Fascist sympathizers

So, here we are, nearly two full days after the initial filing, and I find myself staring at this absolutely disgraceful situation once again. Can you actually believe the sheer audacity of it? It’s almost impressive, in a deeply unsettling sort of way, how things can spiral like this when people just refuse to follow the basic rules of engagement. Is it really too much to ask for a little bit of order? Honestly, it feels like we're just circling the drain at this point. post It remains unchanged.
Could someone please clarify things for me? I find myself wondering whether that particular post and the subsequent report to the moderators simply slipped through the cracks, or if the moderation team genuinely sees nothing wrong with this user’s logic—specifically, the idea that anyone who doesn't support Putin, or rather "the other side" (whoever that may be), is somehow some kind of fascist-lover? And what would that even mean, really? To be an enthusiast of fascism? It seems quite a leap, wouldn't you agree?
Thanks.

steelheron25 said:So, nearly two full days after I filed a report, this disgraceful post is still sitting there.
I’m asking for an explanation: did the moderators simply miss both the report and the post itself, or does the moderation team genuinely find nothing wrong with one user claiming—in their view—that anyone who doesn't support Putin, basically the "other side," is some kind of fascist-lover? (Which, if you're wondering, actually means an admirer of fascists).
Thanks.

Standard. None of this anti-Russian moderation staff is going to give you an answer. It’s been common knowledge for ages that Putinophiles can get away with anything here, including calling anyone who doesn't fall in line a "fascist" or a "fifth columnist."

They act like a pack of wolves, aggressively driving out anyone who dares to say a single word against Putin. Even the only American who used to post here is quitting the forum specifically because of the biased, and quite frankly, incompetent moderation and administration. He was harassed heavily here too.

This thread regarding Russia is increasingly looking like a local meetup for the American branch of the United States. With all due respect to my fellow forum members, I see no point in continuing to participate actively here.

👎

fadedmason3 said:Standard. None of the pro-Russian moderators are going to give you an answer. Putinophiles have been allowed to get away with anything here for ages, including calling anyone who doesn't toe their line "fascistoids" or "fifth columnists."

They just act like a pack, chasing off anyone aggressive enough to say a single word against Putin. Even the one lone Russian speaker who used to post here is giving up on this forum entirely because of how biased and—honestly—clueless the moderation and admin teams are. They harassed him relentlessly, too.

👎

Maybe he caught a glimpse of your post (which is deleted now) where you claimed the pack of Putinophiles chased away all the sane people, and then decided to crank the melodrama up to eleven, hoping some moderator hunter might swoop in and thin out that swarm of rabid Putinophiles?🤔

Don't lose any sleep over it; this isn't the first time that user has played that specific card, and I can practically guarantee he isn't actually going anywhere.
And honestly, let him stay; having a variety of viewpoints on a forum is, in my opinion, a good thing.👍
It makes the discussions interesting and keeps things moving.

What I find tedious—not that it offends me, it’s just uninspired and frankly boring—is the way people label anyone with a different opinion using uncreative epithets like "Putinophile" and such.
By "and such," I’m also talking about terms like "fascistoid," "fascistophile," and all that nonsense.

If you really have to believe that everyone who disagrees with you is part of one giant conspiracy against You...
then "pack" is actually a decent descriptor, if nothing else besides herd or flock.😬

Zachary Torres81 said:Perhaps he just caught sight of your previous post—which has since been scrubbed, mind you—where you claimed a pack of Putinophiles had chased off all the sensible people, leading him to crank up the melodrama to full throttle in some desperate hope that a moderator might swoop in to thin out that unruly crowd of raging Putinophiles?🤔

Don't lose any sleep over it; this isn't the first time that particular user has played that exact card, and I can assure you, it isn't going to lead him anywhere at all.
And frankly, why should it? To my mind, a healthy diversity of perspectives is actually quite welcome on a forum like this.👍 It’s what makes the discussions engaging and keeps things from becoming stagnant.

