Help Desk" section.

Expect notifications later today. We'll see who's telling the truth and who's just making things up.
Rachel Richardson Rachel Richardson Regular
662 messages
joined Jul 2017
#43 ·
Harold Chase48 said:If rules actually applied to everyone equally, you would have been retired from this board a long time ago... ☕

What is even the point of having a report button?
If I'm wrong—or if I happen to break a rule—then by all means, go ahead.
Besides, Linda Smith7, why are you still arguing here if you're supposedly facing a permanent ban? ☕
@Jose Clark2/">@@Jose Clark2, this isn't some chaotic online nursery—if that's what you're looking for, go find a chat room. There needs to be some level of order, which is exactly why we have rules in the first place.
@The Zagorski Crosser, well put. 🙂
Jose Clark2 Jose Clark2 Member
44 messages
joined Jul 2022
#44 ·
amberwalker4 said:Fine. Just so we're clear, I'll quote the rules for you—who knows how many times they've been read.

Starting a new thread.
When starting a new thread, the opening post needs to hit a minimum of 100 words. It’s a standard rule here.
The initial post needs to present a specific question or hypothesis for discussion. If that isn't possible, an explanation should be provided.

The way we debate.
The purpose of this subforum is education and the exchange of knowledge. Please ensure all discussions remain reasoned and constructive.
Please base your arguments on credible literature and verifiable sources. Relying on vague claims like "I think" or "I heard" without providing actual evidence will result in a sanction.
Fabricating sources or literature is strictly prohibited and will be penalized.
If you want to discuss unverified rumors or just have a quick question that doesn't fit elsewhere, please head over to the "Information Desk" thread.

The reports will be coming in throughout the day. We’ll see who’s actually telling the truth and whose story falls apart under scrutiny.

You seem to believe you’d be happiest if you were both the plaintiff and the judge. Naturally, you’d want to hold the gavel yourself. When things don't go your way, you revert to that typical argumentative persona—something you've demonstrated on various threads more times than I can count. Perhaps there's a connection between that behavior and why the site admins haven't bothered responding to your grievances. Sit with that for a moment.
Jose Clark2 Jose Clark2 Member
44 messages
joined Jul 2022
#45 ·
Anthony Nguyen81 said:What’s even the point of having a report button?
If I’m wrong or breaking a rule, just say so.
Besides, Linda Smith7, why are you still arguing here if you're permanently banned? ☕
@Jose Clark2/">@@Jose Clark2, this isn't an online pub; if that's what you're looking for, go find a chat room. There needs to be some order, which is why rules exist.
@The Zagorski Crosser, well said. 🙂

Exactly. And for the record, I haven't been a member of this site for thirty posts, nor did I register yesterday or a month ago, so stop underestimating me. You and your friend are just trying to discredit anyone who doesn't agree with you. If someone points out flaws in your logic and debates you, learn to deal with it instead of plotting ways to run to the moderators to get people purged so your little group can maintain control.
Rachel Richardson Rachel Richardson Regular
662 messages
joined Jul 2017
#46 ·
Jose Clark2 said:Look—you’d be happiest acting as both the prosecutor and the judge in your own little courtroom. But the moment things don't go your way, you pivot into that classic, confrontational forum persona—something you've demonstrated repeatedly across various threads. Perhaps there's a reason the site administrators aren't jumping to fulfill your demands? Maybe it's because of that exact attitude. Just something to chew on.

I've flagged your post.
It's baffling to me how someone can troll within a discussion specifically about trolling...
The rules apply to everyone here. There isn't a special set of guidelines for me, for you, for The Zagorski Crosser, or for Linda Smith7, who's already been permabanned.
Consistency is everything—the rules have to be universal.
The fact that you seem to violate them more than anyone else is just another matter entirely.
rustydrifter10 rustydrifter10 Regular
693 messages
joined Apr 2011
#47 ·
Can we please just stop all this bickering? Seriously, let’s move past the constant accusations about people being "clones of banned users"—it’s just unnecessary ad hominem attacks at this point. If anyone actually has legitimate doubts or real evidence to share, just send over a private message with the details instead of making it a spectacle.
Linda Smith7 Linda Smith7 Newcomer
4 messages
joined May 2012
#48 ·
Sandra Brown18 said:To be perfectly honest, almost all of you should have been handed suspensions by now; I just didn't want to come at you with a sledgehammer immediately. I’ve given you plenty of warnings.
There's zero progress. From here on out, penalties will be flying, because honestly, very few of you have actually bothered to follow the rules. It’s just constant insults, just like I said.
Jose Clark2 was rightfully penalized, and that was only after he repeatedly insulted an entire profession.
And as I mentioned, it’s nice to see everyone finally finding common ground in attacking me. At least you can agree on something. 😁.
By the way, I haven't received many reports.

