Partial credit without explanation?

I was hoping someone could clarify why I’m no longer permitted to post in the thread regarding the war in Ukraine.
I haven't received any sort of explanation as to why my access to that specific discussion was revoked...
I wasn't insulting anyone, there was certainly no hate speech involved, nor was I veering into off-topic territory.

briskdrifter3 said:I’m just looking for some clarity on why I can't post in the Ukraine war thread anymore.
I haven't heard anything about why I got banned from that discussion.
I wasn't attacking anyone, there was no hate speech, and I didn't drift off-topic.

Same thing happened to me.

Got banned out of nowhere without even a warning. I never insulted anyone, and I still haven't received an explanation.

On top of that, it looks like all my old posts in that thread were wiped too. It wasn't a huge amount—maybe ten posts—but it feels like I've been totally erased.

I'd really like to understand how one single post, even if it was controversial, could trigger the deletion of stuff I wrote two weeks ago.

And obviously, I'd love to know what actually made that last post problematic. Which rule did I break? Since I didn't get a heads-up, either my mistake was massive enough to skip a warning, or a moderator just caught me in the crosshairs by mistake.

Thanks.

Just dropping a link here so readers can get some perspective... 👍

I know your question was rhetorical, mostly because you already know the answer...
The "content reviewers" have finally arrived at Reddit too.

So now, it doesn't even matter if you follow all the rules and aren't offending anyone.
Your opinion actually has to be pre-approved first!

And when it comes to the war in Ukraine, you're only allowed to say the approved line: that Putin is a lunatic and a war criminal who UNPROVOKED invaded Ukraine!

That’s the bottom line. Anyone thinking differently is just crazy, a conspiracy theorist, and belongs on Alternative—where else would they go? 😁

They won't even bother trying to argue that they aren't censoring anything. They'll just claim you're a problematic user who's always posting nonsense and conspiracy theories, and then they'll just lock the thread nicely... 😍
(maybe they'll mention Nibir, too)

You're persona non grata, my friend!
Because your views and opinions are just way too dangerous!!!

wanderingdriver17 said:Just dropping a link here—strictly so the readers might gain a bit of perspective... 👍

I realize your question is rhetorical—mostly because you already know the answer yourself...
Even the old forums have been hit by these "content reviewers" now...

It doesn't even matter if you follow every single rule to the letter or if you aren't offending anyone at all...
Now, your very opinion requires official approval!

And regarding the war in Ukraine, one is only permitted to write according to the sanctioned narrative—which essentially claims that: Putin is a madman and a war criminal who launched an invasion of Ukraine FOR NO REASON AT ALL !

And that’s that. Anyone with a different thought is labeled a lunatic, a conspiracy theorist, and belongs over on the Alternative sites—where else would they go? 😁

They won't even bother trying to argue that they aren't censoring anything; instead, they'll just claim you're a "problematic user" who spends his time posting nonsense and conspiracy theories, and then they'll simply lock the thread... 😍
(perhaps they'll mention Nibir too)

You're persona non grata, my friend...
Because your views and opinions are just far too dangerous!!!

Unbelievable... it's as if we've slipped back into 1948 with some politburo witch hunt...
All that's missing is two guys in gray coats showing up to haul me off to George's place... 😁

wanderingdriver17 said:And when it comes to the war in Ukraine, you’re only allowed to write according to the approved narrative, which claims that: Putin is a madman and a war criminal who launched an invasion of Ukraine for NO REASON AT ALL!

Putin is absolutely a war criminal who launched his invasion of Ukraine for NO REASON AT ALL. Of course, by using the phrase "for no reason at all," we're implying there is no moral justification for it. For instance, if you're walking down the street and someone suddenly punches you, you'd be perfectly justified in saying they did it FOR NO REASON AT ALL, regardless of their excuse that you "looked at them the wrong way." Putin's justifications for this criminal invasion are just as irrational and hollow. Now that we've established that, I'll correct your statement above—I actually won a partial point here. Not because of any censorship or official notice, but simply because this place has long been dominated by a culture of petty bickering.

Jesse Price said:Putin is a total war criminal who launched an invasion of Ukraine for NO REASON AT ALL. Look, when we say something happened for "no reason," we mean there's zero moral justification for it. It's like if you're just walking down the street in Chicago and some guy punches you out of nowhere—you’re totally justified in saying he did it FOR NO REASON, regardless of his excuse that you "looked at him wrong." Putin's excuses for this criminal invasion are just as irrational and empty. Now that we've cleared that up, I'm going to correct your claim above—I actually won this point. No explanation or warning needed. Not because anyone's trying to censor different opinions, but because this place has felt like a playground for petty bickering for a long time now.

What a mess of a post.

First off, just because someone starts a war doesn't automatically make them a war criminal; you could call them a warrior or a commander instead. That's where Putin lands right now.

To actually be labeled a criminal, a commander would have to give direct orders to commit atrocities, like targeting civilians and stuff. So far, we haven't seen proof that Putin gave those kinds of orders. In fact, analysts over at NBC are even saying the Russian goal in this campaign is encircling cities rather than taking them outright, supposedly to keep civilian casualties to a minimum.

Second, saying the attack was "unprovoked" is just your opinion. You're entitled to it, but you don't have the right to insult people who see things differently.

Keith Williams3 said:What a nonsensical post.

First off, starting a war doesn't automatically make someone a war criminal; you could just as easily call them a warrior or a military leader. Right now, Putin falls into that second category.

To be classified as a criminal, a leader would have to specifically order atrocities, like the slaughter of civilians. So far, we haven't seen any confirmation that Putin has issued such an order. In fact, analysts over at NBC are suggesting that the Russian strategy in this campaign is to encircle cities rather than seize them, supposedly to minimize civilian casualties.

Second, saying the attack was "unprovoked" is your opinion and you’re entitled to it, but that doesn't give you the right to insult those who see things differently.

Does bombing maternity wards count as minimizing civilian casualties? What about cultural sites? Or apartment buildings? Villages? Evacuation routes?

There are no accidents here; the goal is crystal clear—to terrorize a nation into submission. This is a nation that has made it perfectly obvious they want absolutely nothing to do with the aggressor, proving it through blood every single day. If you can't see the glaringly obvious pattern in how Russia and Putin treat neighboring states—turning them into puppet kleptocratic dictatorships—and you still buy into his concerns about "Nazis" being in power in Kyiv, then that's your problem.

As for penalties, if I were moderating, posts like yours justifying this criminal endeavor would earn a heavy card protest along with a mandatory reminder that you're being a fool, though I wouldn't call it bias. Banning people without explanation or notice seems to be the new standard lately, and frankly, it looks like the result of increasingly incompetent moderation.

Jesse Price said:Does bombing maternity wards count as minimizing civilian casualties? What about cultural sites? Or apartment buildings? Small towns? Evacuation routes?

There’s no accident here; the goal is crystal clear—terrorizing a nation into submission. It's a nation that has made it obvious they want absolutely nothing to do with the aggressor, proving it through blood every single day. If you can't see the blatant pattern in how Russia—basically Putin's way of dealing with neighboring states by turning them into puppet dictatorships—operates, and you still buy into his nonsense about "Nazis" being in power in Kyiv, then that's on you.

As for penalties, if someone were posting stuff like this to justify such a criminal undertaking, I’d hand them a heavy card protest along with a polite reminder that they're being an idiot, but I wouldn't issue a partial ban. Unexplained partial bans are just a new trend, and honestly, it looks like the moderators are just getting more power-trippy.

Insulting people isn't going to help you force your opinion on anyone. You can only do that with actual arguments, and you aren't bringing any to the table.

Regarding your first point about hitting civilian targets, I don't know if you're joking or if you actually don't realize that once military forces take over a civilian building or turn it into a stronghold, that building becomes a legitimate military target. You get that, right?

So, theoretically, if one army takes positions in or around a hospital, the opposing army has the right to strike that hospital, and it isn't a war crime. A war crime would be hitting a hospital where there is no military presence. Makes sense?

Let's be real, we don't know exactly what's happening on the ground because we don't have our own journalists right in the thick of it. We've got Peter Vlahov standing in Lviv near the Polish border reporting on refugees, but we don't have anyone at the front lines, in Kyiv, in Kharkiv, and especially nobody reporting from territories occupied by the Russians.

Bottom line, we don't have the full picture. I'm not making any definitive claims.

