Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions ›
The Resonator injustice
The Resonator injustice
Started by Megan Ruiz13 · · 👁 4 views · 35 replies
Participants
#22 ·
Sam Green73 said:I have no intention of starting a debate about Politics here in the County
Did I even address you?
#23 ·
amberwalker4 said:P.S. If I really have to, I’m happy to sit down and lay out the actual facts—like naming specific witnesses killed by the resistance forces just so this guy doesn't try to spin their actions—to prove that Sam Green73 is just pushing propaganda. Honestly, though, I don't think it's even necessary because the bias is staring us right in the face.
How exactly do you want the administration to handle this?
#24 ·
amberwalker4 said:Did I even address you directly?
Look, let me break this down for you.
What we're doing right here is participating in an internet forum.
The whole point of a space like this is that everyone has the right to ask questions and share their thoughts openly.
If you’re looking for a private conversation with someone specific, that’s what direct messages are for—not public posts. You can always hit up someone's inbox or find another way to reach them privately if you want to skip the public stage.
#25 ·
Daniel Ward87 said:How exactly should the administration handle this?
It needs to be checked. People lie, and when they do, they're just trolling. Honestly, this guy has been handing out bans for much smaller things too. Plus, his posts make his bias so obvious that it’s clear he isn't fit to moderate there.
Regarding these posts... is it okay if I claim that the current government is actually just a continuation of the old regime and that they were all created by reformed extremists? I mean, the currency, the anthem, and how much the flag looks like the old one—it’s hard to ignore. 🙄Is it fair to argue that because certain groups didn't leave behind physical evidence—like remains or skeletons—it means their actions never actually happened? People claim they weren't hiding their crimes, yet since there's nothing left to see, some suggest it's all a myth. Is that a valid way to look at it? I’m asking sincerely.
Is it actually okay for a mod to restore posts that users deleted themselves?
And one more thing—we’re talking about history here. If you’re making claims that can't be backed up by actual facts or solid arguments, that isn't history. It's just propaganda. Even Sam Green73 was shouting about how he was going to shut down posts like that. But the truth is, he can't actually support his own points or provide any real evidence. If that's the case, what are we even waiting for? 🤷?
#26 ·
Sam Green73 said:Let me set you straight on this.
What you’re posting right now is an web forum.
Everyone here has the right to ask questions and provide answers.
If you want a specific answer meant only for you, you use direct messages instead of public posts, or you find some other way to talk privately.
LOL.
Person A talks to Group B about Person C. Then Person C jumps in claiming they aren't interested in discussing Politics, even though Person A wasn't asking for an explanation from Person C or trying to start a debate about Politics. So what happens ☕?
#27 ·
Great, now my last post has been wiped too—the one where I was replying to Sam Green73. And then they have the nerve to ask me what exactly the admins should be looking into here?
Are you guys just messing with me because you're bored, or is there actually some other reason behind this🤣?
Are you guys just messing with me because you're bored, or is there actually some other reason behind this🤣?
#28 ·
If you want to talk about moderation, head over to the County Prefect's thread, and if you're looking to dive into Politics, that's what the Politics subforum is there for.
It honestly feels like everything's getting a bit jumbled up in your head.
It honestly feels like everything's getting a bit jumbled up in your head.
#29 ·
Sam Green73 said:Discussions about moderation belong in the County Prefect section, while any debates regarding Politics should stay on the Politics subforum.
It seems like you've gotten everything mixed up.
And what exactly counts as "commenting on moderation"? Is it pointing out how you basically proved your own claim—that everyone is entitled to their opinion—was pretty much false (though you'll let me have my opinion on that)? Or is it just me saying I won't weigh in on this topic again until the admins weigh in?
🤷
#30 ·
Now we just need to figure out where to draw the line between someone's opinion and an actual fact.
Your take on this is already being debated over in the thread, so there's really no need to keep posting the same thing over and over again.
Your take on this is already being debated over in the thread, so there's really no need to keep posting the same thing over and over again.
