Feedback message

Since the moderator here keeps deleting my posts and pointing me toward this specific document, I’m just going to say it right here:

As someone who has been following the Alternative sub-forum for quite some time—even if I don't check in every single second—I have to say that appointing someone as moderator who has never actually contributed a meaningful thought or participated in a single real discussion is a complete and utter failure. The only time I’ve even seen her post is in the casual chat threads—where her contributions are basically just emojis or brief comments about baking cookies or being at the beach, which has zero connection to the "Alternative" subject matter—or when she's issuing moderator warnings or bickering with users about why their posts were deleted under the PDF improvement proposal thread.

To me, it feels like appointing someone who hasn't even finished high school to moderate a forum dedicated to the natural sciences or psychology—or worse, putting someone in charge of a film forum who hasn't actually watched a single movie. Look, as much as the "Alternative" scene rejects the mainstream, it still requires a certain level of baseline knowledge—the kind all the other moderators clearly possess—to actually manage things effectively (unlike, say, the threads for lonely hearts, social hangouts, or partying).

The result of this is objectively incompetent moderation. We're seeing warnings slapped onto completely irrelevant and misplaced threads—like telling people to "stay on topic" in the True horror event thread, which has never once been an issue, or lecturing people in the raw food thread about not talking about anything else besides what they're eating—as if we’re some kind of mindless animals. On top of that, there is the unjustified deletion of massive amounts of content that doesn't break a single rule. It’s reached a point where actual communication is becoming impossible; people simply lose the will to write when they spend time crafting a post only to have it wiped out thirty minutes later.

Every other moderator on this platform is here because they genuinely care—it's a hobby, a passion, an interest—and you can actually learn something from them. They provide information, and nobody has ever had these kinds of issues with them. Personally, I cannot wrap my head around the motivation of someone agreeing to police discussions on topics they don't care about and know absolutely nothing about. I don't know if it's a surplus of free time, a lack of personal interests, or just a desperate need for validation and to be perceived as a "nice person." Whatever the reason, that's her life and her problem, but in my opinion, it was a terrible decision for the integrity of this forum.

So, there it is.

I noticed you didn't actually list the specific questions you were complaining about—which is why I sent you here in the first place—but I'll answer you anyway so we can put this to rest. Posts get deleted (not just yours) because of being Off-topic, bickering, or insults. Since some of briskbison55's posts were removed, any posts referencing them or quoting them were also wiped, especially if they just added to the arguing. Even if a post contained a useful link or something relevant to the topic, if it was attached to a mess, it gets nuked. It isn't our policy to surgically remove only the problematic parts of a post.
Regarding this thread, please focus on "proposals" in the title rather than "complaints." Anything regarding warnings, deletions, or strikes should go through direct messages or this PDF improvement proposal.

For the part below, it would be helpful if you provided links to the disputed posts and my moderation actions. I don't recall ever saying you could only post about what you eat.

leaving moderator warnings in completely irrelevant and misplaced places (for example, warning people to stay on topic in a peaceful and benevolent thread like True horror event which has never been an issue? Or telling us not to talk about anything besides food in the raw food thread—as if we're pigs?), and the unjustified deletion of numerous posts that don't break any rules.

The mods from the alternative PDF, along with all other mods and admins, have access to all deleted posts and can always verify someone's claims.

And thanks for following my life so closely. 😍

I didn't come here to ask anything about my own threads—I am strictly here to leave a message and comment regarding my thoughts on your general selection as a moderator for this alternative platform. I have zero intention of posting links; anyone can see what’s happening, and frankly, time will tell—other people have eyes, too, and they’ll figure it out themselves.

As for those deleted posts, the reality is that I was winning 2-0. This is the second time Seven Nation Army has charged in with baseless claims to attack Jason Grant, and both times—with help from Lorelai—I used actual arguments to drive him into a corner until he started dodging the point. The first time happened during that debate about cannabis oil, where he attacked Jason Grant by calling him stupid and claiming the oil is made only from seeds—which was a pathetic fail, considering the oil comes from the buds. Just like that first time, he started pulling the "stay out of this, I'm talking to Jason Grant" card. I was actually enjoying the exchange and was curious to see what kind of excuse he’d pull next—only for you to swoop in, completely missing the nuance of the discussion, and delete everything. You "saved" him and effectively trashed an entire morning of my effort. So, there's your reason!

