CheckEmoji Community · the emoji forum
🏠 Home 🆕 What's new ❓ Unanswered 🔥 Popular 📡 RSS Members 👥 0 online
log in · register
Home › Miscellaneous › Feedback & Suggestions › What is the mad house?

What is the mad house?

Started by redhawk76 · · 👁 5 views · 39 replies

📡 Subscribe to replies

Participants redhawk76Sarah Wilson95Gary Perez9Richard Wilson4Frank Cruz2shadowridge14Sam Green73ambermason16Roger Robinson682Nathan Bailey65Raymond Smith23Ronald AllenNathan Ortiz2nimblewalker58Roger Reed49placidjackal36
shadowridge14 shadowridge14 Member
16 messages
joined Oct 2006
#21 ·
Ronald Allen said:The only thing they actually care about is the PDF name change. They didn't say a word back when Mad House was running, moderated or not.
Now, some self-appointed geniuses—citing some future pro athlete's quote—are claiming that LK users have lost their constitutional right to express themselves or write in a "freer style" on this PDF... WRONG.
The topics will stay the same, and there will still be stuff that isn't "appropriate" for On the Edge of Politics, but the moderation stays exactly as it always has.
People are just picking a fight over nothing. It would be boring if they didn't...

I lost interest after seeing that first locked thread and your "brilliant" explanation. This recent streak of yours has completely driven me away from the PDF...🙄
especially that legendary "I am the moderator, you will be banned" routine.😲
When you brought up football, you should have just played it cool like an Englishman instead of nuking threads that everyone else hated. Most people staying silent probably agree with the rest...
Ronald Allen Ronald Allen Active Member
160 messages
joined Oct 2010
#22 ·
Amanda Booth42 said:What do you mean it isn't???
Look, you're straight up lying here.
I mean, you personally have been shutting down basically every topic lately without giving any real reason why.

You should be the first one to realize that we don't start threads by just copy-pasting stuff—that’s never going to fly, now or ever. So, go ahead, count them. Tell me exactly how many threads I've closed that were actually that kind of thing.

Amanda Booth42 said:I have no clue if you or rezon@tor locked the thread I linked, or why they did it, but honestly, the topic fit the new PDF title perfectly: On the Edge of Politics.

Well, if the shoe fits... I guess.

The moderator locked it because it was obvious the thread had zero chance of actually picking up or turning into a decent discussion.

And let's not talk about lying. At least every single time, you guys get an explanation as to why a specific thread gets shut down.
Since you're so busy keeping tabs on every thread closure on LK—or what we call On the Edge of Politics now—why don't you try counting how many times I've asked and warned you all not to start a thread just by dropping a link to some newspaper article or a news site?
Nathan Bailey65 Nathan Bailey65 Active Member
79 messages
joined Oct 2008
#23 ·
Ronald Allen said:You should be the first one to realize that topics aren't started by just copy-pasting links; that method has never worked and certainly won't now. So, why don't you go ahead and count exactly how many closed threads on my end were actually that type of thing?


Am I supposed to laugh?
Oh, I'm definitely looking for a reason to.🤣🤣

Ronald Allen said:The moderator shut down Temu because it was logical—there wasn't a single hint in the thread that it would actually gain traction or evolve into any kind of decent discussion.

And let's skip the accusations of lying; at least every time, you get an explanation as to why a specific thread was closed.
Since you’re so busy keeping a meticulous tally of thread closures here on LK—or rather, on On the Edge of Politics—why don't you try counting how many times I've specifically asked and warned you all not to start a thread just by posting a link to a newspaper article or some news portal?

The thread hadn't even been up for a couple of hours. It matched the PDF title perfectly, didn't insult anyone on the forum, and didn't break a single rule...

If you stick to that logic, you might as well just lock up Roger Robinson682's thread about the Constitution over on the main Politics PDF.

The real issue is that it exposes Jergović and his whole crew—those mentors who are basically the newspaper owners writing those shameful pieces about the Barbarin trench and Titin's crimes.

Is it really that hard to just admit that, instead of clumsily making excuses like 'it was logical that the topic showed no signs of life'
?
You closed threads because they didn't suit your mood, or maybe you just got carried away in a moment of "inspiration" and went on a locking spree...😉, not because they violated the rules. If a thread actually gets locked for breaking a rule, then fine, "even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while,"

So, tell me: what exactly was wrong with the thread about Jergović and his twisted stories, when it fit the On the Edge of Politics theme perfectly and followed every single rule?