What I find tedious—and please understand, it isn't an insult, it's simply uninspired and dull—is this habit of slapping uncreative labels like "Putinophile" onto anyone who doesn't share your view.
The same goes for terms like "fascist-wannabe" or "fascist-lover" and the rest of that tired vocabulary.

If you truly feel compelled to believe that every single dissenter is part of one massive, unified front against You...

then even using the word pack is almost generous, if not a step up from calling them a herd or a flock.😬

I would like to kindly request that we don't cloud the issue or drift away from the actual topic into those typical, predictable bickering matches.
When I originally opened this thread, I wasn't interested in picking sides or joining a factional skirmish.
My question was specifically directed toward a certain post, one where dissenters are more or less branded as fans of fascists; a post that is not only distorted and offensive, but feels genuinely malicious in its intent.
I could easily follow suit, as both of you have, by digging through that user's past contributions to highlight his pervasive tone of condescending, pseudo-argumentative posturing, but I won't. I would truly appreciate it if the moderation team could explain why posts of that nature aren't being addressed. It seems there is a blind spot somewhere that I am clearly missing.

steelheron25 said:I’d really appreciate it if we didn't cloud the issue or veer off into these Standard back-and-forth arguments.
When I first opened this thread, I wasn't trying to pick sides or start a faction war.
My actual question was about a specific post, where someone is basically labeling anyone who disagrees with them as a fan of fascists. It isn't just a total distortion of reality and frankly insulting; it feels pretty malicious too.
I could easily go down a rabbit hole like you two and dig through that user's old posts—where that kind of condescending, pseudo-argumentative attitude seems to be their whole vibe—but I won't. I would honestly love for the moderators to explain why posts like that aren't being moderated. Clearly, I'm missing something here.

I'm not twisting anything, nor am I looking for a fight.

I think it's pretty obvious that I don't support labeling people we talk to.
It's just a cheap way to try and knock someone down a peg; it works on some people, but it doesn't work on everyone.

In my colleague's post, I'm actually pointing out the irony. The guy is throwing around phrases like "Russian-loving moderation", "Putinophile" and "pack of animals" in a thread where you are literally complaining about labeling interlocutors.😬

If only all the users here (regardless of their worldview) practiced a bit of self-censorship and decided not to use various -phile labels or animalistic metaphors, choosing instead to tackle those they disagree with using actual arguments.

Look, I'm not a moderator, but I think they're facing a massive dilemma here:

Either they have to sanction everyone; I mean, they'd have to go after the Putinophiles, the Putinoids, the homophobes, the pro-Russia zealots, the communists, the old-school nationalists, the fascists, the Nazis, the hypocritical Americans, the liberal types, and every other epithet people hurl at each other...

Or they just let users say whatever they want, which maintains a sort of equilibrium.

Option B is much easier for them, because regardless, the intellectual depth of this discussion and the level of civil dialogue is basically stuck at the fifth-grade level.🙂

Just my two cents...

I have to admit, this is the first time I’ve been labeled a Putinophile. In reality, I am quite pro-Western and regularly criticize Russia, which I suppose just shows how far some of you have drifted into conspiracy theories. By that logic, you aren't any better than the other side that treats Putin like a deity.

To be honest, I would prefer to just ban almost everyone here for nearly every single post. But that seems pointless, as your constant propaganda and mindless noise have already driven away anyone attempting to write even remotely neutrally. Closing half the threads on World News would just be foolish.

Discussions regarding Russia and Syria were once incredibly difficult—requiring endless effort and a massive amount of bans—but they have become easy enough now. This is probably the highest level of discourse we will ever see on these topics.

Now that I’ve said my piece, I should warn you not to get worked up with me; I might actually decide to tighten the moderation rules.

northernsailor8 said:I have to admit, this is actually the first time anyone has had the audacity to label me a Putinophile—which is quite rich, considering I’m staunchly pro-Western and find myself criticizing Russia on a regular basis—so it really just goes to show how far some of you have spiraled into your conspiracy theories. In that regard, you aren't any better than the opposing camp that treats Putin like some kind of demi-god.

To be perfectly honest, I would love nothing more than to ban the lot of you for almost every single thing you write, but there is simply no point in doing that, is there? Your constant propaganda and mindless shouting have already driven away anyone who actually attempted to contribute even a modicum of neutrality, and shutting down half the threads on this site would just be an exercise in futility.

The discussions regarding Russia and Syria have become, after much struggle and an exhausting number of bans, essentially a lost cause; in fact, this right here is probably the highest level of civil discourse we will ever see on these topics.

Now that I’ve laid that out, let me offer a little warning: don't push my buttons, because I might just decide to tighten the moderation criteria for real.

If I am interpreting the situation correctly, it seems that if someone dares to criticize Putin and his supporters, they just have to accept being branded a fascist by some lunatic on this forum, all while that person walks away completely unscathed (post is still sitting there, untouched). If you report a comment like that, you're basically just risking a strike against yourself, especially if the moderator happens to be feeling particularly sensitive.

I'm sorry, but it really isn't any mystery why everyone capable of decent communication has been chased off these threads, leaving behind nothing but the exact crowd we see now.

steelheron25 said:If I’m following correctly, if anyone dares to criticize Putin and his supporters, they just have to accept being called a fascist by some idiot on a forum—and apparently, there are no consequences for that (post hasn't even been touched). Reporting a comment like that seems like a gamble; you might just end up getting flagged yourself, especially if the moderator is a bit thin-skinned.

I guess it’s no wonder that everyone who actually tries to have a civil conversation gets driven away, leaving only the usual crowd behind.

I didn't really see that post as an outright label, but maybe more as a toxic, yet valid, reaction to constant provocation. If someone actually calls another person a fascist during a debate, then sure, they should probably be sanctioned.

northernsailor8 said:I didn't interpret that post as calling anyone a fascist at all, rather as something toxic, yet legitimate poking, serving as a response to constant provocations. If someone actually goes around labeling another person in a debate as a fascist or anything of that nature, then naturally, they will face sanctions.

Perhaps we should take a moment to refresh our memories regarding the rules of this thread and the subforum (first post):

...is not permitted: Responding to an insult with an insult. Engaging in trolling or responding to a provocation with further provocation. Otherwise, all parties involved in such an exchange will be sanctioned, regardless of who initiated it.

and:

We won't be bothering you with warnings about avoiding biased language in discussions anymore, as it clearly isn't necessary given how many times this thread has been extended.

So, that specific post clearly violates several rules, yet according to you, it’s perfectly acceptable.

Maybe "Putinophile" is a term that some people find distasteful, but how on earth can it be classified as a "provocation"? It simply describes a person who likes Putin, a figure whose reputation is, if anything, quite polarized—or even largely viewed favorably by certain circles—rather than being purely negative. On the other hand, when one responds to that by saying, "well, if I'm a fan of Putin, then you must be a fan of fascists," you somehow qualify that as "toxic but legitimate poking." Honestly, what kind of bizarre, twisted criteria are we working with here?

And I truly struggle to understand how a single post mentioning the word "Putinophile" cannot be considered part of a "constant provocation," especially when it sits right at the end of a series of posts utilizing terms like "junta," "democrat," or "fascistophile"—terms which, I suppose, are perfectly fine since they haven't resulted in any sanctions, have they?

Let’s settle this once and for all:
"Putinophile" isn't an insult or some troll tactic—the suffix "-phile" literally just means "a lover of"

-phile (Greek), a suffix used in compound words: a lover (e.g., Anglophile, Francophile). ...

Actually, I’d argue that’s way too soft a term for Putin’s fan club. Most of them can't even muster 0.001% of critical thought toward their idol, whom they worship daily through this massive cult of personality. Honestly, his "followers" have all the hallmarks of a fanatic religious cult....
To me, calling them "Putinophiles" isn't trolling; it's just stating a fact.....
Mind you, not every Putinophile is necessarily a die-hard devotee, but on this forum, the pro-Russia crowd definitely dominates the comment section.

