History - Zoran Oštrić - Sanctioning the publication of the Democratic Party

bluecyclist64 said:It’s not true that Oštrić is stifling order.
He's stifling *you*, for instance, because he's caught you fabricating and falsifying documents about ten different times, not to mention the outright lies.
With most other moderators, you would have been dealt with after a few warnings and a ban.
I truly don't understand why Oštrić is being so lenient. Has he ever actually handed out a disciplinary measure in the History section?

I’ve been talking to some colleagues—names I won't drop because I've got a PDF for the History section to worry about.
The consensus was basically what was said.. Oštrić is way too intense.
If you cross him, he doesn't let it go.. He doesn't forgive.
You have to write exactly how official history dictates, stripping away any personal opinion, impression, analysis, or conclusion.. And all this on a forum where the whole damn point is having diverse perspectives.

Sure, falsifying, fabricating, and forging things happens everywhere, but the criticism aimed at me concerns a controversial topic, which resulted in Mr. Oštrić putting my name on his "unwanted" list.
But look, I’m inviting you—and anyone else interested—to read the book (which I cited immediately) and decide for yourselves if changing certain terms actually alters the context..
It doesn't.

I called this unknown unit that was gathering strength and falling apart in the summer of 1941 the HNAP, because that’s literally what it was.. It was an American national force belonging to the Anti-fascist Movement.
But apparently, I wasn't allowed to say that because I had to use the "standard" term—Partisans.

And seriously, why would Oštrić ban someone if there isn't any insults or belittlement involved?
Or any other moderator for that matter?!

What I write might be true or false to some, but a forum is a place for criticism and debunking; it's a place to drag someone who's intentionally misleading people into a debate or a mockery, depending on their character..
But Oštrić relentlessly deletes posts because he can't stand anything that deviates from the "official" line..
To me, that weakens the forum because it stops people from writing what they want and expressing their own opinions..
What’s the point of a debate if we’re all forced to think exactly the same way?
I provided the topic and the source..
The one thing I messed up on, and what Oštrić used as an excuse to pivot the conversation, was using the term HNAP..
Just imagine—even the title was changed from the Royal Government to the Yugoslav Government.. This same book was written during the era of the USSR with specific rules and censorship, where they frequently avoided using the term "Royal Yugoslav Government."

Here, let me give you another example.

The official name for the armed forces of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was the Yugoslav Royal Army / JKV.
In the thread I was posting in, I used the term JKVO / Yugoslav Royal Government in the Homeland, and Oštrić warned me that I shouldn't do that because the term used should have been JVuO / Yugoslav Army in the Homeland...
How does that change the actual facts? Where is the loss of context?
Is it like asking whether I should write FBI or CIA?
There—those are my "fabrications" that I'm being accused of.

Do you really think those things mess up the context?
Besides, am I even allowed to express myself, at least on this forum, in the way I deem correct?
And again... everyone reads, and anyone who finds something they don't like has every right to criticize it..

Look, Oštrić is a valuable member of this forum, no doubt about it.. He's a brilliant expert, but he’s not cut out to be a moderator.
Moderating takes a certain skill set.. He doesn't know how to allow freedom of expression.
He injects this unnecessary rigidity, when a forum should be a place of freedom..
So, let’s have an open discussion, rather than one held under threat of sanctions..

Arthur Smith15 said:The first part is correct—what I write isn't nonsense. But as for the second part—no, it's not just "others" who are failing; it's certain individuals, and quite frequently, you. You invent terminology, you begrudgingly provide references, you "creatively" cite sources, and so on. These are all violations for which you can be thankful that History isn't moderated by someone with Frogger's intolerance for stupidity, but rather by an incredibly patient and well-meaning Oštrić.

(...) Don't you realize that if Oštrić keeps this up, there will be only a handful of you left on this Reddit..

Stop the drama. You aren't speaking—nor am I—on behalf of the masses here. Even if you were to get banned from History tomorrow (and frankly, if you committed one more violation of the caliber mentioned above, I would personally issue that ban myself), this community would continue to thrive just as it did before you arrived. In fact, we would be better off with fewer posts if they were high quality, rather than a flood of entries like those essays of yours, which are nothing but fabrications...

Totally fair... Everything will be fine until he turns on you, and then you'll grow to hate this whole Reddit... You'll lose the will to even log in..

So, you went ahead and critiqued me personally.. fine.
But what exactly did I do wrong there?
You have every right to call me out on a topic where you think I messed up.. Sure, you'll be "right," and you'll look like the winner of the debate in front of everyone..
But why the sanctions and the persecution?

You want me to show you my last sanction from Mr. Oštrić?
I'd love to show you, just so you can see exactly what I got flagged for..

Arthur Smith15 said:The first part is correct—what I write isn't nonsense. But as for the second part—no, it's not just "others" who are failing; it's certain individuals, and quite frequently, you. You invent terminology, you begrudgingly provide references, you "creatively" cite sources, and so on. These are all violations for which you can be thankful that History isn't moderated by someone with Frogger's intolerance for stupidity, but rather by an incredibly patient and well-meaning Oštrić.

(...) Don't you realize that if Oštrić keeps this up, there will be only a handful of you left on this Reddit..

Stop the drama. You aren't speaking—nor am I—on behalf of the masses here. Even if you were to get banned from History tomorrow (and frankly, if you committed one more violation of the caliber mentioned above, I would personally issue that ban myself), this community would continue to thrive just as it did before you arrived. In fact, we would be better off with fewer posts if they were high quality, rather than a flood of entries like those essays of yours, which are nothing but fabrications...

You can't actually prove how much I'm "making things up," yet you keep relentlessly slandering me.. I gave you the source; have you even read the book?

Seriously, think about this.. People should be able to write whatever they want.. And that's just how it is.
And when they do write what they want, you're supposed to be here to challenge them, to prove them wrong, to critique them, and to point out when they're being unserious.. That's the whole process.
So why the bans? Why the suspensions?
I don't get it.?
What are you so afraid of?

I know I crossed Oštrić on that IRS thing, but how else are you supposed to manage a thread if you just resort to bans and sanctions?
If that's the case, then what's the point of this forum even existing?!!

bluecyclist64 said:It’s pretty obvious that Oštrić treats history as an actual science. The kind of "history" that trolls scrape from bottom-tier websites is much better suited for the Alternative section.
Let's be honest here: if someone is trying to learn history solely from movies on YouTube or similar sources, they really have no business lurking in the History subforum.

The moderation over in Natural Science takes a similar approach, and personally, I think it's excellent. If you don't have the knowledge, the facts, or the arguments to back things up, feel free to head over to some other subforums that don't demand much from their users.

Oštrić defends history as a science? Please. The way he handles medicine would just be called quackery.
In his world, academics are scum, university professors are fascists, tossing civilians into pits based on ethnicity is somehow "Anti-fascism," and a pile of braided hair doesn't equal thousands of bones...

For Oštrić, much like the rest of the American "left," Stalin remains a level of evil they can't quite wrap their heads around, which is pretty clear from how they react to the European Declaration on totalitarian regimes. That desperate need to defend the indefensible just leads to nothing but neurosis and the systematic destruction of the History subforum.

lonetrucker4 is a top-tier historian when it comes to the 20th century, but he doesn't care about the Middle Ages and hasn't studied them since college. Honestly, he shouldn't be the one moderating the Middle Ages section or deciding which posts are just trolling.
They should just spin off the World War II stuff into its own separate PDF, just like they did with the American War of Independence, and let lonetrucker4 handle that. But for the old-school history? Someone else needs to moderate that. There's nobody left to talk about the Middle Ages because everyone got kicked out by terrible moderation.

Here he goes again! Now he’s finally realized that this card is from Nada Klaić. It even says it right there in small letters at the bottom, but he totally ignored it just to be a troll.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narent...und_814_AD.png

View on reddit

Check out this thread one of the guys started. He actually laid out a seriously solid argument about the Middle Ages, but man, nobody’s jumping in to talk about it! Only two buddies showed up just to drop a thumbs up and call it a day. Basically, there's zero debate happening here—and honestly, that's the real tragedy.