Because, contrary to your approach, I find much more satisfaction in silencing someone with logic than with censorship! (Just so we are clear: deleting posts is a massive sign of disrespect toward a person.)

Besides, Seven Nation Army is just here to troll; honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if he's just some loser in real life—you really shouldn't take him so seriously. Not everyone shares your specific way of expressing themselves, and it is fundamentally wrong to censor anyone who doesn't mirror your personality.

Last time, you told me you deleted my post because it was "too negative," suggesting I should simply state my opinion in the exact same way Plant did. (I *did* state my opinion, but I refuse to mold my words just to fit whatever version of reality you've imagined!) This time, while debating Seven Nation Army, I was incredibly careful not to say anything that might offend your delicate sensibilities, ensuring my posts were perfectly civil. Yet, you deleted them anyway without any explanation, and now you're claiming it's because I was being argumentative???

Honestly, I think you are overstepping and showing total disregard for the users—as if we are all idiots. You try so hard to present yourself as this sweet, lovely person, but I don't know if you even realize how ugly it looks to arbitrarily delete posts from people who are genuinely interested in the topic and came here to discuss, share, and joke around. Hippopotamus noted quite clearly that the forum administration's stance is to interfere as little as possible with freedom of speech—yet you aren't following that rule at all!

PS. That link you sent isn't working, and my PDF improvement proposal was that you should be removed from that position entirely.

Nicole Johnson20 said:Then you come along, totally missing the point, wipe everything out, "save" him, and just waste my entire morning of hard work. That's why!

I really am sorry. 😢 My apologies.

I don't know if you realize that deleting things without cause is pretty disrespectful to the people who actually care about this topic and came here to discuss, share, or just hang out.

Why do you think the deletion was unjustified? Just because you don't like it?

PS. Your link isn't working,

link.

I honestly couldn't tell if that apology was meant to be sarcastic or what.

No, I don't think it's baseless just because I personally dislike it—I'm saying it's baseless because there were absolutely no grounds for a deletion in the first place. You shouldn't be able to just wipe someone out simply because they don't share your specific writing style or because you happen to find their tone negative.

I post on other subforums using different handles, yet I use the exact same writing style—and NO ONE HAS EVER deleted my posts due to "back-and-forth" arguing (let alone systematically scrubbing everything I write). Even when there is some level of what you might call "clashing," I sometimes even play devil's advocate specifically to spark a real debate. In fact, the only time I’ve ever had a post removed was when I was posting negative takes on conventional medicine in the Psychology section—which actually violated that specific forum's rules, but it wasn't because of any arguing.

I've already covered most of this in my previous post, anyway—it's not exactly difficult for me to recap. I just wanted to lay out my observations here as a bit of feedback, because I don't think you realize how it feels to users when you constantly try to force them into a box—and then refuse to let them participate in the discussions if they don't fit.

This isn't about my personal style or anyone else's. It’s pretty simple: if a post gets deleted—whether it's for insults, going off-topic, or whatever—then usually all the replies tied to it go down too. I laid this out clearly in my first response. If someone's posts are removed for specific reasons, there’s no point in keeping the replies that reference them or quote the problematic content. Half the time, those threads just spiral into off-topic arguments anyway.
Whether there's merit to my argument or not, I'll leave that up to the mods.

Yeah, and when you deleted my post about psychiatry—that was an insult. Whether it’s labeled "Off" or just a response to something else, it's the same thing. When you wiped out Seven Nation Army’s post about how that vegan restaurant downtown is going to tank if they don't add meat to the menu—that’s an insult too. And when you scrubbed Jason Grant’s post where he called out some girl for lying after she gave this absolutely wild speech about certain pills—that’s also an insult, whether it's "Off" or a direct reply...

I’m not even on this forum that often, but I managed to catch all of this in a split second before the posts vanished—who knows how many tons of content you’ve actually purged? Other users—from the science section, if I recall correctly, where there’s never been any bickering unless you count people intentionally messing with each other—have also been dropping by to ask what's going on and why everything is being deleted.

I just came here to say that I think you’ve gone way too far. While I get that you're trying to clean up "Off" topics and insults—and maybe doing it a bit too aggressively (because honestly, it doesn't matter if someone goes slightly off-topic once in a while—like asking about summoning demons in a True horror event thread instead of under Magic and mysticism)—on the flip side, you are severely undermining free speech and the social fabric of this forum. People should be allowed to be who they are.

And frankly, I think that second point is just as vital.

I am in complete agreement with Nicole Johnson20 regarding her assessment. Appointing this specific moderator was a poor decision, not necessarily because of the selective, frantic deletions, but because she allows discussions to veer wildly off course. By permitting the destruction of threads while making any actual dialogue—whether for or against a point—impossible due to the way titles are handled, everything eventually turns into a total mess. It is a predictable pattern: when someone fails to grasp a concept, they simply destroy it and retreat into the areas where they feel competent.

The lateral effect here is that whenever a new forum member arrives with a fresh perspective, they become collateral damage, falling victim to the sheer idiocy and incompetence that the moderator permits under the guise of "freedom of expression." There is a massive distinction between offering an alternative viewpoint and the persistent, emotional denial of reality we see here.
Which brings us back to the fact that everything eventually turns into a total mess... it is patently obvious that this represents the absolute ceiling of her capabilities...

Nicole Johnson20 said:All the other moderators participate because they genuinely love the subject matter and have a hobbyist interest in these topics; you can actually learn a lot from them and get informed if you care, and nobody ever had issues with them.

Why lie about there being no problems? It feels like you're just trying to paint a fake distinction between the mods, when you know perfectly well there was friction between the users pushing the mainstream view and those leaning toward alternative perspectives.
Then there's the issue of a certain moderator's bias toward mainstream medical views—even after Ethan Barrett22, myself, and a few others politely explained how we play by the rules here, things were still messy.😒
It was a massive, drawn-out debate, both here and on other boards, which is exactly why Michelle Robinson stepped in to bring some order to the chaos—something even the most hardcore alternative users described as the arrival of a "Frozen sun."
Just look at how Liana acts in the "praise the moderator" threads.

Don't pretend you don't know what happened; the whole place was buzzing about it, especially in the raw food thread where you're most active.
On top of that, I'm pretty sure you notice how you tend to wander way too far off-topic in many posts, spiraling into endless tangents even after a moderator tells you to knock it off.
And then there's how often you resort to personal jabs in the raw food section; like when I was congratulating Bruce Willis on being vegan for a few months now, you just deadpanned, "How is that not clear to you???"

Let's be clear: in the raw food thread, we're talking about Plant-based nutrition, and not supporting the slaughter of animals.

But you, Nicole Johnson20, couldn't even bother to address my point about how people have emotions; instead, your main goal was just attacking the moderators because they deleted your posts or gave you a warning.

So, everyone else deserves your understanding, but apparently, the moderators who tell you to stop going off-topic don't.
It’s honestly pretty spoiled and disrespectful, both to the staff and to the rest of the community.☕

Michelle Robinson;65475045]. Posts were wiped (not just yours) because of off-topic chatter, bickering, and insults. Since briskbison55's posts were removed, anything referencing them or quoting them was also cleared out, along with several others that were basically just endless arguing.

:
Then, if we're looking at the specifics, you have to look at how Machild used to write (once he switched over to the alternative board), how Plant112 eventually leveled out and became decent enough, and also
Come back 7Nationarmy, and he is still there
It was really this trio that caused the entire meltdown on the alternative board.
The truth is, none of those three ever contributed a single (1) constructive thought to that board, and things only started looking up once Michelle Robinson arrived.
Liana will eventually find common ground with the moderator; it’s mostly just a misunderstanding, and she needs to realize that engaging with trolls is just a fast track to giving herself an ulcer.

But Jerry Robinson56 is the interesting one here. After clearly losing his cool attacking the moderator—so much for talking about "muddy waters"—he’s already backtracking on his own arguments. He’s acting like a fool, completely ignoring the fact that the topic involving him and Ethan Brooks59 was crucial twice over. It’s pretty brazen of him, especially considering his body of work on the alternative board... almost every second post is just him telling someone they write like absolute morons. Here’s a fresh one from today:
post #6161
"it's unbelievable how your posts permanently reek of total illiterate stupidity . is that something you're born with or are you working at it?"
http://www.forum.us/showpost.php?p=6...postcount=6161

And that’s his big talk about "muddy waters."