Following that logic, if they wanted to call us—the ones on the other side—something similar, they should probably go with "Westernophiles." I don't mind the label at all, since I genuinely love the West and the core principles of democracy.
The Putinophiles throw around "democrats" as a slur because, to them, that's clearly something secondary, but hey, I'm fine with it.
Even being called a "Putinophobe" doesn't bother me. Why should it?

I wouldn't go for "Western-lover," though, because I don't have that blind, unconditional devotion to the West that the Putinophiles have for Putin. There is plenty about Western culture that we don't support, something you'll never see from the pro-Russia crowd. As "democrats," we're fully aware of the flaws in Western society; we don't worship it blindly, we just think it's the best system available until something better comes along. On the flip side, when Putinophiles actually complain about Putin's regime, it's usually just because he hasn't been aggressive enough against the West yet, or isn't radical enough about cutting ties and building some parallel world where not a single Western dollar or product touches Russia or its allies....

Looking back at the main complaint of this thread:
Calling people "fascistophiles" isn't some clever, "legitimate" jab, because as far as I know, nobody standing against Putin has ever praised fascism.
So the underlying message of this "legitimate" taunting is: anti-Putinism = fascism. It's like the troll wants us to pick a fascist label in a poll...
This insinuation that being anti-Putin equals being a fascist isn't anything new; it's a subtext that constantly creeps into posts from the pro-Russia crowd.

jeez... you guys even started talking about Putin here 🤣

👍

Is it really that much of a struggle to just follow Jesus's lead? I’m not out here trying to slap labels on everyone else because I know how much people hate that, and frankly, I expect the same courtesy from the rest of you.
It’s always just so much easier to churn out endless pages of text defending why the label I’ve chosen for myself is perfectly valid while simultaneously attacking every other label being thrown my way, isn't it?😵

Actually, scratch what I said about fifth grade.
The intellectual level of this conversation is more like a preschool playground.

To get back to the actual point: I’m with Bradley Diaz on this one—our Leader is basically omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent, all rolled into one.

Brian Doyle6 said:Let’s just set the record straight once and for all:
"Putinophile" isn't some insult or a way to troll people; the suffix "-phile" simply denotes "a lover of" something.>

In fact, I would go as far as to say that term is actually too mild for these "devotees of Putin," because most of them lack even 0.001% of a critical eye when it comes to their idol, whom they worship and elevate to the heavens daily through his cult of personality. You could practically argue that his "followers" possess all the hallmarks of a fanatical religious cult....
To me, calling them "Putinophiles" isn't trolling—it's just a factual description of reality.
However, one should note that not every Putinophile is necessarily a die-hard devotee, though on this forum, those favoring Russia certainly dominate the conversation through sheer post volume.

By that logic, the appropriate way to call out those of us on the opposing side would be "Westernophiles." I don't mind the label at all, because I am indeed a lover of the West and the fundamental principles of democracy.
The Putinophiles try to mock us by calling us "democrats," since to them, that's clearly something derogatory, but I'm fine with it.
Even being called a "Putinophobe" doesn't bother me or offend me—and why should it?

I wouldn't accept being called a "Westernophile," though, because I don't harbor the kind of unconditional, blind love for the West that the Putinophiles have for Putin. There is plenty of Western policy and culture that a "Westernophile" wouldn't support, something you'll never see from the Putin lovers regarding Russia. As "democrats," we are fully aware of many flaws within Western society; we don't exalt it to irrational heights, we just consider it the best option available until a better system can be built. On the other hand, if the Putinophiles criticize his regime at all, it's usually just because he hasn't been aggressive enough in clashing with the West, or hasn't been fanatical enough in terms of cutting ties, pursuing total self-sufficiency, and creating some parallel world where no Western dollar, product, or influence is allowed to touch Russia or its allies....