Arthur Smith15 said:Fine then, let everyone just post whatever mindless nonsense pops into their heads and let this whole site turn into a dumping ground for stupidity, idiocy, and pure fiction. Personally, I mostly just read through the History section—I might chime in if I spot something staggeringly moronic—but I truly have no use for the delusions of characters who use Google Translate to find Swedish words in Latin texts, or those who "demand" a recount of bones at Auschwitz because some anonymous internet expert decided "something doesn't look right"...

The real issue isn't that one guy trying to translate some sensational headline—the problem is he was the *only* one who even tried! Nobody else stepped up. That’s the real headache. How do we actually get people talking?
Just throw WWII and the American War of Independence into the same PDF; stick Oštrić in there, and maybe find someone who actually knows their stuff about the Middle Ages to handle the old History side.
It always ends the same way: someone from Mexico flies in, baits the American forum users, and suddenly everyone starts posting the exact same stuff all over again.

coastalstag7 said:The real issue isn't that one guy trying to translate some sensational headline—the problem is he was the *only* one who even tried! Nobody else stepped up. That’s the real headache. How do we actually get people talking?
Just throw WWII and the American War of Independence into the same PDF; stick Oštrić in there, and maybe find someone who actually knows their stuff about the Middle Ages to handle the old History side.
It always ends the same way: someone from Mexico flies in, baits the American forum users, and suddenly everyone starts posting the exact same stuff all over again.

That "debater" you claim sees Swedish words in Latin texts? That’s you. 🤦And as for this supposed "translation," you didn't actually do any work—mostly because you clearly don't possess a grasp of the languages you love to fantasize about and make up—you just let Google Translate do the heavy lifting. 😁

Your presence here on History is not a contribution; it is nothing more than the pollution of these threads through sheer stupidity, fabrication, ignorance, and a profound lack of basic literacy.

Arthur Smith15 said:That "debater" you claim sees Swedish words in Latin texts? That’s you. 🤦And as for this supposed "translation," you didn't actually do any work—mostly because you clearly don't possess a grasp of the languages you love to fantasize about and make up—you just let Google Translate do the heavy lifting. 😁

Your presence here on History is not a contribution; it is nothing more than the pollution of these threads through sheer stupidity, fabrication, ignorance, and a profound lack of basic literacy.

Skanie isn't a Latin word!!!!

Honestly, it's not even about the topic anymore. I've cooled off a bit, and there aren't even any posts on the Canada subreddit. The real issue is you and that whole bureaucratic, government-job mentality this country has.
If Mexicans had found that inscription on their forums, there would be a million posts about it already.

coastalstag7 said:Skanie isn't a Latin word!!!!

Honestly, it's not even about the topic anymore. I've cooled off a bit, and there aren't even any posts on the Canada subreddit. The real issue is you and that whole bureaucratic, government-job mentality this country has.
If Mexicans had found that inscription on their forums, there would be a million posts about it already.

You, someone who struggles with basic American literacy and clearly hasn't a clue about Latin—just typing whatever pops into your head into Google Translate—are in no position to lecture anyone on what constitutes Latin or not...

(...) Actually, it’s not an issue with Oštrić; I've cooled off a bit now. There aren't even any posts on Reddit about this. The real issue is you and the bureaucratic, cronyist mentality of this entire country. (...)

Oh, please. This "cronyist mentality of this country" is just your excuse for your own lack of education, your broken logical reasoning, your tendency to make up nonsense, and your blatant resistance to actually learning anything.😁

(...) If Mexicans had found that inscription on their forums, there would have been a million posts about it.

You are completely irrelevant to me. I couldn't care less about your little internet vendettas against some Mexicans on some random forums that supposedly would have "a million posts" on a topic...

