Deleting posts

Alex Cook said:I was scrolling through this thread this afternoon, right when it hit about a hundred posts. If you're referring to someone else and not this specific post, then I'll just go ahead and throw myself under a bus now...

But if you *are* talking about this post, buckle up, because here we go.
Getting into his character isn't—and shouldn't be—the main point of this thread, but damn, here we are. We could spend all day bickering over semantics—whether it's "trolling," "flaming," or just some kind of snarky sarcasm—but one thing is crystal clear: that post (specifically those first two sentences, let's be real) does absolutely nothing to lower the tension in this thread. And honestly, as the moderator of this damn subforum, it's your job to keep that tension at a minimum. You're failing at it—not because you lack experience, knowledge, or the actual skill, but because you're being extremist and impulsive. Which, funny enough, are basically the exact opposite of the qualities you need in a moderator. 🙂

None of this would even be an issue if you were acting alone. You could have your little Don Quixote moment, charging at nuclear power plants armed with nothing but nothing, and frankly, I wouldn't give a damn. But you aren't alone; there are other people here whose usernames are sitting right next to yours on the front page. Even if you don't care about your own credibility or authority, at least do it for their sake and just stop for a second. 🙂

I’d love to believe I'm not just barking at the moon here, but I've lived too long and spent too much time on this forum to keep swallowing fairy tales from the Brothers Grimm.

Thanks for listening, folks.

I agree, they really didn't need to go there.

feralpilot0 said:So much for transparency—and the supposed end of the old guard's grip on power. Is anyone actually surprised? 👍

I don't see what's so unclear—really?
I’d say this guy would actually be a real leftist if he tackled the actual issues that leftist critique requires—instead of just generalizing everything under this new wave of American quasi-fascism—but my post gets deleted. Is anyone even listening?
Is that actually normal to you?

Generally speaking—what is with this approach to censorship on the Politics forum? One side gets to write whatever they want and troll at will, while everyone else just finds their posts deleted preemptively. Is that how we're playing things now?
Could you all try taking a more objective stance for once—stepping away from the topics you moderate—and actually realize that different viewpoints exist? 😲

Which aren't necessarily criminal just by existing—right?
It feels a bit surreal—if I’ve read the room correctly—to be explaining this to the leftists.

Given that you're calling for their excellencies to convene and settle things behind closed doors—handcuffs included—I have my doubts about whether anyone actually understands what’s going on here.

William Gonzalez3 is going down—all because of the irony of it all. Honestly, aren't you all a bit embarrassed to be publicly slapping down one of your own like this? Unbelievable.

Mod power trips—pretty standard stuff on this forum, and honestly, everywhere else too.

feralpilot0 said:For all we know, maybe Monica Lewinsky was just trying to fix a stuck zipper. Who knows?

Yeah...
I mean, maybe someone would try to silence her for having an opinion on overfishing Atlantic bluefin tuna just because she once dealt with a busted zipper. Who knows... I guess it all depends on whether they think she's "one of them" or not...

Alex Miller3 said:Yeah...
I mean, maybe someone would try to silence her for having an opinion on overfishing Atlantic bluefin tuna just because she once dealt with a busted zipper. Who knows... I guess it all depends on whether they think she's "one of them" or not...

Yeah, right—as if regular folks on a forum have any power to censor anyone. 👍
That’s exactly why this thread exists in the first place.

If this had been some genuinely significant political event here in America or anywhere else on the global stage, I might have actually had something to say—you know, you can't just stir the pot without reason—so it's obvious there would be crowds, penalties, and clashes and all that...

But this? This is nothing. There isn't anything here worth a penalty, an argument, or even taking up space on this forum.

I fully support the decision to lock this thread.

feralpilot0 said:So much for transparency—and the supposed end of the old guard's grip on power. Is anyone actually surprised? 👍

I don't see what's so unclear—really?
I’d say this guy would actually be a real leftist if he tackled the actual issues that leftist critique requires—instead of just generalizing everything under this new wave of American quasi-fascism—but my post gets deleted. Is anyone even listening?
Is that actually normal to you?

Generally speaking—what is with this approach to censorship on the Politics forum? One side gets to write whatever they want and troll at will, while everyone else just finds their posts deleted preemptively. Is that how we're playing things now?
Could you all try taking a more objective stance for once—stepping away from the topics you moderate—and actually realize that different viewpoints exist? 😲

Which aren't necessarily criminal just by existing—right?
It feels a bit surreal—if I’ve read the room correctly—to be explaining this to the leftists.