But you can't just claim that a destroyed hospital or a ruined daycare is automatically a war crime, because it's entirely possible those were used as Ukrainian military strongholds.

Let's not play dumb. Any defending force would do the same thing. You station troops in civilian areas to defend yourselves, and then if the attacker destroys or takes those spots, you use it for propaganda to smear them.

What kind of Ukrainian would be crazy enough to just stand out in an open field waiting for the Russians to mow them down with superior artillery and firepower?

I'm not saying they should walk out into the open so the Russians can pick them off like pigeons; it's logical that they'll set up positions within a city, and in a city, everything is a civilian area, which then turns those spots into military ones.

So, I’d hold off on the accusations of various crimes for a bit.

Honestly, I'd give you a card for making baseless accusations.

Jesse Price said:Does bombing maternity wards count as minimizing civilian casualties? Or perhaps cultural sites? Or apartment buildings? Small towns? Evacuation routes?

There is no coincidence here—the objective is perfectly transparent... to terrorize a nation into submission. A nation that has made it abundantly clear they want absolutely nothing to do with the aggressor, a fact they demonstrate daily through their sacrifice. If one fails to see the glaringly obvious pattern in how Russia—that is, how Putin—treats neighboring states by installing puppet kleptocratic dictatorships, and yet still swallows his nonsense regarding "Nazis" being in power in Kyiv... well, then that is your own failing.

As for penalties, if I were issuing them, posts such as yours—which attempt to justify this criminal undertaking—would earn you a heavy card protest along with a mandatory reminder that you are being quite foolish, though certainly not a ban. Bans without explanation or notice have become the new norm, apparently, and seem to be the result of increasingly erratic moderation...

Did you happen to listen to the opposing side's news during the Civil War?
There wasn't a day when the opposition wasn't shelling a kindergarten, a hospital, or a church, targeting the most vulnerable and the elderly.
The entire Storm operation was essentially an onslaught by a frenzied horde against an innocent people who had to flee for their lives from certain slaughter. Back then, the shelling of Knin was portrayed by the other side as a deliberate strike against civilian targets.

That is pure propaganda, man....
According to the news reports, it seems the Russians rushed the kindergartens, maternity wards, and schools first.
Every single day we read about some school or nursery being blown to pieces.
Come on now.
Use your head just a little bit....

The moment you see the words "kindergarten" or "school" in a headline, you should recognize it as blatant propaganda.

BTW.
Since 2014, approximately 15,000 people have died in Ukraine—including many children.
Were you even interested in Ukraine a month ago?
You were likely sipping coffee at a cafe while people were dying over there.
Now, suddenly, you are all worked up because you saw some sensationalist, heavy-handed headlines on the news portals.

Try to dial back the emotion; don't be so susceptible to suggestion and propaganda.

Look at the reports from both the Ukrainian and Russian fronts. The lines drawn on the maps differ by a hundred kilometers. They lie—both sides do. It is simply what they do for a living.

We’re just shouting into the void here, aren't we?

I see Nice handed out a card, so clearly this thread isn't invisible to the mods.
But I'm curious if they'd be so kind as to actually answer 👍

The real question is: why are on-topic posts being scrubbed when they don't break a single rule?
No warning, no card, no explanation... just wiped from history like they never even happened.
Meanwhile, the users who actually write them get to lose points...

Because honestly, it feels like: your opinion, your thoughts, your perspective—if it doesn't fit our vibe, you're gone. Cowardly.

Maybe they should consider a "card" for unpopular opinions?
At least a 500-point penalty for it☕

Or maybe they could try categorizing users by their handles?
Since the mods are already all black, red, and purple, why not paint certain users yellow—maybe with a little ribbon—and label them the court jesters? Just because their views don't line up with the front pages of the "serious," approved news outlets...

Or perhaps fully realize the forum version of a concentration camp over at Alternative?
Where anyone with an unpopular or "unaligned" opinion gets banned from every sub-forum and forced to post only in Alternative?

And then stick that section right at the bottom of the site because:
You go to the back of the bus, scumbag!!!!
*Spits aggressively*...

🎉

Keith Williams3 said:Insults aren't going to help you force your opinion on anyone else. You can only do that with actual arguments, and you don't seem to have any here.