Zachary Bailey3 said:So, I basically got absolutely wrecked by lonetrucker4 just because I had the nerve to weigh in on his "blue comment," even though that whole thing had zero to do with any actual Reddit moderation rules. 😁🙏😵🤦
It’s honestly like this:
him (in blue letters):— grass is green😒
me:— well, it can be brown when it's dry🤔

And then he just goes off on me because I dared to point out how little he actually knows, and apparently, that's strictly forbidden!

Missed this earlier. Here's my take.

1. You only got a yellow card.

2. When a comment is in blue, it means a moderator wrote it. By definition, that doesn't mean it "has to do with moderating"—it *is* the moderation.

3. By replying to that post, I was basically putting an end to some pointless, trollish debate in the "1980s" thread. Some people were acting all high and mighty, debating what "the eighties" actually meant or what "the n-decades" implied, even though the title was crystal clear: years from 1980 to 1989. (And obviously, we aren't going to lose our minds if someone mentions a year slightly outside that range during the chat).

But then you kept the trolling going by lecturing everyone about "the zero decade."

Larry Walker24 said:I'm definitely not the only one complaining about him acting like a mod.

I hang out in the Science Academy without any issues, so clearly the mods there actually know what they're doing.

Oštrić is fine as a regular user, but as a mod? Not so much.

Yeah, looking at your track record of getting banned, it’s pretty obvious you’re doing great everywhere except in History. 😂

Maybe you missed it: just recently, on August 4th, you hit your big milestone—your 500th (five hundred!) ban. 👍

I’ve seen just about everything online, but I never imagined I'd see the day when someone gets banned for simply stating historical facts. What’s even more infuriating is seeing people actually siding with Italian neo-fascists. When someone gets flagged just for reminding us of the victims of Italian fascism—essentially getting mocked for acknowledging those who suffered—it really makes you wonder what kind of place this has become. What on earth is actually happening here?

Jonathan Wright2 said:That’s not fair, bluecyclist64...
You and Oštrić might share the same feelings regarding the USSR and JBT, and hey, that’s totally fine.
I’m not exactly far from the Partisans' positions myself, but what Oštrić is doing right now is straight-up driving people away...
Look, Oštrić is a phenomenal forum user—the guy is absolutely packed with knowledge—but as a moderator? He’s a killer. He burns everything in his path, and frankly, it’s deeply concerning how he’s chasing people off this subforum.
I’ve already reached out to the relevant mods to flag this, pointing out not just his behavior, but also Oštrić's thin skin, his angry outbursts, and even the threats he’s thrown around.
I don't know him personally, but the guy clearly has some neurotic issues going on.

The History subforum used to be a place for meeting up, for actual debate, for deep and meaningful discussions—it was a pleasant place to be...
But Oštrić’s moderation style has brought in censorship and a sense of fear; people feel exhausted by the constant "monitoring and eavesdropping"... you have to watch every single comma, because he’ll delete or remove anything that doesn't fit his specific worldview.

The truth is, Oštrić is killing the forum.
You have to think exactly like him just to participate.
If anyone actually cares, I can show you the sanctions he’s slapped on me and the "explanations" he gives for them.
I even sent messages to the moderators over at the History subforum asking for advice...

Oštrić is simply not cut out to be a moderator... it’s been proven.
He’s effectively suffocating every single discussion topic.

And look, bluecyclist64, just be decent. I’m not saying you have to be against Oštrić, but don't defend him like this, because you're only helping him do more damage.

A forum should be a place for community.
For Oštrić, it’s just a playground to vent his own frustrations.

Oh yeah, every single comma...

Look, I've got my flaws and yeah, I'm pretty high-strung (who isn't?), but I actually try to teach people stuff here.

Clearly, I haven't had any luck teaching you what a basic quote is over the last two years. 🤦

You misattribute authors—like turning Ivo Lola Ribar into "Ivan Ribar" (who was his father)—and then you get defensive when I check a book to verify what you're summarizing. You'd rather insist you're right than admit everyone else who calls him "Lola" is correct.