We still need to sanction any and all posts that violate the US forum rules, no exceptions.::Judge

Well, here’s yet another thread from my personal fan club... seriously, what is wrong with you guys? You spend all day spouting absolute nonsense, then you get upset when people call you out, or when moderators delete your posts or ban us all—why the constant whining? Honestly, maybe try learning the actual definitions of things like information, data, facts, an argument, and most importantly—what a real discussion actually looks like. Once you grasp those, then we can start combining terms and having a legitimate, reasoned debate. When you just blurt stuff out without any logic, any structure, or any supporting points, I don't know why you act so surprised when someone asks you what on earth you're even rambling about. Maybe my way of speaking frustrates you, or maybe you really are just super sensitive people with short fuses, but I get banned regularly for my style anyway, so I don't see why you're so obsessed with nitpicking other users instead of actually trying to participate in an argumentative discussion.

It is quite amusing to watch certain individuals point fingers at others, accusing them of paying for mere scraps of information 😂

The fan club 😂
My eyes and my very soul ache from having to endure such mindless posts within this club

So, whose clone are you exactly? I mean, you just registered recently, but you're already such a huge fan... you won me over pretty fast, I guess 😁

@Nicole Johnson20/">@@Nicole Johnson20
Maybe I shouldn't be sticking my nose in here—I might end up getting a warning or something—but since I don't have much to lose, I suppose I'll take the risk...
My intention is simply to offer some commentary on the points you've raised from my own perspective.

I absolutely agree that forum topics should ideally be moderated by someone who actually possesses expertise in those specific areas—someone who is genuinely fascinated by them and lives that lifestyle. However, I believe the most critical factor is that moderation remains fair and impartial, strictly adhering to the forum rules and ensuring those rules are applied equally to everyone, regardless of their niche.
Ever since Michelle Robinson joined the alternative section, I've actually noticed improvements in that direction; honestly, things used to be quite messy, significantly worse than they are now.
I won't get into whether Michelle Robinson is personally interested in the alternative scene—I suspect she isn't particularly invested—but I don't see that as a negative thing. From what I've observed over the last few months, she handles the other half of her responsibilities quite well and stays professional.
Just to be clear, while I think there is room for improvement, compared to one third of the moderators in the alternative section, she is basically a saint. 😁

Without naming names, everything you just listed perfectly describes another individual who also moderates the alternative section. This person has virtually no connection to the alternative community, yet it’s obvious they try to discredit and belittle others whenever they get the chance. They almost never issue bans to trolls, and as for their sense of fairness... well, I won't go there, especially since I was the one who started the only thread I've ever opened on this entire forum regarding that very issue.

So, while I agree that the situation could and should be better, I also remember when things were much, much worse.
From where I'm sitting, I think you're right on one hand, but perhaps mistaken on the other. At least, that's how I see it.
I hope nobody takes this the wrong way. 🙂

Jason Grant said::
Honestly, Jerry Robinson56 is being pretty interesting right now. It’s so obvious he’s just doubling down on his little crusade against the moderator. He starts rambling about some mess without even providing any context, and then—get this—he tries to push back again even after his arguments have been totally shot down. It’s almost like he’s ignoring the fact that the whole topic was actually central to both him and Ethan Brooks59 a couple of times already. To be honest, it feels a bit rude on his part, not to mention his entire body of work over on the alternative boards...
....
Well, there you have it—that's my little deep dive into the world of puddles!

I am totally on the same page as Jerry Robinson56 when I say that this alternative community has turned into a complete gutter lately. It’s become this stinking mess because certain people are polluting everything with posts that have absolutely nothing to do with the actual topics at hand. Instead of real discussion, everything just devolves into petty sarcasm and random off-topic rambling. Threads are being turned into these mindless chat rooms where pure stupidity is actually tolerated—and I’m being serious when I call it bottom-of-the-barrel nonsense. We're talking about people claiming pyramids are somehow connected to the Borg. Not to God, but to the Borg! You know, those fictional characters from Star Trek? On any other decent forum in the world, that kind of idiocy would be deleted instantly, but here, the moderators actually encourage it under the guise of "freedom of speech." Then, if you even try to ask where these wild assumptions come from or demand a single shred of evidence, you just get hit with the "everyone is entitled to their own opinion" excuse. It pushes the entire PDF improvement proposal into a realm of absolute absurdity. It basically means you can write whatever nonsense you want in any thread, refuse to answer questions, skip all logical arguments, and toss out insults along the way—all as long as you happen to be on the good side of the mods.
This whole "freedom of speech" thing feels like a total joke lately. It seems like posts get wiped out constantly if someone actually tries to call out nonsense or even just nudges one of these self-proclaimed "experts." They claim they want an "argumentative debate," but they don't actually follow their own rules! Seriously, when some "genius" drops a complete bombshell in a thread—like calling a pyramid an octahedral Pharaoh’s jacuzzi, some non-material entity, or even a juice extractor (I wish I were kidding!)—the moderators won't let you demand actual proof for such absurdity. But the second you call it what it is—total nonsense—and try to explain *why* it’s ridiculous? Boom, your post is gone. It's pretty wild how they dodge the logic but jump right in to censor the reality check!

If we’re talking about "fairness," I really feel like I need to bring up two major points here. This whole thing started when people began asking why certain posts get deleted while the actual insults and harassment are still sitting there right in front of us. And now, for the THIRD time, I’m pointing out that the specific post containing a direct ad hominem attack is still live. You guys went ahead and wiped all the other posts after that, only to decide they weren't coming back. So, that’s a pretty clear look at how the moderation is handled—it's honestly a shame because this PDF improvement proposal thread has turned into a total mess.

Jason Grant said::
We really need to stay on top of this and sanction every single post that breaks our community rules—no exceptions allowed!

Honestly, Mods, I really think we have more than enough evidence on this one. Between the constant off-topic rambling, the blatant trolling, all that spamming, and the endless insults and ad hominem attacks, there’s plenty of justification to go ahead and do exactly what he requested. Let's just wipe out all those rule-breaking posts. We should probably start by cleaning up his specific mess first, and then we can move on from there. Thank God it isn't exactly difficult to track them down!

Thanks so much! And hey, feel free to throw all the shade you want if that's what you think is necessary. Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion, after all. So, let's see what you've got!

p.s. So much for a "fair" way of doing things.
Insulting someone who holds alternative views? That’s an automatic 40-point penalty, a red card, and your post gets nuked from orbit.
But if you insult someone defending science? You just get a yellow card.

Enough said for those who actually use their brains.

Hmmmm, hmmm, sure thing, Ethan Brooks59, the moderators are definitely going to find something in that little manifesto of yours, like your constant commentary on how they run things.
And you still haven't explained why your buddy got slapped with a ban—he was busy calling our friend Ethan Brooks59 a complete moron due to some supposed innate stupidity, and then he had the nerve to suggest a straightjacket for another user, and get this, Ethan Brooks59!!, right in the middle of the "flight to the moon" thread, and now you’re claiming it wasn't deserved? Give me a break.
Ethan Brooks59, don't you feel even a shred of shame supporting people like that?????
Just a thought: maybe reflect on that.
It’s pretty obvious you’ve been getting in on the attacks against the mods too, but you just needed someone else to break the ice first—like your buddy who shamelessly suggests those straightjackets to other users.
And now you're playing the naive act, which is hilarious, considering your own thread was shut down twice and now you're here just rambling off-topic???

It’s funny how you talk about bringing order to things while completely ignoring your own mess—I don't even know what to call them, but here are a few of your gems, Ethan Brooks59:
"

I wonder if you actually have any clue who or what the Borg are? Or how they came to be?

-then in a thread about pyramids, you suddenly show this intense interest in... well, the !! Borg!!, even though the topic is actually pyramids, Ethan Brooks59.
Then you go on to say—and I'm not sure who would even follow this—
"

someone could build a pyramid from a single piece, but instead, he let hacks work on it for 20 years, messing up the walls and misaligning the main chamber... and everything turned into 'project Small town in USA[/B

]

So basically, pyramids + Small town in USA + hack work = the absolute mess that you, Ethan Brooks59, are creating.
And then comes the grand finale, which is beyond stupid:
"

"RA," acting like an all-knowing genius when he was really just drinking, eating, and partying""

Ethan Brooks59, it's a total disaster.

Ethan Brooks59, that is what a real mess looks like.
...and I won't even list the rest, since this is just from the last day or two; I don't want to go there.
I hope that from where you're standing, Ethan Brooks59, you can see that it isn't just their fingers stuck in the mud, but yours too, so I suggest you both go wash up with plenty of soap.

