Al dente

(And there's absolutely no accountability for insults when discussing history and historical topics.)

Arthur Smith15 said:Calm down—it’s going to be a long night, and you’ve got an entire shift ahead of you pumping out these mindless posts. Just remember: this is a Reddit thread, not Washington, D.C.—don't go flooding the place with nonsense, derailments, or just straight-up trolling.

Arthur Smith15 said:Actually, that whole bit about ignorance, arrogance, and sheer conceit—that was directed at you and people like you. You don't need to hide behind everyone else like a coward.

Arthur Smith15 said:Tone down that arrogant rhetoric—you’re only doing more damage to history and historical topics by acting like this.

Latin isn't exactly something you should be throwing at people who haven't the slightest clue what it is—not that anyone here really knows much about it anyway. Out of nothing. You clearly don't know how to write this correctly. 😁

Arthur Smith15 said:Oh, please... save those crocodile tears for someone who actually buys them. 😁 You’re standing there acting all sanctimonious—playing the victim like it’s some kind of art form—when you’re actually the one flooding the History section with absolute garbage. It’s pure nonsense: a relentless stream of stupidity, ignorance, trolling, and pseudo-science. Honestly, your posts in History are mostly useless clutter—just a repetitive loop of the same basic facts and maps that look like they were spit out by some low-rent internet bullshit generator. You just copy-paste the same junk from one thread to the next without a second thought. I’ve seen your "grand legacy" on Reddit and here in the County Executive's office—the points, the bans, the whining, the trolling, the constant complaining, the appeals, the bias... You really should be ashamed of yourself, constantly playing the martyr and running to higher authorities every time things don't go your way.

Regarding this absolute nonsense about clones—honestly, you and the pollster should consider yourselves lucky I’m not lonetrucker4. If I were him, you both would have spent your time long ago obsessing over the history of logging off instead.

What is the actual point of this behavior—this relentless, repetitive pattern of jumping back into the fray?

Reddit shouldn't be some kind of digital punching bag.
Someone behaving this way—with these kinds of posts—paints a pretty clear picture of their character, but frankly, the job of a moderator should be to prevent exactly this kind of thing from happening.

I’ve already reached out to the moderator to ask them to keep a closer eye on the constant jumping in, the insults, and the general trolling, but unfortunately, nothing has changed.

Look, he’s being blunt and pushing it, sure, but he’s attacking the content, not you personally. I'd say it stays within the lines.

And honestly, there’s a reason people notice him—you post an insane amount, too. Whether it's on the history subreddits or elsewhere, it's obvious. Case in point right now: you’ve dropped 50 posts tonight in just 120 minutes, running from 8:57 PM to 10:55 PM.

Plus, those PDF threads of yours about history and historical topics? They're basically just the same loop over and over. You get roasted by all sorts of users, but you just brush it off. Even when Arthur Smith15 pointed out some flaws, you dug your heels in over a single misspelled Latin phrase, trying to act like you were right when any dictionary would show you totally missed the mark.

lonetrucker4 said:It’s sharp—right on the edge—but he is criticizing what you write here rather than attacking your character. So, I believe it stays within acceptable bounds.

And there are plenty of his posts because you also write quite a lot—both in the History section and elsewhere. It becomes noticeable. For instance, right now: 50 posts published this evening in just 120 minutes, spanning from 8:57 PM to 10:55 PM.

Furthermore, your posts in the PDF History section often feel like an endless loop of repetition. You receive criticism from various users, yet you simply ignore it. Arthur Smith15 offered some corrections, but you actually became defensive over misspelling a single Latin phrase—trying to insist you were right even though any dictionary would clearly show you were mistaken.

You are mistaken.
What would happen if someone actually called out his behavior?

Spamming useless entries, where one might occasionally remember that this is a forum and not Washington, D.C., which he constantly floods with nonsense, off-topic rambling, denialism, and trolling...

Posts overflowing with ignorance, arrogance, and conceit coming from him and those similar to him—where one shouldn't have to cowardly hide behind others...

He could tone down that arrogant rhetoric, as it only serves to further pollute the History section.
... and Latin isn't something meant for those who have no clue about it; for example, even basic declensions are foreign to him.

Boo-hoo... He can go cry crocodile tears somewhere else.
While hypocritically attacking others and playing the victim, he is actually the one flooding and polluting the History section with an incredible amount of garbage, stupidity, ignorance, nonsense, trolling, baiting, and pseudoscience.
His posts in the History section are mostly contentless junk—just a repetitive cycle of the same points and attempts to "correct" others on things he lacks the capacity to understand. He acts like a total internet bullshit generator, spinning the same threads from one post to the next, regardless of the topic, without any regard for anything else.

Regarding his grand forum legacy and his presence here on the County Executive page, there really isn't much need to waste words. He should be ashamed of his constant posturing, his arrogance, his provocations, and his general theatrics.

As for the nonsense regarding clones; it's a good thing I'm not a moderator, otherwise, any critic might find themselves facing nothing but a history of logging off in the History section.

These are his own words, with only slight modifications to accurately describe the behavior that is currently being tolerated.
This latest behavior goes beyond mere insults—it's a complete mockery of the moderation process.

Regarding Arthur Smith15 and this specific thread: it’s quite clear.
He is jumping from one post to another, hurling insults along the way.
What actual value has he added to any discussion by dropping such an inflammatory, argumentative post?

As for my own posting habits—I realize that being a frequent contributor tends to attract all sorts of commenters—but the moderator's fundamental job should be ensuring the rules are actually enforced.

There is a distinction between constructive criticism and destructive noise.
This is nothing but pure, unadulterated disrespect.

The whole point of a debate is to clash through arguments.
A person who dives into a discussion solely to attack someone else just because they used a niche Latin uzrečica contributes absolutely nothing to the conversation.
At best, they are just trolling.
Which, for the record, is also against the rules.

Arthur Smith15 said:Oh, please... save those crocodile tears for someone who actually cares. 😁 You’re out here acting like a martyr, but you’re really just the one flooding the History section with pure garbage—nonsense, stupidity, trolling, and total pseudoscience. Honestly, most of your posts are just useless filler, like you're using some internet bullshit generator to copy-paste the same old clichés from one thread to the next without a second thought. I’ve seen your whole track record here and over on the County Executive boards—points, bans, whining, trolling, spamming, and endless appeals... You should be embarrassed by all this constant complaining and playing the victim. 🤦

Regarding that nonsense about clones; lucky for you and the pollster that I'm not lonetrucker4, otherwise you both would have been looking at a history of logging off a long time ago.

This post really isn't appropriate. Whether or not to issue a ban depends on the general moderation policy, but stuff like this should be deleted immediately, and the user should be told to cool it with these kinds of posts.

Thanks

Daniel Ward87 said:This post is frankly beneath us. Whether someone gets banned or not depends entirely on how the moderation team handles things, but posts like this should be wiped immediately, with a clear warning sent to the user to restrain themselves from such outbursts in the future.

That’s just a post from... The County Executive.Not even about history and historical topics.

Casey Bennett said:that's a post from theCounty Executive, not from the history section.

My apologies—that was my mistake.
I relied too heavily on the search engine and didn't double-check the title properly.
Regardless, the post still reflects the kind of attitude you see from users in our history and historical topics sections.

Anthony Nguyen81 said:... I've already asked the moderator to pay more attention to the constant jumping in, the insults, and the general nonsense, but unfortunately, to no avail.

The established moderator establishment doesn't forward—or rather, share—requests like yours with me. For that reason, I wasn't even aware of your issue until now...
As a prospective moderator, I can only offer a generalized opinion on this matter, especially since I lack the necessary expertise in history and historical topics to weigh in there—and frankly, I have no interest in doing so:

Your post count isn't small, which significantly increases the odds that you won't be "liked" by certain people (to be clear, I find you perfectly likable)...
@Arthur Smith15 (though it could easily be anyone else) is, in my view, justified in being "angry" at you.

With that many posts, you are almost certainly a "main character" for most users; and that kind of forum engagement inevitably fuels the frequency of those threads populated by such "universal main characters"...

People expect their posts—those containing somewhat quality content—to remain on the front page for at least a few moments after they hit send.
Diluting a debate with what appears to be "alternative history" is, for any user genuinely interested in history, an incredibly irritating move in the moment...

(If I've completely missed the mark here, then I sincerely apologize for my assumptions.)

Not really.
It would actually be productive if a person had something meaningful to contribute—if there were some actual expertise in history and historical topics.
I just took a look at his activity; he barely participates, maybe a handful of posts on the subject.

Arthur Smith15 said:Stop playing the offended victim by going off-topic and making selfish jabs; even without that, you're cluttering up the threads enough.

Arthur Smith15 said:Look at your own writing style before you mock others; acting like your own errors, lack of clarity, and unnecessary jargon make you superior isn't working.

Work on your own literacy before criticizing someone else's.

The guy seems to thrive on conflict—he’s trying to play moderator.
And that shouldn't be allowed.
Because of that, I think the moderation team really needs to have a word with him.
The whole point of Reddit should be some level of enjoyment, not dealing with an unofficial, rogue sheriff who bullies people without consequence.

He turns out to be nothing more than a Flamer and a troll—someone who spends more energy picking at other users than actually discussing the specific topics he claims to write about.

It's not just on the history threads. Just your typical flamer.

Anthony Nguyen81 said:You're wrong.
What would even happen if someone actually called out his behavior?

Nothing. If I didn't hand him a red card, I wouldn't hand anyone else one either.

Yeah, I'm softer than some of the other mods.

Boo-hoo... He could go cry about it somewhere else.

We already cleared this up regarding the County Executive subforum.

How exactly did he contribute anything to a thread just by dropping an argumentative post like that?

Don't sweat it. Stop being so sensitive.

There's such a thing as constructive versus destructive criticism.

Give me a break. I hate that old-school USSR-style jargon, where politicians would claim you could criticize "irregularities" as long as your critique was "constructive."😵

A guy who jumps into a debate just to trash someone because they used some obscure Latin uzrečica isn't adding anything to the conversation.

So, you're still refusing to admit you messed up with that Latin term.🤦 Instead of just owning the mistake (it's tiny), you've dragged it out with at least five more posts about it. Just get over it.

lonetrucker4 said:Nothing. If I hadn't handed him a red card, I wouldn't have handed one to anyone else.

So, that’s the narrative they're trying to sell us?
Is this an argument at the level of a dog-mother, or perhaps just a better word choice?🤦

Great. 👍
They’re going to hold you to that.

lonetrucker4 said:Please, don't—I absolutely loathe that old-school terminology from the USSR era, where politicians would "benevolently" claim that criticizing "irregularities" was perfectly fine, provided that the criticism remained strictly "constructive." :b onk:

How does jumping on anyone who disagrees with you—effectively nuking a discussion by pivoting from the actual argument to a critique of the person making it—actually affect the conversation?
Trolling, ad hominem attacks... it’s all just noise.
And the list just keeps growing.

Look, I’ve stated my position—it’s on the record.

lonetrucker4 said:So, you're still refusing to admit you were wrong about that Latin phrase. 🤦 Instead of just owning the mistake—which is honestly a minor thing—you’ve gone and written at least five more posts on the subject, all for nothing.

What does that even have to do with anything?

I picked up that little catchphrase from my old history professor back in Miami.
Let me just trust him—even if he taught history rather than Latin—over some random anonymous user on Reddit who managed to dig up a more common excuse.

Any public record—no matter how official—is fair game for scrutiny.
That part is fine.
What does the structure of a Latin proverb actually have to do with history and historical topics?

I mean, since we’re already on the subject—what purpose do posts like these serve when they show up under history and historical topics?

lonetrucker4 said:I found myself feeling a bit concerned about Rachel Richardson yesterday—his activity levels were uncharacterably low. He only managed about 30 posts in a 12-hour span, which is well below his usual standard.
But he made up for it overnight—he managed to churn out 50 posts between 11:24 PM last night and 5:28 AM this morning.
I suppose our diligent IT-guy is finally asleep.

lonetrucker4 said:Our dedicated IT-guy—who apparently only checks Reddit during his brief work breaks—was exceptionally active last night (April 21st/22nd): he managed 50 posts between 02:37 and 06:13. 👍

I can't be the only topic here—I assume people actually have lives to lead.

It would be quite refreshing if some discussions focused more on their intended subjects, rather than just gossiping about other users.

Arthur Smith15 is right. Rachel Richardson is basically spamming most of this History thread, and she isn't making any effort to follow the subforum rules. They should be restated here:

Discussion Guidelines
1. The goal of this subforum is learning and the exchange of knowledge, so please provide reasoned arguments.
2. Rely on relevant literature and sources during discussions. Insisting on "I think" or "I heard" type arguments without verifiable evidence will be penalized.
3. Falsifying literature or sources is strictly prohibited and punishable.
4. If you want to discuss unverified information or simply have a quick question that doesn't fit existing threads, please use the "Info Desk" topic.

For example, look at this thread I started, which already has 467 posts. Rachel Richardson has the highest count with 91 posts. That one person has written a fifth of the entire thread 🙏. And out of all those posts, how many are actually on-topic? How many actually follow the History subforum rules? Check for yourselves. If anyone finds even three historical sources or pieces of professional literature that Rachel Richardson cited to support her points, I'll buy you a beer.

She just spams and chatters (are those the right terms? 😁) through threads, so it’s no wonder people get annoyed. Then she complains about unfair treatment. I have to say, I support the backlash. Arthur Smith15 and the rest of us should get warnings for harsh posts. She needs to start getting warnings for spamming, trolling, and ignoring the History subforum rules. It's a classic case of the few against the many. 🙂

What can I even say? It might seem like I’m being harsh, but I only direct my energy toward those who pollute the discussions I actually enjoy following and participating in through their nonsense, arrogant ignorance, stubbornness, and destructive tangents. It is frankly pathetic to see someone playing the victim here—someone whose entire track record on the County Executive boards and the rest of this site shows they’ve managed to rack up a handful of minor accolades despite a years-long hyper-production of posts that has resulted in countless bans. If you tallied up their total points, they’d likely be facing several permanent bans by now. Oh, sure, they're a "victim"... if you believe that.

Anthony Nguyen81 said:(...) I picked up the uzrečica from (...) And let me trust him (...) more than some anonymous forum user on the internet who has managed to find a more common excuse. (...)

Look at this: they misspelled the Latin phrase ex nihilo, and not only did they ruin the thread on history and historical topics by stubbornly derailing my correction, but they are doing the exact same thing in their own damn "appeal."😁

Arthur Smith15, I'm right there with you. I don't hang out here constantly, but I've been lurking on Reddit since 2004. And hey, as long as the handle isn't permabanned or currently under a ban, I'm allowed to jump in with whatever nickname I feel like using.

I've known Wikiche for a long time—he’s been in the States forever. He’s a decent enough guy, so I can't really say he's totally lost the plot or anything. But, if I had to pick up on one thing, it's that Wikiche is a huge believer. Personally, I’m all about kids having the freedom to choose their own path as they grow up; I don't think anyone should be forced into a religious identity. Yet, Wikiche keeps going on about how he'd have issues with a partner who opposed baptizing their kids. To me, that’s just forcing a religion on them without giving them a choice—it feels like a kind of psychological pressure on children. Kids shouldn't be molded by nationality or religion before they're grown; they should stay free until they hit adulthood. Then, they can decide for themselves if they want to join some man-made cult, a specific nation, a religion, or both.