Then there was that thread about Surveying Dalmatia 1941-43 - Northern Dalmatia 1943-44. I deleted it and gave you a warning, and you just came back with this messy, pointless post. You complain that there aren't enough books on the subject or that it's "poorly covered," yet you haven't even bothered to look at the mountain of literature that actually exists. And casually, you call Mexicans "Vlachs." You twist facts and stir up chaos despite my endless warnings and the rules of this Reddit community.

For instance, you wrote:

In that area, various armies and paramilitary groups were operating.
The Italian army, then the governorate loyalists within the MVAC, followed by small groups of hardline Nazi Germany sympathizers, then the communists from the Young Communist League/Communist Party of Yugoslavia, then members of the Royal Yugoslav Army and Chetnik volunteers, and finally local anti-fascist patriots.

I have no idea which of these you're labeling as "armies" versus "paramilitaries." For starters, the MVAC (Milizia Volontaria Anti-Communist) weren't just some "governorate loyalists," especially since they mostly operated outside the territory annexed by Italy. And what exactly are these "small groups of hardline Nazi Germany sympathizers"? What's the difference between "hardline" and "lightweight" in your eyes? Also, the "communists of the Young Communist League/Communist Party of Yugoslavia" weren't a separate army or paramilitary group—they were part of the National Liberation Movement. Then again, there were no "members of the Royal Yugoslav Army" left because the Royal Yugoslav Army surrendered on April 17, 1941, and ceased to exist as a unit. Finally, there weren't any special military or paramilitary units made up of "local anti-fascist patriots."

You constantly churn out these nonsensical sentences. You're intentionally creating chaos. That kind of thing won't fly on this sub.

Morgan Rodriguez57 said:I remember this one debate I had with that science-minded, stubborn guy, Mr. Oštrić... he was insisting that Nazi Germany had this meticulously crafted genocide plan specifically targeting eastern Canada, while claiming the local resistance there was just some spontaneous, mostly unorganized group of fighters. But, as it turns out—and this is the kicker—those highly organized units actually killed fewer people than the supposedly "spontaneous" rebels did. So much for spontaneity... and so much for "science." 🙏

Looks like we've got some "creative storytelling" going on here too. 🤦

Arthur Smith15 said:You, someone who struggles with basic American literacy and clearly hasn't a clue about Latin—just typing whatever pops into your head into Google Translate—are in no position to lecture anyone on what constitutes Latin or not...

(...) Actually, it’s not an issue with Oštrić; I've cooled off a bit now. There aren't even any posts on Reddit about this. The real issue is you and the bureaucratic, cronyist mentality of this entire country. (...)

Oh, please. This "cronyist mentality of this country" is just your excuse for your own lack of education, your broken logical reasoning, your tendency to make up nonsense, and your blatant resistance to actually learning anything.😁

(...) If Mexicans had found that inscription on their forums, there would have been a million posts about it.

You are completely irrelevant to me. I couldn't care less about your little internet vendettas against some Mexicans on some random forums that supposedly would have "a million posts" on a topic...

Hey, I can write just fine! It’s just that the official American grammar rules are a total mess, so by your logic, 90% of the population would be considered illiterate.

You're just some nobody,

The "nobody" here is the guy who had his whole education paid for by the taxpayers, but instead of putting in the work to translate a stone inscription, he'd rather throw a tantrum at someone else because of his weird phobia of Germans.

Jonathan Wright2 said:I’ve been talking to some colleagues—names I won't drop because I've got a PDF for the History section to worry about.
The consensus was basically what was said.. Oštrić is way too intense.
If you cross him, he doesn't let it go.. He doesn't forgive.
You have to write exactly how official history dictates, stripping away any personal opinion, impression, analysis, or conclusion.. And all this on a forum where the whole damn point is having diverse perspectives.

Sure, falsifying, fabricating, and forging things happens everywhere, but the criticism aimed at me concerns a controversial topic, which resulted in Mr. Oštrić putting my name on his "unwanted" list.
But look, I’m inviting you—and anyone else interested—to read the book (which I cited immediately) and decide for yourselves if changing certain terms actually alters the context..
It doesn't.