I'd love to see this supposed reasoning and moderation logic applied at Mad House—which, frankly, shouldn't have even kept its name given the way you people moderate things.
Sarah Wilson95 Sarah Wilson95 Regular
267 messages
joined Sep 2006
#24 ·
Ronald Allen said:The only thing actually bothering them is the superficial change of the PDF's name, because they didn't have a single complaint back when Mad House was still running, regardless of whether it was moderated or not.
Now, some self-proclaimed intellectual—specifically one citing some future star athlete from up north—is claiming that the users at LK have had their constitutional right to free speech and a more "relaxed style" stripped away by this PDF change... THAT IS SIMPLY NOT THE CASE!
The threads will remain exactly as they have always been, and there will still be topics that aren't considered "appropriate" for On the Edge of Politics, but the moderation will continue just as it always has.
The reality is that people are just picking a fight over nothing. If we weren't arguing about something, we'd probably all be bored anyway!

No, it isn't about people just looking for a fight. I have to wonder why everyone here is acting so incredibly arrogant.

I assume I’m allowed to ask?

And why on earth was my poll merged with Špranj ???!?!?!

All the veteran members understand what the true purpose and spirit of Mad House used to be and how it functioned. It was meant to be pure fun! Now, it has devolved into international disputes, constant insults, trash talk, provocation, and nothing but heavy-handed moderation turning LK into a total mess.

With this new name, On the Edge of Politics, you're essentially creating two identical sub-forums, because the distinction between them is becoming almost nonexistent.
Ronald Allen Ronald Allen Active Member
160 messages
joined Oct 2010
#25 ·
Topic No. 1
Topic No. 2
Topic No. 3
Topic #4
Topic No. 5

So, are we really going to sit here and question why the threads keep getting locked again...?
It’s not even about being arrogant, honestly. Sarah Wilson95I mean, it’s just that thing where people were basically asked nicely a long time ago to stop doing stuff like that, but some folks? They just keep right on doing it anyway.

Topic No. 6
Topic No. 7
Thread No. 8
Thread No. 9
Thread No. 10

Five topics that start out looking like trolling, stay purely trolling, and then—after everything is said and done—you realize... Nathan Bailey65Honestly, how would those topics even end...? I mean, seriously.

Look, the point is that you guys have been begging for a long time now to just stop with the rude posts, the constant snapping back at provocations, all those shady insinuations, and trying to slap labels on everyone else here at Mad House. It’s true—some stuff went unpunished before, mostly just because this was Mad House. But there's a line. Like Sarah Wilson95 said, there's a difference between just messing around and what this place has actually turned into.
Is it really that hard to just have a conversation? To actually swap ideas without immediately jumping to ad hominem attacks or slapping labels on everyone? I mean, seriously... people sink so low sometimes that it’s embarrassing. We’re hitting levels of disrespect that would make even the most shameless people on the planet blush.

If you guys seriously still think the only reason they changed the PDF filename was to mess with you personally, I honestly don't know how else we can get through to you...

Look, I’m calling it here. Sarah Wilson95, nobody is stopping you from asking questions—you’ve always been free to do that—but since none of the moderators over on the Politics sub ever actually listen to anything said, there's really no point in me keeping this up. I'm done replying to this thread.
Nathan Ortiz2 Nathan Ortiz2 Newcomer
7 messages
joined Mar 2012
#26 ·
Bring back Mad House and it's high time Ronald Allen steps down from his moderator role.
ambermason16 ambermason16 Active Member
213 messages
joined Apr 2009
#27 ·
Nathan Ortiz2 said:Give them back the Mad House and kick Ronald Allen off the mod team once and for all.

Brilliant logic right there.

I stand by everything Ronald Allen wrote. Looking at the rest of your posts, it’s clear you’re right—you don't actually care about the filename, you just see an opening to start a fight...

And with that, I'm out. Because I have absolutely no intention of giving it to you. ☕
Nathan Bailey65 Nathan Bailey65 Active Member
79 messages
joined Oct 2008
#28 ·
Ronald Allen said:Topic No. 1
Topic No. 2
Topic No. 3
Topic No. 4
Topic No. 5

So, are we really going to sit here and go around questioning why certain threads keep getting shut down again? Is this actually going to be a thing?
It isn’t exactly arrogance, is it? Sarah Wilson95Honestly, it’s just that classic scenario where people were politely asked—long ago, mind you—to stop doing those kinds of things, yet some still insist on carrying them out anyway. Why is it that even after a reasonable request, certain individuals feel the need to push those same boundaries? It's almost like they're waiting for someone to tell them "no" just so they can ignore it.

Topic No. 6
Topic No. 7
Topic No. 8
Topic No. 9
Topic No. 10

Five topics that start out looking like pure trolling, evolve into full-blown trolling, and then—after all that noise—leave you wondering what the hell was the point of any of it. Nathan Bailey65And just how exactly would those topics end up? Honestly, where does that all lead?

The bottom line is this: you’ve been politely asking people to show some restraint for a long time now. We’ve asked you to stop the blatant rudeness, quit biting at every provocation, and move away from all those shady insinuations and the constant habit of slapping labels on other members here at Mad House. It’s an uncomfortable truth, but let’s be real—certain behaviors went unchecked for a while simply because this was Mad House. But there’s a massive difference between the kind of banter Sarah Wilson95 is talking about and what this place has actually devolved into. One is just messing around; the other is a complete transformation into something else entirely.
Is it really that much to ask? Is it truly such an impossible task to have a civil conversation and actually exchange ideas without immediately resorting to ad hominem attacks, constant labeling, and dragging the discourse down to such a pathetic level that even the most godforsaken nations on this planet would be ashamed?

If you honestly still believe that the only reason they changed the PDF filename was to personally annoy you, then I’m at a total loss. How else are we supposed to talk sense into people?

I’ll wrap this up here once and for all. Look, Sarah Wilson95, nobody is stopping you from asking questions—you’ve always had that right—but since none of the moderators over at the main News Forum actually bother to respect or acknowledge any of the answers provided, I see zero point in continuing to beat my head against the wall on this thread. Why keep repeating myself when the leadership clearly isn't listening?


If you’re going to act as moderator, why is your only move to shut everything down? It feels like you're just closing doors instead of actually managing the room. Honestly, more than half of these threads could have evolved into genuinely substantive debates—the kind that might have even made it onto the front page of a major news outlet or a political column. Every single topic here carries its own necessary dose of provocation; otherwise, why would anyone even bother engaging with them in the first place?

Look, since you seem to have this habit of shutting down discussions without applying any actual criteria—when, let's be honest, any debate on this topic could end up in pretty much the same place regardless—it might honestly be best if they just officially labeled you. 🤷 To our resident clairvoyant, Ronald Allen...

Is there any point in trying again? Why on earth was that thread about Jergović locked up?

So, I’m still not getting an answer. Seriously? It isn't breaking any rules, and it’s definitely not some trollish attempt at a baiting comment like you seem to think I'm doing just to get a blanket judgment. Why is that?
nimblewalker58 nimblewalker58 Active Member
75 messages
joined Jan 2008
#29 ·
Wait, didn't we just have a discussion about journalists less than a month ago? So why isn't this post about Jergović tucked away in that thread instead of starting an entirely new one? 🤷
Nathan Bailey65 Nathan Bailey65 Active Member
79 messages
joined Oct 2008
#30 ·
nimblewalker58 said:Wait, didn't we just have a discussion about journalists less than a month ago? Why isn't this post about Jergović attached to that one instead of starting an entirely new thread? 🤷

1. This thread is specifically about Jergović and his take on the crimes committed by Tito’s era and the partisans.
2. If it really was the same topic like you claim, why wouldn't the moderator just merge it with the thread you're 'linking' to?
3. How much more logical reasoning does a moderator need before they provide a coherent explanation for locking a thread?

The only conclusion I can draw here—especially considering how they handled the discussion regarding the atrocities at the Barbarin Trench—is that topics dealing with partisan or Tito-era crimes, and pointing out the shameful attitude of the media and certain wannabe opinion-makers toward them, simply don't align with this forum's editorial policy. In other words, the moderators themselves seem to be part of the same circle as Jergović.