Honestly, Wikiche is tripping. Sorry, Wikiche, but it's the truth. Just because they are your biological children doesn't mean you have the right to impose a religion on them or strip away their autonomy. When people are denied the ability to choose, that's a form of coercion. The CDC should probably look into this...

Here we go again.

Arthur Smith15 said:What is there to say? It seems I am only blunt toward those who pollute the threads I actually enjoy reading—those who clutter discussions with nonsense, arrogant ignorance, stubbornness, and destructive tangents. It is pathetic to see someone playing the victim here—someone whose entire posting history, judging by their activity on the County Executive boards and elsewhere, consists of racking up a handful of minor infractions and countless bans; their total accumulated points would likely warrant several permanent bans. Oh, a "victim," sure you are...
There it is: they misspelled the Latin ex nihilo. Not only did they derail and pollute a thread in the history and historical topics section by being stubborn about my correction, but they are doing the exact same thing in their own "appeal." 😁

You aren't a moderator; this isn't your job.

It is truly sad that I have to be the one to point out your track record here.
You haven't contributed anything meaningful to a single thread.
Your only goal is hunting people down just to pick fights on Reddit.
You're just a Flamer—and the whole point of moderation is to stop that behavior.

@amberwalker4/">@@amberwalker4, are you still salty because I pointed out how little you understand linguistics?🙂
You even provided an example of a thread where you were the outsider.

Arthur Smith15 said:What can I even say? I’m only "rude" to people who pollute the threads I actually care about reading—those who clutter discussions with nonsense, arrogant ignorance, pure stubbornness, and destructive tangents. It’s pathetic watching someone play the victim here when, based on their track record over at the County Executive office and the rest of this site, they’ve managed to rack up a mountain of posts, endless bans, and enough accumulated points to warrant several permanent bans. Oh, sure, they're a "victim"... give me a break...

Look at this—they even misspelled the Latin ex nihilo. Not only did they derail and pollute the thread on history and historical topics by being stubborn after my correction, but they're doing the exact same thing in their own damn "appeal." 😁

Compared to Garofeeder, you're practically a saint.
http://www.reddit.com/showthread.php?t=1243549

Where’s Faro when you actually need him? ROFL..
Farooo.. hit me up.. Wikiche is gonna get you, LOL

Anthony Nguyen81 said:It’s honestly sad that I’m the one who has to point out your entire track record here on Reddit.
You haven't contributed to a single topic.

You didn't contribute anything. Like Arthur Smith15 said, you just call your own nonsense, arrogant ignorance, and destructive off-topic rambling a "contribution."

Anthony Nguyen81 said:Flamer, a moderator job should actually be enough to make you stop doing that.

I agree. The mods really should have stepped in and stopped you.

Anthony Nguyen81 said:@amberwalker4/">@@amberwalker4, you still holding a grudge because I proved you don't know the first thing about linguistics?🙂
You gave an example of a topic where you’d be stuck in second place.

Mad? Honestly, I don't even follow linguistics anymore—I have zero interest in trying to make sense of it. That’s exactly why I stick to the history and historical topics sub. You should probably just move over to the Linguistics section. 🙂?
Yeah, personally, I think... Thread starter I have 63 posts, and I’m right behind you with your 91. It doesn't matter. Let the admins compare our activity and hand out bans exactly where they belong. One by one, post by post, let the penalties roll in. Who do you think ends up getting kicked out of the County Executive's office because of this? It’s honestly pathetic that you can't find even three posts of yours that actually follow the rules of the subforum where you claim to be one of the most active users.

lonetrucker4 said:You’re getting flak from all sorts of posters here, but you just don't give a damn about them.

That's not a fair call, Zoran.
Honestly, if anyone's catching heat around here, it's you—but you just brush it off like it's nothing.

If you're gonna go around claiming people are picking on Rachel Richardson, then have the guts to be upfront and actually say who it is..

And as for Al Dent... man, he's basically your henchman and alter-ego at this point. Look, I don't have anything against the guy personally, but this forum is seriously losing its mind because of posts like his—just constant insults and cheap shots that bring everything down.