CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online
log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › Confusing moderator guidelines in the PDF: singular or plural? Looking for an alternative.

Confusing moderator guidelines in the PDF: singular or plural? Looking for an alternative.

Started by casualharbor9 · · 👁 4 views · 25 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants casualharbor9Carol Lopez23Ryan Gomez4
casualharbor9 casualharbor9 Active MemberOP
168 messages
joined Feb 2010
#1 ·
... so I get a warning (yellow card) for "insulting forum members" (not to mention there used to be red ones too) because of this post:

casualharbor9 said:
Am I me? said:The law of the lever was discovered by Archimedes (287-212 BC) just like the approximation of Pi, so your pyramid theory completely falls apart. Mind you, he studied in Egypt.

well, you actually made me laugh... what, did people stop using levers before Archimedes defined the law? Did nobody know about the radius until he calculated it?
What’s next: people didn't bother sailing until Archimedes decided to take a bath?

you sure are a heavy hitter when it comes to logic

What about the Clock of Giza? Coincidence, or...?

hold on... some psychologist pretending to be an alternative expert spins a sci-fi story about semantic terms and geometric parameters related to the pyramids to prove—what, exactly?

Quote:
I partially agree, but it’s even more ridiculous to suggest the pyramids were built using levers, primitive scaffolding, harnessed camels, and miraculous copper axes that somehow slice through granite. All this nonsense just to serve some tombs!
You're the one talking nonsense, along with others like you who can't tell the difference between hardness and brittleness and get all your knowledge from picture books.

Just like with the May, Inca, etc., we can only marvel and invent new theories, which is much better than sitting with arms crossed accepting the outdated science of some half-crazed high school professor who had the exact same kind of teacher.

Keep your own mental state—and everyone else's—to the psychology subforum, along with that obvious resentment toward teachers who clearly gave you failing grades for a reason.
... while at the same time, these messy posts stay up for days without any moderation:

tomatix said:Oh, please, don't go defending Harame... that guy is basically the textbook definition of extreme naivety and a completely flat, two-dimensional way of looking at life. Honestly? He’s either some poor soul programmed through twenty-five different government internships, or just some uneducated kid obsessed with the American flag, or maybe he was just born this way by design. I seriously doubt he’s naturally stupid...

tomatix said:Getting angry at you would mean being even worse than you are... in terms of closed-mindedness, brainwashing, and having that primitive, narrow view of reality and those "academic," pseudo-intellectual, two-dimensional perspectives on the world...
You federal employees are exactly that, simply because that's who you are...

It isn't even worth reading your responses in detail, Vatanen, because they are so heavily shaped by the daily media propaganda that the world leaders serve up so elegantly directly into our brains via the technology we all consume... and that's it... we are nothing but pure consumers...

Once you realize you're just an ordinary consumer and nothing more in today's world, maybe then you'll understand that everything surrounding us is commercially fraudulent. Only then might you actually manage to stand up against this fake world and its propaganda machine...

Vatanen said:😂😂 It's a miracle how someone can spout such cheap propaganda while appearing intelligent (to idiots 😂 )
...


... so I'm curious, what exactly constitutes my "insulting" behavior when the quoted posts from other users are considered perfectly fine? Am I not free to respond to them in the same tone? And if I am not—why?
And please, dear moderators or super-mods, don't try to throw my past behavior and actions in my face; that's just a cheap way to dodge your own lack of principle...
Carol Lopez23 Carol Lopez23 Member
30 messages
joined Apr 2005
#2 ·
Have you submitted those posts for review yet? We aren't stationed here around the clock, and even when we do make an appearance, it’s nearly impossible to catch every single thread and update in real time. Since I haven't been able to stay fully up to date over the last few days, I am certain there is a backlog of content that has slipped under my radar. If we determine that anything stands in violation of our guidelines, we will certainly remove it and, if the situation warrants it, issue a strike.
Ultimately, it all comes down to a matter of time, nothing more.
casualharbor9 casualharbor9 Active MemberOP
168 messages
joined Feb 2010
#3 ·
It’s a little hard for me to wrap my head around how nobody noticed those posts—specifically when my response to tomatix was wiped out so fast. All I did was suggest he check modern medicine to figure out what his actual issue is.

Furthermore, you're labeling my reply as offensive, yet in the post you quoted, someone calls education system employees mentally unstable without making even the slightest attempt at an actual argument. And let's not forget the credentials of the user making that claim—someone who has consistently displayed the logic and educational level of a failing elementary schooler throughout this entire discussion.
And usually, any "praise" directed toward people here (or elsewhere) who actually think scientifically, logically, and rely on facts goes completely ignored—which is quite a feat for user 52_9, given their talent for dragging topics off into endless tangents... but the moment someone writes that proponents of an alternative lifestyle are lunatics, or something similar, it gets promptly deleted or the user gets banned.

I get that the Alternative subforum is supposed to be... niche... but apparently, hate speech is forbidden for everyone.
...unless the visionary designers of this site decide to rename the "Alternative" section to the "asylum for all kinds of madmen, mentally zakinuti, and massive ignoramuses who are forbidden from trying to protusloviti because marketing being the only thing that matters"—just so nobody accidentally tries to explain something, correct a mistake, join an actual debate, or point out an injustice (like antisemitism, for instance).

🤷
Ryan Gomez4 Ryan Gomez4 Active Member
112 messages
joined Feb 2013
#4 ·
Harame, my bad. Like my colleague mentioned, we aren't glued to this forum 24/7. I don't usually hand out bans for posts like these since I typically scrub them the second I see them, but sometimes they slip past me. So, if you see something problematic, please just hit the report button.
Carol Lopez23 Carol Lopez23 Member
30 messages
joined Apr 2005
#5 ·
casualharbor9 said:It is somewhat difficult for me to wrap my head around the fact that no one else seems to have noticed these posts—especially since my response to tomatix was swiftly erased, even though I was merely suggesting he consult modern medicine to identify his specific issues.

Furthermore, you characterize my response as offensive, yet in the quoted post, there is absolutely no attempt at logical argumentation before the individual begins labeling education system employees as mentally unstable (this, naturally, comes from a user who has consistently demonstrated the logic and academic level of an elementary school student repeating a grade, a pattern evident throughout his entire presence on this topic).
It appears that any "praise" directed toward those who utilize scientific reasoning, logic, and verifiable facts—which is a particular specialty of user 52_9, despite his endless habit of derailing discussions—goes entirely unacknowledged by this group. However, the moment someone suggests that proponents of the alternative lifestyle are simply delusional, such comments are promptly deleted or result in a ban.

I certainly grasp that the Alternative subforum is meant to be somewhat... unique... but theoretically, hate speech should be prohibited for everyone.
...unless, of course, the visionary designers of this site decide to rename the "Alternative" section to the "Asylum for All Kinds of Madmen, Mentally Zakinuti, and Stubborn Ignoramuses Who Are Forbidden from Trying to Protusloviti Because Marketing Being the Only Thing That Matters is the Rule"—just so no one accidentally confuses themselves by attempting to explain something, correct an error, engage in a reasoned debate, or point out an injustice, such as antisemitism.

🤷

Regarding that specific thread—it is settled.

As for the off-topic remarks and insults, everyone seems to perform them with such calculated precision that it would be futile for me to begin purging everything immediately. I would end up deleting half the PDF! 😲

Additionally, if a user chooses to write that "Judeo-Masons are responsible for the entire New World Order," I cannot possibly penalize that as antisemitism. Good heavens.
casualharbor9 casualharbor9 Active MemberOP
168 messages
joined Feb 2010
#6 ·
Kimberly White63 said:Harame, look, I’m sorry, but like my colleague mentioned, we aren't glued to this forum 24/7. I don't usually hand out warnings for posts like these—I typically just wipe them from existence the moment I spot them—but sometimes they slip past me. So, if anyone thinks a post is problematic, please just hit the report button.

... oh, please. 😵

You don't need to apologize—not when you're the one letting everyone slide, often way more than they deserve 😁... but honestly, I'm a little intrigued. Who saw my reply to tomatix but missed his actual post? It’s not an issue if I’m allowed to respond in kind... it just feels stupid and pointless to be left looking like a fool in mid-air. I'd rather go "debate" at a local pub if that's how this works... 🙂

Keith Gonzalez said:...
And regarding the off-topic stuff and insults—everyone is playing it so sanitized, and there's really no point in me nuking everything right out of the gate. I’d end up deleting half the PDF!😲

... so what then? Either we all wear gloves, or nobody does...

Also, if someone writes that "there are Judeo-Masons responsible for this whole NWO," I can't penalize that as antisemitism. Good grief.

... no, just leave enough room for a fair response that highlights the sheer stupidity of that entire concept...
casualharbor9 casualharbor9 Active MemberOP
168 messages
joined Feb 2010
#7 ·
... so, why were my last few posts in the thread about the Giza pyramids just wiped away? Was I insulting someone, or did I just drift too far off-topic?
Carol Lopez23 Carol Lopez23 Member
30 messages
joined Apr 2005
#8 ·
What a mess—I ended up leaving this post flagged by mistake while I was trying to delete something else entirely. Anyway, I've managed to get everything sorted out and restored it. 😍
casualharbor9 casualharbor9 Active MemberOP
168 messages
joined Feb 2010
#9 ·
Keith Gonzalez said:My bad—I accidentally left this post marked while I was deleting something else. Anyway, it’s back. 😍

Fair enough.
casualharbor9 casualharbor9 Active MemberOP
168 messages
joined Feb 2010
#10 ·
... alright, let's dive back into those bafflingly vague criteria they're using on this subforum:

So, I actually get banned for insulting people on the forum because of this:

Quote: Kerefek76 casualharbor9 said:casualharbor9

Insulting someone's religious beliefs and bringing their mother into the argument? That really tells us everything we need to know about who you are. Honestly, if I were you, I’d consider talking to a therapist—it’s not like there’s any stigma attached to seeking mental health support these days. It seems pretty obvious you're struggling with some serious ego issues and a distorted self-image. I have no idea what exactly you're trying to prove here, but you've clearly lost the plot.

And you see? It strikes me once again that you and the rest of these self-proclaimed "alternative" types are dealing with some serious psychological issues. I mean, really—how can you react with such raw emotion and zero context when someone simply presents the facts that prove you wrong?
I always kick things off with solid, scientific, and rational arguments. Then, halfway through, these self-proclaimed geniuses come flying in—completely oblivious to the flow of the discussion or the actual point I’m making—just to attack me for things I never even said.
You probably won't wrap your head around this one either...

Even my mother would feel sorry if she had a "logician" like him for a son. 😍 ...

Since we’re already circling the drain on this whole Nibiru topic, I have to say: I haven't received a single concrete counterargument from you yet. Not one. Every time you attempt to push back, it just turns into some sort of logical or semantic wordplay, or you retreat into vague appeals to "mainstream science" without ever providing an actual link to something tangible. Is there an actual point buried under all those semantics, or are we just dancing around the issue?

So, here we go again? To you, a "logical-semantic riddle" is just some pedantic exercise in defining terms that you claim are supposedly used in physics or astrophysics, while everything else you call an "argument" is nothing more than arbitrary nonsense?
And when I drop a link? Then I get hit with the critique that I’m "not saying anything smart or original, just linking stuff." Is that how this works now?

Another one. 😍+🤦 For you and that asylum for all kinds of madmen...

My question: Why exactly is my response considered an insult, while Kerefek's goes completely unpunished? It’s pretty fascinating to watch these kind of chameleon-like shifts during an argument. You see someone flip-flop on their entire stance just to stay relevant. And let's be honest, we aren't just talking about me here—if you look at his recent deleted posts, it’s clear he has a habit of reacting to basic facts or logical questions with nothing but pure, unbridled rage. It's become quite a predictable pattern. So, why exactly does my response, phrased in the exact same way, suddenly become an insult? Wait, am I missing something? Is there seriously no red card for that post?

And before anyone starts handing out red cards or issuing bans based on their personal interpretation of my character and my work, I’d actually like us to take a moment to dive a bit deeper into how this whole "debate" is actually unfolding.
Carol Lopez23 Carol Lopez23 Member
30 messages
joined Apr 2005
#11 ·
It is certainly a relief that you reminded me to delete that particular post of yours as well. 🥳 Given that the quoted content has also been removed.
And yes—you received a penalty because you overstepped the mark. Moving forward, this will be the standard practice every single time. It applies to every user, regardless of whether they decide to leave the platform entirely.
casualharbor9 casualharbor9 Active MemberOP
168 messages
joined Feb 2010
#12 ·
Keith Gonzalez said:Oh, thanks for the reminder. I guess I should go ahead and delete that post of yours too. 🥳 Seeing as the one you quoted has been wiped from existence as well.
And yeah—you got flagged because you crossed the line. And from here on out, that’s how it’s going to be. Every single time. For every user on this board, even if it means people start walking out the door.

So, let me get this straight—even the quoted post was nuked and deleted?
casualharbor9 casualharbor9 Active MemberOP
168 messages
joined Feb 2010
#13 ·
Sure; and what exactly did I overstep on?

Just so I know for next time...
Ryan Gomez4 Ryan Gomez4 Active Member
112 messages
joined Feb 2013
#14 ·
Harame, look, you need to get this: half the time you post, you trigger this massive chain reaction of arguments that barely even touch the actual topic. When we see a thread heading down that spiral—not just yours, by the way—we wipe it out.

Regarding bans: I don't go banning people for minor PDF rule infractions, but if someone keeps repeating the same mistake after multiple warnings, they're getting banned. They might think their specific post isn't a big deal, but I’m looking at the whole pattern of behavior.

This is just a general rule, not a direct shot at your complaint above.
Carol Lopez23 Carol Lopez23 Member
30 messages
joined Apr 2005
#15 ·
casualharbor9 said:So, was that quoted post also flagged and wiped from the board?

It really comes as no surprise to me. I find myself deleting low-quality posts quite frequently, particularly when they drift off-topic or fail to meet our standards.

casualharbor9 said:And honestly, where exactly did I cross the line?

Just so I can avoid doing it again...

I believe you are already well aware of the nature of what you quoted.
casualharbor9 casualharbor9 Active MemberOP
168 messages
joined Feb 2010
#16 ·
Keith Gonzalez said:Nothing unusual there. I delete low-effort posts all the time. Especially if they're off-topic or just cluttering things up.

... what I'm actually asking about is that specific Kerefek post—is it also considered low-effort or flagged for the same reasons?

I think you know exactly what you quoted.

Look, I know what I quoted, and I'm sure everyone else does too. But I’m not entirely sure which part you're claiming is an exaggeration, so I'd appreciate it if you could be specific about that...
casualharbor9 casualharbor9 Active MemberOP
168 messages
joined Feb 2010
#17 ·
Kimberly White63 said:Harame, please understand one thing: you frequently post responses that trigger chain reactions of posts which are mostly just bickering and are only marginally, if at all, related to the topic. That’s why, when a post (not just yours) starts smelling like that kind of escalation, we delete it.

Regarding bans: I tend to overlook minor violations of the site rules, but when a user keeps doing the same thing after multiple warnings, I'm going to hand out a ban. It might look like an overkill violation if you look at that single post in isolation, but I am looking at the entire body of work.

This is a general policy, not just a response to your specific complaint above.

So, Harame is the one responsible for these chain reactions of out-of-this-world bickering?

And users like Tomatix, Henkak, Unreasonable, and Kerefek... they’re all just having perfectly normal, on-topic discussions? (Just take a look at the track record of those names)

Because from what I can see, moderation usually seems to start—and most often ends—with Harame.
Carol Lopez23 Carol Lopez23 Member
30 messages
joined Apr 2005
#18 ·
casualharbor9 said:... I am curious about that specific Kerefek post—is it just as much of a caricature or heavily biased, or not?

I am quite certain of what I quoted, and I believe the context is clear to everyone here, yet I find myself wondering which specific part you feel is an exaggeration; I would truly appreciate it if you could point that out clearly...


Aside from the claims that they suffer from mental instability, lack clarity, or masquerade as "logicians," what else are we discussing?
The caricatures applied to others don't apply to you, sorry. And one really must learn when to simply refrain from commenting on every single thing.

casualharbor9 said:So, is casualharbor9 somehow responsible for the chain reactions of off-topic bickering?