Ethan Brooks59 said:I completely agree with Jerry Robinson56 that lately, the entire alternative section has turned into a total swamp—a smelly mess being polluted by certain individuals whose posts never actually touch upon the topics at hand, instead devolving into nothing but petty sarcasm and off-topic rambling.

So, look, if you’re thinking of someone who has amassed 35,000 posts yet finds themselves under a ban constantly (I wonder how many they would have if they weren't? 🤦), and their posts rarely exceed a few dozen words—often just a handful—they serve as the perfect example of what you're describing. 👍
There isn't a single constructive post to be found in the whole alternative section, and pretty much everything written there consists of insults, complete off-topic nonsense, or trolling. EVERYTHING.
I agree, and it seems quite obvious that people like that are deliberately trying to turn the alternative section into a landfill.
It really isn't surprising to see in the signatures that half the forum is on ignore lists.

Broadly speaking, I think your general direction of thought is quite sound 👍, though I have a feeling that, by some strange twist of fate, you might not be perceiving the textbook examples and caricatures of trolls, the literal definitions of trolling, at all.
My apologies if I'm mistaken. 🙂

The only point where I can't find common ground with you, or anyone else, is the idea that it is ever acceptable to label someone's statements as stupidity.
Think about it; some people never do that, while others do it constantly. 🤔
To me, that feels no different than calling that one particular forum user an idiot; I don't see the distinction.
After all, only a fool would write something foolish, wouldn't they?
It seems clear to me that people resort to calling statements "stupid" out of fear or cowardice, simply because they are too intimidated to call that specific user an idiot directly. Some people get genuinely furious and end up in a near-heart-attack state because they aren't allowed to tell someone exactly what they think or express their dislike due to a difference of opinion, so they settle for labeling those statements as stupid; it becomes their vent, the only thing they feel capable of doing.

If we disagree with something, we ought to explain why using arguments, rather than just rudely dismissing it as stupid without any reasoning.
I believe you'll agree that doing so makes us no better than him—in fact, it arguably makes us worse, doesn't it?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion, and again—I entirely agree that it would be appropriate to present arguments and sources to back up a claim, especially if someone asks for them.
I agree that no one here is obligated to provide explanations; it's all a matter of goodwill and, above all, decency and civility, but still, if someone is able to present a point, and someone else fundamentally disagrees (and is capable of explaining why), then it would be fair for the person who made the initial claim to elaborate and provide arguments.
And whatever you do, please don't disparage someone for presenting an argument, because then you've truly hit rock bottom. 👎
You asked for arguments—you got them.
If you don't like them or you disagree—well, that's your problem; the other side probably wouldn't have agreed with you anyway.
But they did present an argument.

That’s why I feel the moderators are actually doing a pretty solid job overall. It seems like everyone is constantly looking for some kind of bias in their own favor, trying to shut down anyone who doesn't see things exactly their way. I imagine it’s incredibly difficult to moderate this place effectively while keeping everyone perfectly happy.
Because of that, I consider moderator impartiality to be the most critical factor.
Most of the discussions on alternative platforms handle this reasonably well, though a smaller portion of them is a complete disaster.

And let's be honest here—have you noticed that we're sliding back into a pattern where people start trading barbs just because of differing opinions? It feels like personal squabbles and disagreements from elsewhere are being dragged into this space, which, naturally, leads absolutely nowhere.
After all, this thread was opened with a different intention entirely.

There is a fundamental misunderstanding occurring here—one that certain individuals seem pathologically incapable of grasping. This is particularly evident in those wielding moderator authority, who stubbornly insist that any alternative perspective is merely nonsense. They hide behind the hollow guise of "diversity" to shield their own biases, when in reality, they are simply dismissing anything that doesn't align with their specific agenda.
It isn’t a matter of someone positing a philosophical stance regarding the incredible or the unproven. The issue lies in their blatant failure to grasp the reality that is readily verifiable at any given moment, anywhere one chooses to look.
Starting from the horizontal position of the water. 😁.
If that isn't perfectly clear to someone claiming to be... Michelle Robinson And she claims to be "authorized" to enforce order and tolerance, yet she clearly hasn't even bothered to read the rules of this forum. What is there left to say? Honestly, I don't hold it against her personally—it simply serves as a stark demonstration of her limited capabilities. Ultimately, the oversight committee holds the authority to decide where this all leads. It is imperative that we shine a light on these developments, because, as the old saying goes, what happens in the dark eventually comes to light. It is a frustrating reality of human nature that a single fool can dismantle what a hundred wise individuals have spent lifetimes building. One person's sheer incompetence or malice can undo a century of progress in an instant, leaving even the most brilliant minds to pick up the pieces of a wreckage they didn't create. I am not making any claims regarding her level of intellect, nor am I asserting that she is a fool; however, one could argue that her pattern of action—and, perhaps more significantly, her inaction—is quite telling.
I could certainly waste my time pointing out these infantile, primitive posts, though I have warned before that we need to address this directly. It is quite frankly exhausting to see public posts that blatantly deny established facts, much like the one currently on display.
I find myself returning to post #6161, though my patience for these repetitive discussions is wearing thin. It seems we are circling the same drain without any real progress. One would think that after all this time, we might have stumbled upon a shred of actual substance, but instead, we are left with nothing but noise. It is quite exhausting, really.
Instead of simply discarding or cleaning away diseased tissue, they choose to manipulate and stretch it—essentially cultivating and spreading the stench. Of course, this is all accompanied by that same perpetually flawed judgment they seem so fond of exercising.
It is hardly surprising that when users arrive here attempting to discuss alternatives to established philosophical foundations, they find themselves met with nothing but ridicule—take LLskylights, for instance. This reaction stems directly from the experience of dealing with poorly informed, uneducated forum members who openly admit to struggling through even basic middle school. The issue isn't merely their lack of sophistication; it is their fundamental inability to connect facts. Once they realize they might be exposed as ignorant, they succumb to a frantic sort of panic, churning out absolute garbage just to save face—trash that the moderator seems to quite enjoy consuming.

Review:

Ethan Barrett22 said:Let’s be realistic here—can anyone else see how we are sliding back into endless bickering over minor differences in opinion? People are trying to turn personal disputes and disagreements into endless cycles, which, predictably, achieves absolutely nothing.
The entire purpose of this thread is something else entirely.

Given that you and I are essentially walking the same path, attempting to establish the truth simply to foster better understanding,

the actual issue isn't a diversity of thought; it is the sheer incompetence of forum users who deny the obvious. ~ Furthermore, there is an ongoing situation involving the moderator that is becoming increasingly inappropriate, a fact I could prove beyond any doubt.

Now, looking at your field where you possess significant expertise, it is an indisputable fact that raw food is the alpha and omega because it is natural...
organically, our bodies are primarily designed for a raw diet.
However, you find yourself surrounded by sycophants who feed others their nonsense while offering you false support just to attach their own "labels" to you.
Not everyone possesses the intellectual capacity to grasp this, much like yourself...
Granted, processed foods have certain benefits, but for anyone facing health issues, the recommendation remains to utilize raw foods as much as possible.
Beyond that, it becomes a matter of choice—not merely nutritional, but ethical.

Jerry Robinson56 said:The real issue here isn't a simple difference of opinion; it's the sheer quality of the trash being posted by users who flat-out deny what is staring them in the face.

Well, here we go again. It feels like we’re circling back to the exact same topic yet again, over and over.
What you—or perhaps someone else entirely—might choose to call... It seems obvious.I mean, there’s always that one person who refuses to see things any other way. To them, it’s just "obvious" that it’s something else entirely, you know? I guess they’re just convinced their version is the only one that makes sense. 🤷
So, at the end of the day, we’re really just looking at a fundamental difference of opinion here, and honestly, I don't think it's about anything else.
That’s really the only issue here. It’s quite interesting, isn't it? It seems like nobody ever has a single grievance with anyone else as long as they're nodding in agreement—even if both parties are completely and utterly wrong. I suppose it’s just easier that way. As long as you're on the same page, you're considered one of the good guys.

I think we can both agree that there is... It seems we have a few "bad actors" on this forum—people who simply refuse to acknowledge the obvious.
But you... Some of the "bad" forum members who just refuse to acknowledge the obvious. In my eyes, they might just be some kind of... A completely different story altogether. It’s all about perspective, I suppose—seeing things through the eyes of someone who just doesn't process the world quite the same way I do.

Let's take an even more extreme example—for instance, someone claiming that the Earth is round and insisting that it's just a fact. It seems pretty obvious, doesn't it?I suspect we can all agree that one wouldn't make such a claim without having some sort of reasoning behind it, wouldn't you?
I suppose someone else will come along and insist that the world is flat, and they’ll be perfectly content with that notion too. to It’s pretty obvious, really; he wouldn't have even made that claim if there weren't some underlying reason for it.
I have absolutely no intention of sparking a debate or getting bogged down in any arguments regarding the shape of the Earth. That’s not my goal here at all. It was simply the first example that came to mind, and I wanted to point out how two different sides can look at the exact same thing and interpret it in completely opposite ways—to the point where both parties feel entirely certain they are right. Truth and obviousness. I suppose I should probably mention my own... Beliefs.
Personally, I don't have any issue with someone claiming that the Earth is flat—if that’s truly what they believe, then by all means, they should feel free to say so.
Look, even if I find myself disagreeing, I certainly have no intention of mocking him, making fun of his ideas, or being disrespectful. If I genuinely believe there might be some merit to what he’s claiming, then I suppose I should give it the consideration it deserves. I suppose I'll have to ask him to provide some actual arguments.If he decides to attach them, I’ll take a look. Honestly, it doesn't really matter whether I end up agreeing with him or not; he’s entitled to his own perspective, just as I am to mine. That said, I don't see any reason for us to start tearing each other down or resorting to insults just because we have different views.
If his claims strike me as completely nonsensical—or if he’s developed a reputation for being outright rude, arrogant, or dismissive—I simply won't bother. If someone spends their time insulting others, belittling points, or just constant trolling, I have no intention of asking them for arguments. Honestly, there's no point in reading those posts or wasting my breath commenting on them. Why should I waste my precious time on that? Is it completely worthless?

Instead of exhausting yourselves by trying to retrain people who simply refuse to see things differently, wouldn't it be better for everyone involved—including ourselves—to just stop wasting our breath? I mean, maybe it’s more productive to simply stop giving their statements any real weight at all.
Because as long as you continue to give any real weight to what they say, By giving their statements such immediate weight, you’re essentially handing them all the authority on a silver platter. I suppose it's easy to fall into that trap, but it feels like we're automatically validating everything they say without much thought. Even though you all seem hell-bent on denying it every single time we talk...

Jerry Robinson56 Asks:
Look, speaking from the perspective of someone who’s spent a lifetime in this field—and I suppose I have quite a bit of experience under my belt at this point—it seems like an undeniable fact that raw food is really the alpha and the omega of nutrition. I mean, it’s just fundamentally natural, isn't it?
I’ve been thinking about this quite a bit lately, and I suspect that, at their core, most organisms are primarily designed to thrive on raw food. It seems like a fundamental biological reality, though perhaps one we tend to overlook in our modern, processed world.
It’s honestly baffling how you can find yourself surrounded by these social climbers—people who just latch onto anyone else to feed their own nonsense—only to have them slap one of their labels on you as if they’re doing you a favor. It’s a strange kind of false support, I suppose.

Regarding the labeling and those responsible for sticking them on things, I have to admit, it actually stings a little bit. 🥳
Unfortunately, these "clingers" seem to be hovering around everyone on this forum, and trying to pin down a definition for nonsense would be just as difficult as defining what counts as obvious.
That said, there’s no denying that a handful of people visit this specific thread solely to vent their frustrations (much like they do with any alternative lifestyle topic); they clearly lack any real understanding of the subject matter and don't have even a single day of experience with this type of diet. They aren't actually interested in the topic itself; instead, they seem visibly resentful that it even exists on this forum. They haven't read a single page of a book on the subject, yet they churn out posts with a manic intensity and palpable hatred. Their comments rarely relate to the actual discussion; rather, they seem aimed purely at obstructing the conversation and insulting anyone who actually cares about the topic—not to mention the outright rude trolling.
On a brighter note, there are also individuals who have made truly exceptional contributions to the raw food thread through their deep knowledge, practical experience, and thoughtful explanations. So many people have praised their posts, and many have found genuine help through their useful advice. For those contributors, I have nothing but the highest respect.

I am intentionally withholding specific usernames, but I think it is pretty clear to everyone involved which individuals I am referring to, regardless of which "side" they claim to represent.