Clarification regarding PDF Alternatives

Approximately ten to fifteen of my posts have been removed without any explanation provided through public notice or private correspondence. I am certain that I did not direct any insults toward anyone or engage in similar behavior; rather, I simply revisited a few inquiries that had previously gone unanswered by the community, which I believe falls well within our guidelines.

My question is this: when a user's content is deleted, is there a mechanism available to review the original text to determine if its removal was truly justified under the rules?

If my presence here is considered an issue, please just let me know and I will refrain from contributing further.

However, I find myself in a position where I continue to write, only to have my words erased... Had I known my contributions would be met with such silence, I would not have bothered to post at all.🤷

The situation feels quite peculiar to me, as there was no warning issued nor a suspension imposed—just the sudden deletion of my words.

Could someone perhaps offer some insight into this matter and help me understand what I might have done wrong?

Admins can still see deleted posts. There’s a warning right on the thread telling everyone to read the PDF rules first—I even quoted them directly. If that still doesn't click for you, there's nothing else I can do.

Kimberly White63 said:The moderators maintain the ability to review deleted content. Furthermore, this thread includes a clear disclaimer advising users to consult the community guidelines PDF before posting, even providing direct citations from those rules. If these instructions remain unclear to you, there is little more I can do to assist.

I fully grasp why my inquiries regarding the deletion process itself were removed; that seems quite logical to me.

However, it remains a mystery to me why my subsequent attempts to ask questions—questions that simply went unanswered by the community—were also purged.

It appears that neither off-topic commentary nor personal insults have been targeted, yet my contributions have been singled out.

If I have indeed violated the forum policies, why was I not issued a formal warning or a suspension?

What is the reasoning behind the deletions? If my presence here is unwelcome, I will certainly stop posting, but it feels unjust to contribute meaningfully only to have my words erased without any explanation.🤷

To be clear, you have only offered an explanation for the posts concerning moderation matters..What is the justification for the removal of my other posts?

Look, I already answered that. Focus on the argument instead of attacking the person. But hey, if you’d rather get banned than let me just delete the post myself, be my guest.

Generally speaking, the Moderator reserves the right to remove posts if they are deemed unconstructive, off-topic, a response to a deleted thread, or simply a reaction to previously removed content, all without providing further clarification. This policy isn't limited just to the Alternative section but applies to the entire Forum
.

Kimberly White63 said:That serves as an answer; one ought to focus on the subject matter rather than attacking the individual. However, if you find more satisfaction in issuing a penalty than in allowing me to simply delete my own post, I shall yield to your preference.

Please present the deleted posts where I was actually addressing the interlocutor instead of the topic.

Keith Gonzalez said:Generally speaking, a moderator retains the authority to remove posts if they deem them unconstructive, off-topic, responses to deleted content, or similar, without providing further clarification. This policy applies not just to the Alternative section, but to the entire Forum.

Perhaps we could collectively review those removed posts to determine whether their level of constructiveness truly differs from the posts that remain visible?

For instance, have you happened to encounter any of the specific posts that were taken down?

In my ten years of participating in various online communities at regular intervals, I have never encountered any issues with moderators on any platform.

I have never had a single post removed, nor have I ever been banned.

This is a first for me, and the reason behind it seems quite transparent.

It appears the moderator simply takes issue with my perspectives and is therefore misusing his authority. Since I am not insulting anyone or violating any established forum rules, he chooses to delete my posts rather than issue a ban, as that serves as a more efficient way to silence me.

This situation pertains exclusively to the Alternative PDF section. As anyone can attest, I contribute to other sub-forums without any difficulty whatsoever.

Attempting to enforce strict logic and the scientific method within the Alternative PDF is considered grounds for deletion here.

If you visit the thread titled 'what is pseudoscience?', you will see that the moderator yielded to a user who requested that guests from the natural science PDF be excluded from the discussion.

urbanwalker72 said:Could we perhaps examine those deleted posts together to determine if they were actually more constructive than the ones that remain untouched?

For instance, have you happened to catch a glimpse of those removed messages yourself?

That isn't possible for us. That task falls strictly under the jurisdiction of the superadmins and site administrators.
Actually, I am able to view the deleted content.

urbanwalker72 said:I have truly never encountered any friction with moderators on any platform, and I have been an active participant in various online communities for over a decade.

No one has ever seen fit to delete my contributions or issue a ban.

This is a first for me. And the reason behind it seems quite transparent.

It appears the moderator simply takes issue with my perspectives, and is therefore misusing their authority. Since I am neither insulting anyone nor violating any established forum rules, they haven't banned me; instead, they choose to simply erase my posts. It is, quite frankly, the most efficient way to silence someone.

None of the moderators overseeing the alternative section hold any particular bias for or against this topic.
There is a distinct difference between expressing an opinion on a subject and targeting an individual interlocutor. You certainly aren't the only person whose posts have been removed.

urbanwalker72 said:This issue pertains exclusively to the alternative sub-forum. As anyone can readily verify, I write on other sections without any trouble whatsoever.

Attempting to enforce strict logic and the scientific method within the alternative section is apparently enough grounds for deletion.

If you visit the thread titled 'what is pseudoscience?', you will see that the moderator yielded to a user who requested that guests from the natural science section be purged from the discussion.

From what I can observe, you aren't having any issues here either. No one has suggested that your contributions lack substance. 🤷
Furthermore, no one has been "eliminated" from the thread; the door remains open for everyone to participate.

Yes, I am able to see the deleted posts.

In your estimation, what specific reason would lead you to believe my deleted posts merited such removal?

None of the moderators handling that PDF hold a definitive pro or contra stance on this issue.
There is a distinct difference between expressing an opinion regarding a subject and personally attacking a fellow participant. You are certainly not the only individual whose contributions have been removed.

Did you actually find instances of personal attacks within my deleted posts, and if so, could you please provide a quote so that we may all examine them?

Furthermore, there are certainly moderators who lean toward the "pro" side. While I cannot say if any are "contra," I possess evidence of certain moderators who passionately defend pro positions on the alternative. Naturally, I cannot disclose the contents of private messages, as doing so would violate our protocols. And I, thank God, always adhere to the rules. 🙂

From what I can see, you aren't facing any particular issues here. No one has suggested that you lack constructiveness. 🤷

I do have an issue. My posts are being deleted without any objective reasoning or established criteria.

urbanwalker72 said:In your estimation, why would my deleted posts have warranted removal?

Did you actually find instances of me harassing a fellow user within those deleted messages? If so, I invite you to quote them directly so we can all examine the context together.

Furthermore, there is certainly a presence of biased moderators here. While I cannot speak to whether there is an opposing faction, I possess clear evidence of moderators who zealously defend specific agendas on this platform. Naturally, I am unable to share the contents of private messages, as doing so would violate our community standards. And I make it a point, thank God, to always abide by the rules. 🙂

My issue lies here: my contributions are being scrubbed without any objective reasoning or transparent criteria.

It is because they are off-topic.

As I previously mentioned—moderator judgments seem to be subject only to those positioned "above" them.

And yes, there are biased individuals, though they aren't the ones managing the specific PDF thread we are discussing. 😉

Here’s a quick look at how that debate went down (by the way, I haven't touched anything as a moderator; personally, I’m staying completely out of the fray)
urbanwalker72: how do the stars actually affect people?
my response: they don't; it's just a matter of coinciding cycles.
urbanwalker72: nobody has explained the direct influence of the stars to me yet.
my response: because there isn't one—it's just synchronicity.

urbanwalker72: well, that's just the same thing in different packaging.
What follows is a barrage of questions—about twenty per post—that are practically impossible to answer. Of course, that isn't the goal; it's just an attempt to discredit the point.
Then comes the attempt to discredit the person, simply because I identified as both a scientist and an astrologer.
edit: I also forgot to mention the constant tagging of others just because we don't see eye to eye. Apparently, there's a new rule on this forum: if you disagree with me, all your arguments are automatically invalid, and I don't even need to bother responding to them. 😁

This kind of aggressive approach ruins the flow of the discussion. It's nothing more than trolling.

an example of your line of reasoning (by the way, I haven't edited anything as a moderator on this thread, and personally, I am neither for nor against the direction of this debate):
urbanwalker72: how do the stars affect people
response: they don't; it is simply a matter of matching cycles.

Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that some of my posts were removed legitimately—even though they were not. For the purpose of this discussion:

Let us refine this and extract the core essence. There were many questions and answers. Let us analyze those specific points I insisted upon, which were deleted:

urbanwalker72: do the stars influence people, and can a horoscope be made for animals?

Person A: yes
Person B: no
Person C: both yes and no

Persons A, B, and C are all astrologers.

I am merely seeking clarification on who is correct, because we are facing a logical contradiction... it is impossible for everyone to be right simultaneously.

This is vital to the continued flow of our conversation. According to fundamental logic (and even under the law), this is referred to as a 'preliminary question.'

Are you suggesting that WHAT is listed here is grounds for deletion?

urbanwalker72: nobody has explained the direct influence of the stars to me
response: there isn't one; it is just synchronicity.

Slow down. That specific answer is not the point.

The point lies in the COMPLETELY CONTRADICTORY "YES" AND "NO" RESPONSES.

Do I not have the right to ask which of the provided answers is accurate?

it follows a bombardment of clusters of questions (about twenty per post) that would be difficult to answer, which clearly isn't the goal, but rather an attempt at discredit.

Are questions regarding whether one thing affects another, accompanied by "YES" or "NO" answers, difficult to answer?

Is discrediting someone who is clearly lying and being evasive prohibited?

What is the purpose of a discussion then? Is everyone required to agree?

edit: I forgot about the persistent calling out of interlocutors due to differing views. This must be a new forum rule where any arguments from opponents are automatically discarded if there is disagreement, rendering my additional arguments unnecessary. 😁

If you and I were watching an NFL game and I asked if a player is allowed to use his hands, and I received a "YES" from one person and a "NO" from another.

Do I have no right to ask who is correct? Are such questions supposed to be deleted?

While astrology may have various sub-disciplines, the very foundations upon which it rests cannot be CONTRADICTORY.

Such an aggressive approach disrupts the flow of the discussion, which is essentially trolling.

Is aggressively pursuing basic logic considered trolling?

Keith Gonzalez said:They simply don't fit the scope of this discussion.

As I have previously noted, moderator judgments are subject only to those positioned "above" them in the hierarchy.

And yes, there are certainly professionals present, but they aren't the moderators managing the specific PDF document where this topic resides. 😉

It is fundamentally inappropriate to discredit someone who is essentially selling smoke and mirrors. 🤷

Is, for instance, the debate between Vinković and Paar considered inappropriate? Or perhaps Vinković's decision to call out a school principal who squandered $100 on magical trinkets? $0.00

That would undoubtedly make certain individuals feel quite uncomfortable.

However, one must consider the fact that some 'alternative' activities are actually violations of the law, yet no one is held accountable. That is to say nothing of the practices that are unethical or physically hazardous to one's health...

Now we arrive at the core question: which carries more weight? Maintaining politeness during a debate, or addressing the aforementioned issues?

If there is an unwritten rule that prevents us from putting proponents of alternative methods in awkward positions, please just say so. I was clearly unaware of such a regulation. 🤷

For those who aren't following—we're talking about "what is pseudoscience." The last few pages have been completely choked with posts just like the ones above.

Kimberly White63 said:For those who might be lost—we are discussing the concept of "what is pseudoscience." The last few pages have been completely overwhelmed by posts similar to the one above.

Is this an objective assessment, or merely your own subjective perspective?

Isn't it more likely that my contributions simply grate on your nerves and fail to meet your personal preferences?

bluemason3 said:urbanwalker72: just the same old story in a different wrapper
One finds themselves bombarded by a deluge of questions—perhaps twenty per post—that are practically impossible to answer, which is clearly not intended to seek truth but rather to undermine credibility.
Such an aggressive posture disrupts the peace of our discussion, and frankly, it borders on trolling.

Could you please explain why your recent post, in which you attempt to discredit the actual age of astrology, is treated differently than my own contributions?

Or more pointedly—why hasn't it been removed?

If I had authored that exact same post under my own username, would it have been deleted?

The subject at hand isn't strictly "astrology," even if that is the sole focus of the current debate. Consequently, our options are quite simple: we can either split this thread into separate sections or simply begin incorporating other topics into the conversation.
To reiterate my previous point—any posts that failed to contribute meaningfully to the discussion were removed, and frankly, the identity of the author is entirely irrelevant. Every inadequate post is purged regardless of who penned it; no one enjoys special privileges here.

As far as I am concerned, astrology is not illegal (nor should it ever be 🤷), and I personally view it as nothing more than harmless entertainment. I haven't checked this thread since yesterday, so I am quite out of the loop regarding the recent back-and-forth.

Keith Gonzalez said:The subject itself isn't just "astrology," even if that's all anyone is talking about. Therefore, the solution is either to split the thread or to start discussing other topics.
To reiterate—posts were removed because they didn't contribute to the discussion, regardless of who wrote them. Any inadequate post gets deleted without exception; no one receives special treatment.

Astrology isn't illegal (nor should it be 🤷), and I personally view it as harmless entertainment. I haven't read this thread since yesterday, so I am unaware of what has been posted in the meantime.

When you claim that "no one is privileged," you are essentially insulting the intelligence of any objective reader following this topic.

Furthermore, you are asserting that discussing astrology within a thread titled "what is pseudoscience?" constitutes off-topic chatter.