I called this unknown unit that was gathering strength and falling apart in the summer of 1941 the HNAP, because that’s literally what it was.. It was an American national force belonging to the Anti-fascist Movement.
But apparently, I wasn't allowed to say that because I had to use the "standard" term—Partisans.

And seriously, why would Oštrić ban someone if there isn't any insults or belittlement involved?
Or any other moderator for that matter?!

What I write might be true or false to some, but a forum is a place for criticism and debunking; it's a place to drag someone who's intentionally misleading people into a debate or a mockery, depending on their character..
But Oštrić relentlessly deletes posts because he can't stand anything that deviates from the "official" line..
To me, that weakens the forum because it stops people from writing what they want and expressing their own opinions..
What’s the point of a debate if we’re all forced to think exactly the same way?
I provided the topic and the source..
The one thing I messed up on, and what Oštrić used as an excuse to pivot the conversation, was using the term HNAP..
Just imagine—even the title was changed from the Royal Government to the Yugoslav Government.. This same book was written during the era of the USSR with specific rules and censorship, where they frequently avoided using the term "Royal Yugoslav Government."

Here, let me give you another example.

The official name for the armed forces of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was the Yugoslav Royal Army / JKV.
In the thread I was posting in, I used the term JKVO / Yugoslav Royal Government in the Homeland, and Oštrić warned me that I shouldn't do that because the term used should have been JVuO / Yugoslav Army in the Homeland...
How does that change the actual facts? Where is the loss of context?
Is it like asking whether I should write FBI or CIA?
There—those are my "fabrications" that I'm being accused of.

Do you really think those things mess up the context?
Besides, am I even allowed to express myself, at least on this forum, in the way I deem correct?
And again... everyone reads, and anyone who finds something they don't like has every right to criticize it..

Look, Oštrić is a valuable member of this forum, no doubt about it.. He's a brilliant expert, but he’s not cut out to be a moderator.
Moderating takes a certain skill set.. He doesn't know how to allow freedom of expression.
He injects this unnecessary rigidity, when a forum should be a place of freedom..
So, let’s have an open discussion, rather than one held under threat of sanctions..

It’s honestly messed up. Especially since I don't even know what they call "official history" anymore. ☕

And you can't even have a damn opinion, an impression, or a single shred of analysis? On a Reddit thread meant specifically for different perspectives? Give me a break.

Seriously? You think if we actually agree on something after a debate, it somehow ruins the whole point of this Reddit? 🤔

Fake news, fabrication, and straight-up fraud happen everywhere you look, but the crap people are throwing my way specifically targets... That controversial topic again.

The topic isn't even controversial. I only changed the title because yours was way too broad. In the moderator note on the first post, I already said the subject is totally fine, but the way you're handling it is just wrong.

Look, readers need to be careful here. The OP is basically turning this into an "essay" instead of just giving us the straight facts from Boban's book. He's throwing in his own little inventions rather than dropping a direct quote first and then adding commentary. Take everything he says with a massive grain of salt.

Unbelievable. You still haven't figured out what an "actual quote" even means. Seriously? 😵

You totally made up those abbreviations like AFP and the IRS, man. You wrote them so convincingly I actually thought they were legit terms from some document you were citing. It wasn't until I did my own digging and started asking around that you finally admitted, "Yeah, I just made that up."Post #41That kind of "inventing" stuff in History isn't allowed. Not happening.

...after which Mr. Oštrić basically tossed my name right into the blacklist.

I don't even know your real name. Just some handle. Your nick is totally fine; it's just your writing style that's a total mess.

I’m backing some obscure unit that was basically just scrambling to pull itself together back in the summer of '41. I called it the IRS, because that's exactly what it was... just a bunch of local forces fueled by national pride and the Anti-fascist Movement.