If I look back at the core grievance of this thread:
Calling people "fascistophiles" isn't some toxic or "legitimate" jab, because none of the anti-Putin crowd has ever glorified fascism, at least as far as I know.
So, the underlying message of this "legitimate" mockery is: anti-Putinism equals fascism—especially when the troll suggests we choose a fascist label via a poll...
That insinuation that being anti-Putin makes one a fascist isn't anything new; it’s actually a subtext that frequently surfaces in posts from the pro-Russia crowd.

A brilliant analysis by Brian Doyle6 👍 directed at someone who literally has a picture of Putin as their profile icon and is lecturing about labeling while calling others "Putinophiles." 🤦

I honestly hoped the situation would change after northernsailor8 arrived, but the gangbanging of the Putinophile is still being ignored, while the other side gets dissected and picked apart in agonizing detail. Meanwhile, northernsailor8 has turned into nothing more than a standard-issue bureaucratic moderator.

The latest glaring example was the trolling on the topic about the hand of glory, using some ridiculous Russian joke.
He just spammed the thread with a one-liner that only he found funny, and nobody else cared. 👏

There are endless examples, and the moderation has been biased for a long time, allowing the Russophiles to get away with everything. That is the massive issue here, and I don't think there's any fixing it. That's why I support Groznoy in leaving this little circle, which has been unfairly hounding him and everyone else for months without consequence.

fadedmason3 It’s like when you’re watching a slow-motion replay of a car crash—you can see everything unfolding, you know exactly where the impact is going to happen, yet there’s this strange, almost hypnotic feeling of being unable to look away from the inevitable wreckage. That’s how I feel about this whole situation. It feels less like a series of unexpected turns and more like a train that’s been heading toward a broken rail since the very beginning, and we’re all just sitting here in the dining car, sipping our coffee, waiting for the jolt. There isn't much left to say that hasn't already been whispered in the hallways of power, really.
That was a top-tier breakdown, Brian Doyle6. 👍 Honestly, when you see someone rocking a photo of Putin as their profile picture and spending their entire time waxing poetic about some supposedly all-powerful leader, it’s nothing more than blatant labeling. It’s just people slapping a "Putinophile" tag on someone else to make a point, which feels a bit reductive if you ask me.🤦

I had this little glimmer of hope, really, that once northernsailor8 finally stepped onto the scene, things might actually start shifting in a meaningful direction, but honestly? I’m starting to think I was just being overly optimistic. It’s honestly just one massive, chaotic pile-on directed at some random Putinophile, isn't it? It feels like watching a digital mob descend on a single target just because they happen to hold a certain view, much like how a sudden snowstorm in Chicago can turn a quiet street into total mayhem in seconds. Everyone jumps in, everyone gets their licks in, and suddenly you've got this overwhelming wave of collective aggression hitting one person, all while the rest of us just sit back and watch the spectacle unfold. It’s honestly wild how one side just keeps ignoring everything while the other side gets absolutely shredded and picked apart in excruciating detail, all while northernsailor8 has basically morphed into your typical, run-of-the-mill bureaucratic moderator.

The most recent, glaringly obvious example of this was that blatant trolling regarding the Hand of Glory, all wrapped up in some absurdly low-effort Russian meme.
He basically just hijacked the entire thread with those one-liners that only he finds hilarious, leaving absolutely nothing else for the rest of us to actually talk about. *Facepalm.*

It’s like looking at a rigged game where the referees have clearly picked a side; the moderation here has been biased for ages, basically rolling out the red carpet for any Putinophiles while letting them run wild, which is honestly the root of all evil in this community and I don't see a way to fix it. It feels like we're stuck in a loop where the rules only apply to certain people, and because there's zero accountability, I’m fully backing the decision for Grozan to just walk away from this circle, especially since they've spent months relentlessly picking on him while everyone else gets a free pass.