Regarding your first point about targeting civilian sites—I'm not sure if you're joking or if you truly don't realize that the moment military forces occupy a civilian building or turn it into a stronghold, that building becomes a legitimate military target. Are we clear on that?

In theory, if an army takes positions inside or around a hospital, the opposing force has the right to strike that hospital, and doing so isn't a war crime. A war crime would be hitting a hospital where there is no military presence. Do you follow?

To be fair, we don't know exactly what's happening on the ground because we don't have our own journalists stationed there. We have someone like Peter Vlahov over in Lviv near the Polish border reporting on refugees, but we don't have anyone on the front lines, in Kyiv, in Kharkiv, and especially no one reporting from territories occupied by the Russians.

So, we don't have a complete picture of the situation. I'm not making any definitive claims.

But you can't claim that the destruction of a hospital or a daycare center is a war crime in and of itself, because it's entirely possible those were Ukrainian military strongholds.

Let's not be naive. Any defense would do this. You station troops in civilian buildings and defend from there, then if the enemy hits or occupies those buildings, you use it for propaganda to smear them.

What kind of Ukrainian would be crazy enough to just stand out in an open field waiting for the Russians to mow them down with superior artillery and force?

I'm not saying they should stand in the open so the Russians can pick them off like pigeons; it's logical that they'll establish positions within a city, and in a city, all positions are civilian ones, which effectively turns them into military targets.

So, I'd suggest holding off on the accusations of various crimes.

I’d give you a card protest for making baseless accusations.

I'll admit, you caught me there. The logic that "wherever a Russian bomb lands, it's an enemy stronghold" is indeed unassailable, and I wasn't prepared for it. I spent hours trying to figure out how to successfully debunk that argument, but no matter how I approach it, it's hopeless. You've exposed my flaw, and I'm feeling a bit embarrassed, though I recognize there's no shame in losing a rhetorical battle to an intellectual of your caliber. Now everything makes sense. The Ukrainians have taken a page out of the book of our defenders in Vukovar and started hiding in hospitals. Honestly, I'd probably do the same. It's brilliant, really: set up a base in a nursing home, a special needs center, or, as we just saw, a maternity ward. Just brilliant!

Only thing is, something puzzles me. How did someone with such a vast range of knowledge and geopolitical insight like yours say this ten days before the invasion?

Keith Williams3 said:That's why these stories about the war are total nonsense; the Russians should be fighting to divide Ukraine...

briskdrifter3 said:Did you listen to the enemy news during the war?
There wasn't a single day where Americans weren't shelling kindergartens, hospitals, or churches, slaughtering innocent civilians and the elderly.
The entire Storm operation was basically an unhinged mob attacking a defenseless people who had to flee for their lives. Back then, the shelling of Knin was portrayed by the other side as intentional targeting of civilian sites.

That's just pure propaganda...
According to the news, it seems like the Russians were the ones hitting nurseries, maternity wards, and schools first.
Every damn day we read about some kindergarten or school being blown up.
Come on!
Use your head for a second...

Whenever you see "kindergarten" or "school" in a headline, you're looking at pure propaganda.

BTW.
Since 2014, roughly 15,000 people have died in Ukraine (including plenty of children).
Were you even interested in Ukraine a month ago?
You were probably sipping coffee in the plaza while people were dying over there.
Now you're all worked up because you saw some heavy-handed headlines on the news portals.

Tone it down a bit; don't be so reactive and susceptible to propaganda.

Take a look at the reports from both the Ukrainian and Russian fronts. The front lines drawn by each side differ by 100 kilometers. They both lie. It's what they do for a living.

When is the mass cull of the vaccinated scheduled to begin?

Jesse Price said:When will the mass die-off of the vaccinated actually begin?

Regrettably, it has already begun...
It just won't be making the front pages or the nightly news on NBC.
The wars—they're all connected to this. And the economic collapse.
And there’s going to be yet another crisis coming very soon... one that will happen quite "accidentally," if you catch my drift.

briskdrifter3 said:And there's the connection. It all ties back to the economic crisis.

I can't say I'm surprised. 👍

briskdrifter3 said:It feels like we’re just waiting for the next crisis to roll in—one that will inevitably happen "by accident" again.

Yeah, obviously. But you know briskdrifter3—he’s certainly not one to lack common sense. 👍

Keith Williams3 said:It's the exact same thing here.

I just got banned—zero warning, nothing. I haven't insulted anyone, period. And I didn't even get an explanation for why it happened.

From what I can tell, they also wiped all my previous posts from this thread too. It wasn't a huge amount—maybe ten posts or so—but clearly, they want me erased from history entirely.

I’d really love to understand how a single post—even if that last one was controversial—can trigger the deletion of stuff I wrote two weeks ago.

And of course, I'd love to know what was actually "problematic" about that last post. Which rule did I supposedly break? Since I didn't even get a warning, either my "sin" was so massive that a warning was considered redundant, or the moderators just had a complete misunderstanding.

Thanks,

👎 Same story here.

Thomas Grant64, you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

Everything I did was totally above board—I was quoting RT, providing a historical timeline of events in Ukraine since 2011, citing everything properly without picking sides, and... well, just like you, I'm seeing censorship that's worse than any rule-less mess I can remember from way back. Welcome to the 21st century, or should I say welcome to Orvelov's 2022. Just shut up and clap, I guess.🤮

briskdrifter3 said:Can someone tell me why I'm suddenly barred from posting in the Ukraine war thread?
I haven't received a single explanation for this ban.
No insults, no hate speech, and zero off-topic nonsense on my end.

Same story here. I'm dealing with the exact same thing you are.

I started a thread over here—deleted.

Posted in the "card protest" thread—gone.

Sent DMs to Nice, Cuki, and Uncle Strile—nothing but radio silence for days.

I’ve been a member on this forum for 16 years. Never seen anything like this before.

Exactly.
Look, I don't really care.
Maybe I just regret wasting my time engaging in good faith with people
who lack the basic intelligence required for a constructive debate,
since even the masses think they're experts because they can link to Reuters, AFP, security agency sites, academic papers, Kissinger, or Kennan...
We’re supposed to be for democracy, not for everyone just making stuff up as they go. 😉
I'll admit, being slapped with a 10-day ban without any explanation caught me off guard.
Nobody knows how to handle getting shut down when they fail to see the bigger picture,
especially after I was hit with blatant insults that went completely unpunished.
Then my posts started disappearing, and eventually, out of nowhere, my access was just cut off. Fine. Your sandbox, your rules.
I'm fully aware that this is just how the world works. Despite all the regimes, the regulations, and the empty promises, you only have as many rights as you have power. Whether it's on a forum, in society, or within the state system...
All these institutions, these quasi-democracies and freedoms, are nothing more than alibis. They exist because a greater power guarantees them—and that same power systematically violates them whenever they stop serving its interests.
In fact, this forum is a perfect simulation of international relations.
We have some theoretically scribbled general rules that are supposedly followed, we have certain "forces" that enforce those rules, and then there's us, the community members.
But in practice, force ruthlessly ignores the rules whenever they conflict with its own agenda,
which in this case means a specific perspective or opinion,
making it possible to simply remove someone who follows the rules if their views don't align with the "force," while simultaneously tolerating those who break the rules because the force sees some utility in them.
If I actually gave a damn, I'd be here groveling, asking for a list of all the "correct viewpoints" regarding this situation, maybe some guidelines or articles
by Peter Stošić or some idiot's segment on CNN, just so I could stay informed and avoid making mistakes again,
but honestly, I don't give a shit.
🙂
This beautiful echo chamber you've built screams so Russia.
Peace out.

What else is there to say?

The bans are ongoing, and you can request an appeal after six months.
Decisions regarding a ban aren't made by a single moderator; everyone has to reach a consensus based on the PDF standard.
Before every ban, dozens of your posts were removed for violating the specific terms found in that PDF standard.
Since you didn't change your approach following those deletions, the ban was inevitable.
If we banned every "fan" of putin just for introducing censorship, the numbers would be astronomical—but we haven't done that.
There is no censorship here, nor will there be; we have simply increased our level of sensitivity and empathy toward the people of Ukraine.
War-related topics are strictly moderated 24/7, and they will remain so, given how much these platforms are used for media warfare.
We all hope this war—this military aggression against Ukraine—ends very soon; once it does, these bans will stop too.

This is the final word for everyone, and as far as we are concerned, this discussion is over.