Need an explanation from admin regarding a specific moderation error on Philosophy

1. On May 24th, I shared the following post on the Philosophy board regarding the question: Does time exist?

2. As anyone reading the post will see, it doesn't violate any rules. It discusses the nature of time, using a polished style and a touch of wit to highlight a subtle point: how St. Augustine was actually the first to propose a theological hypothesis about time that modern physics has since validated.

3. To my utter surprise, despite my meaningful contribution to the topic, it was deleted without any explanation whatsoever.
Just gone.😲

4. Knowing all too well that this kind of intellectual injustice—this butchering of people's writing—happens far too often, I made sure to save a copy of the text. Now, the forum jury and administration can review it
and see for themselves an example of arbitrary and poor moderation over on the Philosophy subforum.

5. But wait, there’s more.
Please take a look at the recent posts
on that very same thread (Does time exist?) from numbers 302 through 312.

6. You’ll notice that not a single one of those posts even addresses the actual topic of time. Instead, participants are veering off into massive tangents, and nobody even mentions time as the central theme.

7. And yet, my post, which offered an interesting perspective on time,was brutally erased, while everyone else is free to keep chatting in what feels like a casual lounge atmosphere.

8. Now, let me be clear: I wouldn't dream of deleting posts 302-312 myself. Any form of censorship on a public forum is unnecessary and only serves to reveal the character of those who strike down others' work and contributions. My only goal is for the forum jury and administration to recognize this kind of moderator overreach, which undermines the quality of our community. I’d like to suggest that the administration consider implementing a policy where moderators are rotated or replaced every year or two "by law."

9.
I truly believe that such a "democratically mandated" reshuffling of moderators after, say, one or two years of "service" in the "civil service" of the forum would significantly improve operations. It would also reduce the number of complaints regarding moderation based on personal biases against certain writers.

(Below is yet another stellar post from hiddenpuma75, written with his signature grace and just the right amount of wit. It’s a shame it was deleted without any explanation or warning, especially when the topic is whether this revival chat 😉
should even be active.
-----------------------------

I wanted to share a little "eureka" moment I had regarding how the incomparable St. Augustine, through sheer theological brilliance, actually formulated the first scientifically sound hypothesis about the nature of time. 😲

You see, the rational philosophers of his era—much like the cynical skeptics you find on most internet forums today
—used to toss snide questions at St. Augustine:

- "So, what exactly was your God doing before He created the universe?"🙄

Now, St. Augustine didn't give a polite answer like that small-town preacher who once snapped back at a heckler by saying—
'He was busy building Hell for people like you!' 🙂 ( 🤣 )

Instead, St. Augustine gave a truly genius response: he argued that there was no such thing as "BEFORE." Rather, the Lord
created time itself along with our good old universe; He essentially "fired" the arrow of time at the very moment of creation. 😲

It turns out modern science, with its Big Bang theory, has arrived at the exact same conclusion as St. Augustine.
The current scientific consensus is clear:

Time had a beginning. 😲

In the hopes that you might finally start questioning your own doubts
and find the courage to dive into St. Augustine's *Confessions*, 🙏I send you my warmest regards.
👋

Respectfully yours, hiddenpuma75 🙂

hiddenpuma75, you’re clearly delivering some hard truths here, but you wrap them in such a polished style that most people couldn't pull it off. I have to admit, I love reading your stuff—provided you don't start rambling too long.

Up.

... maybe his reverendness just hasn't realized yet that his little sermonizing monologues—and let’s call them what they really are: performances—can be met with nothing but polite silence from a church congregation, regardless of whether the pews are full or nearly empty. On an online forum, however, people actually expect a discussion. They don't just sit there nodding in awe at his supposed intellectual prowess, his "flawless" logic, his endless verbosity, or his masterful selection of emojis.

*Reverend might be a fitting collective title for all those clones he operates under to write...