I think it should be obvious to you—and to the site admins—that good moderation isn't signaled by saying "penalties will start flying from now on." True moderation would have meant punishing those who insult others, especially when they're doing it in the most primitive ways possible.

For what it's worth, I reported a couple of posts by The Zagorski Crosser where he was being blatantly abusive toward other users, yet in the end, you were scolding Jose Clark2 while The Zagorski Crosser didn't even get a serious warning, let alone a suspension...
Mark Harris66 Mark Harris66 Active Member
158 messages
joined Oct 2016
#49 ·
Harold Chase48 said:I think it should be obvious to you—and the admins too—that good moderation isn't about how many people get banned or suspended. Real good moderation means actually penalizing those who insult others, especially when they're being as crude as possible.

By the way, I reported a few posts from The Zagorski Crosser where he was being super disrespectful to other users... yet in the end, you ended up scolding Jose Clark2 while The Zagorski Crosser didn't even get a serious warning, let alone a suspension...

You didn't report any posts to me. Or maybe they just didn't go through for some technical reason? You're also misinterpreting what I meant about suspensions. They're for rule-breakers, not just random calls...
Linda Smith7 Linda Smith7 Newcomer
4 messages
joined May 2012
#50 ·
Sandra Brown18 said:You didn't report my posts. Or maybe they just didn't reach you due to some technical glitch? You clearly misunderstood what I meant about the warnings. Warnings should be issued to people actually breaking the rules, not just handed out on a whim.

I used the actual report button designed specifically for flagging posts. Does that feature even function at all?
bluecyclist64 bluecyclist64 Regular
369 messages
joined Oct 2011
#51 ·
Sandra Brown18 said:It seems you haven't reported any of my posts to me. Or perhaps they just haven't reached me due to some technical glitch? Either way, you clearly misunderstood what I meant regarding the warning system. Penalties should be reserved for those who actually violate the rules, not handed out on a whim.

Fine then, do you honestly believe you have the capacity to moderate the History section?

I’m asking this in earnest, not to bait you.

Let’s be realistic here: you hold very strong right-wing views, and given that, can you truly maintain objectivity?

Based on your forum profile, I have my doubts.

I understand that being a moderator is a heavy lift, but we’ve seen how entire Social Science departments in universities crumble when they lose competent leadership.

In the interest of fairness, it might be better to simply lock the entire PDF thread until you find someone capable of moderating it with integrity and without partisan bias.
Mark Harris66 Mark Harris66 Active Member
158 messages
joined Oct 2016
#52 ·
Linda Smith7, I don't have any issues with the commands—it's just those button clicks that get me...
rustydrifter10 rustydrifter10 Regular
693 messages
joined Apr 2011
#53 ·
bluecyclist64 said:Let's be real here—you’re pretty firmly on the right side of the aisle, so I have to ask: can you actually stay objective when we dive into this?

Look, if you’re actually going to call out someone for bad moderation, you’ve got to come at it with receipts. Don't just throw accusations around based on their political leanings or what side of the aisle they sit on—that doesn't hold any water. If you want to make a real case and prove they aren't doing their job properly, bring the actual evidence to the table. Show us the specific instances where things went wrong. Otherwise, it just looks like noise.
rustydrifter10 rustydrifter10 Regular
693 messages
joined Apr 2011
#54 ·
Sandra Brown18 said:Linda, I don't have any issues with the way things are being phrased, but those "Yes" buttons on the registration forms? That's where the trouble starts.

I think we can probably get this sorted out. Just shoot me a private message with a quick breakdown of what's going wrong, and we'll figure it out.
Rachel Richardson Rachel Richardson Regular
662 messages
joined Jul 2017
#55 ·
So, is this registration situation finally sorted out?
I'd rather not have to send a DM every single time—it’s becoming a bit of a time sink...
Mark Harris66 Mark Harris66 Active Member
158 messages
joined Oct 2016
#56 ·
Nah, I'm actually traveling until the end of June. So I’ve just been using Tapatalk to check my History—it's really my only way to delete stuff since I can't manage my profile properly yet—and those triangle login issues aren't fixed either. Plus, I use Gmail, and it keeps flagging everything as spam...

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads