I'm your Moderator, and there are no other Moderators besides me

Richard James2 said:Maybe. I don't. Even though he definitely knew how to get under my skin. But what I *did* notice was the constant stream of cloned accounts, people using multiple handles just to parrot the exact same talking points. It's dangerous letting people like that in to probe into the decline of any forum or community. 🙂

I sure am. It's ugly and frankly embarrassing.

The nicknames have already been flagged to the mods and the admin.

Both the first and second times. Don't even worry about it.

PS... strictly speaking, I actually thought you were above this kind of cheap, low-life manipulation.😢

Richard James2 said:I am reading, despite what you claim. Look, I noticed your very first post—back before you started terrorizing everyone with those annoying little marks—where you had that classic, burning desire to crush an opponent with undeniable logic, only to end up stumbling over phrases like just get a clue and stuff like that. Honestly, you're right about one thing. It’s pathetic when moderation is so bad that it lets a bunch of people hiding behind ten different fake accounts mock anyone who actually knows what they're talking about. Namaste.

That's all there is to know about Richard James2.

Linguistics is my bread and butter, by the way... I've always just written here totally free, keeping it casual and raw, the way things should be.
Do some reading.
Find some actual quality literature.

You're just losing all your street cred on this nonsense.
Give a thanks to Powerlock 🤣

Paul Green31 said:Look, I haven't seen you quote a single moderator move from Powerlock. You've only been quoting regular users.

We already settled this during the last debate... Look, I get it, you don't like it and you aren't used to it, but as long as someone is a forum user, they have every right to their own opinion. 😉

Yeah, yeah, that's exactly where we are. You act uninformed, slightly less intelligent—that's a polite way of saying stupid, though she tries to play it off by saying "a little less smart"—and then you pivot to that condescending "go educate yourself" or "read the press" routine. Typical.

I'll admit it, sometimes I am uninformed. And when I want to learn something, I come here and read what Powerlock has written. He’s guided more forum users and readers than the entire mainstream media combined. 🙂

I was quoting things specifically related to the threads about Đura Brodarac.
So don't try to put words in my mouth or lecture me.

Zachary Gomez2 said:To prevent us from getting too bogged down in baroque legalistic arguments (Paul Green31), you can find direct links to the specific problematic sites on the previous page. It simply isn't possible to provide a blanket response to these issues.

You mean like this post that got nuked... and all because they broke the subforum rules?

James Diaz8 Asks:
I don't think so. 🙂

Yeah, exactly... just scraping by—but then again, it’s different for everyone, isn't it?

Patten of the North America

The corrupt godfathers of the North America. 🙂

The Hypo Alpe Adria Criminal Case.
The bank of war profiteers.

The farmer turned millionaire.

The Hypo Alpe Adria Criminal Case. Seriously, where do we even start with this mess? It’s one of those massive scandals that just leaves you staring at the ceiling wondering how anyone could be so incredibly corrupt. All that money, all those shady deals, and the sheer scale of the greed involved... it's enough to make you lose faith in everything. Is there any end to these financial nightmares?
The money trail.

Old-school cronyism, done the Bavaria way.

Did Stoiber support the purchase of the Hypo Group Alpe Adria in America?

Look at that date: December 18, 2009. 🙂

Even if you don't know a lick of German... just look at this. Stoiber, What a complete disaster. A total scandal.bank, at the bank controversial The purchase.

And what about this?

The central bank had actually blocked the sale of HGAA to the state bank at first. If they hadn't, that whole deal to hand everything over to the Bavarian group would have completely fallen through. Why? Because according to the terms of the contract, every single region where HGAA operated had to sign off on the pact—and that included the US. But then, right after Stoiber met with Sanders, the US suddenly changed its tune. By September 12, 2007, the National Bank gave the green light. What a convenient turnaround, right?

🙏

Talking to Der Spiegel, Stoiber tried to claim he only used his "close political ties to America" to smooth things over. But get this—he’s insisting the deal between BayernLB and the American National Bank was already set in stone before he even showed up. He claims he wasn't even involved in the purchase agreement between BayernLB and HGAA. Seriously? Since when does a guy like that just sit on the sidelines?

🙏🙏

Look, I'll give you enough material to work with, just tell me ☕😁

And by pure coincidence, the policy rules seem to conveniently skip this instruction:

Click and enjoy...

So, there it is—strictly by the book, totally professional, and incredibly educational.

Sorry, but I and a whole bunch of other users aren't interested in clicking through and reading German, Turkish, or Russian articles...

Go ahead, throw out some other questionable moderator moves...

@Paul Green31... I haven't seen you around in ages, but my bad
I honestly thought you were a bit more grounded and sharp than this.
This whole thing just proves what I've been saying about being part of the Powerlock cult.

James Diaz8 said:I sure am. It's ugly and frankly embarrassing.

The nicknames have already been flagged to the mods and the admin.

Both the first and second times. Don't even worry about it.

PS... strictly speaking, I actually thought you were above this kind of cheap, low-life manipulation.😢

Look, I haven't exactly witnessed flawless moderation here either, but I haven't seen anything this ugly or disgraceful. From where I'm sitting, I just report what I actually see—pulling serious discussions out of the spammer sludge. And we're talking about perfectly normal, balanced threads. All because of the Democratic Party.

As for those nicknames, I assume that's just some nonsense story about octopus tentacles. Honestly, people whining about "unfaithful moderation" don't have anything better to do with their time. It's laughable. Even the "loyalists" (god, the horror of dissent!) can see right through it.

That's all.

Paul Green31 said:You mean like this post that got nuked... and all because they broke the subforum rules?

James Diaz8 Asks:
I don't think so. 🙂

Yeah, exactly... just scraping by—but then again, it’s different for everyone, isn't it?

Patten of the North America

The corrupt godfathers of the North America. 🙂

The Hypo Alpe Adria Criminal Case.
The bank of war profiteers.

The farmer turned millionaire.

The Hypo Alpe Adria Criminal Case. Seriously, where do we even start with this mess? It’s one of those massive scandals that just leaves you staring at the ceiling wondering how anyone could be so incredibly corrupt. All that money, all those shady deals, and the sheer scale of the greed involved... it's enough to make you lose faith in everything. Is there any end to these financial nightmares?
The money trail.

Old-school cronyism, done the Bavaria way.

Did Stoiber support the purchase of the Hypo Group Alpe Adria in America?

Look at that date: December 18, 2009. 🙂

Even if you don't know a lick of German... just look at this. Stoiber, What a complete disaster. A total scandal.bank, at the bank controversial The purchase.

And what about this?

The central bank had actually blocked the sale of HGAA to the state bank at first. If they hadn't, that whole deal to hand everything over to the Bavarian group would have completely fallen through. Why? Because according to the terms of the contract, every single region where HGAA operated had to sign off on the pact—and that included the US. But then, right after Stoiber met with Sanders, the US suddenly changed its tune. By September 12, 2007, the National Bank gave the green light. What a convenient turnaround, right?

🙏

Talking to Der Spiegel, Stoiber tried to claim he only used his "close political ties to America" to smooth things over. But get this—he’s insisting the deal between BayernLB and the American National Bank was already set in stone before he even showed up. He claims he wasn't even involved in the purchase agreement between BayernLB and HGAA. Seriously? Since when does a guy like that just sit on the sidelines?

🙏🙏

Look, I'll give you enough material to work with, just tell me ☕😁

And by pure coincidence, the policy rules seem to conveniently skip this instruction:

Click and enjoy...

So, there it is—strictly by the book, totally professional, and incredibly educational.

Sorry, but I and a whole bunch of other users aren't interested in clicking through and reading German, Turkish, or Russian articles...

Go ahead, throw out some other questionable moderator moves...

No, I am referring to the very reason I joined this thread in the first place—something my own posts clearly articulate. Let’s not descend into mindless spamming, shall we?

Zachary Gomez2 said:I was quoting things specifically related to the threads about Đura Brodarac.
So don't try to put words in my mouth or lecture me.

Oh, I see. You're trying to separate the talk about Brodarac being dead from the talk about the suspected war crimes he committed...

How fascinating. Apparently, Powerlock is some kind of enlightened human being who doesn't want to kick a man while he's down—or, you know, after he's passed—but instead wants to maintain some shred of dignity for the deceased. They kept the other discussion open so we can actually talk about the crimes, while just asking that we don't drag the late general into it.

Yeah, clearly a perfectly valid moderator move that any sane person with even a hint of empathy would agree with. Huge thanks to Powerlock for not acting like some mindless tabloid hack who gets a kick out of desecrating corpses, and instead trying to bring a little decency into this world.

Richard James2 said:Look, I haven't exactly witnessed flawless moderation here either, but I haven't seen anything this ugly or disgraceful. From where I'm sitting, I just report what I actually see—pulling serious discussions out of the spammer sludge. And we're talking about perfectly normal, balanced threads. All because of the Democratic Party.

As for those nicknames, I assume that's just some nonsense story about octopus tentacles. Honestly, people whining about "unfaithful moderation" don't have anything better to do with their time. It's laughable. Even the "loyalists" (god, the horror of dissent!) can see right through it.