I suppose we’re just collectively deciding to gangbang anyone who dares to use the term "Putinophile" now? Seems like a bit much, doesn't it?
The way I see it, those guys are basically just collateral damage in some massive moderator conspiracy theory, if you want to get technical about it.
So, I guess you could say they’re basically just gangbanging at this point, right? Or maybe that's being a bit too generous with the description, but honestly, looking at the way everything is playing out, it certainly feels like a free-for-all where everyone is just piling on.

PS: That’s a fantastic way to put it, honestly. I mean, really, let's sit down and have a serious conversation about this whole "gang banning" craze that seems to be popping up everywhere lately. It’s one of those topics where people jump straight to the most extreme conclusions without actually chewing on the implications for a second, much like how someone might see a "No Parking" sign and immediately decide they should just bulldoze the entire street to avoid the inconvenience. You see these headlines about cracking down on certain groups, and everyone starts shouting about safety and order, which, okay, fine, we all want to live in neighborhoods where we don't have to look over our shoulders every time we walk to the mailbox, but there's a massive difference between targeting actual criminal activity and just sweeping an entire subculture under the rug because it makes the local news cycle feel more intense. It reminds me of how some cities try to solve traffic congestion by simply outlawing cars altogether—it technically stops the gridlock, sure, but you end up with a bunch of very frustrated people walking ten miles in the rain just to get a coffee. We tend to act like these social issues are simple binary switches that we can just flip from 'chaos' to 'control,' ignoring the messy, complicated reality that when you ban an entire identity or group, you aren't actually erasing the underlying problems; you're just pushing them into the shadows where they become even harder to manage and much more volatile. It's like trying to fix a leaking pipe by just painting over the damp spot on the drywall; the wall looks better for a day or two, but the structural rot is still happening right behind the surface, waiting for the right moment to turn into a catastrophe..😁

Zachary Torres81 said:I guess it’s just a massive gangbanging of anyone who dares to use the term "Putinophile"?
As far as I can tell, these people are clearly victims of some moderator conspiracy,
so I suppose they just get gangbanged for it?

PS: Great choice of words, gangbanning.😁

This is such a textbook occurrence and a perfect illustration of how Zachary Torres81 responds. It’s always the same pattern: you grab onto some tiny typo or some completely irrelevant detail (and you're always the first one to jump on it), then you join up with the Putin administration's fan club and spend two entire pages just relentlessly mocking someone. Meanwhile, the moderation team ignores all of this, just like they ignore those fascist types—those damn Russians pushing propaganda through Konev, whom they shamelessly label as a terrible fifth column that belongs in a gulag.

fadedmason3 said:It’s such a classic move and honestly a perfect example of how Zachary Torres81 responds. It’s always the same pattern where you just latch onto some tiny typo or some totally irrelevant nitpick—you were actually the first one to pull that move—and then you immediately join forces with the Putin administration crowd to spend two whole pages just dogpiling and trolling. Meanwhile, the moderation team just looks the other way, much like they ignore those fascist types, those pathetic Russians pushing propaganda that they unceremoniously label as a grozan fifth column that belongs in a gulag,

If you actually post something substantive, you might get a substantive response.👍
I’m not sure if you’ve noticed, but even when I’m throwing in a healthy dose of sarcasm, I frequently end up dismantling your flawed premises with actually solid arguments, almost by accident.

It was just like in my last post, where I used a simple typo to highlight your weird little obsession with feeling persecuted by the entire forum world.
(The problem is obviously everyone else; there’s just no way it could possibly be you)

PS: Still giving props to the term gangbanning.
Whether it was intentional or not, it’s a fantastic way to put it.👍

PPS: I assume it’s clear to you that the grozan era is making a comeback, and likely very soon?

We don't need this kind of discourse here on Amtrak. The moderators over at the Politics board are doing their best to keep the absolute chaos surrounding the situation in Ukraine somewhat contained. Just as a side note from my perspective: labeling someone a Putinophile versus a fascist sympathizer isn't a fair comparison of "epithets." Declaring someone a fascist simply because they don't align with the Russian side of this conflict shouldn't be an acceptable standard.
Greetings to all.