Moreover, the moderator has concluded the debate regarding astrology by deciding that ASTROLOGY IS NOT PSEUDOSCIENCE, and has threatened to delete any future mentions of astrology in this specific thread.

What is an objective reader supposed to take away from that? 🤷

Astrology remains legal provided it avoids offering advice in the realms of medicine or law; otherwise, it falls under the jurisdiction of the criminal law on quackery. Unfortunately, it frequently offers such guidance, particularly regarding health matters.

There are certainly greater transgressions than simply disregarding the law. For instance, during his presidency, Ronald Reagan would consult with an astrologer when making significant decisions for the USA.

urbanwalker72 said:When you assert that "no one is privileged," you are essentially insulting the intelligence of any objective reader following this discussion.

Furthermore, you maintain the assertion that discussing astrology within a thread dedicated to the topic of "what is pseudoscience?" constitutes an off-topic diversion.

Furthermore, the moderator is... She brought the debate regarding astrology to a definitive close, firmly asserting her position that astrology is not what is pseudoscience, and she even issued a warning that any future mentions of astrology within this specific thread would be subject to immediate removal.

What should an objective reader take away from all of this? 🤷

Practicing astrology isn't actually against the law, provided that one avoids offering specific advice regarding legal matters or medical health; if they cross those lines, they fall squarely under the jurisdiction of the criminal law on quackery. It is quite a common occurrence to see people stepping into that territory, particularly when it comes to prescribing health-related guidance, which can be quite problematic.

There are certainly circumstances far more egregious than a mere disregard for the law. To illustrate, one might consider how even during his presidency in the USA, Ronald Reagan was known to seek counsel from an astrologer when faced with making significant decisions.

I must respectfully disagree; engaging in such off-topic discussions would be quite a departure from our intended course of conversation. Just a single word? It seems we have barely scratched the surface of this conversation, much like a light drizzle attempting to soak through parched Texas soil. I find myself waiting with great anticipation to see how this dialogue unfolds. If we were to engage in a spirited debate regarding astrology—and I mean a truly biting, witty exchange where everyone takes a little jab at one another—it might actually be entertaining. Of course, not everyone would have the stomach for it, but I suspect those who have consistently maintained that specific, provocative tone would be most eager to participate. Then again, looking at why certain posts keep getting deleted, it seems some people are far more interested in being inflammatory than in actually holding a conversation! 🙂

If the government decides to let astrologists run the show, then so be it; however, if someone chooses to fall for their empty promises and ends up being misled, that individual bears the full weight of their own responsibility.

Keith Gonzalez said:No, discussing this would be considered off-topic. Just enough. Let’s talk about astrology, but let’s do it by actually roasting one another. I mean, literally. Not everyone will be up for it, obviously, but those who want to join in should probably adopt a different tone than what we've seen so far—otherwise, you're just going to keep seeing your posts get nuked by the mods. 🙂

While I certainly respect the sense of solidarity among moderators—given they often take on the thankless tasks that everyone else avoids—this level of blatant partiality has become quite excessive.

First off, I am certainly not having a one-sided debate here. Everyone is discussing this exact same topic. It seems to me that my posts are being removed under the pretense that astrology is off-topic, yet all the other discussions regarding astrology remain untouched.

Is there any reason why someone wouldn't be allowed to just jump into a conversation and ask, "What are your thoughts on homeopathy?"

What can I possibly achieve here?

Simply stating that "we were just joking around with each other" does not constitute a valid justification for deleting my posts.

Perhaps the federal government should simply hand the reins over to the astrologers. If someone decides to betray a confidence or compromise another person's story, the responsibility lies solely with them.

I find myself quite surprised by the conclusion you have reached. 😕

Following pseudoscience can pose genuine risks to one's physical well-being, regardless of how convincing or authoritative the rhetoric might seem.

A while back, drago Plečko utilized herbal infusions rooted in ancient Indian medicinal traditions—a legacy of ancestral wisdom where the recipes are so timeless they were essentially written in the stars.

After consuming a medicinal tea, a child suffered severe lead poisoning. To be clear, both the child and their parents had given full consent to the treatment. While there have been other cases of lead poisoning involving this product, the consequences weren't nearly as devastating as what happened here. If you want to find the truly bizarre part of this story, the same lead-laced tea actually poisoned drago Plečko himself. He is the one distributing these teas, which means he clearly believes in the efficacy of his own product. In the end, everyone just looked the other way and let the whole thing slide.

Based on your reasoning, am I to understand that no one here carries any responsibility for answering?

My posts keep getting flagged and removed because of entries like this. I honestly can't help but wonder: what exactly would prevent people from reading this?