While users like Tomatix, Henkak, Unreasonable, and Kerefek are supposedly engaged in a perfectly normal, topical debate? (One only needs to look at their respective bodies of work)

Because it seems to me that moderation usually begins with casualharbor9, and more often than not, ends there as well.

You aren't necessarily the first link in that particular chain. However, surely you can grasp that their contributions serve a purpose, particularly since this is the alternative scene. Within that framework, they are actually staying on topic. And believe me, half the users on this forum don't even realize how much nonsense gets scrubbed away behind the scenes.
Ryan Gomez4 Ryan Gomez4 Active Member
112 messages
joined Feb 2013
#19 ·
casualharbor9 said:So, is casualharbor9 really the one responsible for all these off-topic flame wars?

And I suppose tomatix, henkak, Unreasonable, Kerefek... are all just having perfectly normal, topical discussions? (Just look at their track records)

Because from what I can see, things usually start with casualharbor9, and they usually end with the mods stepping in.

Where did I actually say you were the only one to blame?

It’s just that most people here try to bribe me with shady DMs after their posts get nuked, yet you're the one complaining about the rules.😬
casualharbor9 casualharbor9 Active MemberOP
168 messages
joined Feb 2010
#20 ·
Keith Gonzalez said:
Besides the whole mental instability thing, the constant confusion, and their self-proclaimed status as "logical thinkers," what else is left?

Do you honestly believe that someone who responds to a simple presentation of facts with a furious, personal attack—simply because those facts prove they're wrong—is somehow exempt from having mental health issues?

So, let me get this straight. Is it actually a punishable offense to conclude a debate by pointing out that someone clearly hasn't a clue what's going on?

Is nerazuman actually a logician, or just someone playing dress-up as one? Ever since they started cloning themselves, post after post, they keep dropping these absolute gems that have nothing to do with the actual topic at hand. Is it logic, or just a complete lack of it?
Honestly, science hasn't exactly been a silver bullet for us. It feels like we’re just spinning our wheels. Until we actually nail the basics—like making sure everyone has reliable access to clean water and enough food on the table—can we even sit here and debate whether scientific progress is actually "improving" our lives? It seems a bit premature, doesn't it?
The wealth gap we’re seeing today is unprecedented. Honestly, it hasn't been this extreme even two millennia ago, yet here we are, still clinging to the idea that we live in some kind of progressive, humanitarian society. Is anyone actually buying that?

So, let me get this straight: we’re allowed to tear down reason, logic, and actual science without having to back any of it up, but the second someone tries to push back? That’s strictly off-limits?


Other people's business isn't your concern, sorry. And honestly, how many times do we have to say this? Just learn when to sit this one out and stop commenting on everything.

It definitely hits home for me. What's the point of being penalized if I’m just treating everyone with the same level of scrutiny that they apply to those who don't get flagged? It feels pretty one-sided.

And who exactly is supposed to hold their tongue? What does "everything" even mean in this context? An off-topic thread is perfectly fine, but apparently, casualharbor9’s comments on them aren't tolerated? Just so I know how to navigate things moving forward...

You aren't necessarily the first one to point this out. But surely you get that their body of work is necessary, especially since they represent the Alternative. In that sense, they’re actually right on-topic. And believe me, half the people on this forum don't even realize how much nonsense gets scrubbed from the boards.

Excuse me? So, someone like Henkak is suddenly the center of attention, and apparently, he needs an entire opus written just for him? Or is this just nerazuman trying to shove something down our throats that wouldn't even fly in a Religion or Philosophy seminar? He hasn't written a single meaningful word regarding the Nibir topic, yet here we are, watching him attempt to push an agenda that most people wouldn't dare touch in those academic circles.

If this is supposed to be an "alternative" viewpoint, then it isn't some psychiatric ward where patients lose their minds just because someone presents them with actual facts that don't align with their delusions.
If you’re actually serious about maintaining even a shred of tolerance, you have to prove that trashing everyone's views isn't okay—and I don't just mean the "alternative" ones.

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads