Other media outlets

Dead subforum. Aside from the absolute garbage on the New York Post thread and those random spammers trying to plug their own sites, there’s just total silence here. For years, it’s basically just been Guga keeping a handful of us actually engaged. Congrats on the moderation gig.

Maybe Guga is just on vacation, but ever since he got censored over there, there's nothing worth reading. Pretty soon, even the formal debate will be more popular than this. 🙂

hollowtrucker77 said:if this whole subforum just revolves around Guggenheim, we might as well shut it down...

Maybe we should just get a massive sponsorship from Ford, then have the moderators switch between being New York Post editors on even days and local news anchors on odd days. hahahaha. heh. 😕

...Guga got penalized for one simple reason: he was commenting on a moderator's work in one subforum (TV News) over in another one (other media), which just isn't allowed. So, he wasn't censored or anything—you can easily check his profile to see that not a single one of his posts in other media was deleted, except for the ones that actually triggered the ban. It wasn't about someone hating his opinions or views; it was about breaking a rule that any other user would have been flagged for too. And since Guga is such a vocal advocate against injustice and corruption in our society, I don't think it'd be fair (especially to him) to give him special treatment just because he's considered a "subforum legend." We have to treat everyone the same...

Fine, if I really have to: it was sarcasm. I’ve got a sneaking suspicion I’m right on the edge of a ban, so I don't know how to be blunt without getting wiped (not that I care about the bans). Basically, the editors of these tiny little outlets should be the ones moderating other media. Ha ha. And then turn a PDF into something resembling TV.

Whatever bugged Guga and made him stop posting bothers me too. I’m not alone in that, though I can't reply to everyone via DM. 😉 It’s like he was poking a hornet's nest. Isn't that interesting? Everything gets deleted, everything gets punished based on a first glance at an opinion that seemed perfectly harmless regarding TV networks. Is the staff just being petty, or is there something bigger going on? All Guga wanted—or at least that's how I saw it—was for the network's site to actually cater to people looking for more sophisticated TV content.

...man...🤦..not again...

...looks like Guggenheim's paranoia is starting to spread. So, let me say this one more time, hopefully for the last time:

...NO, nobody on the TV board or the OM board is dictating which topics get opened or who opens them. Just because certain shows get their own threads doesn't mean there's some massive media conglomerate in D.C. pulling the strings. It’s just forum members or mods starting discussions. Look, as mods, we can't stop someone from starting a thread about a show, whether it's amazing, trash, or whatever else. We can't ban threads about networks or journalists either. And we definitely don't block people from talking about "alternative programming" or whatever you want to call those niche shows. If a thread flops and nobody visits it, that's NOT the moderator's fault—especially when the person who started the topic is salty about the low view count. Plus, we can't stop anyone from hanging out and posting here unless they break the rules. Seriously, it's NOT
our fault if someone cares way more about CSI, Capri, or a football game than some documentary, Aco Stanković, or how a news anchor pronounces words.

..so, once again—nobody is paying us, and nobody is telling us what can or can't be posted on the TV or OM boards. Every new thread is welcome (as long as it follows the rules and isn't a duplicate), but we have zero control over whether people actually click on it.