Host Katrin

This lady has been a headache on this forum for ages. Is there any actual chance we can get a tyrant like her replaced so we can have a real discussion without her constant meddling?
If the hostess is so annoyed by a topic, then please, just don't read it. Don't just sit there posting quotes like:

crimsonsailor7 said:Now there would just be a bunch of fighting and mindless bickering. You've been circling the drain with the same arguments for three pages now and you're getting nowhere. Enough!

If she thinks a single debate counts as "mindless bickering," what else are we supposed to talk about? Nobody was even being insulting, but the hostess managed to delete my response—which was just my answer to everything said so far—and slapped me with a 35-point penalty for trolling. I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that a group of women attacked me while their own messages stayed untouched?

Is this really worth 35 points? And what exactly is "trolling" here?

http://www.forum.com/showthread.php?p=23108449

Quote: William Green4 said:but they'll punish you for murder.....

They probably would for abortion too, if it were actually illegal.

placidorca16 said:I already told you, you were citing equality based on women's absolute rights. But if you claim you aren't looking for absolute rights for men, then what are you looking for? Be specific and clear so there's no "wrong" matchmaking. And you can label that yourself—trolling.

Where did I ever cite equality? Quote me.

For me, just like under the law, abortion isn't murder; it's ending a pregnancy. If you supposedly defend a woman's right to an abortion, then what's the issue? What are you actually after?

I want men to stop being treated like zero in this whole conversation. Biologically speaking, abortion is murder.

You’re totally ignoring how massive a role pregnancy and childbirth actually play in fetal development and bringing a baby into the world. Seriously?

Not true.Hey, give me a quote where I actually said that.

Negative views on feminism are basically just a hallmark of people who don't get it—it's standard in any patriarchal society. What exactly are you using as "objective" benchmarks here? To me, you just look incredibly biased.

Slow down for a second. Every single move you make just speeds things up. And no, this isn't just about feminism. You can't act like I'm some product of a patriarchal bubble who just "doesn't get" the movement. That’s a reach. Honestly? Feminism is a total train wreck. It feels like it does more damage to women than anything else.

Yeah, and? So what? You’re quoting Wikipedia like it’s gospel, but nowhere does it actually say an embryo equals a human being. It says it's an embryo. Period. If it were a person, wouldn't it actually say "person"? That's the whole point of evolution—an organism develops through stages until it's fully formed and capable of surviving on its own. Otherwise, why even have pregnancy? Why couldn't this "organism" just exist independently outside a woman's body? Just because it has human DNA doesn't suddenly make it a person. Every single part of the human body has human DNA. But look, we aren't here to debate the definition of humanity. We're talking about how to solve the issue of forced pregnancy when someone's life is on the line. How is a woman supposed to exercise her right to an abortion?

We're talking about the entire genome here, not just random scraps of DNA. Seriously, go back and actually read the quotes I posted. Just because pregnancy is a requirement doesn't mean we aren't talking about a human being. If you follow your own logic, what are we even looking at in the eighth month of pregnancy? Not a human? Then what exactly is it?
Look, I’m telling you again: this isn't some forced pregnancy case. This was your friend's situation. Period.

What even is this whole "objective women" vs. "objective men" nonsense? According to you, it sounds like being "objective" is just a code word for any woman who’s terrified of feminism. Is that really how this works?😕 I don't see any logic here. Period.

These people? They run for cover the second things get radical. Doesn't matter which way the wind blows—they’re terrified of both sides. Patriarchal radicals? Feminist radicals? Doesn't matter. If it's extreme, they're out.

You’re being patronizing toward women. Seriously. Why on earth would you claim they "often wouldn't realize that such an action still leaves consequences"? Are we assuming women lack basic reasoning skills here? And why do you think they aren't "seeking counseling beforehand"? (Are those even accurate quotes?) How exactly are men better informed about miscarriage risks than the women actually going through it? Plus, you dodged the second scenario entirely. Why is number two "it depends," but number one isn't?

Nothing about this is patronizing. You think a greeting is an insult? No one ever said women lack common sense, yet here you are, putting words in my mouth. I said they should go to counseling. Period. The real question is how many actually go, versus how many just end up stuck with the trauma.
Look, I gave you a straight answer, lady, but nothing in life is black and white. That’s why I went into more detail.

Since you're personally against abortion, why do you think your stance is "objective" or valid when it comes to someone else's decision—especially a woman's?

Because I'm against abortion, yet I'm also for it being legal. How many anti-abortion people do you know who actually support its legality? Very few.

placidorca16 said:That's not how it works. A man and a woman together start the pregnancy process—conception—by joining sperm and an egg.

See, you finally managed to write that out. I was waiting for you. That's exactly what I've been talking about this whole time. You just cherry-picked a crucial part.

After that, the woman alone takes on all the risks and burdens of pregnancy and childbirth—for nine months. The man has nothing to do with it anymore. He doesn't take any risk, he doesn't sacrifice his own body, and he carries none of the burden. He can only watch from the sidelines. So, by what logic should a man have an equal say in the pregnancy?

Only idiots have nothing to do with it. You think all men are idiots?
Any normal man will live through that pregnancy right alongside his wife.

Engelchen00012 said:Oh, here we go. Another genius wanting to debate a woman's right to abortion.🙄

Got a problem with that?

You called this post trolling?! 😕

Do you honestly think it's the same thing to dump seed into a container (or a uterus) outside your own body for a few seconds versus subordinating your entire body and every single organ to the development of a fetus growing inside you for nine months—with the risk of anything from minor issues to lifelong complications or even death?

That isn't trolling, friend. That is the TRUTH.😉

Too bad nature worked out that way. Maybe they'll come up with some robot surrogate since women aren't actually required for pregnancy, and eventually just ban women who think like you from having kids altogether.☕

I really hope the forum leadership takes a look at this hostess. This isn't about actual moderation—it’s just one hostess acting on her own whims.👎

I don't even need to mention that a few hours BEFORE getting banned, I actually messaged Vojky asking her to check in so she'd let us finish our debate—since I had a hunch she might drop the ban hammer.
I log onto the forum, and what do I see? I've been banned.👎
I didn't want to start this thread earlier, even though this issue has been festering for ages. The main reason was that, just like slybison8, I simply walked away from the rule : Quote because I saw bans being handed out completely arbitrarily.
Now, after jumping back into this sub-forum for a bit because of this whole debate, I'm running right into the same wall.

What I want to know is: why are moderators treated like untouchable royalty? I get it with the admins—they’re the alpha and omega here—but the moderators?! Come on, man. They're just people. Most of the time, the admins don't even know them; they just hand out mod status because they seem "nice."

So, I really don't get who this hostess is trying to impress? She's arrogant as hell, just like slybison8 said, acting with this childish "you're annoying me so I'm shutting down the discussion" attitude.
That sub-forum isn't her private playground, even though she acts like it is. I'm not the only one who feels this way; I've talked to plenty of people who feel exactly the same.

Something needs to be done. And again, hats off to Vojky. I've clashed with him plenty of times in various threads, but he stays objective, and I respect that. I know he's in this debate specifically to make sure things run smoothly, just like they do in other sensitive discussions—you know, like those debates over the death penalty.
But with this hostess? It's a total disaster.👎

🙄

rustywalker42 said:This lady has been a headache on this forum for ages. Is there any actual chance we can get a tyrant like her replaced so we can have a real discussion without her constant meddling?
If the hostess is so annoyed by a topic, then please, just don't read it. Don't just sit there posting quotes like:

If she thinks a single debate counts as "mindless bickering," what else are we supposed to talk about? Nobody was even being insulting, but the hostess managed to delete my response—which was just my answer to everything said so far—and slapped me with a 35-point penalty for trolling. I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that a group of women attacked me while their own messages stayed untouched?

Is this really worth 35 points? And what exactly is "trolling" here?

http://www.forum.com/showthread.php?p=23108449

They probably would for abortion too, if it were actually illegal.