#31 ·
Sam Green73 said:Now we just need to figure out what qualifies as an opinion versus what is a fact.
Your opinion is still being debated, so there’s no need to double up on messages with the exact same content or viewpoint.
This is getting rude. Replying to someone isn't "duplicating an opinion." This is a forum; people quote each other here.
And that bit about needing to distinguish opinion from fact? Pure gold. I guess you're right. The US Army was just an independent partisan movement, and Gojko Šušak was their political commissar (sarcasm intended).
I might as well go out and try to baptize a rabbit. We have an unbiased moderator who deletes half the posts, talks nonsense, and then—as if to top it all off—actually restores a post that a user deleted themselves (I wonder if that's even allowed?)....all while using the excuse that we still have to decide what's an opinion and what's a fact. It’s funny how his own posts aren't considered duplicates, but everyone else's are 😍.
Honestly, I don't care anymore. I see there's no point in hanging around this specific thread. I reported the posts, let the administration know, pointed out the issue, and now I just don't give a damn (pardon my French). All I can do now is guess what the admin will decide... which should be pretty hard to predict, right?
#32 ·
amberwalker4 said:Well, let's verify that. People lie just to troll, plain and simple. Not to mention he's handed out bans for much smaller things before. Plus, the bias dripping from his posts makes it pretty obvious he shouldn't be moderating there.
Look, this isn't the place to be proving stuff like that. There's probably a specific thread for that over in Politics.
amberwalker4 said:And about these posts... is it okay for me to claim that the US is actually just a continuation of the Independent State of America and was built by reformed fascists? I mean, look at the currency, the anthem, and how similar the flag is—it's striking 🙄. Is it okay for me to say that since those guys didn't hide their mess, and because there's no physical evidence left (like skeletons, etc.—which builds on that), it means it never happened? Is that okay? I'm asking sincerely.
It's not okay because the US isn't a successor to the Independent State of America.
amberwalker4 said:And is it okay for a mod to restore posts that users deleted themselves?
That really isn't okay, but since I don't know the full story here, I'll just keep my answer general.
amberwalker4 said:One more thing—we're talking about history here. Claims that can't be backed up by facts aren't anything more than propaganda. Sam Green73 was going off about how he'd ban posts like that. He can't even support or argue his own points. If that's the case, what are we waiting for 🤷?
Sorry, but since I'm out of the loop on this one, I'd rather not comment.
#33 ·
Daniel Ward87 said:Look, this isn't the place to be proving points like this. There should probably be a specific thread for that over in the Politics section.
So, what you're saying is I have to go back to that thread and prove the guy is being unfair and abusing his mod powers, all while racking up warnings just for talking about how he manages things? Thanks a lot. You’ve said it all.
#34 ·
Look, you need to stop trying to play referee on the Politics subforum and deciding who gets to respond to a post and who doesn't.
Next time you try that, you’re getting a formal warning.
Consider this your final heads-up.
Next time you try that, you’re getting a formal warning.
Consider this your final heads-up.
#35 ·
Sam Green73 said:Stop trying to dictate who gets to reply to posts on the Politics subforum.
Next time, you'll get a formal warning.
Consider this your final warning.
You’ve got it stuck in your head that I'm some kind of moderator giving orders or deleting things just because I feel like it. It wasn't like that. It was just some harmless advice. But what would you know about that?
#36 ·
amberwalker4 said:So, what you're saying is I have to prove someone is being unfair or biased just to earn points for talking about the mods? Thanks for nothing, you basically answered my question.
Look, if you've got actual facts to back up why someone is wrong, go for it. But if you want to vent about how the mods are running things, there’s a specific spot for that. This isn't the place for political bickering, so let's keep it moving.
🔗 Similar threads
- The Resonator injustice in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 14, 2012
- Resonator injustice in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 14, 2012
- How does a resonator actually "resonate"? in Feedback & Suggestions · Nov 19, 2019
- The resonator won't stop in Feedback & Suggestions · May 26, 2018
- Unfairness/Injustice in Psychology · May 17, 2015