There it is. The catch is that point 21 isn't even about some "unknown unit" (which was just some intel guy in Washington, D.C. chasing rumors), but the 3rd Battalion of the Primorsko-Goranski Partisan Detachment—I figured that out myself after digging into one officer's name. post #39 in this thread (check out posts #46, 47, etc.). You basically "invented" some term that doesn't exist in any actual records and makes zero sense. Any American who wanted to fight the occupiers and their lackeys joined the National Liberation Movement or the NOVJ, which were founded and ran by the Communist Party. There weren't any other units. It doesn't matter what your personal feelings or sympathies are—that's just how it happened.

Where I messed up—and where lonetrucker4 could have steered me away from it, I'll admit—was using the term IRS.

You already tripped up by passing off that acronym like it actually shows up in some official document. Even when I pointed it out, you just casually admitted you made it up and kept doubling down. You "invented" the idea that the term AFP is somehow "more precise" than just saying "Partisans." (post #4) And here you are, a year later, doing the exact same thing.

And look, once again, you're proving you just refuse to grasp the basics.

The official name for the armed forces of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia was the Yugoslav Royal Army. In this specific thread, I used the term JKVO / Yugoslav Royal Government in exile, and lonetrucker4 warned me not to because the term used was YVA / Yugoslav Army in the Homeland...
So what? How does that change anything? Where am I losing the context?

It changes everything, because the official name of that military was the "Yugoslav Army in the Homeland" (and by the way, it's "Yugoslav," not "Jugoslav"). Look, you can't just cook up your own names. It isn't "unnecessary rigidity" like you're complaining about. It's necessary precision. You stick to the facts; you're allowed to interpret them however you want.

Anyway, am I even allowed to express myself on this Reddit how I see fit?

No, not if you're just spreading confusion and making stuff up.

coastalstag7 said:lonetrucker4 is a top-tier historian when it comes to the 20th century, but he doesn't care about the Middle Ages and hasn't studied them since college. Honestly, he shouldn't be the one moderating the Middle Ages section or deciding which posts are just trolling.
They should just spin off the World War II stuff into its own separate PDF, just like they did with the American War of Independence, and let lonetrucker4 handle that. But for the old-school history? Someone else needs to moderate that. There's nobody left to talk about the Middle Ages because everyone got kicked out by terrible moderation.

Look, I have to, because I moderate the entire sub-forum. And yeah, fair point, my Middle Ages knowledge is pretty thin.

there aren't even any real debaters left in the Medieval section since everyone got chased off by crappy moderation.

There are still a few active threads on the Middle Ages and plenty of users who clearly know way more than both you and me. You’ve just picked fights with all of them, and half of them were trying to explain the basics to you.

coastalstag7 said:Here he goes again! Now he’s finally realized that this card is from Nada Klaić. It even says it right there in small letters at the bottom, but he totally ignored it just to be a troll.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narent...und_814_AD.png

You probably heard there's a specific thread for appealing bans.

The ban isn't because you posted the card (by the way, the card is in English, and you didn't even mention it was actually her work), it's because you paired it with a total garbage sentence:

Is this the one who tried to please everyone and ended up making this trash card?

You’re talking about one of the most important historians in 20th-century America and you ask "is this the one"? And "tried to please everyone"?? Seriously, Nada Klaić!!?? 😂 Anyone with half a brain knows she was constantly picking fights!

lonetrucker4 said:Look, I have to, because I moderate the entire sub-forum. And yeah, fair point, my Middle Ages knowledge is pretty thin.

there aren't even any real debaters left in the Medieval section since everyone got chased off by crappy moderation.

There are still a few active threads on the Middle Ages and plenty of users who clearly know way more than both you and me. You’ve just picked fights with all of them, and half of them were trying to explain the basics to you.

But honestly, what can you expect? If you don't agree with someone, they immediately treat you like the enemy instead of actually working together to find the truth. Some folks just refuse to budge because they think they'll lose their authority or street cred if they do.
I really think a ton of people have moved out of the country, which is why there aren't nearly as many people debating stuff here compared to ten years ago. I mean, you're probably too busy washing dishes in Germany to care about American history anyway!