Given that you're calling for their excellencies to convene and settle things behind closed doors—handcuffs included—I have my doubts about whether anyone actually understands what’s going on here.

William Gonzalez3 is going down—all because of the irony of it all. Honestly, aren't you all a bit embarrassed to be publicly slapping down one of your own like this? Unbelievable.

This is perfectly normal behavior for any group, organization, or company. Especially when we aren't talking about a democratic setup or private ownership where the management structure is established from the top down—starting with the owner rather than through democratic elections. Making everything public just serves as a way to vent frustration. Nobody likes everything, and there are sub-forums I stay away from simply because the moderation style is irritating. That said, I think making a circus out of this or sparking fights among moderators would cause more harm than good. I’m not claiming to be the ultimate authority on what matters, but regardless of how much born anarchists might enjoy the chaos, I’d say constructive progress is unlikely. Whenever things get even slightly serious, unnecessary arguments break out and drag on far too long.

However, if the mods of this specific PDF actually referred people to the PZK, there's really no point in dragging the issue out or playing the blame game now.

feralpilot0 said:Yeah, right—as if regular folks on a forum have any power to censor anyone. 👍
That’s exactly why this thread exists in the first place.

The real issue here isn't just about one specific thing; it's about how we even got to this point and why, in my humble opinion, this thread shouldn't be locked yet. René Bitorajac, his song, and the drama surrounding them are really just the catalyst. In this context, they're secondary because we're actually debating much larger, more fundamental principles.

I realize that moderating this forum is a volunteer gig, and I truly respect the fact that the moderators and super-mods put in their own free time and effort to keep this place somewhat civilized and organized for all our different discussions. It makes total sense that they have more authority than the "regular" users due to those extra responsibilities. Most of them do a solid job, and I've actually gone out of my way to praise some of them in the dedicated thread.

However—and I’ve tried to point this out to the forum leadership multiple times now—things work very differently over in the Politics sub-forum. There's a huge roster of moderators there, and while I have nothing against most of them, there are a few who are incredibly biased. They seem to hand out red cards in bulk, which frequently ends up leading to outright bans.

I’ve been around here since 2009, mostly active, and in seven full years, I’ve only picked up a handful of red cards. Up until a few months ago, I had never once been banned. Then, suddenly, the cards started flying... 😁 ...it's just been one ban after another, some for three days, some for seven. Over the last two months, I’ve spent more time as a "gray" user than a "blue" one, and most of those red cards came from the exact same moderator, lonebadger6, along with a couple from FranKrsta, and then Bradley Sanders4 slapped me with a hate speech card on the Tomić thread—which carries a 500-point penalty—though super-mod William Bennett53 downgraded it to a different violation worth 200. Right now, I’m sitting at 216 private messages (out of a limit of 200) because the last twenty or so were all from moderators, mostly just notifications about cards. I'll admit part of the problem might be me—I can be pretty stubborn—but on the flip side, I don't go around trying to break the rules on purpose. Other users are complaining about these same moderators too, so I don't think I'm the only one feeling this way.

bluemason3 said:This is perfectly normal behavior for any group, organization, or company. Especially when we aren't talking about a democratic setup or private ownership where the management structure is established from the top down—starting with the owner rather than through democratic elections. Making everything public just serves as a way to vent frustration. Nobody likes everything, and there are sub-forums I stay away from simply because the moderation style is irritating. That said, I think making a circus out of this or sparking fights among moderators would cause more harm than good. I’m not claiming to be the ultimate authority on what matters, but regardless of how much born anarchists might enjoy the chaos, I’d say constructive progress is unlikely. Whenever things get even slightly serious, unnecessary arguments break out and drag on far too long.

However, if the mods of this specific PDF actually referred people to the PZK, there's really no point in dragging the issue out or playing the blame game now.

We aren't talking about a board meeting here; we're talking about moderation—a principle that everyone, regardless of their political leanings, has to live by. If the rules are supposed to be universal, then why all the backroom deals and whispering in the shadows?

That said, you have to admit—watching volunteers defend private ownership structures and the privileges they grant is honestly ridiculous.
Especially when one of those volunteers gets so swept up in their tiny bit of micro-management that they actually start driving users away—it makes you wonder who is really pulling the strings here.

feralpilot0 said:We aren't talking about a board meeting here; we're talking about moderation—a principle that everyone, regardless of their political leanings, has to live by. If the rules are supposed to be universal, then why all the backroom deals and whispering in the shadows?

That said, you have to admit—watching volunteers defend private ownership structures and the privileges they grant is honestly ridiculous.
Especially when one of those volunteers gets so swept up in their tiny bit of micro-management that they actually start driving users away—it makes you wonder who is really pulling the strings here.

No, we're talking about an executive management meeting. 👍 😁
Sure, an employee at an electric company like ExxonMobil might be a customer too, but that doesn't excuse them from professional standards or business confidentiality.

It’s just like those people who get way too invested in playing the moral arbiter; no matter how much they try to "fix" things, they always find a way to blame the situation instead of looking in the mirror. 😁

feralpilot0 said:We aren't talking about a board meeting here; we're talking about moderation—a principle that everyone, regardless of their political leanings, has to live by. If the rules are supposed to be universal, then why all the backroom deals and whispering in the shadows?

That said, you have to admit—watching volunteers defend private ownership structures and the privileges they grant is honestly ridiculous.
Especially when one of those volunteers gets so swept up in their tiny bit of micro-management that they actually start driving users away—it makes you wonder who is really pulling the strings here.

The principle definitely isn't the same. The guys in blue have this massive privilege where they get to hang out in the moderator subforums, and they’re basically immune to getting flagged—only the supermods and admins can touch them, while us regular blue-shirt folks can't flag them at all. Even if you look at the posts in the forums they don't moderate, it's obvious that "regular users" are treated differently because of their status. So, the real question isn't why things are happening behind the scenes, it's why they're putting on such a massive show for the public.

bluemason3 said:No, we're talking about an executive management meeting. 👍 😁
Sure, an employee at an electric company like ExxonMobil might be a customer too, but that doesn't excuse them from professional standards or business confidentiality.

It’s just like those people who get way too invested in playing the moral arbiter; no matter how much they try to "fix" things, they always find a way to blame the situation instead of looking in the mirror. 😁

People constantly hide behind "professionalism" and "confidentiality"—usually those who have some shady family business they’d rather keep out of the light.
And honestly? It would be a nasty ad hominem attack—not to mention just plain trolling—if anyone actually held their colleagues to the same standards they apply to regular customers.

feralpilot0 said:People constantly hide behind "professionalism" and "confidentiality"—usually those who have some shady family business they’d rather keep out of the light.
And honestly? It would be a nasty ad hominem attack—not to mention just plain trolling—if anyone actually held their colleagues to the same standards they apply to regular customers.

Collegiality and trade secrets are the modus operandi for every company I've ever worked for—ranging from perfectly organized outfits to those shady, politically-connected mess halls. It’s the bedrock of any human community. You’re collegial with friends, family, and so on, unless you have some major social issues. Usually, you just avoid groups that don't suit you, which helps people understand each other better, but there's always some level of internal camaraderie baked in, probably dating back to single-celled organisms.

The second point is an experienced "fact" (or at least an impression). It applies to forums, companies, and families alike. People who constantly hunt for errors and problems—even people I've known since birth—always maintain the same attitude and narrative regardless of the context. Much like how conservatives or liberals act (though most of us are somewhere in between), our mode of operation is tied as much to the context as it is to our personal character traits and the lens through which we view things. That isn't inherently bad. For instance, I know a small firm where the boss intentionally keeps an employee with Asperger's around specifically to act as a corrective force because he's the only one who will say things directly to your face. But none of these perspectives are comprehensive enough to make things work if we relied on them exclusively. Even the "opposition" functions as a corrective mechanism, though they tend to perform much worse when they're actually in power.

Bringing this back to our specific case: everything has its flaws, and it's good to point them out. But when you overfocus on them—when there's this obsessive need to clarify every little thing endlessly and at any cost—you quickly cross a line where the process starts doing more harm than good. It's like if the mods, management, or the owner were constantly trading verbal blows in public; it's perfectly normal for people to have different opinions, but constant infighting is counterproductive.

I’m honestly lost here
Is this thread actually about René Bitorajac?
Or is it about people deleting posts within the music discussion section?
Is this supposed to be a thread about Bradley Sanders4
Or is it just about how this forum is managed?
What on earth is the point of this thread?

motive: frustration with the "leftist" moderation on the politics board
trigger: René Bitorajac

+ larpurlartistic sidekicks

Daniel Ward87 said:In my book, there isn't one, but what really matters is the specific thread where the debate is happening.
I can't tell you off the top of my head why certain posts stay up while others get nuked. It all depends on the context of the thread itself, which is why we always ask people to be more specific—like dropping a link to the thread or the exact post. To be fair, I haven't moderated Politics in a while, so I might not be the best authority here.

True, but you're a supermod, and as we all know, you used to be an admin. Plus, you significantly improved that "chronically problematic" Religion sub-forum (along with another section, thanks to the initiative of several other forum members back then and, let's not forget, the respected owner who agreed to the proposals), so those are your "credentials," so to speak. Maybe Politics needs someone like that.

Alternatively, why not open a thread for appeals/comments regarding the Politics sub-forum (similar to what other forums have had since the beginning)? That way, these issues could be handled internally, and appeals/comments would only go to the PZK if they couldn't be resolved there or if the admin needed to intervene.

The PZK shouldn't be clogged up with appeals about moderating Politics threads (which seems to account for about 85-95% of all PZK appeals at any given time). This would lighten the load for the moderators of this sub-forum who are already overwhelmed, and users would eventually have a chance to resolve disputes or questions about moderation in certain Politics threads without them being rushed to closure (which sometimes happens when people jump in from other sub-forums, starting off off-topic or trolling, leading to threads being locked).

Just an idea...

bluemason3 said:motive: frustration with the "leftist" moderation on the politics board
trigger: René Bitorajac

+ larpurlartistic sidekicks

I had no idea this topic was such a massive umbrella term.😁

bluemason3 said:motive: frustration with the "leftist" moderation on the politics board
trigger: René Bitorajac

+ larpurlartistic sidekicks

Whom you—if I'm not mistaken—neither moderate nor have ever moderated.

(And how do you respond to the complaints from people whose posts were deleted in that thread over there?)

Susan Price30 said:True, but you're a supermod, and as we all know, you used to be an admin. Plus, you significantly improved that "chronically problematic" Religion sub-forum (along with another section, thanks to the initiative of several other forum members back then and, let's not forget, the respected owner who agreed to the proposals), so those are your "credentials," so to speak. Maybe Politics needs someone like that.

Alternatively, why not open a thread for appeals/comments regarding the Politics sub-forum (similar to what other forums have had since the beginning)? That way, these issues could be handled internally, and appeals/comments would only go to the PZK if they couldn't be resolved there or if the admin needed to intervene.

The PZK shouldn't be clogged up with appeals about moderating Politics threads (which seems to account for about 85-95% of all PZK appeals at any given time). This would lighten the load for the moderators of this sub-forum who are already overwhelmed, and users would eventually have a chance to resolve disputes or questions about moderation in certain Politics threads without them being rushed to closure (which sometimes happens when people jump in from other sub-forums, starting off off-topic or trolling, leading to threads being locked).

Just an idea...

It would just be unnecessary double work. That thread would end up buried under constant appeals, and if someone wasn't happy with the response there, they'd just end up back here anyway...
If the moderators feel that's necessary, they'll open it... But let's get back to the topic at hand...

Susan Price30 said:Whom you—if I'm not mistaken—neither moderate nor have ever moderated.

(And how do you respond to the complaints from people whose posts were deleted in that thread over there?)

The answers he provided were regarding general questions about how the forum administration works. It doesn't really matter that those responses came from someone acting as a moderator on Politics...

Moderating this thread isn't your job...

Ha, it looks like even the political commentary on PL is gone...

Maybe it's better if I just stay quiet...

Benjamin Reyes52 said:Ha, it looks like even the political commentary on PL is gone...

Maybe it's better if I just stay quiet...

It’s out of our hands entirely. I can't give you a better answer than that, because frankly, we have no idea what's going on with our colleague, other than the fact that he's alive and well.

Charles Fox10 said:It’s out of our hands entirely. I can't give you a better answer than that, because frankly, we have no idea what's going on with our colleague, other than the fact that he's alive and well.

Man, thank God he's doing okay—I was actually starting to get a little worried there! But wait, hold on a second... how can you say you "don't know" what's up with him, yet you somehow know he's perfectly fine? If you know he's alive and well, you've gotta be in contact with him, right? And if you're talking to him, then you should definitely have some idea about what's actually happening...