And frankly, I don't see any reason why they shouldn't just say that publicly. Let us know where we actually stand.
Instead of being transparent, they choose to make excuses—or rather, they troll and provoke users who hold different political convictions or different views on that period of history, doing it in such a blatantly obvious way.

...........................

from frequently asked questions

6) Why was the thread locked?
Because the mods can't clear out the trash being generated by users fast enough to keep things under control. Once they've cleaned it up sufficiently and decide it's necessary, they will reopen it.

But the thread wasn't even open for a few hours; there wasn't even enough time for people to sign up, let alone for a massive debate to break out...

.
Roger Robinson682 Roger Robinson682 Active Member
73 messages
joined Jan 2008
#31 ·
nimblewalker58 said:I mean, if we just had a discussion about journalists less than a month ago, why isn't this post about Jergović tucked away in that thread instead of starting a whole new one? 🤷

The thread is actually on the sixth page of the Politics section, and it isn't specifically about Jergović anyway. I suppose what really should happen here is.........
1. Some cards issued for reviving an old thread
2. Some cards issued for going off-topic

😁😁
nimblewalker58 nimblewalker58 Active Member
75 messages
joined Jan 2008
#32 ·
It’s all connected, really, so it doesn't even have to be about Jergović; I mean, tomorrow Dežulović will probably churn out something just as similar, and then what? Are we honestly going to start an entirely new thread over it again?
Roger Reed49 Roger Reed49 Active Member
88 messages
joined Jan 2008
#33 ·
Look, calling it a "failure in Los Angeles" isn't just some dry, literal label like people keep acting like it is. It’s more like... I don't know, it's like letting a massive wave of clueless trolls loose on the internet and then handing the keys to a moderator who clearly doesn't get the joke. You end up in this ridiculous loop where the "clever" trolls get banned or deleted because nobody gets their sarcasm, while the actual idiots just keep piling up. It's a mess.
Anyone who tries to fix premature ejaculation by taking up a job in moderation is basically guaranteed to screw everything up.
placidjackal36 placidjackal36 Active Member
183 messages
joined Jan 2008
#34 ·
Why don't we just move all that nonsense over to Alternative? All the pseudoscience and snake oil peddling should be migrated from National Science Foundation and Health straight over to Alternative. Even those ridiculous global conspiracy theories about lizard people—they belong in Alternative.

And honestly, why wouldn't we move the political equivalents there too? It would be great to have one dedicated subforum where everything of that ilk is gathered in one spot... kind of like a digital junk drawer. 🙂
Sam Green73 Sam Green73 Active Member
144 messages
joined Aug 2018
#35 ·
We aren't about to hand our people over to those lizards
Nathan Bailey65 Nathan Bailey65 Active Member
79 messages
joined Oct 2008
#36 ·
Sam Green73 said:we aren't throwing our own people under the bus for some lizards

I mean, if you could just be honest for once...
even though that would probably strike David as bizarre, considering he insists they never reveal the identities of us regular folks.. 😉
Sam Green73 Sam Green73 Active Member
144 messages
joined Aug 2018
#37 ·
I mean, what would I even do if they took you away and moved you over to Alternative
I’d be absolutely heartbroken, honestly.
Nathan Bailey65 Nathan Bailey65 Active Member
79 messages
joined Oct 2008
#38 ·
Sam Green73 said:Honestly, if they took those away from me and moved them over to Alternative,
I’d be absolutely devastated.

A total utopia would basically be drowning in tears...

🤔

Moderators, please, throw us a bone here!!!!
Sam Green73 Sam Green73 Active Member
144 messages
joined Aug 2018
#39 ·
Amanda Booth42 said:Come on, admins, let's see some more action here!!!!

🙂
Sam Green73 said:We aren't letting them take our people out like lizards
Nathan Bailey65 Nathan Bailey65 Active Member
79 messages
joined Oct 2008
#40 ·
Oh, don't try to play innocent now. We all know exactly who you were aiming at. In these online circles, they're known as moderator trolls—those agitators planted right into the community... and if you ask David, he’d probably describe them as cold-blooded reptiles.

Sam Green73 said:We aren't handing our people over to the lizards.

Amanda Booth42 said:Come on, at least have the decency to admit it,
even though that would be a weird thing for David to hear, considering he insists they never reveal the identities of us regular folks.. 😉

You must log in or register to reply here.

Log in Register

🔗 Similar threads