Where did I ever cite equality? Quote me.

For me, just like under the law, abortion isn't murder; it's ending a pregnancy. If you supposedly defend a woman's right to an abortion, then what's the issue? What are you actually after?

I want men to stop being treated like zero in this whole conversation. Biologically speaking, abortion is murder.

You’re totally ignoring how massive a role pregnancy and childbirth actually play in fetal development and bringing a baby into the world. Seriously?

Not true.Hey, give me a quote where I actually said that.

Negative views on feminism are basically just a hallmark of people who don't get it—it's standard in any patriarchal society. What exactly are you using as "objective" benchmarks here? To me, you just look incredibly biased.

Slow down for a second. Every single move you make just speeds things up. And no, this isn't just about feminism. You can't act like I'm some product of a patriarchal bubble who just "doesn't get" the movement. That’s a reach. Honestly? Feminism is a total train wreck. It feels like it does more damage to women than anything else.

Yeah, and? So what? You’re quoting Wikipedia like it’s gospel, but nowhere does it actually say an embryo equals a human being. It says it's an embryo. Period. If it were a person, wouldn't it actually say "person"? That's the whole point of evolution—an organism develops through stages until it's fully formed and capable of surviving on its own. Otherwise, why even have pregnancy? Why couldn't this "organism" just exist independently outside a woman's body? Just because it has human DNA doesn't suddenly make it a person. Every single part of the human body has human DNA. But look, we aren't here to debate the definition of humanity. We're talking about how to solve the issue of forced pregnancy when someone's life is on the line. How is a woman supposed to exercise her right to an abortion?

We're talking about the entire genome here, not just random scraps of DNA. Seriously, go back and actually read the quotes I posted. Just because pregnancy is a requirement doesn't mean we aren't talking about a human being. If you follow your own logic, what are we even looking at in the eighth month of pregnancy? Not a human? Then what exactly is it?
Look, I’m telling you again: this isn't some forced pregnancy case. This was your friend's situation. Period.

What even is this whole "objective women" vs. "objective men" nonsense? According to you, it sounds like being "objective" is just a code word for any woman who’s terrified of feminism. Is that really how this works?😕 I don't see any logic here. Period.

These people? They run for cover the second things get radical. Doesn't matter which way the wind blows—they’re terrified of both sides. Patriarchal radicals? Feminist radicals? Doesn't matter. If it's extreme, they're out.

You’re being patronizing toward women. Seriously. Why on earth would you claim they "often wouldn't realize that such an action still leaves consequences"? Are we assuming women lack basic reasoning skills here? And why do you think they aren't "seeking counseling beforehand"? (Are those even accurate quotes?) How exactly are men better informed about miscarriage risks than the women actually going through it? Plus, you dodged the second scenario entirely. Why is number two "it depends," but number one isn't?

Nothing about this is patronizing. You think a greeting is an insult? No one ever said women lack common sense, yet here you are, putting words in my mouth. I said they should go to counseling. Period. The real question is how many actually go, versus how many just end up stuck with the trauma.
Look, I gave you a straight answer, lady, but nothing in life is black and white. That’s why I went into more detail.

Since you're personally against abortion, why do you think your stance is "objective" or valid when it comes to someone else's decision—especially a woman's?

Because I'm against abortion, yet I'm also for it being legal. How many anti-abortion people do you know who actually support its legality? Very few.

See, you finally managed to write that out. I was waiting for you. That's exactly what I've been talking about this whole time. You just cherry-picked a crucial part.

After that, the woman alone takes on all the risks and burdens of pregnancy and childbirth—for nine months. The man has nothing to do with it anymore. He doesn't take any risk, he doesn't sacrifice his own body, and he carries none of the burden. He can only watch from the sidelines. So, by what logic should a man have an equal say in the pregnancy?

Only idiots have nothing to do with it. You think all men are idiots?
Any normal man will live through that pregnancy right alongside his wife.

Got a problem with that?

You called this post trolling?! 😕

Do you honestly think it's the same thing to dump seed into a container (or a uterus) outside your own body for a few seconds versus subordinating your entire body and every single organ to the development of a fetus growing inside you for nine months—with the risk of anything from minor issues to lifelong complications or even death?

That isn't trolling, friend. That is the TRUTH.😉

Too bad nature worked out that way. Maybe they'll come up with some robot surrogate since women aren't actually required for pregnancy, and eventually just ban women who think like you from having kids altogether.☕

I really hope the forum leadership takes a look at this hostess. This isn't about actual moderation—it’s just one hostess acting on her own whims.👎

Oh, poor baby—you got attacked by women.🙄 Stop whining; you're acting like such a girl.🙄 Anything that shuts down your argument is suddenly an "attack" to you. Why aren't you defending yourself instead of crying? So much for being a "tough guy"—yeah, right.😁

You aren't the only one who got hit with a penalty. I got a 35-point deduction right before you, and you don't hear me complaining. If the forum rules allow moderators to judge what fits a topic and what doesn't, then they have that right. I don't think crimsonsailor7 is some special case here—other moderators on different sub-forums, like the religion section, hand out penalties for even minor "trolling," which to them is just anything loosely related to the subject. You could easily interpret it that way.

Honestly, it seems to me that the insults thrown at hostess crimsonsailor7—and at women on this forum in general—should warrant much heavier penalties or even bans, since that pretty much qualifies as gender discrimination, which is actually illegal.

No, I'm not saying Katrin should be replaced—based on the current rules, she’s actually doing a solid job. I’d much rather see the rules and posting guidelines themselves get an overhaul.

Since I was actually part of this discussion, I feel I have a legitimate right to share my perspective.
Look, rustywalker42, telling me not to troll or to "stick to the topic" is a bit much—if you ask me, being handed a seven-day ban is a greater provocation than anything I’ve done.
Beyond that, I asked you right at the start: if you really wanted to keep this conversation going, why not just move it over to the philosophy or politics section?
The thing is, a PDF document is just a set of facts, and the law is inherently dry; discussions based strictly on legal text tend to be exactly like that.
As for crimsonsailor7, people can think whatever they want about her, but she is clearly a legal professional who isn't interested in playing philosopher.
I hope you see where I'm coming from.......

gle power, I find myself agreeing with part of what you mentioned...
Essentially, crimsonsailor7 wants to provide this as a free public service, which I think is a great move.
However, she should probably leave the door open for philosophical discussions regarding certain laws and regulations.
I know for a fact that Vojky enjoys those kinds of deep dives, and he and I often end up bickering over various topics.
The problem is that these subjects can be quite volatile; they have a tendency to spiral quickly into personal attacks and toxic venting.
That becomes especially tricky if you happen to be dealing with someone like rustywalker42.
It seems obvious that crimsonsailor7, or perhaps someone else in charge, has realized that nobody can realistically moderate those heavy, philosophical debates twenty-four hours a day...

William Green4 said:gle power, I find myself agreeing with part of what you mentioned...
Essentially, crimsonsailor7 wants to provide this as a free public service, which I think is a great move.
However, she should probably leave the door open for philosophical discussions regarding certain laws and regulations.
I know for a fact that Vojky enjoys those kinds of deep dives, and he and I often end up bickering over various topics.
The problem is that these subjects can be quite volatile; they have a tendency to spiral quickly into personal attacks and toxic venting.
That becomes especially tricky if you happen to be dealing with someone like rustywalker42.
It seems obvious that crimsonsailor7, or perhaps someone else in charge, has realized that nobody can realistically moderate those heavy, philosophical debates twenty-four hours a day...

However, I think there is a deeper issue here. For a free public service to maintain any level of credibility, the people offering advice should probably be verified experts in their respective fields. We seem to be facing some rather paradoxical situations under crimsonsailor7's model, where an individual offers advice based on their own lived experience, yet crimsonsailor7 then decides the quality of that advice, arbitrarily deleting posts or issuing penalties. I feel such behavior is perhaps unacceptable, because from a moderator's perspective, one should probably respect both participants in a discussion. Not to mention how any urgent request for a referral to an attorney or a law firm is immediately deleted—or rather, redirected to private messages—which leads me to wonder if crimsonsailor7 might be using her peripheral authority over Legal PDF to favor certain commercial interests, and if so, I wonder whose they might be.

The only model of public debate that would actually satisfy crimsonsailor7's demanding standards would likely be one where every single participant has to submit their posts for her majesty's review and approval before anything is published—posts she could then use as raw material to construct some strictly defined vision of legal science, which might partially serve her own private interests or those of her close associates.

This isn't what Legal PDF was like before she arrived. A free discussion regarding law and legal topics isn't just "philosophizing"; it is simply free discussion. It is something that repressive and controlling minds, like crimsonsailor7's, will probably never be able to truly grasp.

Here is a typical example of what a real PDF looks like today (from just a few minutes ago):

rule :

mentalny said:I have a question... actually, two!

1. Why do I have to go to the County Clerk's office when I renew my driver's license, and what is that even for?

2. How fast can a new ID be made, and can I use a police clearance certificate to cross the border, since I have to head over to Canada on October 31st...?

crimsonsailor7 said:1. Maybe you mean the property deed and you need the title search?

2. An ID should be ready in about two weeks. You can't cross the border with just a certificate.

What does this even look like? A "Ask a Lawyer" column in the Arena?

One might also notice how, in response to the first question, Her Majesty the Hostess of Rules further confuses the visitor instead of providing a very clear answer that she surely knows (No, you don't need to go to the county office; you're mistaken, you need the land registry and the title for the property where you are registering your residence, or if it isn't yours, then you need the owner's consent to live there).

In some good old days, certain good old uncensored forum members would act educationally, and they would mock and embarrass this specific person so thoroughly that he would never again think of asking such a question under section 2—I mean, imagine him trying to travel across the border with nothing but a paper certificate. 🙄

But instead, we have a forum-like version of Big Brother: a hostess who stifles discussion, monopolizes the "advice," and performs a classic lobotomy on visitors—essentially dumbing them down.

Perhaps it isn't surprising that she became a moderator. The poor thing perfectly reflects the spirit of the times we live in.

rustywalker42 said:I don't even need to mention that a few hours BEFORE getting banned, I actually messaged Vojky asking her to check in so she'd let us finish our debate—since I had a hunch she might drop the ban hammer.
I log onto the forum, and what do I see? I've been banned.👎
I didn't want to start this thread earlier, even though this issue has been festering for ages. The main reason was that, just like slybison8, I simply walked away from the rule : Quote because I saw bans being handed out completely arbitrarily.
Now, after jumping back into this sub-forum for a bit because of this whole debate, I'm running right into the same wall.

What I want to know is: why are moderators treated like untouchable royalty? I get it with the admins—they’re the alpha and omega here—but the moderators?! Come on, man. They're just people. Most of the time, the admins don't even know them; they just hand out mod status because they seem "nice."

So, I really don't get who this hostess is trying to impress? She's arrogant as hell, just like slybison8 said, acting with this childish "you're annoying me so I'm shutting down the discussion" attitude.
That sub-forum isn't her private playground, even though she acts like it is. I'm not the only one who feels this way; I've talked to plenty of people who feel exactly the same.

Something needs to be done. And again, hats off to Vojky. I've clashed with him plenty of times in various threads, but he stays objective, and I respect that. I know he's in this debate specifically to make sure things run smoothly, just like they do in other sensitive discussions—you know, like those debates over the death penalty.
But with this hostess? It's a total disaster.👎

I honestly have no clue why anyone would call this trolling or provocation or say it deserves a ban 🙄 The fact that you seem to think every single thing I post is an argument is totally irrelevant to what’s actually happening here... ☕

slybison8 said:Here is a typical example of what a real PDF looks like today (from just a few minutes ago):

rule :

What does this even look like? A "Ask a Lawyer" column in the Arena?

One might also notice how, in response to the first question, Her Majesty the Hostess of Rules further confuses the visitor instead of providing a very clear answer that she surely knows (No, you don't need to go to the county office; you're mistaken, you need the land registry and the title for the property where you are registering your residence, or if it isn't yours, then you need the owner's consent to live there).

In some good old days, certain good old uncensored forum members would act educationally, and they would mock and embarrass this specific person so thoroughly that he would never again think of asking such a question under section 2—I mean, imagine him trying to travel across the border with nothing but a paper certificate. 🙄

But instead, we have a forum-like version of Big Brother: a hostess who stifles discussion, monopolizes the "advice," and performs a classic lobotomy on visitors—essentially dumbing them down.

Perhaps it isn't surprising that she became a moderator. The poor thing perfectly reflects the spirit of the times we live in.

Bravo, truly a stroke of genius, that conclusion... If you actually bothered to read, you could have just answered the guy yourself. I simply asked him what he needed, maybe he does have to deal with the local records office, how was I supposed to know...

As for that whole mess about forced pregnancy, what you guys did wasn't even a discussion, it was just straight-up bashing and trolling, even after Charles Thomas70 and I warned you all to knock it off. Do you guys need me to draw you a map or something?

Go ahead, keep on spitting venom if you want, it seems to be working out great for you... 👋

crimsonsailor7 said:I honestly have no clue why anyone would call this trolling or provocation or say it deserves a ban 🙄 The fact that you seem to think every single thing I post is an argument is totally irrelevant to what’s actually happening here... ☕

Bravo, truly a stroke of genius, that conclusion... If you actually bothered to read, you could have just answered the guy yourself. I simply asked him what he needed, maybe he does have to deal with the local records office, how was I supposed to know...

As for that whole mess about forced pregnancy, what you guys did wasn't even a discussion, it was just straight-up bashing and trolling, even after Charles Thomas70 and I warned you all to knock it off. Do you guys need me to draw you a map or something?

Go ahead, keep on spitting venom if you want, it seems to be working out great for you... 👋

It is quite brilliant, I suppose. I generally try to simplify things in my life rather than making them more complicated. I would have been more than happy to explain certain details to that young gentleman from Miami (who, by the way, probably isn't even familiar with the specific legal term for property deeds that you used in your reply), but ever since you joined the Law School, I've started to feel like I'm being pigeonholed for simply trying to be helpful—what you seem to call "acting like a know-it-all."

crimsonsailor7 said:I honestly have no clue why anyone would call this trolling or provocation or say it deserves a ban 🙄 The fact that you seem to think every single thing I post is an argument is totally irrelevant to what’s actually happening here... ☕

Bravo, truly a stroke of genius, that conclusion... If you actually bothered to read, you could have just answered the guy yourself. I simply asked him what he needed, maybe he does have to deal with the local records office, how was I supposed to know...

As for that whole mess about forced pregnancy, what you guys did wasn't even a discussion, it was just straight-up bashing and trolling, even after Charles Thomas70 and I warned you all to knock it off. Do you guys need me to draw you a map or something?

Go ahead, keep on spitting venom if you want, it seems to be working out great for you... 👋

Well, perhaps you should know—he didn't ask anything, and God knows why you'd make it so complicated. If a person doesn't realize you can't cross an international border with just any old scraps of paper, why would you assume they might understand the distinction between the county assessor and the land registry?

I guess this leads to a situation where you've become a victim of your own ambitions—by focusing so much on PDFs, you've pushed away most of the creative thinkers and left yourself and a lot of confused visitors behind.

I’m right there with you. Honestly, the Rule subforum is a total mess. Both crimsonsailor7 and Charles Thomas70 are basically cut from the same cloth, and frankly, they aren't doing a great job. I can't help but wonder if we could find some actual quality people to handle the moderator roles instead? 🤷 😕😢

It’s like, why even bother debating a legal system that isn't even ours...

From a legal standpoint, there isn't much to discuss—we aren't talking about our own judiciary (if we were, commenting on a non-final verdict wouldn't even be allowed), but rather some Greek system that nobody here understands anyway.

Does anyone remember when Laptalo was behind bars? Back then, the young lady wouldn't even touch the topic because—get this—it wasn't about our own courts.
I spoke up, and well, I got screwed.
So, she doesn't really try too hard; crimsonsailor7 is great because she's always around the forum, does her job, and everything stays smooth.
When someone messes up now, it’s just like dealing with the US Army—you know, collateral damage. Just my luck.

Oh, and after this appeal, don't go posting in the Law section anymore, or crimsonsailor7 will start handing out cards for nonsense.

After that whole business with Laptalo, I ended up getting slapped with a 35-point penalty for "insulting" someone, all because I wrote: "my neighbor the slob is ringing my doorbell..."
😂🤣😁

So, don't go walking down her path...

One more thing—I called it; I knew we'd see an appeal like this against crimsonsailor7 every couple of months. Apparently, there aren't many people left in the Law section who are thick-skinned enough to avoid getting stung.
🤷

👋

restlessrider15 said:I’m right there with you. Honestly, the Rule subforum is a total mess. Both crimsonsailor7 and Charles Thomas70 are basically cut from the same cloth, and frankly, they aren't doing a great job. I can't help but wonder if we could find some actual quality people to handle the moderator roles instead? 🤷 😕😢

And who are you again? I don't really recall. Could you give an example of my "bad" moderation?

You can't just show up and criticize without any actual arguments. Otherwise, I could just write that you're a bad forum user or a troll, too, without providing any proof.😉

Charles Thomas70 said:And who are you again? I don't really recall. Could you give an example of my "bad" moderation?

You can't just show up and criticize without any actual arguments. Otherwise, I could just write that you're a bad forum user or a troll, too, without providing any proof.😉

Everything you've said about crimsonsailor7 is a perfect example of your poor moderation. You're handing out bans like they're candy, dodging direct questions, and just throwing threats at the users instead of actually managing the site. It's all very unhelpful.

Charles Thomas70 said:And who are you again? I don't really recall. Could you give an example of my "bad" moderation?

You can't just show up and criticize without any actual arguments. Otherwise, I could just write that you're a bad forum user or a troll, too, without providing any proof.😉

To be honest, I don't really know you at all. However, I feel that the general state of the Law subforum, the childish nature of its topics, and the way people there interact with the Forumas community overall, reflects on everyone responsible for maintaining those spaces.

It seems to me, if I may say so, that even your "supermoderator" Vojky is now encountered much more frequently on the Politics board than on the Law board, which, if I recall correctly, is the very one I established a long time ago.

crimsonsailor7 said:I honestly have no clue why anyone would call this trolling or provocation or say it deserves a ban 🙄 The fact that you seem to think every single thing I post is an argument is totally irrelevant to what’s actually happening here... ☕

Bravo, truly a stroke of genius, that conclusion... If you actually bothered to read, you could have just answered the guy yourself. I simply asked him what he needed, maybe he does have to deal with the local records office, how was I supposed to know...

As for that whole mess about forced pregnancy, what you guys did wasn't even a discussion, it was just straight-up bashing and trolling, even after Charles Thomas70 and I warned you all to knock it off. Do you guys need me to draw you a map or something?

Go ahead, keep on spitting venom if you want, it seems to be working out great for you... 👋

You’re suffocating the discussion. You leave me in this position where three women just tore me to shreds, and then you go ahead and delete my response? You think that's fair? It's not just unfair—it's plain rude.
Trolling? It’s just provocation without a single actual argument.Look, I was actually making some points here, but you? You just acted like a total brat. "The thread is annoying me, just stop." Really? That's your move?
You think I know why you gave me the ban? It’s because I reported you for trolling again. Yeah, I did it once before, and I got slapped with a ban then, too. Simple as that.
Do I really have to dig up all her outbursts? Fine. Take a look at what people have been saying about this hostess for over a year now:

This first one is especially interesting. People on here actually ended up reaching the exact same conclusions we did:

And there's more:

I can't believe I'm even looking at this again. Is anyone else seeing this? Honestly, what is going on with the moderation lately? It’s getting ridiculous. Does anyone actually think this is fair? We’re all sitting here trying to have a conversation, and then suddenly—bam—everything changes. It feels less like a community and more like some controlled experiment. Why does everything have to be so strictly managed? And don't even get me started on the latest drama involving crimsonsailor7. Seriously? Is this really how we're running things now? It’s just one thing after another. Does anyone else feel like they're losing their mind, or is it just me? Just asking.

I can't believe people are still obsessing over this. Seriously? Is everyone really that bored? The whole thing about crimsonsailor7 is getting ridiculous. Does anyone actually care what she thinks anymore? It’s just noise at this point. Why do we keep circling back to the same old drama? It’s exhausting. Honestly, if you're looking for substance, you're looking in the wrong place. Just move on already.

I can't believe people are still obsessing over this. Seriously? Is everyone really that bored? The whole thing with crimsonsailor7 is just noise. Constant, repetitive noise. Does anyone actually listen to what she says, or do they just wait for their turn to bark? It’s like watching a slow-motion train wreck where nobody even bothers to look away. And the drama? Please. It's all just posturing. A bunch of people acting like they're part of some grand saga when it's really just a mess of ego and bad takes. Why does everyone act like this matters so much? It doesn't. It never does. Get a grip.

Thanks for those links, rustywalker42.

I suppose this kind of mindset is essentially what causes the disaster over on the Legal board:

rule :

crimsonsailor7 said:best wishes to you too 👋

If you want to troll, maybe try other sub-forums or threads where people aren't actually looking for serious advice.

The Legal PDF isn't—no matter how crimsonsailor7 might feel about it—really a place where people come seeking legitimate counsel. I mean, when someone truly needs serious legal advice, they would probably just go to an attorney. People visit the Legal PDF because they're interested in the law as a way to pass the time, have some fun, or just indulge in a hobby. God forbid we ever see a day when internet forums become places where people rely on them for actual legal guidance.

But even if that were to happen, I doubt there would be enough competent lawyers left to help, especially with hostess crimsonsailor7 in charge—most of them have already abandoned the forum.

restlessrider15 said:Everything you've said about crimsonsailor7 is a perfect example of your poor moderation. You're handing out bans like they're candy, dodging direct questions, and just throwing threats at the users instead of actually managing the site. It's all very unhelpful.

Whatever. Where are you even getting that from? I guess if I've handed out maybe ten warnings total so far, I haven't banned anyone, let alone made threats.

Honestly, Charles Thomas70, I don't even recognize you as a regular here, let alone as a mod. I really hope you bring some actual creativity to this legal subforum—it needs a bit of a spark.
To be blunt, everything up to this point has felt like reading a dry corporate meeting minute.
A little bit of creative thinking and lucidity wouldn't hurt anyone, much less this place.
I tend to drift through three or four different subforums regularly—even if I haven't actually posted anything in ages. Most of my time is spent clicking through History, Politics, Constitutional Law, and IT...
There used to be a "Legal Corner" on my list, too.
You know the drill—that morning routine where you grab a coffee and scan the latest threads.
It’s been a long, long time since I last clicked on the legal section.

I already know someone is going to chime in with those nauseating comments like "it's not our loss" or "oh, what a shame," but people who take responsibility for a specific subforum simply cannot afford to have that mindset by default.

The thing is, some people mistake arrogance for importance, or they think authority is all about raw power.
With all due respect, I'm talking to people like that.
And frankly, I give the areas they moderate a very wide berth.

BTW—don't get me wrong, I'm not against a firm hand. For instance, Tyndall is a rock-solid moderator. He doesn't play games. But in all my time here, I've never seen a ban issued out of pure ego; it's always strictly for the good of the forum he's managing.

As for Katrin, this whole drama has been hashed out a hundred times over on the linked threads, and I vividly remember older, defunct threads that presented far better arguments than what we're seeing now.
People have taken permanent bans because of her before.
And I honestly don't see things changing this time around.
Signing off for now.