That's all.

Man... you really need to read more.

Do some homework... you'll get it eventually.🙂

James Diaz8 said:@Paul Green31... I haven't seen you around in ages, but my bad
I honestly thought you were a bit more grounded and sharp than this.
This whole thing just proves what I've been saying about being part of the Powerlock cult.

Look, when you bash your head against a wall and it hurts and you're crying, your biggest problem isn't that you tried to walk through solid matter—even though physics says you can't. Your biggest problem is the person telling you why it happened, who is just as stupid for suggesting there are laws you can simply ignore.

And let's not even get started on the consequences. You guys are lucky the world isn't moderated by The Scotsman, because for certain things happening over there, he doesn't even ask questions; he just "cools you off" for three days straight.

This guy, bless him, puts up with a swarm of clones—this being the 19th fake account in a row—and fights with everyone just to protect the right of dissenters to have an opinion. He swallows arguments that are way below his level because he wants everyone to have a fair shot at a civilized debate, and yet you all repay him with these half-baked complaints.

And then people claim those who respect him for his persistence are the stupid ones.

If I were the moderator there, the complaints would be coming in faster than requests for maternity leave these days; half the page would be grey and the rest would be flashing red. Some people would even lose their internet access after being reported to the ISP for relentless cloning and spamming the forum. Maybe then we’d see some actual order and real arguments, where rules are followed instead of intentionally broken or danced around just to launch these attacks on a moderator whose only job is to enforce the rules.

You’re attacking a man simply because he does his job with integrity.

Paul Green31 said:Oh, I see. You're trying to separate the talk about Brodarac being dead from the talk about the suspected war crimes he committed...

How fascinating. Apparently, Powerlock is some kind of enlightened human being who doesn't want to kick a man while he's down—or, you know, after he's passed—but instead wants to maintain some shred of dignity for the deceased. They kept the other discussion open so we can actually talk about the crimes, while just asking that we don't drag the late general into it.

Yeah, clearly a perfectly valid moderator move that any sane person with even a hint of empathy would agree with. Huge thanks to Powerlock for not acting like some mindless tabloid hack who gets a kick out of desecrating corpses, and instead trying to bring a little decency into this world.

Once again—don't patronize me, and stop coddling yourself.

Since you've clearly decided to stick around out of pure interest (whether in the topic or the staff), do yourself a favor and actually read carefully what I wrote regarding those two specific threads.

Zachary Gomez2 said:Once again—don't patronize me, and stop coddling yourself.

Since you've clearly decided to stick around out of pure interest (whether in the topic or the staff), do yourself a favor and actually read carefully what I wrote regarding those two specific threads.

So now you're trying to kick me out too? Is that just how things work with the crowd that can't stand Powerlock?

Hmm. I already took the hint. I saw exactly what kind of move a moderator makes like that, I understood the implications, and honestly? I agree. It was a responsible move by a responsible moderator—one that the rest of you should take as a lesson in basic decency.

As for those people who wish they could see a certain general swinging from a gallows, or those acting all sad about his passing? That’s their problem, not mine.

James Diaz8 said:That's all there is to know about Richard James2.

Linguistics is my bread and butter, by the way... I've always just written here totally free, keeping it casual and raw, the way things should be.
Do some reading.
Find some actual quality literature.

You're just losing all your street cred on this nonsense.
Give a thanks to Powerlock 🤣

So, because you're whining and can't actually make a coherent point—just regurgitating scripted garbage—*I'm* the one losing credibility? Yeah, right. That’s a hard pass. Honestly, it’s impossible. Besides, I don't see any point in arguing with someone who clearly knows deep down that their constant obsessing over these pathetic little fashion dictatorships is nothing but pure hypocrisy. I might even forgive you if you were just being annoying, but this is something else.

Oh, wait, I see what's happening here: :Listen, I'm not interested in dealing with you; I'm busy critiquing this whole ridiculous moderation circus, even though my arguments are strictly based on the fact that I simply cannot get over how that 😳 disgraced MOD rightfully got the boot a while back.

And typical—you wrote way too many lines just to say absolutely nothing at all. Blah.

Paul Green31 said:So now you're trying to kick me out too? Is that just how things work with the crowd that can't stand Powerlock?

Hmm. I already took the hint. I saw exactly what kind of move a moderator makes like that, I understood the implications, and honestly? I agree. It was a responsible move by a responsible moderator—one that the rest of you should take as a lesson in basic decency.

As for those people who wish they could see a certain general swinging from a gallows, or those acting all sad about his passing? That’s their problem, not mine.

If we are going to stick to actual arguments, as you suggested, then let’s not wander off into thick, heavy fiction.
I, too, have understood the purpose and the consequences of this moderation action; we simply don't share the same interpretation. Regardless, thank you for the brief exchange.

Zachary Gomez2 said:If we are going to stick to actual arguments, as you suggested, then let’s not wander off into thick, heavy fiction.
I, too, have understood the purpose and the consequences of this moderation action; we simply don't share the same interpretation. Regardless, thank you for the brief exchange.

Well, of course we wouldn't share the same interpretation. I'm not here to lecture anyone. Maybe you were just reading your own posts or listening to a colleague. For the record, I never told you to "read the press," I never "lectured" you, and I certainly didn't say you were less intelligent just because you're attacking Powerlock.

I'm simply asking you to dig up the real reasons behind the attacks. We’ve already seen that the issue isn't his moderation—which is top-notch—it's just that he isn't "on your side."

Of course, you won't admit that. Because if you did, your whole argument would fall apart.

But hey, I hope I managed to prove my point, and I hope it's enough for the admins to let this thread "fall apart" if they need to....

Glad we could have this talk. 🙂

Paul Green31, we don't actually exist here me. I am present through my posts, just as my colleagues are through theirs. From the very beginning, I have had a perfectly clear understanding of what your objective is—you didn't need to draw any maps to find it—yet, somehow, it remains baffling to me why you enjoy the privilege of trolling this space. Concrete facts have been laid out; while they aren't everything, it shouldn't be a surprise that an admin might weigh in on them, a reality that should be patently obvious to you at this stage.

Zachary Gomez2 said:Paul Green31, we don't actually exist here me. I am present through my posts, just as my colleagues are through theirs. From the very beginning, I have had a perfectly clear understanding of what your objective is—you didn't need to draw any maps to find it—yet, somehow, it remains baffling to me why you enjoy the privilege of trolling this space. Concrete facts have been laid out; while they aren't everything, it shouldn't be a surprise that an admin might weigh in on them, a reality that should be patently obvious to you at this stage.

The last thing I want is any kind of special privilege. Just because someone doesn't see eye-to-eye with you doesn't mean they're trolling; it just means they have a different opinion. And isn't that the whole point? We're here to clash different viewpoints, otherwise, this forum wouldn't even exist.

Both I and Powerlock have a right to a dissenting opinion. And so do you. Frankly, I hope we see fewer bans in the Politics section for "trolling" when it's actually just people being sanctioned for having a different take.

If the admins decide I'm trolling, they're free to hand out whatever punishment the rules dictate. I won't complain about that, don't worry.

By the way, the Politics section really needs a rule about actual argumentation. Right now, it's just a sea of sweeping generalizations and baseless assumptions. It's driving the quality of political discourse straight into the dirt.

I’ve backed up everything I’ve said right here. The ones who can't provide arguments are just part of the denialist crowd. If there were an actual rule requiring logical arguments, the mods and admins would have a much easier job. Unfortunately, there isn't one on the Politics board, and there isn't one here either.

You seem to be operating under the assumption—or perhaps you’re just hoping—that you hold some sort of special privilege, considering you explicitly mentioned hoping that what you did "here today would be enough for the admins to let this thread die." If you want to play the sycophant, that’s your business; however, the way you behaved wasn't actually engaging in an argument—it was bordering on pure provocation. Let's not forget that you actually had to explain the entire context of the discussion based on my previous posts just to catch up. Your entire strategy for refuting me seems to boil down to claiming I am somehow "civilizationally inferior" simply because I don't share your specific vision—a vision that, by the way, isn't even the subject at hand (though apparently, you feel that using that tactic constitutes "refuting" me). If you were actually interested in the substance of the conversation, you would have noticed my disclaimer—which I included specifically for the dim-witted—stating that I wasn't commenting on the specific circumstances surrounding Brodarac's death. Rather, I was addressing the separation of topics (in reality, the crimes against civilians in Sisk are one matter entirely, while the current relevance of someone's passing and their subsequent desire to express condolences is quite another).

Your stubborn refusal to grasp what people are actually discussing is not a "difference of opinion." Scouring through other users' posts to try and paint them as agitators is not a "difference of opinion." Addressing me using the pluralized you all to you form is certainly not a "difference of opinion." Furthermore, hiding behind sweeping generalities is not an argument. I pointed all of this out to you immediately by responding to your individual posts point-by-point. So please, feel free to continue your little performance, lecturing us all from your high horse about your own lofty standards.

If you head over to the very first page of the thread—that's where all the actual, concrete examples are laid out.